Decision Making

Question:

What is the Nature of Decision-making? Explain.

Answer:

According to me, decision-making is one of the vital attributes taken by managers in Multinational Corporations. It is the act of choices between alternative courses of action for designing produced specified result in accordance with explicit criteria. After attending workshop, I gathered facts relating decision-making as finding probable course of action as well as selecting viable options at the same time. It is the ongoing process for evaluation of alternatives in meeting objectives by decision maker in proper course of action (McWhinney, 1992). 

Nature of Decision-making

I analyzed so many definitions on decision-making based upon scholarly literature articles. There is no specific grand theory on decision-making in alignment with future goals and objectives. Quantitative approaches include operational research as well as statistics and computer programming in commencing post World War II period. In case qualitative approaches, it enhances psychology as well as sociology as emerged in the year 1970. I believe that quantitative approaches help in enhancing disciplines in final decision-making process (Bolman & Deal, 2003). It deals with uncertain actions in providing perfect information by economist and statistician at the same time. 

I have gathered detailed investigation on the decision-making models by the professors. These models render complexity in real decision-making as emerged by management in variables for future analysis purpose. Models especially identify significant causal variables as well as attempts ways for rendering real-world phenomenon in the most appropriate way. 

I have analyzed these decision-making models after the workshop for detailed individual investigation as far as possible. Most of the successful organization tries hard in involving in better decision-making process as well as fast and reliable at the same time. It is the generic process involving skills and principles by business organization in an overall manner. 

Conclusion 

I would like to conclude that decision-making is much empirical in nature. Decision-making takes place in physical place like office (McWhinney, 1992). Decision-making takes place for discussing key issues and innovation policy required for new business organization. Decision-making takes place on typology concerning attributes and multiple classifications as far as possible. 

Introduction 

This workshop session on decision-making gave me clear understanding on ways required for managing level of certainty in real-life scenarios. Rational in decision-making intends in giving relative concept. It interprets decisions on much broader concept as well as subjective and disciplined manner. Rationality in decision maker helps viewing continuum in case of rationality for rational-irrational classification in the most appropriate way. Non-rational accepts certain behavior pattern of person by cognitive faculties for bringing changes in degree of reflection in final decision-making process (Gibbs, 1988). 

Managing Under Certainty

According to Simon, there are five differences in and from rational model:

Factored problems- I had noticed that factored problems occur due to high level of complexity in real-life scenarios. It is the human factor problems in small pieces as well as dealing it in smoother terms as far as possible. 

Satisficing- It is one of the problems faced due to lack of complete information for seeking human proper course of action. It aims at maximizing utility for future analysis purpose. 

Search- It is one of the alternatives for generating ways for human for seeking proper course of action.

Uncertainty avoidance- There is problem for avoiding uncertain actions as well as short-term feedback in changing with emerging outcomes at the same time. 

Repertoires- It is important to understand the fact that organization requires in possessing more alternatives in identification of intended outcomes as far as possible. 

Conclusion 

According to me, normative models give assumptions on rational person whereas descriptive models assumes on non-rational person. It is the continuum of rationality requires in proper behavior pattern in case of non-rational behavior. Bounded rational models is one of the qualitative approaches for acknowledging ways for bringing changes in behavioral constraints that affects decision-making process largely (McWhinney, 1992). 

Introduction 

I would like to address the fact that managers handle high risk and uncertainty on daily basis. It is important in understanding the fact that there is high level of risk in final decision-making by any managers (Argyris & Schön, 1974). Risk is the chance of certain negative outcome in relation with decision undertaken for possible elements. It is the potential of exposure in considering uncertain events as well as occurrence on making undesirable consequences in the near future. Likelihood of risk implies principles of probability for future analysis purpose. Decision makers seek ways in identifying possible outcomes in the most appropriate way (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Decision-makers helps in recognizing ways for exercising over ways that is subjective in nature. A perception of risk varies largely in reported incidences in relation with probability outcomes. 

According to me, not all potential outcomes can be experienced in final decision-making for uncertain decisions. Individuals possess ways for interpreting real-life scenarios for future analysis purpose. It limits ways for creation of less uncertainty levels for standard ways in and across groups as well as individuals. I feel that qualitative differences occur in case for interpreting uncertainty factors in other concepts in final decision-making process for cost measurement. It drives potential drivers in rendering reliable data for converting accurate data for management information in final decision-making process.

Conclusion  

Decision tree senses data in final decision-making process for getting access towards best decisions. In order to predict best decisions, it is necessary to deal in high return on investment as well as physical characteristics at the same time. Utility is considered as the method for quantifying as well as measuring decision-maker preference pattern in case of alterative patterns in certain course of action. It aims at measuring the total worth of an outcome for filtering decision-maker for future analysis purpose. Risk averse avoids taking risks as far as possible. Risk seekers has optimist in nature and losses large amount in comparison with winning amounts (Argyris & Schön, 1974). Risk neutrals accept EMV calculation types for information choice of policies in the most appropriate way. 

In this particular workshop on personality, I had gathered knowledge on the personality concepts. It is the dynamic organization in and within individuals from those psychological systems in determining unique adjustments for business organization. The particular way reacts as well as inter-reacts with each other. It is termed as the bundle of characteristics for viewing at the psychological process in and behind external traits and internal traits in the most appropriate way. 

Personality and values in decision-making

According to me, personality theory is considered as the individual concerns for gathering facts regarding inherent characteristics for behavior pattern analysis. Traditionally, it is measured as self-report surveys as well as observer rating surveys at the same time. Carl Jung had developed approach on personality in introducing concepts on future goals on emphasizing of past behavior in an overall manner (Argyris & Schön, 1974). 

Self-concept represents individual beliefs as well as evaluation in guiding decisions and behavior. It senses self that differs between individuals from contexts like family, religion and home (Bolman & Deal, 2003). It is important in considering fact regarding individual perception, attitudes in final decision-making process. Self-dimensional concept includes self-enhancement, verification as well as evaluation and social self for future analysis purpose. 

Conclusion 

I would like stress on value terms based upon normative standards. It is because of influencing attitude of human beings for alternative course of action. It endures belief for specified conduct for social preferable options in end state of existence. It requires comparing values with attitudes relating specified issues as well as person (Schön, 1991). It is the belief of accepting or rejecting on values by individual course of action. 

After attending this workshop, I have developed understanding on knowledge in action, reflection at the same. It is the intellectual exercise by managers. Leaders focus on events for ascertaining own beliefs as well as assumptions in background experiences for smooth functioning of business organization. It is the process of reflection in leading gain in knowledge for challenging concepts for situation reflection as far as possible. It views at reflection on committed alternative course of action for future analysis purpose. 

Professional Reflective Practice

Gibbs Reflection cycle encourages clear description of situation as well as analysis of feelings at the same time. Reflective process as well as frameworks is the structuring process for reflection. All of the reflective models comprises of certain process including retrospection, self-evaluation and re-orientation. In the recent reflective practice, it focuses mainly on the practical course of action as far as possible. It is the interactive cycle for actions and realities as reflected in future outcomes in the most appropriate way (Sergiovanni, 1989). 

Conclusion 

I had detailed understanding regarding the professional reflective practice based upon scientific knowledge in an effective way. It is accounted for real facts in skills in managing as well as leading human organization. It includes managers as well as leaders in deciding upon proper course of action (Bolman & Deal, 2003). It aims at recognizing ways for managing as well as leading changed behaviors in proper course of action.  

Reference List

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A.  (1974).  Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bolman, L., & Deal, T.  (2003).  Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd edition).  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 361-374.

Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Oxford, Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechnic.

McWhinney, W.  (1992).  Paths of change: Strategic choices for organizations and society.  Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 

Schön, D. A.  (1991).  Educating the reflective practitioner.  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, T. J.  (1989).  Informing professional practice in educational administration.  Journal of Educational Administration, 27(2),   p. 186.