This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
decision making is when the leader gives up ownership and control of a decision and allows the group to vote. Majority vote will decide the action. Advantages include a fairly fast decision, and a certain amount of group participation. The disadvantage of this style includes no responsibility. An individual is not responsible for the outcome. In fact, even the group feels no real responsibility because some members will say, "I didn't vote for that.". Lack of group and personal responsibility seems to disqualify this style of decision making; however, the democratic style does have its place in business.
Autocratic decision making is when the leader maintains total control and ownership of the
decision. The leader is also completely responsible for the good or bad outcome as a result of the decision. The leader does not ask for any suggestions or ideas from outside sources and decides from his or her own internal information and perception of the situation. Advantages include a very fast decision, and personal responsibility by the leader, for the outcome. If an emergency situation exists, the autocratic style is usually the best choice. The disadvantages are varied and sometimes include less than desired effort from the people that must carry out the decision. If the employee is personally affected by the decision but not included when the decision is made, morale and effort may or may not suffer. It is not always predictable. If the outcome for the decision is not positive, members of the organization begin to feel they could have done a better job themselves and the leader may lose credibility.
Collective - Participative decision making is when the leader involves the members of
the organization. Other perspectives of the situation are discovered because the leader deliberately asks and encourages others to participate by giving their ideas, perceptions, knowledge, and information concerning the decision. The leader maintains total control of the decision because, although outside information is considered, the leader alone decides. The leader is also completely responsible for the good or bad outcome as a result of the decision. The advantages include some group participation and involvement. This is especially valuable when a person is affected negatively by the decision. In most cases, the individual is informed before the decision is implemented (no surprises) and usually feels good about personal involvement. If the leader is a good communicator, and listens carefully to the information collected, he or she will usually have a more accurate understanding of the situation and make a better decision. The disadvantages of this style include a fairly slow, time consuming decision; less security, because so many people are involved in the decision.
decision making is when the leader gives up total control of the decision. The complete group is totally involved in the decision. The leader is not individually responsible for the outcome. The complete organization or group is now responsible for the outcome. This is not a democratic style because everyone must agree and "buy in" on the decision. If total commitment and agreement by everyone is not obtained the decision becomes democratic. The advantages include group commitment and responsibility for the outcome. Teamwork and
In the standard version. each individual group would then rank their preferences numerically. It's similar to a vote. Finally. The one that ends up highest overall ultimately is chosen. Another person may feel that showing the stark imagery of the existing problem with encourage donors. A more accurate decision is usually made. The disadvantages include a very slow and extremely time consuming decision. It's helpful when decisions need to be rendered in a timely manner. For instance. Still others might propose that showing the work in progress is best. After this. Someone may come up with the idea that showing a positive outcome for the charity through a visual image is the best way to encourage donors. It takes skill and practice for a group to learn how to work together. experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel.good security is also created because everyone has a stake in the success of the decision. interactive forecasting method which relies on a panel of experts. DELPHI TECHNIQUE The Delphi method is a structured communication technique. the experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. with a higher probability of success. skills and "brains" were involved in the creation. With the nominal group technique. Techniques in Decision Making 1. After each round. if it's a nonprofit group that a project is for. 2. NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE (NGT) The nominal group technique is a method used for group decision making. everyone is then giving a chance to state which is best and why it's best before the votes are in. the process is stopped after a pre-defined stop criterion (e. but it also takes the opinions of each individual that forms the group into consideration. because so many ideas.g. It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Example situation: The Nominal Group Technique is used effectively for many situations. perspectives. originally developed as a systematic. several people may be trying to come up with the best way to garner donations on a website for the holiday season. yet the company wants all of the opinions of the individuals in a group to factor within the decision in a bigger way than a simply "majority rules" voter pool. It is also a lot of work getting everyone in the organization involved. only the strongest choices will remain. a facilitator provides an anonymous summary of the experts’ forecasts from the previous round as well as the reasons they provided for their judgments. . Thus.
3. it yields consensus. Staff seem distracted and under pressure. PARETO ANALYSIS Pareto Analysis is a simple technique for prioritizing possible changes by identifying the problems that will be resolved by making these changes. Keeping them separated avoids the negative effects of face-to-face discussions and avoids problems associated with group dynamics. The facilitator (panel director) controls the interactions among the participants by processing the information and filtering out irrelevant content. They need second visits to bring extra parts. His objective is to increase overall customer satisfaction. in order to solicit specific information about a subject or content area. They are kept separated and answer through an open-ended questionnaires.) # 1 2 3 Problem (Step 1) Phones aren't answered quickly enough. surveys. Poor organization and preparation. The process is repeated until the responses converge satisfactory. etc. Engineers don't appear to be well organized. the third column shows the underlying causes identified in step 2. the second column shows the problems he has listed in step 1 above. Members then make another decision based upon the new information. He decides to score each problem by the number of complaints that the center has received for each one. Too few service center staff. With this tool. Members are asked to share their assessment and explanation of a problem or predict a future state of affairs. we're trying to find the 20% of work that will generate 80% of the results that doing all of the work would deliver. Example Situation: Members are selected for the Delphi panel due to their expertise. and then fed back to all the group members. with a host of problems that need resolving. and the fourth column shows the number of complaints about each column identified in step 3.number of rounds. you can prioritize the individual changes that will most improve the situation. stability of results) and the mean or median scores of the final rounds determine the results. Example Situation: Jack has taken over a failing service center. achievement of consensus. By using this approach. Score (Step 3) 15 6 4 . Cause (Step 2) Too few service center staff. summarized. Replies are gathered. (In the table below. Pareto Analysis uses the Pareto Principle – also known as the "80/20 Rule" – which is the idea that 20% of causes generate 80% of results. that is.
however. It's possible." Paired Comparison Analysis (also known as Pairwise Comparison) helps you work out the importance of a number . rather than spreading his effort over training.the classical case of "comparing apples with oranges. taking on new staff members. Lack of training (items 5 and 6) – 51 complaints. Jack will get the biggest benefits by providing staff with more training. 2 Lack of training. Lack of training. 3. By carrying out a Pareto Analysis. 2. As you can see from figure 1 above. 30 21 Jack then groups problems together (steps 4 and 5).4 5 6 Engineers don't know what time they'll arrive. that this won't be necessary: the number of complaints may decline. it may be worth looking at increasing the number of staff in the call center. the customer finds that the problem could have been solved over the phone. Too few service center staff (items 1 and 42) – 21 complaints. Poor organization and preparation (items 3 and 4) – 6 complaints. and orders the list as follows: 1. Poor organization and preparation. He scores each group by the number of complaints. When engineers visit. and training should help people to be more productive. PAIRED COMPARISON ANALYSIS Paired Comparison Analysis helps you to work out the relative importance of a number of different options . Jack is able to focus on training as an issue. Once this is done. Service center staff don't always seem to know what they're doing. and possibly installing a new computer system to help engineers be more prepared. 4. This means that customers may have to be in all day for an engineer to visit.
subjective options. 1 C. where you need to decide the relative importance of qualifications. Figure 2 – Example Paired Comparison Analysis Table (filled in): A: Overseas B: Local C: University Development Educational A: Overseas A. and teamworking ability when hiring people for a new role. she draws up the Paired Comparison Analysis table in Figure 1. for example.of options relative to one another. writes down the letter of the most important option. for example. 1 Educational C: University D: Disaster Relief D: Disaster Relief A. Figure 1 – Example Paired Comparison Analysis Table (not filled in): A: Overseas B: Local C: University Development Educational A: Overseas Development B: Local Educational C: University D: Disaster Relief D: Disaster Relief Then she compares options. 1 B. or to pick the solution that will be most effective. It's also an ideal tool to use to compare different. comparing three similar IT systems. experience. skills. a philanthropist is choosing between several different nonprofit organizations that are asking for funding. To maximize impact. 2 C. A local educational project. 1 Development B: Local C. The tool is particularly useful when you don't have objective data to use to make your decision. First. 2 . It also helps you set priorities where there are conflicting demands on your resources. she only wants to contribute to a few of these. Disaster relief. A bequest for her university. Figure 2 illustrates this step of the process. This makes it easy to choose the most important problem to solve. Example Situation: For example. and she has the following options: An overseas development project. where Grid Analysis or some form of financial analysis can help you decide. and scores their difference in importance to her. Decisions like these are often much harder to make than.
and D values and converts each into a percentage of the total. and totals them. D = 0. she decides to make a bequest to her university (C) and to allocate some funding to overseas development (A). at a time when other people might be struggling to make a decision. C = 4 (50 percent). and scores each option by how well it satisfies each factor: Figure 1: Example Grid Analysis Showing Unweighted Assessment of How Each Supplier Satisfies Each Factor Factors: Cost Quality Location Reliability Payment Total Options Weights: Supplier 1 1 0 0 1 3 Supplier 2 0 3 2 2 1 Supplier 3 2 2 1 3 0 Supplier 4 2 3 3 3 0 Next he decides the relative weights for each of the factors. Quality.5 percent). B. This makes it a great technique to use in almost any important decision where there isn't a clear and obvious preferred option. It's particularly powerful where you have a number of good alternatives to choose from. C. These calculations yield the following totals: A = 3 (37.5 percent). This is shown in Figure 2: .Finally. GRID ANALYSIS Grid Analysis is a useful technique to use for making a decision. Factors that he wants to consider are: Cost. she adds up the A. Firstly he draws up the table shown in Figure 1. Here. He has four options. Example Situation: A caterer needs to find a new supplier for his basic ingredients. and many different factors to take into account. Location. Reliability. He multiplies these by the scores already entered. Payment options. B = 1 (12. 5. Being able to use Grid Analysis means that you can take decisions confidently and rationally.
Give everyone sufficient time to think about what needs to be done and to form their own opinions on how to best accomplish the task or solve the problem. Example Situation: Before getting together as a group. and so on. Add a third group member to the core group. The Stepladder Technique is a simple tool that manages how members enter the decision-making group. despite the lack of flexibility of its payment options.Figure 2: Example Grid Analysis Showing Weighted Assessment of How Each Supplier Satisfies Each Factor Factors: Cost Quality Location Reliability Payment Total Options Weights: 4 5 1 2 3 Supplier 1 4 0 0 2 9 15 Supplier 2 0 15 2 4 3 24 Supplier 3 8 10 1 6 0 25 Supplier 4 8 15 3 6 0 32 This makes it clear to the caterer that Supplier 4 is the best option. Form a core group of two members. Have them discuss the problem. The third member presents ideas to the first two members BEFORE hearing the ideas that have already been discussed. to the group. they discuss their options together. Allow time for discussion after each additional member has presented his or her ideas. 6. . STEP LADDER ANALYSIS The Stepladder Technique is a useful method for encouraging individual participation in group decision making. present the task or problem to all members. Repeat the same process by adding a fourth member. After all three members have laid out their solutions and ideas. Reach a final decision only after all members have been brought in and presented their ideas.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.