Decision-Making and Decision-making Processes One way to think about organizational behavior and management is to examine the make-up

of decisions. Decisions range from daily individual behavioral decisions , whereby indiviudal decide among behavioral alternatives (see Cognitive approac h to motivation) to the highest level strategic decisions. All decisions are comprised of three distict components Criteria- The standards by which decision makers evaluate alternatives. These ar e what Fisher and Ury term "Interests" Alternatives- Specific courses of action or options, being considered. "Position s" Cause and Effect Beliefs- Cause/effect belief are cognitions linking specific al ternatives to specific criteria. These are often referred to as models, theories , assumptions, beliefs, or alternative attributes. Our attitude discussion, cove red the relationship among the four attitude components namely; Cognitions, Affe ct, Evaluations and Behavioral Intentions. These C/E beliefs are cognitions or i ndividual theories. Ineffective Decisions We will work from the deductive premise that ineffective decisions result from e ither: 1. Problems with the development of criteria such as incorrect criteria, im proper weighing of criteria or not all relevant criteria considered; 2. Search for alternatives- Did not identify alternative that would satisfy criteria set. 3. Use of incorrect cause and effect information (theories/mental models). What is a decision-making construct? A decision-making construct is a model or plan which determines the process by w hich a decision is made. There are three major elements to a decision-making con struct: 1. How are criteria determined? Which criteria should be used in making a d ecision? How does one deal with multiple, conflicting criteria? 2. How are alternatives generated? 3. How are alternatives evaluated against criteria, that is, how are cause/ effect relationships established and how are cause/effect conflicts resolved? These questions involve differences between rational and political models of dec ision-making, differences between group and individual decision-making, and rela te to the manner in which problems are identified, diagnosed, and ultimately sol ved. The effectiveness of the decision making construct may be judged by the followin g: 1. Does the construct allow/encourage the decision maker to include all rel evant criteria? 2. Does the construct allow/encourage the consideration of all alternatives ? 3. Does the construct allow/encourage the decision maker to have access to the most accurate cause/effect information? 4. Does the construct allow/encourage the decision maker to include all rel evant criteria? 5. Does the construct allow/encourage the consideration of all alternatives ? 6. Does the construct allow/encourage the decision maker to have access to the most accurate cause/effect information? Conflict from a Decision Making Perspective Additionally, from a decision making perspective, we can view conflict as a brea kdown in the decision making process. As such the following assumptions apply: Conflict manifests itself as a disagreement over alternatives or positions. When there is agreement as to what option to pursue, what plan to implement, or what course of action to take no substantive conflict exists and thus, a decision is made. This does not mean that there is no emotive conflict or that parties to t

he decision share either the same values (criteria) or theories (cause/effect be liefs). When conflict does exist (an impasse as to what option to choose), its source is one of the following: Value Based Conflict. Disagreement over Criteria or Interests. This is a broad c ategory which not only includes individuals attempting to accomplish mutually ex clusive goals, but also includes differences in importance or weights placed on multiple criteria. Also included in this category are hidden agenda. Conflicts g enerated from this source are the type dealt with by the Fisher Getting to Yes s trategies. Theory Based Conflict. Disagreement over cause/effect beliefs or theories. In th is case, individuals share the same goal or interests, but disagree about the be st way to accomplishment this goal. The underlying cause is that they do not sha re common theories regarding the relationships between alternatives and criteria . Dealing with Multiple Conflicting Criteria The simplistic Auto Choice (in some classes we used a Network Printer choice dec ision) case required the use of a strategy for dealing with a set of multiple, c onflicting criteria, that is, a set of criteria where a different alternative is selected when each criterion is used. The three strategies that were identified were: Singling out a criterion to maximize. Using this strategy the decision maker sim ply eliminates the conflict by selecting what he/she believes to be the most imp ortant criteria and eliminating all others until the conflict is resolved.