| - What are the obstacles that hamper successful | | | | ignores the emotions and egos affecting the course |
| decision-making? | | | | of discussion. |
| - What are the downsides of group decision-making? | | | | One of the tools that are used in organizations to |
| - How does our management style affect the | | | | broaden the scope of thinking and decision-making is |
| process of decision-making? | | | | Edward De Bono's method of Six Thinking Hats. We |
| - And why is rational thinking overrated? | | | | used it in numerous organizational settings and training |
| The following article discusses tools for the | | | | sessions as a tool for an effective and thorough |
| management of decision-making processes under | | | | discussion of complex issues. It helps map different |
| changing conditions. | | | | aspects of the subject towards making a decision. |
| Decision-Making with Style | | | | The principle of this method is to direct the thinking |
| Try to recall an important decision which you were a | | | | and the debate of all group members to six different |
| part of in the past 6 months. Think of the most | | | | thinking directions. Thus, the entire group moves |
| significant choice you had to make in your | | | | forward in the same direction, instead of clashing and |
| organization. How was this decision taken? Did the | | | | arguing on the correct way to address the issue |
| senior manger make the call after consulting with | | | | altogether. For instance, early in the discussion |
| several assistants? Was it a majority rule? Was it a | | | | participants should put on their "Red Hat" - |
| consensus decision? Were objective facts and | | | | encouraging people to express feelings, hunches and |
| information the driving force behind it, or intuitions | | | | intuitions - without the need for logical explanations. |
| and feelings? How long did it take to make the final | | | | This minimizes hidden influence of negative or positive |
| decision? | | | | feelings later in the discussion. Wearing the "White |
| Some of us tend to make our major decisions on our | | | | Hat" (focusing on facts, information and missing data) |
| own, while others prefer to do it after hearing the | | | | soon afterwards prevents the dangers of ignoring |
| opinions and exploring the options with others. We | | | | crucial facts and ensures that a decision can be made |
| also differ in the time we take to make a decision, | | | | based on available information. The use of other |
| and in our need to base it on factual analysis or on | | | | thinking hats may provide an answer to other typical |
| intuition. In other words, each of us has a | | | | decision-making errors - such as wearing the Black |
| characteristic personal decision-making style. | | | | Hat to investigate potential problems when the entire |
| The managerial decision-making style may be mapped | | | | group is enthusiastic about moving forward with a |
| using three axes: | | | | certain decision. |
| - Decision-making speed: on the one end you have | | | | Overcoming group pressure |
| the impulsive decision-makers, who do no stop to | | | | Another well-known hazard characteristic of group |
| consider the results of their choices, while on the | | | | decision-making is the Groupthink effect, discussed |
| other extreme you'll find those who postpone and | | | | by Janis & Mann (1977). The Abilene Paradox |
| avoid making any decision in fear of taking | | | | also describes how group decisions can actually be |
| responsibility for it. | | | | opposite to the views of its members. This |
| - Collection of information: to what extent does the | | | | phenomena was observed by Jerry B. Harvey and it |
| manager base their decisions on an analysis of data | | | | denotes a process that leads a group to make an |
| as opposed to intuition and an internal compass. | | | | irrational decision, mostly because each member tries |
| - Sharing: the extent and manner by which managers | | | | to adjust his/her opinion to what they consider to be |
| involve and include others in the collection of | | | | the view of other group members. |
| information and in the making of the decision itself. | | | | Numerous studies have shown that this type of |
| Usually, when we think of the first axis - | | | | failure has lead to crucial decisions - such as the US |
| decision-making speed - the common view about | | | | misinterpretation of the Japanese maneuvers before |
| postponing a decision is negative ("How long must we | | | | the attack on Pearl Harbor, the invasion to the Cuban |
| wait for his decision?"). Indeed, some situations call | | | | Bay of Pigs, the Challenger and Columbia space |
| for an early resolution before things get out of hand | | | | shuttle disasters and lately - the American invasion of |
| and a greater problem is faced. However, on other | | | | Iraq. |
| situations a hasty decision may very costly. In other | | | | Janis lists a number of symptoms that help identify |
| cases things may be resolved by themselves (one | | | | when groupthink occurs - the illusion of unanimity, self |
| may say that it is better "to decide not to decide" | | | | censorship, avoidance of criticism, pressure on |
| then). | | | | non-conformists, etc. He then points to the typical |
| The second and third axes (collection of information | | | | characteristics of decisions made under these |
| and sharing) provide a framework for describing five | | | | conditions - insufficient examination of alternatives, |
| typical managerial decision makers: | | | | partial understanding of the purposes of the decision, |
| - The Lone Wolf: this manager never consults with | | | | ignoring of significant risks involved, lack of vital |
| anyone and decides on everything by himself. | | | | information and no contingency plans. |
| - The Surveyor: this type of manager does not hold | | | | We offer two tools for a structured discussion in |
| a discussion before the decision, but rather samples | | | | order to reduce the dangers of groupthink. The first |
| the views of people involved (in a kind of | | | | tool is called "Devil's Advocate" and is used to force |
| referendum), and decides according to the majority | | | | the participants to examine the arguments against a |
| view. | | | | decision that is about to be made. Before or at the |
| - The Authoritarian: this manager consults and listens | | | | outset of the debate one of the group members is |
| to others to draw ideas and directions, but makes | | | | given the role of questioning the underlying |
| the final decision by himself. | | | | assumptions and major arguments of the team. |
| - Semi-Democratic: this manager holds a discussion | | | | When someone is trusted with this official role, there |
| and strives for a collective decision, yet keeps the | | | | are greater chances that they will not fear to |
| right of veto on certain decisions. | | | | express their criticism, opening the way for others to |
| - Harmonic: this manager consults and reaches a | | | | raise doubts and disagreements. |
| common agreement, usually through a consensus (e.g. | | | | Another tool for overcoming the risks of groupthink |
| where others have the right of veto as well). | | | | is based on the Delphi Technique for situational |
| Flexible decision-making - according to the situation | | | | analysis and decision-making. The views of each |
| In order to improve the quality of decision-making, | | | | group member are written separately and collected in |
| we should begin by recognizing our typical | | | | advance (and in sensitive decision - anonymously). |
| decision-making style and that of our co-workers. In | | | | The results are then collected and discussed in the |
| addition, as managers, we must understand that | | | | group. Due to this seemingly technical procedure |
| different situations call for different decision-making | | | | participants don't know the opinions of others when |
| strategies and techniques. Therefore, we have to | | | | they have to make their own recommendation, and |
| acquire new mechanisms for making decisions, so | | | | a wider range of views is usually produced. |
| that we may choose the way we tackle a situation | | | | We used this technique for an expert committee |
| according to its characteristics. | | | | that discussed and rated product innovation ideas. |
| There are three central questions we need to ask | | | | The meeting is opened with a general discussion on |
| ourselves whenever we are about to make a | | | | the criteria that should be considered when rating the |
| managerial decision: | | | | ideas. Participants then personally rate dozens of |
| - Is it vital to make a decision, and if so - how urgent | | | | innovation ideas (produced beforehand) on a scale of |
| is it? | | | | 1-5. An average rating for each idea is calculated from |
| - What information is required in order to make a | | | | these individual judgments and the highest ranking |
| calculated choice, and when is it necessary to go | | | | ideas are discussed. In such a way, a certain idea |
| ahead even with partial information? | | | | may be highly rated by most members, yet one |
| - Who need to be a part of the decision-making | | | | participant might have noticed a major flaw in the |
| process, and to what extent? | | | | idea, and his reservation is revealed through the low |
| Let us demonstrate the use of the above questions | | | | rating given to the idea. |
| through several examples: | | | | The trap of commitment (to preceding decisions) |
| Example A: The organization has grown and needs to | | | | The last aspect of decision-making we turn our |
| be moved to a new office building. The Operations | | | | attention to has to do with emotion and ego. |
| Manager is required to choose the location for the | | | | Whenever we make a personal decision, or are |
| new building. His decision will probably have a direct | | | | involved in a group decision, we become emotionally |
| influence on all departments, and it is desirable to | | | | and psychologically committed to the choice we |
| make them a part of the process. This will often | | | | made. As time progresses and we invest more |
| contribute to the quality of the decision (providing a | | | | resources in the execution of our chosen path, our |
| more holistic view of the implications of the decision), | | | | individual and organizational tendency to support that |
| and will also lower levels of resistance once the | | | | direction grows. Even if we are faced with signs that |
| decision is made (as everyone had a chance to | | | | indicate that the original decision was wrong, we |
| express their concerns and suggestions and where | | | | usually find it hard to admit the mistake, conquer our |
| involved early in the process). | | | | ego and pride, and change it. This kind of situation |
| The decision does not seem to be an urgent one, as | | | | may lead to a magic trap, driving people and |
| well. In such a scenario the Operations Manager may | | | | organizations on a path of deterioration and |
| prepare initial information on available choices, costs, | | | | escalation of a single mistake, leading to more and |
| and considerations. Later - others may be made part | | | | more wrong choices (see Drummond, 1994). |
| of the decision buy presenting three or four | | | | An interesting way to expose managers to this type |
| acceptable options, to be decided by the majority. | | | | of danger, so that they may learn to avoid it, is by |
| The Surveyor style is most appropriate. | | | | letting them experience it. This may be accomplished, |
| Example B: One of your employees was caught | | | | for instance, through a decision-making simulation and |
| stealing company equipment. Your decision will not | | | | analysis through board games. Such exercises require |
| directly affect other employees (they might learn | | | | participating managers to make personal, small team |
| from the way you handle the case). The best tactics | | | | and entire group decisions in a variety of game |
| in this case would be a thorough investigation of the | | | | situations. Most partakers fall into the trap of sticking |
| facts, and if in fact the employee has committed the | | | | to an initial game plan, and find it hard to exert |
| theft, it should be handled without delay and in an | | | | strategic or tactical flexibility. Following this |
| authoritarian manner - discharging the employee. It is | | | | demonstration through play, is an observation and |
| advisable to consult with the HR department and the | | | | discussion of the emotional and inter-personal causes |
| legal department, to make sure the dismissal adheres | | | | of this escalation. Finally, work related examples of |
| to all legal procedures. | | | | similar decision patterns should be discussed and tools |
| Example C: You come across a significant business | | | | are offered for breaking those patterns. |
| opportunity for your organization, but a quick | | | | Improving the quality of personal and organizational |
| response and action is needed in order to grab it. It is | | | | decision |
| obvious that others will be influenced by the decision, | | | | In this final section, we suggest ways to cope with |
| and must therefore be a part of it. In order not to | | | | the dangers listed above. The suggested measures |
| lose time you may call an urgent interdisciplinary | | | | may be implemented by the management of the |
| meeting, collecting vital information from all | | | | organization, and especially the Human Resource |
| participants before making a common and more | | | | Department: |
| balanced decision, taking into consideration the | | | | |
| various risks and benefits. A group decision will also | | | | 1. Raising the awareness of managers and employees |
| allow other the chance to agree and support the | | | | to their decision-making styles through the use of |
| new business direction. | | | | personal test or surveys, observations, management |
| The Age of Rationality and its dangers | | | | consulting or workshops. |
| If we seek to improve the way we make decisions, | | | | 2. A systematic placement of different types of |
| understanding the situation and adopting the | | | | decision-makers in key positions and in task forces. |
| appropriate decision-making style is hardly enough. | | | | 3. Encouraging the use of decision-making tools such |
| The crossroads in which we choose the directions to | | | | as Delphi, consensual decision-making, Devil's |
| our future carry with them quite a few traps and | | | | Advocate and the Six Thinking Hats. |
| obstacles that may fail us. Following is a discussion of | | | | 4. The analysis of cases of good and bad decisions in |
| some well-known pitfalls of decision-making | | | | the organization itself - aiming towards learning rather |
| processes, along with relevant tools and measures to | | | | then blaming. |
| face those dangers. | | | | Personally, each one of us may learn to improve our |
| The modern age has seen the rise of rational thinking | | | | decision by observing the ways other people make |
| to a position of supremacy. This has gone so far as | | | | decisions, asking feedback on the way we make |
| to lead to the illusion that human can and should try | | | | decisions, and intentionally trying out decision-making |
| to be perfect decision-makers. The unequivocal belief | | | | styles which are different from our typical style. All |
| in the rationality of man is based on the modern view | | | | of this should eventually contribute for improving the |
| of man, on western philosophy and on the rise and | | | | way we make decisions and the quality of the |
| achievements of science in the past two centuries. | | | | decisions we make. In the long term - this is what |
| However, there is still a lot of evidence of the limits | | | | every organization and person must do in order to |
| of human rationality. We know of the limited ability to | | | | advance in today's challenging world. |
| collect and process decision-related information, the | | | | References |
| subjective interpretation of facts, and the effects of | | | | - Harvey, Jerry B. (1988). The Abilene Paradox and |
| personality and culture on decisions. | | | | Other Meditations on Management. Lexington, Mass: |
| Consider, for instance, a meeting in which the | | | | Lexington Books. |
| participants have to make a certain decision. In most | | | | - Janis, I. & Mann, L. (1977). Decision Making: A |
| cases, they would voice arguments supporting | | | | Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and |
| different views, using logical explanations to support | | | | Commitment. New York: The Free Press. |
| their point of view. The underlying meaning of making | | | | - Drummond, H. (1994), "Escalation in Organizational |
| a decision in such a setting is that one explanation is | | | | Decision Making: A Case of Recruiting an Incompetent |
| logically correct while other arguments are logically | | | | Employee", Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, |
| false. This process fails to face the truth of limited | | | | 43-55. |
| information that participants have. It completely | | | | |