Critical Steps in the Decision-making Process - Coursework Example

?Phase 2 Discussion Board 2 Relative values of proactive and reactive thinking in determining an action plan. Following the unethical and unlawful action that one of our partners has committed, by discharging his duties in a dishonest manner; as an organization, we shall have to undertake a reactive action to quick-fix the damage. However, I must bring to your attention that we must start undertaking proactive actions so we can address issues in a more holistic manner. Furthermore, by rushing to address the issues through a reactive approach and then stop there, I am afraid we shall miss the opportunity to restructure our organization so we can avoid a recurrence of the problems we are experiencing. Nevertheless, we must start thinking proactively so we can identify and fix the weak systems that are occasioning the problems we are going through. Ideally, our partner could not have been involved in breach of good conduct if we had earlier taken proactive measures by, for example, formulating a tough code of conduct framework to guide our officers when discharging their duties (Hastie, 2010). Apparently, I would like to encourage the members of this committee to adopt a proactive thinking as opposed to reactive thinking. This is primarily because of the shortcomings we are likely to experience if we continue with the reactive approach. For example, you should realize that a reactive thinker will use the company’s resources to solve the immediate problems and then hope that the problem has been done away with. In some situations, a reactive thinker will tend to imagine that a problem has become less significant only to be surprised when it recurs in future with serious consequences. On the other hand, proactive thinking involves conceiving problems as systems, which is a dynamic approach that puts into account the interaction of both human and non-human elements. For example, an introduction of compulsory integrity course in our organization will go a long way in preventing problems that have a far reaching repercussions from occurring in the future (Hastie, 2010). Defining critical steps in the decision-making process. In regards to decision making in our organization, we can apply rational model (Towler, 2010), which involves six critical steps including problem identification, generation of alternatives, evaluation of alternatives, choosing of an alternative, implementation of the decision, and evaluation of decision’s effectiveness. We should, therefore, start by pointing out the problem we are undergoing. Our problem was perpetrated by one of our partners who disregarded his contractual obligation by failing to advise the contracting team to carry out a very crucial market research analysis on behalf of one of our long-standing clients. If we fail to take an action to address this issue, we are likely to experience dire repercussions including possible litigations for breach of contract, loss of reputation of our company as well as the loss of our esteemed and royal customers. Ideally, it is recommendable that all the stakeholders take part in scanning both the internal and the external environment with the aim of identifying problems so that next time actions can be taken proactively and on a timely basis (Hastie, 2010). Once the problem has been identified, generation of alternatives should follow. Before generating these alternatives, we should specify the goals that we want to achieve. For instance, we intend to increase the integrity level in our company so we can avoid the consequences that comes with dishonesty and lack of fulfillment of our contractual obligations. We also intend to address the mistake that our partner did, so our reputation is not tainted. Having identified the goals, it will be easier for us to identify the alternative, however, enough evidence must be gathered regarding each alternative. In addition, the repercussions of taking each alternative should be analyzed (Hastie, 2010). When it comes to the stage of evaluating the alternatives, we must ask ourselves questions such as: Is the alternative satisfactory? Is the alternative practicable? What impact will the alternative have on different people? (Grant, 2011). Once all the alternatives have been evaluated, we shall try to choose the best alternative. The best alternative must be feasible, acceptable and satisfactory to the members of this committee. We shall simply use our intuition and judgement to come up with the best alternative, which will help us achieve our goals more effectively. Apparently, we shall try our best to ensure that the chosen alternative is understood and accepted by each one of us so that its implementation will be successful. Besides, I will try my best to bring the concerned department on board so they can allocate us enough resources for the successful implementation. Determine considerations in the decision-making process. When making our decisions, several ethical and potentially legal issues will be conceived because the mistake that our partner did is likely to present serious repercussion to our business. More importantly, we need to consider the impact of taking an action and compare it with the impact of not taking any action. Ideally, the action that we shall take must address the problem on hand and not worsen the situation. With this, I mean we must assess the repercussions against the partner himself, our client, our organization, and even against the committee members who shall be involved in the execution of these measures. If we let our client know that the data they were presented with had been presented to another client three years ago and that it is not worth being used, we do expect that they may decide to file a case against our partner. Additionally, the consulting firm, which owns the data, may sue the partner or even our company for breach of copyright. If we lose credibility, this shall have dire consequences on the performance of our upcoming IPO since many companies as well as individuals will not want to invest in a company that is marred with integrity issues. In essence, in the course of our decision-making process, we must make sure we reduce negative outcome as much as possible, in respect to any action we undertake or fail to undertake (Hastie, 2010). Identify a creative, innovative, and optimal solution to the problem with appropriate justification. As discussed above, an optimal solution must involve the adoption of an optimum course of action, which minimizes the negative consequences that leads to the best results. In this sense, different course of actions must be evaluated based on both internal and external factors. Ideally, it is of paramount importance to tell our client that our partner went against his contractual obligations and advise them to abandon the deal before they take any of the recommendations they were given by our partner. In addition, we shall tactically negotiate with them so they may allow us to conduct for them a justifiable market research and analysis. If we fail to do this, the client is most likely to realize that they were duped in the future when they will have already committed their funds and incurred heavy losses. This will force them to sue us and it could cost us a substantial amount of damages. In the same measure, we shall ask the partner to resign, so at least we can guard our reputation (Hastie, 2010). Outline the expected organizational impact. Issues of integrity are paramount, and if care is not taken, they can bring our company to its knees. There are some bodies which are charged with formulating rules of the code of conduct to be followed by all the members under their umbrella. If our company is found to have violated these rules, we can be sued or even prevented from undertaking some duties. Also, the government has set some laws that protects, for example, the intellectual property and we can be sued because one of our partner violated these laws. In addition, failure to discharge our obligations with integrity will create a bad reputation of our company and, therefore, potential investors will keep off when we unveil our IPO (Jones, 1997). References Grant, R. (2011). Contemporary strategy analysis. New York, NY: Wiley. Hastie, R. (2010). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jones, M. (1997). In bad company. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199707/in-bad-company Towler, M. (2010). Rational decision making: An introduction. New York, NY: Wiley. Read More