Making a quality, well-thought-out decision is extremely important in an organization. Certain decisions may have the power to make or break the manager's job, or even the organization as a whole. Peter Drucker states, "a decision is a judgement...a choice between alternatives." When making a decision a manager must evaluate all alternatives and the solutions that will result from those alternatives. Slack & Parent recognized two types of decisions: Programmed and Nonprogrammed. Programmed decisions are one's that managers face regularly. This may be a hockey coach deciding what line plays next, or a manager of a store deciding to exchange a returned item, as stated in the book. Nonprogrammed decisions are those in which a manager does not face regularly. Oftentimes with nonprogrammed decisions, the manager has no past experience to base his alternative ideas off of, therefore he may enter the decision making process 'blind'. Decisions in a sport organization are often made under one of three conditions: certainty, risk, and uncertainty. Certainty occurs when the manager is aware of all alternatives and the costs and benefits of each alternative. This means the manager is well-informed of what may happen after the final decision has been made. The most common condition is risk. This is when a manager knows all alternatives but is unaware of the costs and benefits of each. The manager must make their decision based on a subjective processes based off of past experiences. Uncertainty comes when alternatives and outcomes are all unknown. These decisions can be considered the one's that could 'make or break' the managers career. Slack and Parent recognized two Individual Decision Making approaches. The first is called the 'rational model'. This model uses a step by step analysis of the alternatives and decision making process. These steps are, briefly: monitor the decision environment, define the problem relating to the decision, diagnose the problem, identify and analyze the alternatives, select and implement the best alternative, and evaluate the decision to be sure that the original problem has been solved. The second individual approach is called 'the administrative model'. These decisions are followed by time constraints, and the managers are often times not able to analyze all alternatives. A manager is then forced to settle for the best alternative at the time. Slack & Parent also analyzed Organization decision making approaches. The first is 'management science', in which numbers and statistics are used to make decisions. There is also the Carnegie Model in which managers form coalitions, usually one manager from each department involved, and make decisions based on each managers thoughts and input. The third approach is 'the structuring of unstructured processes' where major decisions are broken into smaller decisions that collectively contribute to the major decision. They also created a three phase decision making process: identification, development, and selection phase. The fourth approach is 'The Garbage Can Model' which states that several aspects of organizations are changing as the decision making process is happening. Therefore, choices are made when problems come together with the right solutions and participants.
The influence a decision can make on an organization can often times lead to a great amount of stress for the manager. It is extremely important to analyze all alternatives, and the costs and benefits that could occur because of them.
Organizational Decision Making
Students:
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/99259
Leave a comment
Students
- #1 Team (8)
- Adam Vargas (3)
- Alex Maschoff (10)
- Alexa Smith (9)
- Alyssa Otto (16)
- Alyssa Wiebusch (14)
- Andre Phillips (12)
- Andrew Myers (4)
- Anthony Crowell (13)
- Ashley Deisting (14)
- Austin Calhoun (3)
- Ben Masnado (12)
- Brian Grant (18)
- Bryan Pederson (15)
- Christopher Dirkes (15)
- Dan Pavlue (17)
- David Dahlstrom (17)
- Douglas Jorgenson (15)
- Dustin Permann (15)
- Emily Oberlander (18)
- Example Student
- Group #5 (5)
- Group 1
- Group 10 (4)
- Group 2 (4)
- Jamie Prescott (3)
- John Bosman (12)
- Kristen Dockery (11)
- Kristin Furukawa (7)
- Laura Schnell (15)
- Matt Macer (19)
- Nathan Hinkley (12)
- Nicholas Donofrio (12)
- Parker Kruckenberg (16)
- Paul Lehrer (4)
- R.J. McGinnis (17)
- Ram-Rods (7)
- Rebecca Picha (18)
- Ryan Hooser (17)
- Ryan Nordness (13)
- Ryan Prochaska (13)
- Samantha Hadley (14)
- Team Gophers (7)
- Team Org. Man (7)
- Team Uncreative (4)
- The Leaping Lizards (5)
- Tony Des Marais (13)
- Twins (8)
- Yuri Nagai (15)
I strongly agree with Alyssa's last two sentences. By making good decisions you are allowing for an organization to operate in a less stressful environment. It is crucial for work environments to be as stress free as possible because it is then easier for others to make decisions and do their work. Working in a stressful environment will only cause more problems and more than likely lead to more poor decision-making. Decisions should never be made in a spur of the moment instant. As Alyssa says, “it is important to analyze all alternatives,” even if the decision maker thinks they know they have the right alternative from the beginning. Without looking at your options you will never know what you could potentially accomplish. Once all alternatives are out there the costs and benefits need to be weighed carefully. Without critically looking at costs and benefits you make pick an alternative that will end up being more costly and regret your decision later. Do your homework from the beginning so that when you make your decision you are satisfied and you do not have to go back and fix things, you are able to move on and work on new decisions to be made.
Alyssa gave a very good synopsis of the chapter within this blog. I think it is very true that a manager would face nonprogrammed decisions over programmed ones. Problems that come up are usually very unexpected and a decision needs to be made quickly. The last two sentences of this blog are very true: the decision a manager makes often determines the success and well-being of the organization. It is very important to weigh all the alternatives before making a decision, no matter the weight of the decision.
Analyzing alternatives is something I feel is too often over looked in organizational decision making. Many times it seems they feel something is too good to pass up or something or are pressured into it. This is very common within sports organizations. Too often a team will jump th egun on a trade offer without thinking about where they are in terms of organizational development. Two years ago the Seattle Mariners traded their top two prospects to the Baltimore Orioles for All-Star pitcher Erik Bedard. Both teams were not expected to compete for a league title for a few years. The orioles looked at it from the perspective of a team who by the time they were ready to compete, Bedard, who had experienced some minor shoulder problems, would either be too expensive, or begin to see his skills diminish. The Mariners, a lot more than just a pitcher away from competing, pulled the trigger because they thought that the chance to bring in a proven pitcher for unproven minor league players was too hard to pass up. Today, all the minor league players have advanced to the majors, one already being an All-Star, and Bedard is now a free agent after 2 injury plagued seasons in Seattle. This is an example of one teams making an informed decison based on their organizational situation, and another failing to do their homework.