How Federal Decision Making Works - Example

Case Study Student’s name Institution Plan in First Thirty Days After being appointed as a mid level supervisor, after the firing of a previous supervisor for poor performance an important step that I will take is finding out the reasons for the failure of the previous supervisor. Foremost in the agenda would be performing a SWOT Analysis of the team which I am heading given that I have been informed by the previous leader that the problem lay with the team’s motivation (Howell &Costley, 2006). I will make strategic information gathering be the focus of my first thirty days in power. While top management has asserted that the previous supervisor was fired for poor leadership I would seek to find out for myself the reasons for the poor performance of the workforce. Strategic Issue Identification Strategic issue identification is one of the most important aspects of organization planning which have to be applied in any leadership problem identification. Strategic issues I will be intending to identify will include will include employee motivation, organizational mission and vision, and organizational structure. Since the problem in the workforce is generally related to poor leadership in my first thirty days I would seek to find out the best leadership model which may be applied according to the context of the workforce. There are two leadership models which would be of concern to me in performing a SWOT analysis at this stage; transformational and transactional leadership. Problems in leadership are usually a result of application of a wrong model (Howell &Costley, 2006). In my SWOT analysis I will seek to analyze the characteristics of the workforce in order to determine which of the two models of leadership would be the most effective in bringing out the best in the workforce. I will also be seeking to know the type of leadership model which the previous supervisor had unsuccessfully applied. This will be important in helping me to know whether I will need a change of model or simply a modification of model application for better outcomes. In the first thirty days I will seek to find out which of the two models would be more effective for the institution. Hence the first fifteen days of my supervisory duties will be an analysis of how good a transactional model is for the workforce. I will thus appeal to the needs of the workers in motivation and direction of the workforce which is geared at fulfilling their own interest. This would be important in seeking to find the cause of their lack of motivation. Through a system of rewards and punishment I will establish subordinate needs and weaknesses and strength of the members of the workforce. This part of the SWOT analysis will include the use of contingent rewards, laissez faire, passive management b y exception, and active management by exception. This will enable me to make an appraisal of the effectiveness of the model in the first fifteen days. The next fifteen days will be spent in a SWOT analysis of a transformational leadership model. A transformational leadership style results in motivation for those who are led. In the application of this model I would be more focused on not only the process of improving worker performance but also in creating all members of the group contribute to outcomes (Howell &Costley, 2006). I would focus on changing of expectations, perceptions and try to foster motivation intended at the attainment of organizational objectives. In this approach I would thus seek to apply the concepts of idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation in finding out the needs of the workforce and also their strengths and weaknesses. Plan in Sixty Days After the first thirty days I would have a background on the strengths and weaknesses of the workforce with which I will be working. I will thus need to come up with a strategic plan for implementation of a certain model for application in order to improve the performance. This needs be done through an application of the principles and processes which guide change leadership. I will have to find out the means through which culture change may be pursued and how core competencies of the workforce may be fully exploited. Aspects of motivation may be due to a need for cultural change in the organization. It will be important for me to find out the mission and vision of the organization relative to client needs. I will have to establish whether the workforce has a good understanding of the mission and vision of the organization. While I may be interested in adopting a certain framework I may have to assess the policy of the organization regarding the leadership structure i.e is it hierarchical or unstructured. In order to be effective collaboration with senior management and related departments will thus be an important aspect of the change management process. Since data has already been collected, the next step I would undertake is a synthesis of creative competencies. In order for the change I am intending to implement to be effective and sustainable, I would need to have an understanding of how to create useful leadership capacities and also rational capacities in influencing the workforce. I will take into account the motivation of the workforce and also their emotional and social needs since these are important for change and transformation. Through organizational analysis in order to find and develop key competencies coupled with an analysis of current capacity and the need to change workforce culture I will find ways of transforming the workforce (Howell &Costley, 2006). I will make use of the four common question of organizational change; why? What? How? And what if? These four questions form the basis on which my plan for change leadership will be based. These questions are important in the discovery process since they allow for the development of workforce capacities relative to organization missions needs and vision. Through coalescing these four questions I will be able to get an understanding of organizational and workforce culture, why it is the way it is, what needs to be modified and how. It also enables an analysis of what if scenarios that query new models of improving performance. The first question of why the workforce needs to change will involve challenging assumptions and organization culture. At this point I will engage the workforce and management ion the need to modify organizational culture and if possible organizational systems. I will require the workforce and the management to put forth the needs for change for the organization. Next is what needs to be changed it is important that I get a clear picture of what will be possible to change and what will only require modification or abolition. Aspects such as strengths and weaknesses of the workforce and structures will be very important in my analysis at this moment. Next I will make plans on how to execute the changes intended. It will be important that the strategy I select is acceptable to all the stakeholders if it is to e effectively implemented. An important aspect of the process of change planning will also involve putting forth and trying different what if scenarios. Such questions and scenarios will offer a platform for reflection and will enable me to come up with the best strategy to adopt. Leadership Behavior Style to be adopted I will make use of leadership reward and punishment behavior in order to reform the workforce in the organization. This theory is based on the law of effect which asserts that certain behaviors tend to increase in frequency when the behavior is rewarded. Behavior which is punished or is unrewarded will in turn decrease in frequency. Rewards will include; recommendations for promotion, compliments, salary increase among others. Negative reinforcement will include unpleasant assignments, reprimands and reduced privileges among others. I will apply the model as a process of social exchange between the workforce and the supervisor (Howell &Costley, 2006). Since I am interested in eliciting motivation and drive in the workforce, I would take control of what the workers hold dear or what they like to avoid due to its unpleasantness. I would apply what I deem to be fair to both the organization and the workforce by getting the workforce to agree on what is required of them and the consequences for going against this. Rewards and punishments will thus be contingent on the behavior exhibited by the workforce. It has to be asserted that instances of underperformance may be related to wrongful reward. Since the previous supervisor asserted that the workers were lazy it may be that rewards were given for fast work, risk avoidance, complication, quick fixes, aggressiveness and conformity. I intend to change this by rewarding quality work, risk taking, lasting solutions, simplification, cooperation and creativity. I believe my application of this behavior model of leadership will be successful due to the traits, skills and sources of power I possess as a leader. Given that the previous supervisor was fired for poor leadership I would assume that this organization offers the leader significant autonomy to run the human resources department. Coming in as a new supervisor I would have legitimate and coercive power as there would be less interference in my work as I am expected to reform the department. I will also have the reward power and resource power since I will demand to have control of these before I take up the job. Through monitoring methods I will thus be able to reward and punish work performance (Howell &Costley, 2006). Lastly given that I will have access to reward, connection and punishment power, I will take responsibility for the performance of the workforce unlike the previous manager who placed the blame on the workforce. I will employ the Leader Reward and Punishment Behavior Model for both the group and individual workers due to leader, task, follower and group characteristics that are evident in this organization. It would seem that the workforce in this organization is a cohesive group but with negative performance norms. I intend to change this through enhancing positive performance norm by developing a culture of rewards for the best performers. This will ensure that negative group behavior is minimized by the need to get rewarded for good performance. I also intend to ensure better performance by explaining to the workforce what is expected of them since performance to a great extent is dependent on not only capacity but also effort (Howell &Costley, 2006). I will introduce a system of tangible rewards which are distributed on the basis of timeliness and fairness according to certain set standards. The previous supervisor asserted that the workers were lazy, an application of this model through offering a variety of tasks may reduce monotony and boredom thus enhancing motivation. As a leader who has been involved in the lower cadres of the workforce I have expert power which I will also use in influencing the workers towards greater performance. I also have legitimate power and resource power which I will use in influencing worker performance (Howell &Costley, 2006). Since the previous supervisor was ineffective I would try to avoid his leadership style and carve my own authority and respect for myself. Reference Howell &Costley, (2006). Understanding Behaviors for Effective Leadership (2nd.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc Groupthink Definition Groupthink refers to the making of faulty decisions as a result of deterioration of mental efficiency, moral judgment and reality testing (Irving Janis, 1972, p. 9). The major aspect informing group think is the instance of people involved in decision making deciding not to go against the common objective thus making the desire for group consensus override rationality. Avoiding Groupthink In order to avoid groupthink there are certain processes which must be put in place to ensure that assumptions made are rational and not based only on desire for conformity to group consensus. The following are important aspects to be taken into consideration to avoid groupthink; Have a contingency plan Explore objectives Objectiveness be made a key consideration Alternatives ought to be pursued Outside opinion is sought Ideas brought up are challenged in a manner of mutual respect without fear of reprisals Risks of chosen decision are fully analyzed Rejected alternatives rejected are reexamined All assumptions are tested. Symptoms of Groupthink Groupthink is characterized by a variety of symptoms which include; illusion of invulnerability, illusion of unanimity, belief in the inherent morality of the group, mindguards, rationalization, direct pressure, stereotypes of out-groups and self censorship. Illusion of Invulnerability The illusion of invulnerability refers to a feeling of authority and power which makes the decisions made by the group seem infallible to themselves. The group tends to have excessive optimism which results in excessive risk taking due to irrational feeling that success is inevitable. Belief in Inherent Morality It is quite common in a group that people deem the members of the group to be right in their decisions which results in ethical and moral considerations being ignored. This belief enables the persons to be relieved of the responsibility of justification of action in a rational manner. Collective Rationalization This is a situation in which the members of the group do not take into account warnings as they already have assumptions which are relied upon instead. Stereotype Views of Out-Groups This refers to the characterization of people deemed conflicted with our group which results in warning or facts not being taken into account. This result in faulty decision making based on wrongful assumptions. Self Censorship Even as the expression of individual opinion may not pose problems for many, in group situations people will tend to self censor in order to enforce group loyalty through adhering to group policy, spirit, or opinion. This result in doubts and conflicting opinions, which might be objective, not being expressed due to the need for maintaining consensus. Direct Pressure on Dissenters Direct pressure results from members of the group being conditioned against the expression of dissenting views. Dissident views will thus not be expressed as in most instances they will not be tolerated or encouraged. Open inquiry is discouraged and this type of symptom is mainly associated with directive leadership. Self Appointed Mindguards This type of symptom usually results from member’s intention to protect the group and the leader from information that may interfere with group cohesiveness. This keeping of thoughts and opinions which may be deemed a danger to group cohesiveness usually results into potentially objective ideas not coming to light thus affecting the quality of group decision making. Illusion of Unanimity The illusion of unanimity refers to instances in which decisions taken by the group are assumed to be unanimous. In many instances, towards the end of the decision making process dissenting voices tend to be quieter resulting in the making of faulty decisions. This is due to due to a reduction in objectivity and rationality in the process. Key Factors/Setting for Groupthink There are three important factors that determine groupthink; group cohesiveness, group dynamics, and a required decision. Group Cohesiveness In order for groupthink to be possible a cohesive group is an important condition. A group which is overly cohesive increase the group’s susceptibility to groupthink even more. Since people work together they tend to be more in agreement and have the same perspectives on issues. Having a contrary view to the group norm is thus a rarity. Persons in the group who have dissenting or varying opinions may thus not voice their opinions. Group Dynamics Group dynamics are related to the relationships formed in the group which make the group act in a certain way. Intra-group dynamics such as cohesion and the black sheep effect are very important in the setting up of conditions for group think. Members of the group have social identity from the group and hence ideas which are deemed to be deviant will result in the member being cast into the out-group. This results in the black-sheep effect thereby limiting dissent and objectivity. A Required Decision A decision is normally required of the group towards a unanimous stand on issues. The result of this is coming up with ideas and sticking to them in instances of unanimous acceptance. Anxiety usually builds up in the group over decisions over the fear of the unknown and as such the decision making processes are further impaired. Irrationality under pressure is common in individual decision making but it is magnified in group situations which are cohesive. Remedies/How to Avoid Groupthink There are several strategies which may be applied in order to avoid groupthink; It is the responsibility of the leader to set each member as a critical evaluator of decisions and ideas. The stating of preferences and expectations by the leader should be minimized. Discussion of the deliberation among trusted associates should be encouraged before coming up with a final decision. Outside professional help ought to be consulted randomly in order to critique group decisions and member ideas. At least one member ought to be given the responsibility of questioning all plans, ideas and assumptions.  There should be enough time set aside to assess warning signals. In addition to these there are four important remedies for groupthink; 1) Keeping an open climate for communication-The use of a leadership style that is open in having openness, promoting creativity, has non judgmental attitudes, fosters acceptance and divergent thinking, deliberations are not restricted or moderated too highly and lastly defensive posturing is discouraged. 2) Avoid group isolation – since groupthink is highly promoted in cohesive groups, it is important to improve the mobility of these groups and in instances of excessive cohesion such groups ought to be broken up. 3) Assign Members the responsibility of critical evaluator – people ought to be free to challenge any member of the group and ideas of the whole group no matter how sacred. 4) Tone down on directive behavior – it is sometimes beneficial for the leader not to take an active role in group deliberations as this would present an opportunity for unbridled discussion. Examples of Groupthink The Challenger Disaster The Challenger Disaster is one of the most profound examples of the devastating effects of Groupthink. Groupthink has elements of peer pressure which results in decisions made not based on rationality and objectivity. In this instance, NASA and Thiokol erred in applying groupthink to such a sensitive mission. The Challenger disaster was as a result of objective opinion being sacrificed on the altar of groupthink. NASA had intended to launch the Challenger but warnings from Thiokol’ engineer about the weather being right were not heeded. NASA badgered Thiokol to give the go ahead in a teleconference. Thiokol through a conference held at its offices prevailed upon its engineer for the Challenger mission to drop his engineering knowledge for a time. The engineer was made to make a decision from a management perspective and he complied in order to be a good sport. The Challenger was launched in poor weather despite warnings from an engineering perspective and it exploded. NASA in asking Thiokol if they had to wait until April for good condition in order to launch show a disregard for expert opinion and also defies reason by implying Thiokol was being unreasonable. Pearl Harbor The attack on Pearl Harbor is another important lesson in group think. In this instance the American military generals were guilty of believing in the invulnerability of the American fleet lying in anchor at Pearl Harbor. The United States had been supplying Japan with raw materials such as iron and oil well into the 1940 as Japan extended her reach and captured Chinese Manchuria and Russian ports on the pacific. The United States did not deem these acts of aggression and expansion as posing any threat as Japan was deemed a lesser power militarily as compared to the Western powers. On the other hand, experts deemed the Pearl Harbor fleet to be particularly vulnerable to attacks from the sea. Studies had even been conducted which had shown planes attacking from the sea could launch an attack undetected. This caused only mild concern and while some generals were concerned and wanted the US to stop shipments, the other general dismissed these fears and nothing happened. It had also been observed that the Japanese modus operandi would be a bombing operation prior to an attack but no action was taken on this intelligence as the leadership felt Pearl Harbor was not vulnerable to Japanese invasion. Pearl Harbor happened in exactly the same way it had been predicted with major losses for the United States with the entire fleet sunk or heavily damaged with heavy loss of life. If only groupthink feelings of invulnerability had been checked by objectivity this would never have happened. Sayre Model The Sayre model is a model of decision making put forth by Wallace Sayre to explain the workings of the Federal government. He asserts that decision making in the federal Government is a complicated process which he analyzes from different perspectives. Sayre identified nine sets of actors who are important in the making of decisions in the federal government. In this model Sayre asserts that the Bureau chief is the focal point from which all decision making in the national government is based on. Other interests are also important in the development, implementation, and adoption of policy in the federal government such as the president, interest groups and congressional committees. Since I have been assigned by the FAA administrator to push through a bill through concerning the Next Generation Air Traffic System there are a number of procedures and steps which I will follow in order to ensure that the bill is passed and made law. The FAA is one of the most important bureaus of the American Federal Government. The FAA is the bureau chief of the FAA and thus by passing this bill to me he has made me his representative in relation to the other arms of the federal government. I will thus have to activate and follow through all the procedures that the Bureau chief would have to follow in order to get the bill passed in Congress according to the Sayre model. I will make use of the SAYRE model in order to make the various connections that are of great importance in getting this bill passed through Congress. As the representative of the Bureau chief I will be placed in the center of the SAYRE model from where I will establish the important relationships with the other members of the Federal Government decision making model. The other actors in the model are; the president, other bureaus, the courts, the media, career staff, interest groups, Congress, and lastly the political parties. Parts of the SAYRE Model The Bureau leader forms the focal point of the SAYRE model as this is the level at which policy formulation is conducted. The Bureau leader in this instance is the FAA administrator who has delegated his responsibilities of pushing the bill to me. The term bureau as applied in this model is generic and may refer to either department, administrative agencies the military among other federal organizations. In this instance the FAA is the bureau, and the focal point from which the bill originates. The Bureau is charged with the powers of running its mandated programs and its activities will include making regulations, having personnel for implementing its rules and regulations, developing relevant legislative proposals and the preparation of budgets. There are several political influences which intersect at this level making this post very influential. The Bureau chief is also of great importance given that they are responsible for implementation and development of public policy. Due to the influence they wield, interest groups tend to be attracted to bureau chiefs. The presidential line of influence is composed of departments in the executive arm and other related organizations such as the White House Staff. The Congress which is composed of the Senate and House of Representatives and has influence due to its involvement in various committees, staffs special committees and other organizations which are set up to assist congressional duty. The Courts are influential in that they are involved in the interpretation of various policies passed by Congress and as such may be invaluable as allies in instances of interpretation of certain public policies. In many instances public policy may overlap and hence other bureaus may have an interest either in promoting or campaigning against a policy of another bureau. Political parties are of great influence since they are the members of Congress responsible for making bills into law. Political parties will thus make use of their power in Congress in order to achieve certain goals. The media is influential in that it is the means through which publicity is gained either for or against certain pieces of policy and thus the media may make or break a given policy. Interest groups comprise of lobby groups of a range of stakeholders who use interest groups to influence policy through pushing for friendly policies in Congress and through influencing Bureau chiefs to draft certain policies. Career staff is the people working under the bureau chiefs who are the technocrats in the running of the bureau. In pushing forth with the bill I will have to take into consideration the Iron Triangle, alliance building, bargaining/negotiation, and negotiation. The Iron Triangle is a series of alliances between congressional committees, bureau leaders and interest groups which work to influence decision making in the executive arm of the government. The president therefore does not have as much power in executive policy decisions in the face of the Iron Triangle. Bureau leaders may find that they are caught between the agenda of Congress and the agendas of other bureau leaders resulting in conflict. As a bureau leader I will first of all attempt to prevent conflict with Congress and other bureau chiefs by trying to lobby as much as possible before making the bill public. Interest group leaders form relationships with certain members of Congress in order to influence them into supporting their interests. My Bureau chief has contacts among various lobby groups and as such I will use such contacts in trying to influence members of Congress towards accepting passing the bill on the floor of the house. On the other hand I also have some contacts in Congress who I intend to convince on the benefits that may accrue from passing such the legislation. How Federal Decision Making Works Federal decision making works through three aspects; alliance building, bargaining, and compromise otherwise referred to as the ABCs of Federal Decision Making. I will look to the formation of an alliance with the several actors in the federal decision making system to promote the bill. The Iron Triangle will be the first priority with chief lobbyists in aviation, and communications being the first person I will contact and bring onto my side. I will also make an alliance with Congress committee members that serve on the relevant aviation safety committee. It would be important to get the contribution of the media, and as such I will enter into an alliance with the media in order to promote the merits of the bill to the public in order to get t0 influence Congress. I will also need to lobby other bureau chiefs to support the bill. Other Bureau chiefs that might be interested in supporting the bill will include security chiefs and transport chiefs who will like the idea and also form an avenue through which I can access more members of Congress and lobbyists. I will make use of bargaining by calling in favors from other departmental bureau chiefs whom my bureau has supported in their respective legislations over the past three years. Since I need support for my bill I believe the other bureau chiefs and lobbyists would also have some bills which they would need support for. I would thus offer my support to the bills of the other bureau chiefs in exchange for their support towards my bill. Congress members may also require formulation of certain policies by my bureau in return for supporting my bill. I will thus offer my support. On the other hand I will also work closely with the media and bargain for more coverage of the bill in exchange for some information from my bureau which had not been released to the media earlier. Lastly I will seek compromise on aspects of my bill and on future support for other stakeholders, lobbyists and Congressmen. I will have to acknowledge that it is not possible to get all that I wanted since I will have to edit some aspects of the bill in order to fit the needs of the Congressmen, lobbyists, and other bureau chiefs with an interest in my bill. Adaptation to a Smaller Business Model The model could be adapted to a small business company though to a lesser extent. Since the smaller business company does not have a lot of influence it would be hard for it to influence policy making as much as a bureau can. However, the aspects of the Iron Triangle and the nine actors can still be simulated in a small business company. For a small business company, influencing of policy making would more likely be restricted towards industrial policy relating to its business. As such the company will have the chief executive officer who acts as a lobbyist and bridge between the company and the industry regulator. The CEO will thus draft policies which he deems to be good for the company and then present them to the members of the committee responsible for formulation of policy. It will thus be important for the CEO to enter into an alliance with the experts in the industry, the media and also with some members of the committee in order to influence policy formulation in the bureau. Alliance may thus be made between the media, consumers, manufacturer and committee members which will result in compromises between the parties in order that each of the stakeholders get some benefit from proposed legislation. Read More