Decision-Making Perspectives - Greenheart - Case Study Example

Decision-making Perspectives Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Introduction In management, what has been of major concern is to understand and improve on the process of making decisions. Various strategies to decisions have been proposed to decision-making including those that of ‘divide-and-conquer’ which is also labeled as problem decomposition whereby large and very complex issue is broken down into very portions. The essence of making decisions is to ensure that organizations goals and objectives are achieved within the accepted timeframe by deciding what activities should be done and which should not. However, more often than not, the issue of making corporate decisions becomes more complex when different interests dominate the process. Take for instance, where the organization is expected to enact environmental sustainability policies and also ensure balance profit maximization for the business. In such a case, the decision-making process is likely to become difficult as the decision makers will be expected to make judgment on what to include in its corporate values so as to ensure that as the business continue to ensure environmental sustainability compliant, it is also able to generate good profits. Further, managers are always called to make decisions that can solve various problems even though their decisions are influenced by such factors as personality, psychology and sociology. Both decision-making and problem solving are continuous processes of evaluating various situations and problems, considering various alternatives and making choices and then following them up with appropriate actions. While in some situations the decision-making can be very short and less strenuous, in other cases, it may take weeks or even several months (Kahneman and Tversky 2000). It is with this regard, that this analysis has sought to establish the emerging decision-making issues in relation to Greenheart Company. The purpose of doing the analysis is to evaluate various decisions made and make recommendations on management decisions can be improved. Company overview Greenheart is a multinational food producer that is headquartered in the Netherlands. Greenheart was founded in 1900 when it started operating as a small, craftsman-like Dutch food producer. During the 20th century, the company managed to make very important strides not only in the Netherlands, but globally. This is after it managed to establish over 20 subsidiaries with over 3,000 staff. Towards the end of the 20th century, Greenheart had managed to make significant improvement both in sales and workforce. The company has various food brands which are recognized globally. Greenheart was operated and run as a family business. However, like is the case of grown businesses, the businesses has not gone without having its fare share of challenges. One such challenge that has been a big issue with the business is about embracing sustainability as part of its core values. The decisions with regard to environmental sustainability have continued to vary as the operating environment has continued to change. Environmental impact is big challenge for the business and making appropriate decision to manage the problem is highly desired. Decision-making issues There are two major decision issues emerging from this case namely environmental sustainability and business sustainability. Environmental sustainability The society expects that the business leaders are always aware of how they should manage their businesses in a more environmental friendly manner so as to remain relevant and competitive in the changing operating environment. According to David Schejbal who is the dean in the University of Winsconsi-Extension continuing education, “it is becoming very apparent that sustainable management is not confined to ‘green sector jobs’ but also every job that is confronted with sustainability issues.” This calls for the need for all leaders to have some understanding on issues related to environmental sustainability. In the case of Greenheart, the issue of environmental sustainability has been there since the onset and has remained top of the agenda in the company decisions. This can be learned from the view by the company’s chief executive officer for 25 years. According to Greenheart CEO before acquisition, ‘nature was in a critical state.’ This is to mean that even though the business was supposed to make profits by increasing its sales, the impact of its activities on the environment, ought to be considered. This is to ensure that as the business continue to grow and expand its market, it must be able reduce its negative impacts to the environment. However, the challenge that ought to be considered in this case is the impact the decision to be environmental sustainability will impact on the business (Goodwin and Wright 2004). The management decision in this case is to decide whether to incorporate the environmental sustainability into its corporate values. This is because, the incorporate environmental values into its corporate values as it will have some impact on the company’s performance and budgeting. This can be learnt from the company’s annual report where environmental sustainability has been given priority before the take-over. To be responsible in ensuring sustainable environment, the management decisions must agree to invest in activities that will see that despite a lot of pressure by the company on the environment, important aspects such as human environment and natural resources do not deteriorate but are sustained for longer-term use. This is to ensure both economic and social development is ensured. The establishment of the environmental sustainability fund by Greenheart and the decision to have 1% of its annual profits taken to support society initiatives that are aimed at creating public awareness on the importance of sustaining the environment is the decision the management must sacrifice to make Gregory R., (Ohlson and Arvai 2006). Business sustainability Unlike was the case before the take-over, the change of management in the company show shift in corporate values. Before 1995, the Greenheart’s mission was to care for the environment, and should be dedicated reducing the impact of the business to a sustainable level. Interpreting this mission, it meant that the company was aimed at out its business activities without negatively affecting the environment. However, after the change in management, a new business mission was formulated which placed more emphasis on the employees contribution in the social and natural environment. This was considered as a compromise to environmental sustainability. On the other hand, in the company new vision, the issue of environment is not mentioned anywhere but instead the company mission seemed to put more emphasis on the need to have the company become a world leader in the food industry and also offer the market with what is more appealing and value adding to the customer. While environmental sustainability was given priority in top management team (TMT), in the case of new management, the concept of environmental sustainability was shifted to the subsidiary level and in many occasions, issues relating the environment were made there. This approach to decision-making led to decline in the environmental initiatives. This was evident with the new owner’s decision to apply the ‘lean and mean’ philosophy which puts more emphasis on social-economic targets more than any other issue. This gave room to the subsidiaries to engage in those activities that comply with regulations and that are cost-effective (Edwards and Miles 2007). However, unlike was the case of the earlier owner, this approach to decision making did not help the business reach its targets until the environmental coordinators were given the opportunity to coordinate all environmental actions. Decision making perspective The decision made by different company owners, has been influenced by the values the leadership under different CEOs have towards the business growth and development. While the former Greenheart before the take-over preferred the idea to have all business activities controlled and maintained at an acceptable sustainable level, the new CEO valued the need to have the business grow and excel in its core activities. The idea to take charge of the environment has been informed by the idea of corporate governance that unfold the need to care of all stakeholders to the organization and embracing management styles that that do not cause deterioration to the environment. The values can be explained in the context of what kind of goals and objectives that an individuals that can affect his decision. While some decisions may seem to favor the idea of striking balance between corporate goals and environmental sustainability, the other decisions may give environmental sustainability a second priority after profit maximization. This can be clearly learnt from the case of Greenheart. For instance, before the take-over, the company embraced the tradition of engaging in open communication with the external world and in particular the Dutch Ministry of Environment and other business platforms that engage in produce food are committed to sustainable development. The purpose of making this choice had been informed by the need to partner with other stakeholders for the purpose of ensuring that the environment in which the business operates is sustained for long-term benefits. Further, the decision to have the technical staff to deal with technical standards in order to provide solution to environment problems is also a clear indication on how the decision-making process can be influenced by the values that an individual believes in. this can also be established from the Greenheart Plus through its decision to restructure in order to have the subsidiary coordinators have chance to play a central in coordinating all environment activities. This is especially important in ensuring that all decisions are reconciled better growth of the business and sustainability of the environment (Belton and Stewart 2002). Conclusion This analysis has established that decision-making is an important process in any organization. This is because it entails determining those activities that need to be committed so as to ensure that organizational goals and objectives are achieved. However, the decision being made can be influenced by a number of factors which include personal, psychological and sociological. This can be learnt from the case of Greenheart where individual values and in particular among the CEOs where their decisions have been influenced by the choice between working towards attaining balance between organizational development and environmental sustainability. For example, in the quest to reduce its impact on the environment, the environmental sustainability was embraced as its core value amid numerous economic challenges. Recommendation After a critical analysis of the decision-making process at Greenheart, it has been found out that competing interests between environmental sustainability and business development play a central role in the decision process. However, since the business sustainability is depended on environmental sustainability, it is therefore recommended that any decision being should ensure that it strikes a balance between environmental sustainability and business if the business is to grow into the future and remain relevant in the market. References Belton, V. and Stewart, T. (2002). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Edwards, W. and Miles, R. (2007). Advances in decision analysis: from foundations to applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, UK. Goodwin, P. and Wright, G. (2004). Decision Analysis for Management Judgment. 3rd Ed.New York: Wiley and Sons. Gregory R., Ohlson, D. and J. Arvai. (2006). Deconstructing adaptive management: criteria for applications to environmental management. Ecological Applications, 16, p. 2411-2425. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More