Managing under Uncertainty - The Decision-Making and Implementation Process - Essay Example

Running Head: REFLECTION ON DECISION MAKING PROCESS Decision Making Process Name Course Tutor Date Introduction As a management intern, I was tasked with many responsibilities that included but not limited to decision making at a lower level. My seniors and mentors were involved in the day-to-day running of the organisation and I observed them make crucial decisions that ranged from simple to strategic ones. The decisions that were made by top management were meant to affect the organisation positively by ensuring productivity and profitability was kept at the highest levels. Just like many other organisations in the country and in the world at large, the company was facing challenges that were mainly due to fast changing operating environments and increasing competition brought about by globalisation. At low-level management, duties revolved around implementation of already made decisions at top-level management. However, top management was open to suggestions and views from all employees as their decisions affected them in one way or another. The company was facing tough times as it had to deal with a huge work force and at the same time maintain its customer base which was quite challenging. In a bid to liberalise its operations and reduce costs, the company had a few years back decided to do a complete overhaul and upgrade of its systems that would see it more technological conscience. This would see a major system overhaul which would see the company comply with modern and up to date standards. In this report, I will analyse the decision making process using theories, models and frameworks that may have been used. I will also evaluate these decisions and see how they could have been addressed differently. Analysis of the decision making process As mentioned earlier, the strategic decision making process in the company is left for senior management. Low level management is charged with supervision and overseeing the implementation process. Decision making is an important primary function of any managerial position (Adair, 2011). Managers are expected to make rational sound decisions which will help the organisation achieve its objective. They have to keep in mind the culture of the organisation, its vision and mission and enumerated by the leadership of the organisation. Therefore, the decision making process by management is highly influenced by the leadership in that particular organisation (Caughrona & Mumford, 2012). As a management intern, I was able to scrutinize the decision making process that the company used, including the process and the strategies that were followed. Managers have a critical task of making acceptable and enthusiastic decisions that will receive support from majority of stakeholders. An unpopular decision is likely to receive non compliance and can result to apathetic mutiny among employees (Aepli, Summerfield, & Ribaux, 2011). Structure of the process The organisation uses a structured decision making process where a complete assessment of the issues at hand is laid on the table and all courses of action considered. In the decision to upgrade its systems, the consequences of the decision were well enumerated and weighed appropriately to estimate the specific outcomes that would follow. Factors such as time costs, operation dynamics, organisational values, ethics, risks, operating environment, exponential patterns, among other issues were to be considered before making the final decision (Donkor, 2006). The management team also recognizes the need for exceptional rationale and critical thinking when making such crucial decisions. The management and leader ship as well were aware that such a drastic and bold move was inevitable and the survival of the organisation, they realised that in one way or another, the organisation required such steps to keep up with market dynamics. The company took the most basic approach to decision making, though they included some complex strategies at several stages of the process. First, they began by identifying the need for change in the organisation (Caughron, Shipman, & Mumford, 2009). This was clearly stated and the reasons for this change properly documented. To make an informed decision on any issue, it is core that the problem, opportunity or need is well documented and understood. In many organisations, the complexities and challenges faced are symptoms of basic root problems. Complex chains result and this means that if the root problems are fixed, then the effects can be done way with (Papamichaila & Robertsonb, 2005). The company also realized a system change was a great opportunity to place the organisation in a competitive road map and add muscle to its brand. The new improved systems had the potential of increasing customer satisfaction and reduce overall costs. After the need for change was identified documented and justified, the management took time to brainstorm and deliberate on the various options they had. At this stage, low level management was involved in information and fact finding in their respective departments and were expected to liaise with their supervisors to get this critical information. The views of various stakeholders on what kind of improvements they would have wanted to see implemented regarding the issue was also put in to consideration. It is crucial for those in managerial positions to involve those who will be directly affected by the decision (Griffin, 2007). One of the major issues that emerged was the reaction of employees in the company. Some of whom had been in the organisation for years and had seen it grow to what it was. The future of their jobs and its security was uncertain. Consequences of the decision The impending decision on the company was inevitable. The consequences of the decision were the worrying factor for many. As it was witnessed in many organisations, technological advancements and system overhauls had seen many people lose their jobs to technologically advanced personnel some roles had also been declared either redundant or obsolete (Rubart, 2007). The management team realized that the big decision would be followed by other major decisions that affected the day to day running of the company. For instance, the human resource department had a hard task of guaranteeing safety of jobs. This way the top level management had to be involved to come up with amicable solutions. The restructuring decision threatened to put the company operations in jeopardy due to internal misunderstandings. The internal affairs of an organisation are the backbone of success. If employees are not satisfied, they will not be productive at their fullest capacities. This will translate to losses and high costs of maintaining an incompetent work force (Evans, 2000). This can be a major headache for any management and may escalate to industrial actions which may be detrimental. Management moved in to quell the unrest by affirming that the decision to upgrade the company was to make operations simpler and it was a long term decision. Available alternatives When making any major decisions, management should look at and asses possible alternatives. The alternatives should be feasible, creative and innovative in nature (Baker & Jennings, 2002). No potential option should be left out in the evaluation process. This ensures that only the best course of action is taken and necessary combinations if deemed appropriate. The best alternative should be considered after ranking advantages and disadvantages. All aspects from costs, risks, benefits should weigh in on the final decision made. Ranking should be based on correct information gathered relating to the issue at hand. Such information should be accurate, up to date and timely (Verbeek & Martin, 2007). Instead of upgrading the systems in the company, management had the alternatives of brand reengineering, intensive marketing campaigns, and brand diversification all these were viable alternatives but upgrading was considered to be more urgent and strategic to facilitate other growth campaigns. The decision to undertake the upgrade was reached and implementation had began A few months down the line, the implementation process was already facing challenges. The estimated cost of the systems upgrade was proving to be higher than expected. This was driven by global economic recession and rising costs of doing business. It had also emerged that a huge number of members of the public were becoming more and more conscious of their spending habits. This further suppressed the financial situation of the company. The company was faced with several legal suits when some employees lost their jobs as a result of the upgrade. The workforce was drastically cut but the upgrade had its fair portion of success but it was not as smooth as anticipated. The consequences of the decision were closely monitored and feedback was documented to be used for referenced in a programmed and structured decision making process in future. The results of strategic decisions can be crucial in making similar decisions in future under similar circumstances. This facilitates a faster, structured and programmed process (Bannister & Remenyi, 2005). Applicable Management theories Looking at the decision that the management made and its consequences, there are several issues that I would have done differently. I, however appreciate their expertise and their managerial prowess given their experience and understanding of operational dynamics. My decisions would have been based on four basic pillars or elements that guide managerial decisions. The four main pillars of a decision should revolve around legal viability, ethical responsibility, economic viability and its practicability Rational decision making Rationality is decision making under existing circumstances is diverse. The decision making management may have different views on what is rational and what is not. Rationality is subjective to different views and perspectives (Alvarado, René, & Trujillo, 2005). The organisation in this case had the objective of maintain growth standards and at the same time survive turbulent and competitive environments. Though the welfare of employees was in their agenda, it was unfair for those who had worked there but had to look for jobs elsewhere when the upgrading was done. The few instances that came up should serve as future examples. Losing the jobs was to some extent inevitable for some staff due to redundancy and obsoleteness. However, to maintain the good name of the company, management should have settled the cases with reasonable compensation packages which it was well capable of. It should have avoided the legal process which would saw huge financial losses to the company. In this case, I would have called for more rationality in the decisions to deal with employees. Structure and type decision making The initial decision was not a routine decision. The only basis that the company could use was other companies that had used similar strategies. There were no rules or guidelines to follow hence everything were decided based on judgment intuition and information gathered. The decision making process was non- programmed. The decision was new. The results of non programmed decisions should be documented and used in future to address similar situations in case they arise. This was well implemented and lessons leaned proved valuable when quick decisions needed to be made (Outland, 2012). The decision making process was also structure and involved top managerial positions. Though the views of stakeholders were taken into consideration, some, especially relating to employee welfare were not fully implemented. I would have had a structured system where all affected stakeholders would have their views addressed in the final and consequent decisions. Loyal and satisfied employees are major success determiners for any organisation. Ethics and values Every decision that management of an organisation makes should be guided by ethics and values governing their professions. In their decision making process, managers should uphold ethical codes of conduct, personal and professional values. The managerial team was faced with various ethical dilemmas in the process of decision making and came up with a decision finally. However, they did not consider some factors in depth. Some factors such legality, culture. Employer employee agreements were not properly scrutinized (Sharma & Bhal, 2004). Some alternatives should have been considered on the fate of jobless employees. In making such decisions, management should have considered the greater good, fairness and values. They should have made decisions that they would fully accept responsibility. Conclusion In conclusion, the decision making and implementation process was successful, though, it could have used a few improvements. Its major detriment was the fate of some employees which the company was not willing to compensate after it became apparent that their jobs were n longer required. The decision making process was largely done at top level by experienced individuals who were in the profession for long. Some of their decisions were made on experience and knowledge in different issues. It was, however, apparent that some level of rigidity was exercised as key views by key stakeholders were no accounted for. The management should have encouraged dynamism and participation to make the transition and implementation process for all. A participatory form of management ensures tat even the view and need s of low level employees are heard References Adair, J. (2011). Effective Decision Making: The Essential Guide to Thinking for Management Success. London: Pan Macmillan. Aepli, P., Summerfield, E., & Ribaux, O. (2011). Decision Making in Policing: Operations and Management. London: EPFL Press. Alvarado, M., René, A. T.-A., & Trujillo, A. (2005). Improving the Organisational Memory by recording decision making, rationale and team configuration. ournal of Petroleum Science and Engineering , 47 (2), 71-88. Baker, H. E., & Jennings, K. M. (2002). Dysfunctional organisational control mechanisms. Journal of Applied Management Sciences , 8 (2), 231–239. BANNISTER, F., & REMENYI, D. (2005). value and IT investment decisions. Journal of Information Technology , 15, 231–241. Caughron, J., Shipman, J., & Mumford, M. D. (2009). Thinking about changing the system. The International Journal of Creativity , 1 (1), 7–32. Caughrona, J. J., & Mumford, M. D. (2012). Embedded leadership: How do a leader's superiors impact middle-management performance. The Leadership Quarterly Journal , 23 (2), 342–353. Donkor, L. (2006). Strategic Decision-making for Excellence. Bloomington, Indiana: AuthorHouse. Evans, M. G. (2000). Leadership and motivation. Academy of Management Journal , 13, 91–102. Griffin, R. W. (2007). Fundamentals of Management. Stamford, Connecticut: Cengage Learning. Outland, H. B. (2012). Decision-making's impact on organizational. Journal of Business Research , 65 (6), 814-820. Papamichaila, K. N., & Robertsonb, I. (2005). Integrating decision making and regulation in the management. International Journal of Management Science , 33 , 319 – 332. Rubart, J. (2007). The Employment Effects of Technological Change. Berlin: Springer. Sharma, P., & Bhal, K. T. (2004). Managerial Ethics: Dilemmas and Decision Making. California: SAGE Publishers. Verbeek, M., & Martin, P. V. (2007). Sustainability Strategy. Sydney: Federation Press. Read More