Evaluation of Breaking the Operations Department of ABC into Several Subdivisions - Assignment Example

Evaluation of Breaking the Operations Department of ABC into Several Subdivisions Dear Supervisor Lawton, This email serves as a self-evaluation of the decision to break the Operations Department into several smaller units to handle different operations concerns in ABC. The overall goal is to segregate important tasks and responsibilities and have one office to handle one concern, thus eliminating the stress and attrition problems among employees and increase the overall service level of the department.

The decision was analyzed using Bazerman and Moore’s six steps in managerial decision making, which includes defining the problem, identifying the criteria, weighing the criteria, generating alternatives, rating each alternative on each criterion, and computing the optimal decision (2009, p.4), to examine and define the feasibility of increasing service quality, decreasing attrition rates, and increasing the ease of resolving accountability concerns. 1. Define the Problem: The main problem within the department was the continuous decrease in the quality of service.

It created a domino effect of lowering the morale of employees, thereby increasing job dissatisfaction, which ultimately led to attrition or at least, attendance issues. These factors aggravated the concerns in quality of service that had been gradually increasing partly due to not having any specialized office to work on the concern. 2. Identify the criteria: According to Bazerman and Moore, “the rational decision maker will identify all relevant criteria in the process” (2009, p.4). Based on this, three things were considered in determining the solution to this problem.

The three criterions are effectiveness, cost, and term. 3. Weigh the criteria: A possible 50 points or 50% importance is given to effectiveness (the solution fixes the problem), 30 points or 30% to cost (financial investment within the reasonable scale), and 20 points or 20% to term (fixes the problem on a long-term basis). These weights were based on the recent multiple huddles with the top and middle management within the Operations Department. 4. Generate alternatives: It is necessary to identify all possible courses of action (Bazerman and Moore, 2009, p.4). This eliminates the possibility of hasty decisions due to lack of presented options that could result in more serious concerns in the future.

Although creating smaller units within the Operations Department was the first solution considered, there were other alternatives presented. One was decreasing the quality standard and second was retraining of employees on problem areas concerning quality. 5. Rate each alternative on each criterion: This step was the most difficult since it requires the most accurate forecasting (Bazerman and Moore, 2009, p.4). However, since the numbers from previous departmental reports were on hand, and the criterions used were not new to the department, these made the task easier.

The ratings were evaluated based on the points given to the weight of each specific criterion in number 3 (See Fig.1). Figure 1 Ratings per Criterion EFFECTIVENESS COST TERM LOWERING THE QUALITY STANDARDS 25 30 10 RETRAINING OF EMPLOYEES 30 0 10 HAVING SEVERAL SUBDIVISIONS 45 25 20 Alternative A: Lowering the quality standards would merely be effective on paper but would not really resolve the issue on increasing the standards of quality, giving it a 25. There is practically no money involved in this alternative so the financial risk is not high, giving it a full 30.

It will be short-term because in the long run, stakeholders and company clients will notice the decreasing standards that might affect the business relationship, giving it a 10. Alternative B: Retraining of employees cannot give high guarantee to the effectiveness since information retention is not easy to achieve immediately especially if there are several areas where employees need retraining on, giving it a 30. Additionally, it will be expensive to retrain all employees, considering the non-productive hours, and overtime pays for trainers and employees, giving it a 0.

However, training can produce long-term effects if the information is properly retained, but since there are several problem areas that need focus, this cannot be immediately realized, giving it a 10. Alternative C: Having several subdivisions proved to be the most effective among all the criterions. It is effective because it divides the tasks to different teams or divisions, thus lessening the stress on each employee and giving them more leeway to improve their specific responsibilities, giving it a 45.

The cost would be small because even if trainings are needed, they would be minimal and can be done per division or team, giving it a 25. It would have a long-term effect because each division’s responsibility will be permanent, giving more way for employees to master the area they are involved in, giving it a full 20. 6) Compute the Optimal decision: Based on the procedures done above, the optimal decision computation is summed up as follows: Alternative A (Lowering the Quality Standards) = 65; Alternative B (Retraining of Employees) = 40; Alternative C = 90. (See Fig.2 for a simplistic view of the calculations of the decision) Figure 2 Calculations EFFECTIVENESS COST TERM TOTAL PERCENTAGE LOWERING THE QUALITY STANDARDS 25 30 10 65 65% RETRAINING OF EMPLOYEES 30 0 10 40 40% HAVING SEVERAL SUBDIVISIONS 45 25 20 90 90% Having several subdivisions within the Operations Department provides employees to be more confident in their knowledge and ability to perform in their specific job responsibilities.

It minimizes the possibility of having several people to blame, while maximizing the chances of developing specialized people in important areas of the department. There were no discrepancies between the optimal decision of “Breaking the Operations Department into Several Subdivisions” and the actual decision, and it is not surprising because obviously, this decision greatly outweighs any other alternatives available even at a first glance. The problem with this method, however, is that it may seem robotic to base every decision on number.

One has to be aware that some decisions cannot be solely based on numerical computations. For example, in this decision, the management needs to consider whether this method can be used exclusively in deciding lateral transfers of people once the sub-offices are set-up. While it can avoid neglecting several goals and alternatives, can ensure that alternatives contribute to the overall goals, and enable other decision makers to be actively involved in group decision processes, employee sentiments and emotional considerations should also be acknowledged (Lieberman, 2000, 110).

The company has spent a lot in team building activities to encourage an environment of harmony and healthy competition among employees. Disbanding teams whose members have worked together for years may cause a negative impact, and minimizing it requires additional study within the managerial level (Lieberman, 2000, 113). For this particular decision, it is considered the best method to follow; but it may present a weakness in other decision making areas where some steps are not absolutely necessary, and employee sentiments is a factor.

References Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. A. (2009). Judgment in managerial decision making (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Lieberman, M. D. (January 01, 2000). Articles - Intuition: A Social Cognitive Neuroscience Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 1, 109-137. Rational Decision Making Models. (n.d.). Decision-Making-Confidence Online. Retrieved April 3, 2011, from http://www.decision-making-confidence.com/rational-decision-making -models.html