Influencing and Making Decisions

Question: Discuss about the Influencing and Making Decisions. Answer: Introduction This report is based upon the study of various models, methods and processes of the decision making in the organisation which is taken by the manager and top management respond to the various situations. Moreover, it is also analysed that the decision making tools and styles helps the manager to the careful evaluation of the all the alternatives in the sequential manner which generated the positive outcomes for the organisation. Furthermore, it also evaluates the decision-making framework and taxonomies tell the management about the influence of various cause and effect of information at the time of decision. Decision Making and its Process in Organizational Context It is an act or process that any employee or manager consider the various alternatives from the range of options and select the best alternative or option that is important to the organisation or people in the long term. It is an integral part of the modern management. Essentially, Rational or sound decision making is an important function to accomplish the organisational and managerial objectives. Decision-making process is an important process that links the various activities at different functional levels for effective organisational functioning (Xu, et al., 2011). Furthermore, decision making process helps the organisation to maintain and check the organisation system that helps to keep develops in both the directions i.e. vertical and linear directions. The decisions are taken in the company to make the company more competitive and achieve the long and short term goals. To accomplish these objectives company faces the hurdles at the administrative level and operational levels. To solve these problems the comprehensive decision-making process is to be followed in the organisation to solve the problems effectively and accomplish the objectives at each department level. Decision-making process is continuing and dynamic because if one problem solve the other problem arises and so on. Below given are the basic steps is to be followed by the organisation while taking important decisions (Ford and Richardson, 2013). Figure 1: (Umassd, 2017) Decision Making Process Above given process are the sequential steps followed by the management to solve the administrative and operational problems in a business setting. The entire process is the time consuming but the outcomes generate from this process is positive and helpful for business for its long-term growth. Decision-Making Tools and Styles A decision-making tool is an important technique followed by the manager and top management to solve the complex problems and take the best decision from the available alternatives. There is a range of available decision-making tools used by the business according to the nature of the problem. Below given is the evaluation of the some of the important decision-making tools (Arens, et al., 2012). A) Decision matrix tool is used the manager to evaluate all the alternatives of the business and placed them on the table and list all the factors in one column that affect the various alternatives. The managers put the scores and weigh which factor is more important to consider. Figure 2: (Source: Bruce, 2011) Above given example of the restaurant indicates which is the most important factor or problem in the restaurant. It is identified that the Customer pain is an important factor that scores high as compared to other factors. It means that the long waiting time in the restaurant increases the customer pain that will probably impact the goodwill of the restaurant in future. B) Cost-Benefit: This technique is used by the manager or top management to assess the overall cost and benefits of the organisation in terms of financial perspective. For e.g. in the production department, there is the requirement of the 15 machines that can produce the 70 units per hour (Pettigrew, 2014). In this case, the production manager needs to analyse the overall cost of the machine, time spent on each unit and labour engaged in production. On the other side, the manager also needs to analyse the selling price of the 70 units multiplied by the no of hours engaged in the production and other direct and indirect costs to ascertain the benefit from the particular machine. On the basis of various calculations, the manager can take a decision whether have to purchase or not. Decision-making styles influence majorly the growth of the organisational performance in the long term. It also impacts the performance of the team and their motivation level. There are some important types of decision making styles which are followed by the manager or top management to solve the problems effectively (Lunenburg, 2011). Below given figure indicated an important decision styles followed commonly in the organisations. Figure 3: (Source: Goetsch, and Davis, 2014) Types of Decision making styles a) Rational Decision-making style is based upon the thorough search of the information and logical evaluation of alternatives. b) Intuitive Decision-making style is based on the feeling and emotions associated with the particular tasks. c) The dependent decision-making style is based upon the advice and direction of others. In this style, manager needs the direction or advice to select the best alternative from the different options. d) Avoidant decision-making style is characterised by attempts to avoid decision making. e) Spontaneous decision-making style is based upon the sudden and impulsive decisions taken by the managers and employees according to the situation (Vaiman, et al., 2012). As per the various decision styles listed above in the figure, it is identified that the rational decision-making style is appropriate for the organization for long term profits. In this style, it collects the appropriate information for the organisation in a logical manner. It reduces the chances of errors, uncertainties and assumptions. It reduces the risk of failure as compared to other styles. The approach and selection process of this method is based upon the logic information and knowledge. Decision Making Methods Decision-making methods help management to take decisions according to their consensus. They required team members to discuss debate and decide on a mutual conclusion. The group decision making is the common and important method to take decisions while the problem is complex, but it has its own disadvantages like it is a time consuming process and most of the time employees might not be clear about their roles. If the roles are not clear it will increase the chances of conflicts among them that would ruin their relationships. Moreover, on the other side, it seems that if more people are involved in decision making which generates the more creative ideas with more information flow (Turban Sharda, and Delen, 2011). There are five methods of decision making are adapted by the organisation is as follows: 1) Brainstorming: This is the common method of solving the problem through group discussions. This method helps management to reach the solution to the problem quickly due to an end number of views and ideas of the different people. For e.g. if the manager received the new e-learning project in the organisation and they received the instruction to implement this project into the team. Gather the team of different designers into the room and collect the different inputs of the designers and then takes the final decision (Ingram, et al., 2012). 2) Nominal Group Technique: This technique is also useful to take important decisions in the team. The team is divided into smaller groups and best possible ideas are noted down in the piece of paper and advise team members to vote the best possible option or choice. The choice or alternative receives the maximum responses or vote is accepted as the group decision. Continuing with above example, the group of designers is divided into smaller teams. Every member of the team gives their idea and at the end, each member votes for the best one. At the end, the idea gets maximum responses would be finalised. 3) Voting method: It starts with a round of voting where individuals cast his vote for the shortlisted options. Each individual gives the one vote at a time. The process is repeated many times if the maximum number of votes is generated for best option (Starcke and Brand, 2012). For instance, from the above-given situation, each team of the designer proposed their strategy in front of other team and that team would vote for the one they prefer best and that would consider final. 4) Delphi Method: In this method of decision making the facilitator allows team members to submit their ideas without writing their names on the paper. Other team members do not know the owner of the ideas. The manager or facilitator collects their views from different employees and circulates them others for improving and modify them and this process continues till the final decision is made. Similarly, in the above example, the facilitator can collect the different strategies of the employees without disclosing their names and later the facilitator collects the improved strategy and selects the best one (Proctor, 2014). These decision-making methods are commonly adopted in the organisation to carry out the important decisions at every hierarchy level of the organisation. Decision-Making Models The decision-making models are rapidly used by the organisations due to the complexity and challenging business environment in the past recent years. There a huge amount of data and algorithms has opened the new ways to improve the corporate performance. There are two types of decision models are used in the organisation i.e. the rational model (Classical model) and bounded rational model. In the rational model, the management or manager or decision maker takes the decision to consider the best alternative. In bounded rational model, decision is based upon those alternatives that satisfy the minimum criteria. According to the modern research, it depicts that the managers who make the best decisions dont over analyse the rational decision-making approach (Del Missier, et al., 2012). The rational decision approach is used by the manager is falls into three types i.e. classical models, administrative models and political models. The manager selects the model according to the type of dec ision model whether it is programmed or non programmed and the elements attached with the model i.e. risk, uncertainty and ambiguity. The programme decisions are planned decisions which are taken according to the organisational problems. Non programmed decisions are the outcomes of the strategic planning of the organisation due to high uncertainty and complex decision process is involved. The classical model of decision making that tells managers to how they should make decisions. In this model, the approach is assumed by the manager is logical and rational. This type of model is based on assumptions and readily information is available for managers and they are capable of taking optimal decision after evaluating every alternative (Tropman, 2013). Figure 4: Source: Tropman, 2013) In the above figure, it indicates that the manager faced a situation and then they carefully evaluate the alternatives and takes the final decision for the organisation. Moreover, there are four assumptions behind the model listed as follows: Clearly defined problem - It assumes that manager or decision maker is know all the information and objectives Certain environment - The model suggests that the decision maker eliminates all the uncertainties that influence the decision. As a result, there is no risk associated with it. Full information The manager is able to recognise the all alternatives and rank them effectively (Ford and Richardson, 2013). Rational decisions- Finally the manager or decision maker believes that the decision is based upon the interest of the organisation. Similarly, there are some drawbacks of this model that decision maker have bounded by time or resources and can continue evaluate the alternatives until he finds the best available alternative that suits the organisational objectives. Furthermore, another drawback is that the decision maker has the cognitive ability to rank all the alternatives accurately and effectively if the full information is available. Another model which is used by the decision maker in the organisation is bounded rational model; this model says that the decision maker is taking decisions under certain assumptions and constraints due to limited time and resources in the organisation (Saaty and Vargas, 2012). The decision is taken on the basis of the limited time, resource availability and limited cognitive ability of the manager. This model is upon following assumptions a) Satisficing (bounded rationality) b) Incremental c) Intuition In these assumptions, manager seeks the alternatives until they find the satisfactory, not optimal. These assumptions are taken on the basis of time, resources and ability constraints. For instance, the company has launched the new satellite mobile phone that weighed 1.5 pounds and it could not be used in the buildings and cars. Instead of waiting to improve the technology, Company sells the phone into the open market that covers the cost of the company and product. In this situation, it clearly indicates the bounded decision making of the company due to limited resources and time, the management takes the decision that satisfies the minimum requirement of the organisation. Decision Making Framework and Taxonomies The Cynefin framework is developed by the Dave Snowden in 1999 in the context of knowledge management and organisational strategy (Kaner, 2014). Below figure indicated the various elements described in the framework that helps the manager to assess, where the organisation stands in the external environment. Figure 5: (Source: NCBI, 2017) Cynefin framework of decision making In the above figure, it indicates the different domains and each situation requires the different actions. It is divided into five categories i.e. simple, complicated, complex, Chaotic and disorder. These categories enable the manager to how they perceive the situations and to take decisions according to the other peoples behaviour. Below given are the explanations of different domains according to the different categories. Simple domain indicates the Known category in the figure it means that if you do X the result is Y. The cause and effect relationship is clear and this is the best practice adopted by the managers in the organisation because it is based on rules (NAP, 2017). The second domain is complicated and it is related to the Known category which indicates the relationship between the cause and effect requires expertise due to many alternatives available. In this situation, the manager needs to sense-analyze and respond the situation for good practice in the organisation. In complex category the cause and effect relationship is unknown and manager not known about the outcomes of the decisions. In this situation, there is no right or wrong answer, so the manager makes series of experiments in case of emergency situations for e.g. bad quarterly results, organisational change and merger and acquisition in the organization (Strategic Content, 2017). In chaotic category cause and effects are unclear so that the manager as the only option to act-sense and respond to handle the complex situations. Finally, the disordered domain is not determined and it lies in the centre. In this type of situation, manager has no clarity which of the other domains applies. Decision-making Taxonomy consists of policies, procedures and documentation required for effective management. Taxonomy is the process which evolves and grows with the business and it ensures that if the growth happens in the organisation it should be in an organised and predictable manner. Good taxonomy governance in the organisation answers the below questions clearly: -Who are the stakeholders? -What are the key responsibilities of the organisation? -Who is responsible for changes in the organization? -What is the process of change? -What are reviewed and updated processes? To develop the good taxonomy governance policies in the organisation which helps to maintain the structure, workflow and management processes in the company (Springer, 2017). Conclusion As per the above report, it is concluded that the decision making is an important process in the organisation to accomplish the objectives effectively. Furthermore, it is also concluded that the decision-making models and processes supports the management to evaluate the alternatives effectively which leads to reducing the chances of uncertainty and risk while taking important decisions. References Arens, A.A., Elder, R.J. and Mark, B. (2012).Auditing and assurance services: an integrated approach. Boston: Prentice Hall. Del Missier, F., Mntyl, T., and Bruin, W. B. (2012). Decision?making competence, executive functioning, and general cognitive abilities.Journal of Behavioral Decision Making,25(4), 331-351. Ford, R. C., and Richardson, W. D. (2013). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. InCitation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics(pp. 19-44).Germany: Springer. Ford, R.C. and Richardson, W.D. (2013). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. InCitation classics from the Journal of Business Ethics.19-44. Springer Netherlands. Goetsch, D. L., and Davis, S. B. (2014).Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper Saddle River, UK: Pearson. Ingram, T. N., LaForge, R. W., Avila, R. A., Schwepker Jr, C. H., Williams, M. R. (2012).Sales management: Analysis and decision making. ME Sharpe. Kaner, S. (2014).Facilitator's guide to participatory decision-making.USA: John Wiley Sons. Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Decision making in organizations.International journal of management, business and administration,15(1), 1-9. NAP (2017) Conceptual Framework for Benefit Estimation and a Taxonomy of Benefits. Retrieved from : https://www.nap.edu/read/11327/chapter/5 NCBI (2017). A Framework for Classifying Decision Support Systems. Retrieved from : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1480261/ Pettigrew, A.M., (2014).The politics of organizational decision-making.UK: Routledge. Proctor, T. (2014).Creative problem solving for managers: developing skills for decision making and innovation.UK: Routledge. Saaty, T. L., and Vargas, L. G. (2012).Models, methods, concepts applications of the analytic hierarchy process(Vol. 175).Germany: Springer Science and Business Media. Springer (2017).Towards a Taxonomy of Decision Making Problems in Multi-Agent Systems. Retrieved from : https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-04143-3_19 Starcke, K., and Brand, M. (2012). Decision making under stress: a selective review.Neuroscience Biobehavioral Reviews,36(4), 1228-1248. Strategic Content (2017). Introduction to Taxonomy. Retrieved from : https://strategiccontent.com/introduction-to-taxonomy-governance/ Tropman, J. E. (2013).Effective meetings: Improving group decision making(Vol. 17).USA:. Sage Publications. Turban, E., Sharda, R., Delen, D. (2011).Decision support and business intelligence systems.UK: Pearson Education Vaiman, V., Scullion, H., Collings, D. (2012). Talent management decision making.Management Decision,50(5), 925-941. Xu, H., Luo, X.R., Carroll, J.M. and Rosson, M.B. (2011). The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing.Decision support systems,51(1), 42-52. Umassd (2017). Decision-making process. Retrieved from : https://www.umassd.edu/fycm/decisionmaking/process/ Bruce, J.P. (2011). Understanding Decision-making Processes in Airline Operations Control. UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Influencing and Making Decisions Question: Discuss about theInfluencing and Making Decisions. Answer: Introduction Effective teamwork is fundamental in todays world. The aim of this report is to develop a virtual team and establish processes so that it is easier to make team decisions. This report is a reflection of the processes on team formation and decision making. Observations are made on the basis of own experiences and is supported with extensive literature review (Anderson et al. 2013). A brief idea about team, virtual team, facilitator and effective decision making is provided. The assumptions while forming the team is also stated. Further, various models are discussed and rationale for choosing one is provided. The application, benefits and drawbacks are stated for a better analysis. Definitions Team- A team can be defined as a group of people assembled together for achieving or accomplishing a task or project together. The team members have a strong mutual commitment for ensuring success (Parke, Campbell and Bartol 2014). Virtual team- A virtual team can be defined as the group made of people present in different geographical locations. These team members rely on communication technology such as voice or video conferencing (Hoch and Kozlowski, 2014). Decision- A decision can be defined as a choice that is made between alternative courses of action in presence of uncertainty. Every situation might have more than one possibility and a choice made after considering them is termed as decision (Hoch and Kozlowski, 2014). Effective decision making- Effective decision making can be defined as a process of selecting through alternatives and managing it to achieve the objectives. The effective decision result from a systematic process that is handled in a series of steps (Fransen, Weinberger and Kirschner 2013). Assumptions Every team has certain assumptions such as they have a common goal that is well-defined in nature. It is further assumed that a team has more than two members for jointly achieving the goal. Every team has a shared understanding while they work towards achieving the goal. It is also assumed that the team members have trust and integrity (Schjoedt et al. 2012). Team Start-Up Models Types of Models Starting up or developing a team is an important part of the job as it helps in leading the team effectively. The two models which can be considered while starting up a team are described as under: Tuckman Team Development Model Dr Bruce Tuckman formed a model for developing a team which explains that a team develops and establishes maturity. The model has four stages- forming, storming, norming and performing. In the first stage, there is very less agreement among the team members. In the second stage, the decisions are difficult to make as conflict in opinion arises (Mathieu et al. 2015). The teams have to work hard and not lose their focus. In the third stage, there is agreement and consensus among the team members and roles are clear. In the fourth stage, the team members realize their performance level. They focus on over-achieving their goals. The model is beneficial in creating a more productive, integrated and performing team (Zimmermann 2011). Drexler/Sibbet Model Allan Drexler and David Sibbet developed a model comprising of seven strategies for optimizing team effort. The first stage is orientation in which the team identifies a task together which they find beneficial. The second stage is trust building in which the people are clear on their roles and responsibilities for establishing a better understanding. The third stage is goal clarification in which a shared vision is identified so that the conflicts can be addressed and resolved (McGrath and Bates 2013). The fourth stage is commitment in which the team members own or disown their responsibilities. The fifth stage is implementation in which timing and schedule is focused with the help of work plans or other management tools. The sixth stage is high performance in which the team members spend time and effort to deliver higher outcomes. The last stage is renewal in which every team member is expected to reflect as to what worked out and what did not (Kohn and O'Connell 2014). Rationale The Tuckmans model is chosen for team development. This was chosen because it helped the group members in understanding the development process. The stages of growth are predetermined in this model that helped in recognizing the type of situations for which the team members could gain competitive advantage. In a virtual team or a temporary working group, group dynamics need to be recognized easily. Tuckmans model is simple to understand that makes the complexity of group dynamics. The model is selected as going through extensive literature and journal articles; Tuckmans model was used by most organizations while forming a team. The model is beneficial in creating a more productive, integrated and performing team. Moreover, Drexler/Sibbet Model has multiple stages and is a time consuming process (Halverson and Tirmizi 2013). Application of Model The model was applied using Google Docs. Google Docs is an online word processor that allows viewing and editing the documents at the same time. The collaborators or team members were connected to Google Drive. The link was shared among all team members so that they could edit and make changes in the document (Holzner and Holzner 2012). In the first stage of Tuckmans Model, the individuals were brought together and assembled as a team. The team members had positive expectations from the project while some were anxious about the same. The team members clarified the mission and behaved independent of each other by stressing on scope of task, way of approach and potential challenges and opportunities (Mathieu et al. 2015). In the second stage, the views of team members were expressed strongly. Discussions were made for addressing the differences. The issues that shall really be solved by the project were discussed. The team members were jockeying for the positions clarified and there was enhancement in relationships (Halverson and Tirmizi 2013). The third stage was all about resolving differences and focusing more on achieving goals or mission. The team members were learning more about each other and setting team values, problem-solving process, setting team values. The team was aware of the competition and they started tolerating whims of other team members. In the fourth stage, work was delegated and benefits were brought to the team project. The team has a shared vision and is able to stand on its own feet with no interference or participation from the leader (Mathieu et al. 2015). Critical Analysis The first stage-forming went well as clear directions and structure was provided to build a strong relationship. The team members were in their best behaviour and everyone took initiatives and contributed towards discussing the scope of the project. The focus of the team members was on the task to be performed. The team members experienced an enhancement in active listening skills. The third stage helped in transforming the attitudes and there was feeling of cohesion, harmony, mutual respect and trust. There was increase in productivity when the team reached the third stage. Morale is high and the general atmosphere is positive. Team members' attitudes are characterized by positive feelings and eagerness to be part of the team. Members are confident about the outcome, enjoy open communication, exhibit high energy, and disagreement is expected and allowed as long as it is channelled through means acceptable to the team (Beatty and Scott 2012). In the first stage, as every team member was putting efforts to be accepted by other team members, serious issues such as non-routine issues were being avoided. There were circumstances when the team members felt reluctant to build relationships for a successful team. There were situations when the team members faced a decline in morale. There were signs of conflict appearing in the second stage of application of Tuckmans model. There was wastage in time as the team members spent a huge amount of time in unnecessary or less important issues. Another issue was that while preventing conflict, the team members were reluctant to share issues controversial in nature (Lewis 2011). Conclusion Teams can achieve more than each team member individually. Being part of a high-performance team can be extremely rewarding, but it requires time and commitment to get to that stage. The Tuckman Model of team development was chosen for starting up the team. The model was effective as it was divided into four stages which made the team deliver exceptional results. There was excitement optimism associated with this model of team development. The tools were effective and there was shared understanding while they worked towards achieving the goal. There was trust and integrity among the team members. However, there were situations when the team members faced a decline in morale. There was wastage in time as the team members spent a huge amount of time in unnecessary or less important issues. The model is beneficial in creating a more productive, integrated and performing team. References Anderson, E., Pollard, L., Conroy, S. and Clague-Baker, N., 2013. Forming a new clinical team for frail older people: can a group development model help?.Journal of Interprofessional Care, 28(2), pp.163-165. Fransen, J., Weinberger, A. and Kirschner, P., 2013. Team Effectiveness and Team Development in CSCL.Educational Psychologist, 48(1), pp.9-24. Hoch, J. and Kozlowski, S., 2014. Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership.Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(3), pp.390-403. Kohn, S. and O'Connell, V., 2014.6 habits of highly effective teams. 1st ed. Franklin Lakes, NJ: Career Press. Mathieu, J., Kukenberger, M., DInnocenzo, L. and Reilly, G., 2015. Modeling reciprocal team cohesionperformance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members competence.Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), pp.713-734. McGrath, J. and Bates, B., 2013. Little Book of Bi Management Theories;... AND HOW TO USE THEM. 1st ed. S.l.: FT PRESS. Parke, M., Campbell, E. and Bartol, K., 2014. Setting the Stage for Virtual Team Development: Designing Teams to Foster Knowledge Sharing.Academy of Management Proceedings, 2014(1), pp.17244-17244. Schjoedt, L., Monsen, E., Pearson, A., Barnett, T. and Chrisman, J., 2012. New Venture and Family Business Teams: Understanding Team Formation, Composition, Behaviors, and Performance.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(1), pp.1-15. Zimmermann, A., 2011. Interpersonal relationships in transnational, virtual teams: Towards a configurational perspective.International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(1), pp.59-78.