Rational Choice in an Uncertain World - Assignment Example

Three Personal Reflections Name Institution Name Date Personal reflection 1: Based on group decision making When analyzing decision making process in the assigned group, I realized group decision making creates challenges and also contributes to positive in the nature of decisions made. I gathered information and observed how the different members of the team present their views and ideas. According to De Groot et al. (2010) some of the ideas were completely different and lacked commonness or similarity. I thought to myself the benefits of decision making and the challenges occasioned by group decision making. Some issues discussed were direct in that the expected outcome was premised on rationality, but some members introduced aspects of subjectivity in the decision making. Some of the team members started arguing about subjectivity, but I pointed out that Edmondson & Nembhard (2009) states that perception starts with an individual, context, and available information. I argued that decisions are based on available information, context, and use of the information. Without perception and a subjective component, the fundamentals of a team cannot suffice. To address the point further, I asked the team members to break from the group work and discuss some strengths and shortcomings of group work in decision making process. The obvious challenge was time consuming. One group member stated that the decision making process took a lot of time, and some of the decisions were direct. In addition, some pointed out that decision making in groups may result in conflicts and misunderstanding between the group members because of ineffective communication processes, which are supported by De Groot et al. (2010) analysis. I realized that the group members appreciated the benefits of the group in decision making. The acknowledgment of a broader range of knowledge employed was common throughout identification of benefits of group decision making (Edmondson & Nembhard, 2009). Others presented better discussions of issues, broadens constituencies’ interests and narrows decision alternatives. The acknowledgment of these benefits and strengthens was the basis that I used to advance the aspect of perception. One of the group members presents the significance of the different educational and experience of the group members, and the strength towards the decision of we worked together De Groot et al. (2010). The discussion on the significance of group decision making enabled addressing varied aspects of the decision making. Each of the individuals was able to present their views on the assigned task, and the views were either combined, or others were removed from the list (Saaty, 2008). The list had ten alternatives based on the ten group members. The alternatives, after heated debate, were scaled to three alternatives. The strengths and weakness of these three alternatives were discussed, and the alternatives were merged to create one alternative. The group members realized the importance of group work and effective decision making process. References De Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management, and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 260-272. Edmondson, A. C., & Nembhard, I. M. (2009). Product development and learning in project teams: the challenges are the benefits. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(2), 123-138. Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98. Personal reflection 2: Cultural diversity in decision making The working environment and decision making process incorporate aspects of cultural diversity. The workplaces continuous to become diverse, while the decision making process should also be diverse. In the Hofstede’s framework, I relate with the individual versus collectivism approach when it comes to addressing cultural factors in decision making. According to Husted & Allen (2008), ethics are important in making ethically based decisions. I accept that an aspect that is viewed as ethical in one culture, may be unethical in another culture. Husted & Allen (2008) presents that understanding the cultural dimensions of culture is important especially when operating a business that incorporates individuals from different backgrounds. Each culture has a unique way when making decisions that affect their community or society. For example, the expectation of an individualistic culture is concentration on the nuclear family setting in making decisions. I accept that making an individualistic decision is important and also can guide in arriving at collectivist decisions. The underlying component of decision making in such situation is impact and influence to the society. For example, a group that is made of persons from different cultures is sometimes a challenge to lead because of the difficult underlying perceptions and presumptions. Lowry et al. (2010) state that a group that is made of persons from different cultures enables development of a product or service that addresses the collective requirements of the targeted market. According to Oumlil & Balloun (2009), a single decision can satisfy the requirements of different individuals. However, it should be based on creation and development of alternatives based on the expected goals of each of the members. Collectivists approach views the larger community or setting as important in arriving at decisions. The collectivist perspective is the wider benefit to the society, which I accept but other variables should be included. For example, Oumlil & Balloun (2009) states that corporate social responsibility is commonly used to advocate for collectivism, but the same organizations still use the aspect of “individual” to capitalize on revenue generation. The solution to address the conflicts and misunderstanding in individualistic and collectivist cultures is to understand the larger benefit of a strategy, and developing tradeoffs to address the underlying presumptions. Husted & Allen (2008) argues that the culture of an individual defines the direction in which the individual take. The context and availability of information also inform in the right direction, which I believe that continuous research and sharing of information is the only solution to understand the different positions of the different stakeholders. I recognize and appreciate the challenges that may occur when a situation is viewed from the angles of individualism and collectivism, but the right strategy is synchronizing the different views in advancing the strategic objectives of a situation/action. References Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2008). Toward a model of cross-cultural business ethics: The impact of individualism and collectivism on the ethical decision-making process. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 293-305. Lowry, P. B., Zhang, D., Zhou, L., & Fu, X. (2010). Effects of culture, social presence, and group composition on trust in technology‐supported decision‐making groups. Information Systems Journal, 20(3), 297-315. Oumlil, A. B., & Balloun, J. L. (2009). Ethical decision-making differences between American and Moroccan managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(4), 457-478. Personal reflection 3: International and Globalization of Business Internationalization and globalization of business have become common across the world. Multinational and small businesses employ different methods to enter a market or to engage the different stakeholders. However, Gigerenzer & Selten (2002) points out that the decisions made in determining the direction of an organization should be based on reason and rational requirements. I believe that bounded rational model is important in entering a new market: whether local or global business environment. In the bounded rational model, the decision may be affected by behavioral and environmental constraints. I associated with the views of Simon’s five differences of the rational model (Su, 2008). The five differences are factored problems, satisficing, search, uncertainty avoidance and repertoires. Simon’s articulations are important when applied to an organization. For example, the factored problems approach is important because it is possible to divide a larger problem into parts, which are then solved based on the available information. In addition, I concur with the aspect of satisficing because it enables address a problem or taking a course of action with available information. For example, exploring the international market requires entering by steps meaning the available information is used to further the requirements of the organization. In addition, since operating in an international business environment is a challenge, obtaining information and utilizing the information to make short term strategies and provision of feedback is important. Through uncertainty avoidance, it is possible to highlight the changing conditions through analyzing specific strategies and significance of the strategies to the wider strategy of the organization. I understand and support the views of Hastie & Dawes (2010) when they state that it is a challenge to obtain all the information before proceeding with a strategy. The strategy is to use the best-obtained information, and continuous feedback used to improve the view or strategy. I understand the significance of the assertions in defining the decision making process because an organization cannot wait until all the information is gathered, presented and analyzed before deciding the course of action. The strength of a strategy is based on competitive advantage, and capitalizing on benefits arising. Therefore, I categorically state that continuous decision making is important because change is unavoidable. Effective implementation of change whether ion decisions or operational strategies should be based on information, and continuous research. The impact of the decision should be viewed from the wider influence of the society. Hastie & Dawes (2010) presents that a leader should be able to change, and institute measures that support a change in decision making process. I understand some decisions are difficult to make but searching and using available information can be used to defend some actions, which cannot be embraced by the wider stakeholders. Therefore, rational decision making based on informed perspective is the solution addressing organizational related challenges. References Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2002). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. New York: MIT Press. Hastie, R., & Dawes, R. M. (Eds.). (2010). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. London: Sage. Su, X. (2008). Bounded rationality in newsvendor models. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 10(4), 566-589. Read More