Chapter 6
Essentials:
Individual
Decision Making
NOTE: There
are 2 sets of handouts for this unit. First
set had stuff about the challenger in it, and notes for the Chapparel Steel
video. Second set was about
groupthink, and problems associated with group decision making, e.g., risky
shift, group polarization.
Why study
decision making?
Decisions
have a big impact on ability to achieve goals.
Who to hire
Where to look for new
business
How to talk to
people, treat others, reward, punish, motivate, judge
It all boils
down to making decisions, choosing options
Decision Making
Choices from
among alternatives to reduce the discrepancy between current state and desired
state.
Best stuff:
Context
BEFORE and AFTER decisions are made
Social support before and after
Pressure from reference group members before
Predecisional regret fear before decisions
are made
CONSEQUENCES
after decisions are made
Regret (preoccupied with bad choice, worse off)
Bolstering (feel better, want
to think it was a good decision)
Reactance theory (buyers remorse)
The pragmatic
view:
We make some
great decisions, some poor decisions.
Lets hope
its at least a wash.
Make sure
YOUR VALUES are taken into account
The right thing for
the right reason
Types of
decisions:
Programmed
decisions
structured, e.g.
an employee checks the inventory to see if it meets the minimum requirements.
Nonprogrammed
decisions
poorly structured
I. Optimizing Model of Decision Making
Ascertain
need for decision
Identify
decision criteria (e.g., rights)
Allocate
weights to the criteria
Develop
alternatives
Evaluate
alternatives
Select best
alternative
RATIONALITY
assumes correct process:
First you
look at all the options
Examine
options with set of criteria in mind
Choose the
option that gives you the highest number or outcome
Rationality
models assumptions
Goal
Orientation
All options
known
Preferences
clear
Preferences
constant
Final choice
maximizes outcome
II. Satisficing Model
Assumes
bounded rationality
Assumes
cognitive limits
Assumes
limited knowledge of options
Assumes
limited set of preferences
Choose
"good enough" rather than maximizing outcome
The Satisficing
Model
III. The Implicit Favorite Model
IV. Intuitive Model
Unconscious
process created out of distilled experience.
May not be
rational.
Intuition
may SUPPLEMENT rational decision making.
Draws on
PAST experience.
E.g., the chess
players who can play 50 games at once.
When intuition is
used:
High level of uncertainty exists
Little precedent to draw on
Variables are less scientifically predictable
When facts are limited
When facts dont clearly point the way to go
When analytical data are of little use
When there are several plausible alternative
solutions to choose from
When there are several good, plausible
solutions to choose from,
When time is limited
Flawed decision
making:
Escalation
of commitment
Heuristics
Group think
Risky shift
Cautious
shift
Sources of
decision BIAS:
Decision
Bias takes us away from facts, just as perceptual biases
did.
Heuristics
Escalation
of Commitment
Heuristics
= Decision short cuts
Kahnaman and
Tversky
Availability
heuristic
Basing decisions on information READILY available
e.g., Basing Performance
evaluation on recent
events
Representative
heuristic
Using things we observe now to indicate potential for our success
e.g., Judging potential
to play professional
basketball because one
person 10 years ago
did it.
Escalation of
Commitment:
Barry Staw
Knee deep in the big muddy
Increase
commitment when decision stream represents a series of decisions
In
spite of negative information,
stick to decisions
Having a lot invested in a relationship
Risk taking in
groups:
Risky shift
Cautious
shift
Group
polarization
Groups may
polarize toward extreme points of view if risk is involved.
Probably results from premeeting inclinations,
which impose biases during group discussions.
Group members will encourage others to buy into
their way of thinking.
May be explained by dominant cultural values.
V. Decision Style: decisions
Refers to
the PERSON, not the TYPE of decision that is made
How well do
you tolerate ambiguity?
How do you
THINK?
Rationally?
Intuitively?
This model
recognizes individual differences
Organizational
Constraints:
Evaluation
Managers make
decisions that influence ratings
Reward
systems
People make decisions
that make them rich
System-imposed
time constraints
Makes it tough to
gather enough information
Precedent
Organizational
Inertia results from patterns of making decisions
Ethical Decision
Criteria
Utilitarianism:
Greatest good for
greatest number
Rights
Decisions based on
fundamental liberties, privileges
Justice
Impose, enforce rules
fairly, impartially for equitable distribution of benefits, costs
Ethical concerns:
What are the
"hot" topics in organizations today, in terms of social
responsibility, and ethical concerns:
What if the
culture that you join supports unethical conduct? Will you stay?
In this
case, fit might be more of an issue.
For most of
us, a match of values between self and the organization is managed by
exception.
We are only driven to
leave an organization by ethical concerns if the mis-match occurs at an
extreme!
E.g.,
Religious zealousness,
Extreme attention to values that are
unimportant to you, e.g. social climbing.
Dishonest deception of the public.
These are
black and white concerns, your own situations may not be.
Often, it is
a question of interpretation. As
a lower level employee you sometimes operate "blind".
Training and Development
Journal:
Ethics set
boundaries
Values are
beacons
Ethics
convert values to actions
Ethics
ensure that actions achieve objectives without violating values
More often
define what is NOT acceptable than what is
Values versus
Ethics
Values:
Define
individuals
Are constant
Concerned
with VIRTUE
Stated
morally
Set
priorities
Ethics:
Translate
values into action
Change
Are
situationally determined
Are highly
specific
Stated
behaviorally
Set
boundaries for behavior
The Power of
Ethical Management,
by Kenneth Blanchard and Norman Vincent Peale
The 3 Ethics Check Questions:
1. Is
it legal?
will I be violating
either civil law or company policy?
2. Is
it balanced?
Is it fair to all
concerned in the short term as well as the long term?
Does it promote
win-win relationships?
3. How will it make me
feel about myself?
Will it make me
proud?
Would I feel good if
my decision was published in the newspaper?
Would I feel good if
my family knew about it?
Control your
destiny or someone else will,
Tichy and Sherman, re: Jack
Welch, GE CEO
As a society
the US is failing to convince people about the value of honesty
McCabe, an
ethics professor from Rutgers, studied 6,000 university students
76% planning business
careers admitted to cheating at least once, 19% said that they had cheated 4
times or more
How does GE fend
off ethics abuses?
Employees
sign a written statement each year saying they know of no breach in wrongdoing
Despite very
well prepared ethical policies and the above step, employees of GEs defense
contracting business have still been found guilty of diversion of US defense
funds into private accounts.
Factors
Affecting Ethical/Unethical Decision-Making Behavior
INCREASED CAPACITY FOR ETHICAL DECISION MAKING BEHAVIOR
What can we do to
improve QUALITY of decisions?
Dialectic Inquiry
Involves the
generation of a plan and a critical analysis of it.
Devils Advocacy
A member of
the group acts as the devil's advocate, bringing out all the reasons why the
proposal should not be adopted.
CHALLENGER FILM:
Show (2)
versions,
Hand out
notes.
Challenger
Questions:
WHY did NASA
launch?
What situational
factors contributed to the decision process?
e.g., politics of individuals, expense, etc.
Could this
situation have been prevented?
How?
Other questions
for teams:
What
personality issues, perceptual barriers contributed to this problem, flawed
decision process?
Are all
decisions created equal? Why, or
why not? What does this say about
decision PROCESS?
What
systematic flaws contributed to this decision process?
Situational
Context of Challenger Decision
Time
pressure
Political
decision context
Ethicality
of decision: value of human life
Legal
context: Specifications presented
were questionable
Financial
aspects: cost of delaying launch
again
Favorable
track record (WARM weather)
Self
interest
Socialization
into professional patterns of decision making