EDUC 604

POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION

MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

March 12,13-WEEK 1 1. Submit a self-introduction (2 paragraphs only)

2. Relate the subject to CTU-VMGO

SELF-INTRODUCTION

I am Arlinda S. Bongcalon, 44 years old, from Santa Fe, Danao, Bohol. We

are 13 children in the family and I am the youngest. I graduated my bachelor’s
degree at University of Bohol, Tagbilaran City. For the help of our almighty father
I took and passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET) in August 2007.

I am now working with the Department of Education as a public pre-school

teacher for almost 9 years and counting at Santa Fe Elementary School, Santa
Fe, Danao, Bohol. Lastly, my goal is to attain a career in an organization where
my potential will be fully discovered while working for the school or institution
dedicatedly. To contribute meaningfully towards achieving its set goals through
constant professional and personal growth, while maintaining a good team spirit.
Relate the subject to CTU-VMGO
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

March 19,20-WEEK 2 Discuss the following:

1. Administrative Law
2. Administrative Decision Makers
3. Administrative Decision & its examples
(100-300 words)

1. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Administrative law is the division of law that governs the activities of executive branch agencies of
government. It concerns executive branch rule making, adjudication, or the enforcement of laws. It deals with
the decision making of such administrative units of the government that are part of the executive branch in such
areas as international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration, and transport.
It is a body of law created by the agencies and departments of the government, which carry out the laws
passed by Congress or a state legislature. When Congress passes a law on a complicated issue, Congress often
needs help determining all of the details of how the law will be enforced and implemented. Administrative
agencies and government departments fill in those gaps for Congress and pass additional rules and regulations
to achieve Congress’s goals.
Administrative law is also considered as a branch of public law.

2. ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION MAKERS

Administrative decision makers are not free to exercise statutory discretionary powers in any way that
they may wish. They must act within the limits of the statutory authority (for jurisdiction) that has been
conferred of them.

3. ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION & ITS EXAMPLES

Administrative decision means decision made in the implementation, administration, or enforcement of
development regulations that involves the determination of facts and the application of objective standards set
forth in this chapter or local government development regulations.
This can be also described as the application of general rules to individual cases, often in the context of
performing public tasks.
 It is to be taken as to which grant shall be paid to which person, and which shall not. However, their
influence in administrative decision-making is quite limited.
If a government body takes an administrative decision, then this in many cases should not be based on
an inductive argument but on regulation.
Example 1:
A responsible staff member imposes on a student, as the penalty for late submission of an assessment item, a
reduction of 10% of the assessed mark for that item. The student complains that the penalty is too harsh. The
responsible staff member considers the student's complaint and decides to not alter the penalty. That decision is
a reviewable administrative decision.
Example 2:
A staff member sets a trial assessment task, the completion and results of which will not affect students'
grades or be released to any other person. A student complains about the task. The staff member decides not to
take any action in response to the complaint. The staff member's decision is not a reviewable administrative
decision because the complaint is frivolous or trivial.
Example 3:
A student complains to the Registrar about an initial refusal of special consideration. The student has not yet
followed the University's published policy and procedure on complaints but rather has applied immediately to
the Registrar for a review. The initial refusal is not a reviewable administrative decision because it is not
final.
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

March 26,27-WEEK 3 Answer the following:

1. Where does the authority to make decision come from?
2. Does legislation provide you any preference in making your
decision?
3. Are you empowered to make the decision?
4. Have you acted reasonably in making your decision?

1. Where does the authority to make decision come from?

The decision authority always lies with a person and can’t be designated to a machine. It is the right,
power or obligation to make a decision and the duty to answer for its success or failure. Nations, societies,
organizations, teams and groups typically have systems that make decision authority clear. Where decision
authority isn’t clear, it is difficult to take action as disagreements may make decisions impossible.

2. Does legislation provide you any preference in making your decision?

The Act may require you to make a particular decision or it may give you discretion in what you decide.
A requirement to make a particular decision will often be indicated by the word ‘must’. Discretion in making a
decision will often be indicated by the word ‘may’. If the legislation gives you discretion, make sure you
understand the boundaries within which you can exercise the discretion. This includes making decisions that are
consistent with the purpose of the legislation (the purpose of the legislation may be set out at the beginning of
the legislation).

3. Are you empowered to make the decision?

It will not always be possible for the people given decision making power under legislation to make all
of those decisions. For example, ministers are often given powers to make decisions under legislation but are
too busy to make all of those decisions personally. In these circumstances the minister may be able to authorise
someone else to make the decisions for them. If the legislation does not give you direct power to make the
decision, you will need to be authorised as an authorised officer or delegate of the decision maker who is
identified in the legislation. Make sure you have up-to-date documentation of this authorisation (for example, a
document signed by the minister authorising you to make the decision) and that the decision you want to make
falls within the scope of your authorisation.
4. Have you acted reasonably in making your decision?
Procedural fairness (sometimes called ‘natural justice’) requires a decision maker to provide a fair
hearing and be free of bias. To provide a fair hearing, you must provide a person affected by your decision with
an opportunity to respond to all issues or factual allegations that have come up during the decision making
process. You should make sure there are no grounds for anyone to think you are biased or have a foreseeable
conflict of interest. A decision maker is bound by these requirements unless the legislation governing the
decision excludes or modifies them (which is rare). The legislation may also impose additional procedural
fairness requirements, such as holding a formal hearing or issuing a notice.
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

April 2,3-WEEK 4 Explain the following:

1. Administrative decision-making model
2. Classical model in decision making
3. Administrative model in decision making
4. Classical versus Administrative

1. ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION-MAKING MODEL

Herbert Simon was the first to introduce an administrative model of decision making to provide a more
accurate description of the way administrators both do and should make organizational decisions. The basic
approach is satisficing – that is, finding a satisfactory and sufficient solution rather than the best one. The
satisficing decision-action-cycle includes the following steps. The administrator must:
a. Recognize a problem and the frame and define it clearly and concisely.
b. Analyze the problem by examining relevant data.
c. Before proceeding: Establish criteria for success – outcomes that are satisfactory and
sufficient.
d. Develop a plan of action by identifying a set of alternatives, considering the likely
consequences of each option. At this stage, the decision maker exams all relevant options and
their consequences, deliberates, and selects a multi-step plan of action with contingencies
included in the plan.
e. Initiate the action plan
f. Evaluate the implemented plan in terms of the criteria you have established for a
satisfactory solution.
When uncertainty and conflict prevail, as is typically the case in administrative decision-making, a
satisficing strategy becomes appropriate. The administrative model is flexible and heuristic. Decisions are based
on comparisons among consequences of alternatives and the decision maker’s aspiration level. Only a partial
exploration of the alternatives is performed and the aspiration level is lowered. Lack of time, of course, may
truncate the process by forcing the consideration of fewer options.

2. CLASSICAL MODEL IN DECISION-MAKING

It is a rational model of decision-making that assumes that managers have access to complete
information and are able to make an optimal decision by weighting every alternative. The model then
recommends a list of actions for managers to follow to arrive at the decision that's best for their organizations.
 There are four main assumptions behind the classical model:
a. A clearly defined problem. The model assumes that the decision-maker has clearly set goals
and knows what is expected from him.
b. A certain environment. The model further suggests that it is in the power of the decision-
maker to eliminate any uncertainty that might impact the decision. As a result, there are no
risks to account for.
c. Assumption is full information. The decision-maker is able to identify all alternatives
available to him and to evaluate and rank them objectively.
d. Assumption is rational decisions. The decision-maker is believed to always be acting in the
best interests of the organization.

Steps in the Classical Model

a. Listing all available alternatives. Under the classical model, the decision-maker is not limited
by time or resources and can continue looking for alternatives until he identifies the one that
maximizes the utility from the decision.
b. Ranking listed alternatives. The decision-maker is believed to possess not only all required
information but also the cognitive ability to prioritize the alternatives accurately and
objectively.
c. Selecting the best-suited alternative. Because it’s impossible to rank alternatives objectively,
it also becomes possible to identify the single best solution of the problem. This is the
solution that maximizes the utility of the organization.

3. ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL IN DECISION-MAKING

In the foundation of the administrative model of decision making lies the belief that decision makers
often settle for a less than ideal solution because of time and motivation shortages. Instead of seeking the best
solution that maximizes the value of the decision, the decision maker accepts the first available 'good enough'
alternative producing a value above the minimally acceptable. The concept of settling for a less than perfect
solution is called satisficing.
Because of the limited rationality of the decision maker, the model is also known as the bounded
rationality model. The limited rationality entails that the decision maker has a limited number of criteria and
considers a limited number of alternatives. The degree to which the choice will be limited will depend upon the
values and skills of the decision maker. This model is based on ideas first expressed by Herbert Simon. He
called the decision maker with limited rationality an Administrative Man and opposed him to a perfect
Economic Man, who takes into consideration all possible criteria and evaluates all possible alternatives.
In our busy everyday lives, we often employ such approaches without thinking twice. Imagine yourself
sitting in the office on a weekday afternoon and suddenly realizing you have to attend a birthday party later the
same day. Had you remembered about the party earlier, you might have spent the whole Sunday browsing the
shops in search of a perfect gift. Now, your options are very limited. You have only one shop next to your office
and quickly browse the shelves on your way to the party, settling for the first gift that remotely matches your
friend's interest. Will it be the best gift your friend will receive that day? Unlikely. Did you save yourself from
the embarrassment of showing up empty-handed? Definitely.
 The main drawback of this approach is, of course, a lowered quality of the final decision. However, this
model also has a number of benefits. Under certain circumstances, these can well compensate for the loss in
quality. First, this approach requires less time to reach a decision. In a situation where time is costly or
unavailable, settling for a 'good enough' option can be an efficient strategy. Secondly, reaching for an ideal
solution often means more resources have to be dedicated for information gathering. So a solution reached with
the administrative model in mind is likely to be cheaper.

4. CLASSICAL VERSUS ADMINISTRATIVE

There are some similarities between the classic model and the administrative model. The major
difference is that the administrative model calls for a decision that is satisfactory rather than the ultimate best
solution. The difference comes into play early in the decision-making cycle. After the problem has been defined
and analyzed, and before proceeding with the generation of alternatives, the decision maker confronts the issue
of the criteria for a satisfactory outcome.
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

April 2,3-WEEK 5 Briefly discuss the following:

1. Explain how intelligence, design, choice, and review affects
our decision making.
2. Rational model in decision making
3. Incrementalism way of decision making
4. Mixed-Scanning way of decision making
5. Decision irrationality – action rationality
6. Garbage Can Theory in decision making

1. HOW INTELLIGENCE, DESIGN, CHOICE AND REVIEW AFFECTS OUR DECISION MAKING
At the most basic level, decision-making is the process of choosing among two or more alternative
courses of action for the purpose of attaining one or more goals. Generally speaking, decision-making can be
considered a step in the problem-solving process. That is, one way to distinguish between the two is to examine
the phases of the decision process: 1. intelligence, 2. design, 3. choice, and 4. review. Some consider the entire
process (phases 1–4) as problem-solving, with the choice phase as the real decision-making. Others view phases
1–3 as formal decision-making, ending with a recommendation, with problem-solving additionally including the
actual implementation of the recommendation (phase 4). Note that a problem may include situations in which a
person must decide which opportunity to exploit. In this book, we use the terms, problem solving and decision
making, interchangeably.
INTELLIGENCE
The intelligence phase in the decision-making process involves scanning the environment, either
intermittently or continuously. It includes several activities aimed at identifying problem situations or
opportunities. It may also include monitoring the results of the implementation phase of a previously completed
decision-making process.
DESIGN
The design phase involves finding or developing and analyzing possible courses of action. These include
understanding the problem and testing solutions for feasibility. A model of the decision-making problem is
constructed, tested, and validated. Modeling involves conceptualizing a problem and abstracting it to
quantitative or qualitative form. For a mathematical model, the variables are identified, and their mutual
relationships are established. Simplifications are made, whenever necessary, through assumptions. For example,
a relationship between two variables may be assumed to be linear even though in reality there may be some
nonlinear effects. A proper balance between the level of model simplification and the representation of reality
must be obtained because of the cost-benefit trade-off. A simpler model leads to lower development costs,
easier manipulation, and a faster solution but is less representative of the real problem and can produce
inaccurate results. However, a simpler model generally requires less data, or the data is aggregated and easier to
obtain.
CHOICE
Choice is the critical act of decision-making. The choice phase is the one in which the actual decision
and the commitment to follow a certain course of action are made. The boundary between the design and choice
phases is often unclear because certain activities can be performed during both phases and because the decision-
maker can return frequently from choice activities to design activities, such as by generating new alternatives
while performing an evaluation of existing ones. The choice phase includes the search for, evaluation of, and
recommendation of an appropriate solution to a model. A solution to a model is a specific set of values for the
decision variables in a selected alternative.
REVIEW
Once the decision has been made and implemented, the job is done, and it’s time to move on. However,
the review stage is crucial to effective decision-making because it allows you to assess what worked and what
you need to do differently next time to improve the process.
If the decision did not meet the desired effect, consider returning to some of the previous steps you took.
Reevaluate the strategies you discarded in the first instance may lead to making a better decision the second
time around.

2. RATIONAL MODEL IN DECISION MAKING

Rationalism is a deeply optimistic approach that assumes
we can learn all we need to know; mixed scanning is an adaptive
strategy that acknowledges our inability to know more than part of
what we would need to make a genuinely rational decision.
Incrementalism is profoundly cautious and avoids decisions based
on partial knowledge; mixed scanning seeks to make the best
possible use of partial knowledge rather than proceed blindly with
no knowledge at all.
Rational decision making leverages objective data, logic,
and analysis instead of subjectivity and intuition to help solve a
problem or achieve a goal. It’s a step-by-step model that helps you
identify a problem, pick a solution between multiple alternatives,
and find an answer.
Rational decision making is an important skill to possess, especially in the digital marketing industry.
Humans are inherently emotional, so our biases and beliefs can blur our perception of reality. Fortunately, data
sharpens our view. By showing us how our audience actually interacts with our brand, data liberates us from
relying on our assumptions to determine what our audience likes about us.
 Rational Decision Making Model: 7 Easy Steps
A. To prove that you actually have a problem, you need evidence for it.
Most marketers think data is the silver bullet that can diagnose any issue in our strategy, but you
actually need to extract insights from your data to prove anything. If you don’t, you’re just looking at a
bunch of numbers packed into a spreadsheet. To pinpoint your specific problem, collect as much data
from your area of need and analyze it to find any alarming patterns or trends.

B. Research and brainstorm possible solutions for your problem.

Expanding your pool of potential solutions boosts your chances of solving your problem. To find
as many potential solutions as possible, you should gather plenty of information about your problem
from your own knowledge and the internet. You can also brainstorm with others to uncover more
possible solutions.

C. Set standards of success and failure for your potential solutions.

Setting a threshold to measure your solutions' success and failure lets you determine which ones
can actually solve your problem. Your standard of success shouldn’t be too high, though. You’d never
be able to find a solution. But if your standards are realistic, quantifiable, and focused, you’ll be able to
find one.

D. Flesh out the potential results of each solution.

Next, you should determine each of your solutions’ consequences. To do so, create a strength
and weaknesses table for each alternative and compare them to each other. You should also prioritize
your solutions in a list from best chance to solve the problem to worst chance.

E. Choose the best solution and test it.

Based on the evaluation of your potential solutions, choose the best one and test it. You can start
monitoring your preliminary results during this stage too.

F. Track and analyze the results of your test.

Track and analyze your results to see if your solution actually solved your problem.

G. If the test solves your problem, implement the solution. If not, test a new one.
If your potential solution passed your test and solved your problem, then it’s the most rational
decision you can make. You should implement it to completely solve your current problem or any other
related problems in the future. If the solution didn’t solve your problem, then test another potential
solution that you came up with.

3. INCREMENTALISM WAY OF DECISION MAKING

A formal title for what is otherwise known as the science of
muddling through. Incrementalism advocates moving not so much
toward a goal as away from trouble, trying this or that small maneuver
without any grand plan or sense of ultimate purpose. It has two attractive
strengths. First, it eliminates the need for complete, encyclopedic
information by focusing on limited areas, those nearest to hand, one at a time. And, second, it avoids the danger
of grand policy decisions by not making any. Its main weakness is that it is highly “conservative”; it invariably
chooses a direction close to the prevailing one. Grand new departures, radical changes in course, do not occur,
however much they may be needed.
Incrementalism, too, contains a self-defeating feature. Theoretically, incremental decisions are either
tentative or remedial—small steps taken in the “right” direction whenever the present course proves to be
wrong. But the moment decision makers evaluate their small steps—which they must do in order to determine
whether or not the present course is right—they must refer to broader guidelines. These wider criteria are not
formulated incrementally but have all the hallmarks of grand, a priori decisions, which incrementalism seeks to
avoid. Yet without such guidelines, incrementalism amounts to drifting, to action without direction.

4. MIXED-SCANNING WAY OF DECISION MAKING

A less explicitly recognized approach to decision making has been with us for centuries. Effective
managers have made use of it since business began. Because this approach is particularly well suited to the new
age of data overload and pell-mell change, it deserves a new look and, though still evolving, the respectability
that a clear formulation can give it. I call it humble decision making, but a more descriptive title might be
adaptive decision making or mixed scanning, since it entails a mixture of shallow and deep examination of data
—generalized consideration of a broad range of facts and choices followed by detailed examination of a focused
subset of facts and choices.
Mixed scanning contrasts strongly with two prevailing models of decision making—rationalism and
incrementalism. We have already seen that the rationalist model, which requires full scanning of all relevant
data and choices, is often impossible to heed. It requires the collection of enormous quantities of facts, the use
of analytic capabilities we do not command, and a knowledge of consequences that are far away in time. Many
of those who despair of its usefulness tend to favor incrementalism, or muddling through.
Mixed scanning, as the term suggests, involves two sets of judgments: the first are broad, fundamental
choices about the organization’s basic policy and direction; the second are incremental decisions that prepare
the way for new, basic judgments and that implement and particularize them once they have been made. Thus
mixed scanning is much less detailed and demanding than rationalistic decision making, but still broader and
more comprehensive than incrementalism—and less likely to be limited to familiar alternatives.

5. DECISION IRRATIONALITY – ACTION RATIONALITY

Irrationality is a basic feature of organizational behavior. Organizational decision making tends to be
irrational, and organizational ideologies bias organizations’ perceptions. Much effort has been spent on
prescribing how organizations should achieve more rationality. However, rational decision making affords a
bad basis for action. Some irrationalities are necessary requirements for organizational actions. Choices are
facilitated by narrow and clear organizational ideologies, and actions are facilitated by irrational decision-
making procedures which maximize motivation and commitment.
Also, it argues that decision-makers who choose to or must stick closely to the rule of rationality may be
likely to make good choices; but they are also likely to face difficulties in realizing their decision. Mobilizing
organizational actions is easier when decision processes are systematically irrational – when decision-makers
consider only one action option for instance, and when preferences and consequences that support this
alternative are the only ones considered. This relationship between decision and action is dependent upon the
tendency of decisions to produce both determine and stabilize the future. But because decisions are interpreted
as choices, they also produce uncertainty by highlighting the fact that the choice could have been different – or
perhaps should have been different – and that the future is dependent upon the whims of human beings rather
than on stable, reliable entities.

6. GARBAGE CAN THEORY IN DECISION MAKING

The garbage-can theory (Cohen, March, and Olsen
1972) adds that an organization "is a collection of choices
looking for problems, issues and feelings looking for decision
situations in which they might be aired, solutions looking for
issues to which they might be the answer, and decision makers
looking for work". Problems, solutions, participants, and choice
opportunities flow in and out of a garbage can, and which
problems get attached to solutions is largely due to chance.
They are a bit more pessimistic on the value of
charismatic leaders in these situations. They note that leaders
can make a difference in the "garbage can" by:
* carefully timing issue creation
* being sensitive to shifting interests and involvement of participants
* recognizing the status and power implications of choice situations
* abandoning initiatives that get hopeless entangled with others
* realize the planning is largely symbolic and an excuse for interaction
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

April 9,10-WEEK 6 Discuss the various models of decision making:

April 16,17-WEEK 7 a. The model of bounded rationality
b. The organizational procedures view
c. The political view
d. The individual differences perspective
e. Naturalistic decision-making
f. The multiple perspective approach
g. The use of technology in decision-making

MODELS OF DECISION MAKING

A. THE MODEL OF BOUNDED RATIONALIY
This model is introduced by Herbert Simon. It is a human decision-making process in which we attempt
to satisfice, rather than optimize. In other words, we seek a decision that will be good enough, rather than the
best possible decision. Moreover, it is a core assumption of the “natural assessments” view of heuristics and
dual-system models of thinking, and it is one of the psychological foundations of behavioral economics.

B. THE ORGANIZATIONAL PROCEDURES VIEW

The organizational procedures view sees decision making as a bargaining process in organizations.
Choice is made in terms of goals, on the basis of expectations. The organization is a coalition of participants
with disparate demands, focus of attention and limited ability to attend to all problems simultaneously (direct
link to bounded rationality). Bargaining among coalitions produces agreements which are the organization’s
goals. Organizational expectations arise from inferences from available information. Choice emerges as the
selection of the first alternative that expectations identify as acceptable in terms of goals (similar to satisficing).
Choice in the long-run is driven by organizational goals. Choice in the short-run is driven by standard operating
procedures.
There are five (5) relational concepts of organizational procedures view. These are:

1. Quasi-resolution of conflict - Organization can be considered as coalition of members

having different goals and unequal power to influence organizational objectives. Conflicts
rise among the goals of various members (different departments, different goals). Conflicts
can be resolved through: local rationality, acceptable-level decision rules and sequential
attention to goals.
 2. Uncertainty avoidance - Organizations live in uncertain environments. Theory assumes that
organizations will seek to avoid risk and uncertainty at the expense of expected value. “A
decision-maker is willing to accept a reduction in the expected value in exchange for an
increase in the certainty of the outcome” (versus the rationality view where the decision-
makers will choose the alternative with the highest expected value) Major benefit: reduction
in uncertainty.

3. Problemistic/problematic search - Search for solutions is problem-stimulated (problem

triggers the search). Little planned search for solutions not motivated by problems. The
decision-makers search locally and if solution is not found, they expand the search until the
aspiration level is fulfilled.

4. Organizational learning - Considers the past of the organizations in decision-making.

Organizations change their goals and revise problem search. Aspiration levels for goals are
assumed to change in response to results obtained. Plans tend to reflect aspiration levels.
Information system are an important factor in reconciling achievement level and aspiration
level.

5. Incremental decision making – Decision making in organizations is confined to small

changes from existing policy. It emphasizes on correcting or improving existing policies and
actions, and on consensus. The major organizational choices are usually a series of small
choices that combine together to produce major decision. It is also called as “muddling
through”.

C. THE POLITICAL VIEW

Reference has been made to this view as a typical, sometimes appropriate for interdepartmental
decisions. Some students of decision theory contend that all decisions made by a university are political. The
university, these critics maintain, is not like a corporation ((the rational model) but is much more like a political
entity in its pluralism and in its recognition of the legitimacy of internal conflict. Actors in an organization.
Whether individuals or subunits such as academic departments, presumably are knit together by some mutually
understood purpose.
Moreover, the organization is not reliant on decisions based on following routines, rules and policies,
decisions can be made within the groups involved or coalitions.

D. THE INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE PERSPECTIVE

The decision-making is shaped by individual differences. Individual differences is a broad term,
covering any variable that differs between people, from decision style to cognitive ability to personality.
Individual differences are the ways in which people differ from each other. Every number of organization has
its own way of behavior. It is important to understand individual differences because these influence one’s
feelings, thoughts, and behavior in making such decisions.

E. NATURALISTIC DECISION-MAKING
 The naturalistic decision making framework emerged as a means of studying how people make
decisions and perform cognitive complex functions in demanding, real-world situations. It is also a framework
used to study, inform, and shape how people make decisions. Moreover, this framework is used to improve
performance through revisions of training that is focused on decision requirements, and the developments of
information technologies to support decision making and related cognitive functions.

F. THE MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVE APPROACH

This is the process of making long-term decisions that shape the course of an organization while taking
into account diverse perspectives. Often, these perspectives affect the group decision more than “objective”
criteria. This approach also stressed on recognizing that decision makers cannot rely solely on technical analysis
and modeling when dealing with complex real-life systems.

G. THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN DECISION-MAKING

Technology is taking on increasingly major role in decision-making today. The sheer amount of data is
absolutely staggering compared to the work few decades ago. While on the surface it may seem as if the more
information we have at our disposal the better our decisions are.
Technology can speed up data collection to help company managers make decisions faster and more
efficiently. By offering network links between consumers and the company’s central database, the company will
collect current data on sales and can make decisions based on the new information.
A technology that is minimally involved in the decision-making process will have minimal impact on
the process, and a technology that is significantly involved in the decision-making process will have a major
impact on the process.
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

April 23,24-WEEK 8 Explain the following Flerbert Simon’s arguments in decision

April 30,May 1-WEEK9
making:
a. Decision-making is a complex matter.
b. Human mind and rationality cannot comprehend all
possible situations.
c. Decision of an organization is subject to change with the
change of time and circumstances.

FLERBERT SIMON’S ARGUMENTS IN DECISION MAKING

a. Decision-making is a complex matter.
Decision making is a complex matter involving both reasoning and emotions. Even the most emotional
person uses rational thought when deciding, and even the most rational person is affected by emotions when
making decisions. Yet we often, as you do here, tend to highlight the negative role of emotions in decision
making.

b. Human mind and rationality cannot comprehend all possible situations.

Human mind and rationality cannot comprehend all possible situations. It may naively be stated that on
the decision making process of all developing countries there is clear influence of the capitalist countries. It is
so called because the policy maker makes one type of comparisons methods or processes for the purpose of
getting maximum benefits or favourable for his organization.

c. Decision of an organization is subject to change with the change of time and circumstances.

Organizational change occurs when a company makes a transition from its current state to some desired
future state. Managing organizational change is the process of planning and implementing change in
organizations in such a way as to minimize employee resistance and cost to the organization while
simultaneously maximizing the effectiveness of the change effort.

Today's business environment requires companies to undergo changes almost constantly if they are to
remain competitive. Factors such as globalization of markets and rapidly evolving technology force businesses
to respond in order to survive. Such changes may be relatively minor—as in the case of installing a new
software program—or quite major—as in the case of refocusing an overall marketing strategy, fighting off a
hostile takeover, or transforming a company in the face of persistent foreign competition.
 Organizational change initiatives often arise out of problems faced by a company. In some cases,
however, companies change under the impetus of enlightened leaders who first recognize and then exploit new
potentials dormant in the organization or its circumstances. Some observers, more soberly, label this a
"performance gap" which able management is inspired to close.

But organizational change is also resisted and—in the opinion of its promoters—fails. The failure may
be due to the manner in which change has been visualized, announced, and implemented or because internal
resistance to it builds. Employees, in other words, sabotage those changes they view as antithetical to their own
interests.
 EDUC 604
POLICY ANALYSIS & DECISION
MAKING
Submitted by:
ARLINDA S. BONGCALON

May 7,8-WEEK Answer the following:

10  Two employees are having regular conflicts with each other
and often disturb the team’s balance. How would you handle
this situation?
 Do you usually make better decisions alone or with a group?
Why? When do you ask for help?
 How would you deal with a demanding external stakeholder
who keeps changing requirements about a specific project
you’re working on?

 Two employees are having regular conflicts with each other and often disturb the
team’s balance. How would you handle this situation?

Any business will have employees who don’t get along from time to time. Whether it’s because of
differences in their personalities, lifestyles, opinions or some other factor, sometimes employees just don’t
mesh.

And when there’s discord in the workplace, it affects everybody.

Here are some tips to help you tactfully turn conflict into consensus between feuding employees.

Step 1. Understand the nature of the conflict

It’s often tempting to make assumptions about conflict, especially if rumors are circulating. But don’t
assume anything. Instead, figure out what’s fueling the disagreement between your employees.

Step 2. Encourage employees to work it out themselves

As a business leader, you want your employees to be as self-sufficient as possible. After all, you’re their
supervisor or manager – not their mother.

Step 3. Nip it in the bud quickly

Unfortunately, some situations won’t work themselves out on their own and you’ll be forced to step in.
If ignored, employee disputes can infect the entire workplace and eventually taint the reputation of your
company. Other employees may find themselves unintentionally drawn into the conflict. This “employee
sideshow” can further derail productivity.

Step 4. Listen to both sides

 When it’s time to get involved, start by dismissing any gossip that may be buzzing around the office,
and don’t buy into whatever you hear.

Step 5. Determine the real issue, together

Often, the actual cause of an employee argument is clouded by emotions. By the time the issue is
brought to a manager’s attention, the squabbling employees may already be angry and defensive. That’s why
it’s important to slow things down and listen.

Step 6. Consult your employee handbook

Reviewing pertinent company policies in your employee handbook may shed light on the best approach
to solving the problem. Sticking to the common ground rules that every employee is expected to follow at all
times can be a practical way to remain objective.

Step 7. Find a solution

Employees don’t have to be best friends; they just need to get the job done. And don’t forget – there’s
good and bad conflict. Help employees learn the difference.

Step 8. Write it up
Whether employees like it or not, it’s important that you document all workplace incidents. Recording
these events will help you monitor behavior over time and notice repeat offenders that may be negatively
impacting your office.

Step 9. Teach them how to communicate

For some troubled employees, talking out a situation isn’t enough. Typically, people who have these
types of problems likely have communication issues already. If there’s a lot of discord among your staff, it’s
probably time to teach them some basic communication and problem-solving techniques.

Step 10. Lead by example

Set the standard for employees who don’t get along – and employees in general.

 Do you usually make better decisions alone or with a group? Why? When
do you ask for help?
According to the idea of synergy, decisions made collectively tend to be more effective than decisions
made by a single individual. ... Finally, when the decision is made by a group rather than a single individual,
implementation of the decision will be easier because group members will be invested in the decision.
If you have exhausted all potential solutions or you are in over your head, don't be afraid to reach out. If
you can approach your manager, colleague, or direct report in an effort to gain their assistance, show them
what you have already done.
 How would you deal with a demanding external stakeholder who keeps
changing requirements about a specific project you’re working on?

 Pay attention to communication: Keep internal and external lines of communication open

and receptive. Be direct and ensure that you understand everything expected of the project team.
The same applies to stakeholders. Convey the implications of additions and changes on the
project constraints. Instead of reading between the lines, ask to spell out the details. The
stakeholders may not always know what it takes from your side to fulfil their expectations.

 Create a requirement approval process : With the help of stakeholders, establish a

procedure that lays out the sequence of actions and interaction moving forward. A standard
process ensures that any deviation is recognised as change and hindrance. This brings order to
collaboration and makes it a better structured process. Working in an organised and mutually
agreeable manner prevents the escalation or even occurrence of conflict.

 Spend more time in requirement analysis : This is a given and sounds simple enough,
but looking at the number of projects that fail due to poor requirement management, bears
repeating. Spend adequate time in understanding the problem statements that motivate the
project or the 'existing system' that you're replacing. Leave no detail of requirements gathered
from stakeholders inadequately analysed. 

 Get clear SLAs: Service level agreements should be carefully worded and on time. Let
agreements clearly state terms of the collaboration, the work environments and deliverables
before you begin.

 Be flexible and adaptable within reason : Be flexible, receptive, and reasonable. Best
assume that requirements are subject to change. With this approach, you establish a positive
relationship with external stakeholders and increase your chances of getting their approval later.

 Convey the impact of specific changes : Stakeholders may not wholly comprehend the
indirect impact of the changes in terms of person hours and other costs. Be upfront on how
specific changes may lead to unexpected complications and delays in the project. Make
stakeholders understand which changes lead to significant ripple effects.

 Use requirement management software to set a change control process :

Establish a foolproof change control strategy. Adopt a requirements management software to
regulate the process of requirement extraction and management. It shouldn’t be just a series of
changes conveyed from one channel and one person to another but a properly documented,
transparent and trackable process. Software will present a clear picture of where each
requirement stands, what tasks and responsibilities are marked against it and how it has evolved.

 Establish a prototyping mechanism: Gathering requirements using a limited prototype is

attractive to users since it allows key stakeholders to envision what parts of the product may look
 like and check if they have any concerns going ahead. Minor details that both sides may have
missed otherwise may now be visible.

 Go agile: Agile, iterative or scrum projects ease managing new additions and modified
requirements. The backlogs in agile projects ensure that all changes, even new ones springing up
on the spur of the moment are documented as 'user stories' or prototypes, documents, pictures –
whatever describes the idea the best.