Decision-making encompasses the process of choosing between many alternative courses of action with the inclusion of inaction as one of the factors. Management is categorized as decision-making but almost all the decisions made by the top management fail due to lack of the proper information gathered from the organization (Robbins, 2004). Maximization of effectiveness in a working environment warrants the increased concentration on an effective decision-making process as the decisions made can affect the lives of the different people affiliated to the organization while at the same time diverting the course of the organization from the intended direction. In decision-making, different types of decisions exist and they depend on the situation at hand. Some may be simple in nature while encompassing few consequences while others might be complex while including many different consequences.
In the case of Herb’s Garden Products, Martha, being a new employee, is bestowed on the role of making different types of decisions regarding the case at hand in which a customer has complained that the company’s fertilizer killed her beloved and expensive pet dog. When Martha talks to her immediate manager, he laughs of the case making it even harder for her to make the right decisions before getting back to the customer who had filed her complaint. In this case, Martha is faced with three types of decisions that include the strategic decision that might set the course of the business, a tactical decision in which decisions are made on how things should be done, and lastly the operational decision in which employees make decisions to enhance the daily running of the organization (Erdogan & Bauer, 2010). Under the strategic decisions, Martha has to decide on whether to force the company to change the ingredients utilized in making the fertilizer in order to solve the customer’s complaint.
This is meant to change the course of the company because as the owner of the business stated, the fertilizer was their most important product. Under the tactical decisions, Martha has to make decisions on how the company can compensate the customer due to her complaint and at the same time, she has to decide on how the company can change the ingredients of the fertilizer to alleviate its harm (Johns, 2008). Under the operational decisions, and her being an employee, she has to make the decisions on what to do when she is responding to the customer in regards to her complaint, as this is part of the every day running of the company. Being a new employee, she is faced with many decision-making challenges. The first challenge is the fact that she is not aware of the secret ingredient added to the fertilizer as this was only revealed to the older employees. This means that without knowledge of all the ingredients contained in the fertilizer she cannot make the right decision regarding the fate of the fertilizer.
The next challenge encompasses the fact that the owner of the business called her to warn her that the fertilizer is the business’ most important product and she was therefore not meant to let the company down. This means that if she makes the wrong decisions according to the perception of the company’s owner she will either lose her job or at the end of the day be illegible for the promotion that she was eyeing. At the same time, she might make a decision that would change the course of the company hence affecting all the people affiliated to the company, including herself (Robbins, 2004). The last challenge is the fact that Mac, who is her immediate boss, does not believe in what she is saying and therefore cannot support any decisions that she makes against the company. If she makes the wrong decision and does not lose her job, she will not be able to work under a favorable working environment because her boss will always give her a hard time due to her questioning of his better judgment as he has been working in that company longer than she has.
A company facing such a situation should on one side focus on a good decision-making model while on the other side, focus on avoiding faulty decision-making. On another front, Mac, Martha’s boss, was showing signs of the overconfidence bias when he stated that there was nothing wrong with the fertilizer and that occasionally, a few consumers find a few reasons to discredit the fertilizer without having any concrete evidence. As stated earlier, the above situation is delicate because it can change the course of the company (Erdogan & Bauer, 2010). For this reason, the companies in question should select the rational decision-making model, as it is more flexible and can work with many different alternatives. The procedure to be followed in this case is the identification of the problem – which is the complaint, an establishment of the decision criteria to be followed, weighing the effectiveness of the decision criteria, generation of alternatives to the decisions made, evaluation of the alternatives and eventually making the best choice out of the alternatives in question. Finally, an implementation of the decision made is done to solve the situation (Johns, 2008).
The company should not just ignore the complaint of the customer because many more complaints will keep in streaming and later lead to the destruction of the fertilizer brand, which can easily drive the company out of business, the fertilizer being the most important brand that they rely on. The best option in this case is to come up with a team of experts extracted from the employees and the management who can sit down to review the ingredients of the fertilizer and their effects to the environment to ensure that those harmful ingredients that are added to the fertilizer are eliminated in the production process. Additionally, the company should offer the customer an apology, with the assurance of looking into her complaint. The company should also ensure that the customer is compensated due to her loss hence reducing the chances of negative publicity from the customer as the company sources for alternative solutions to the problem at hand.
From the perspective of the management at Herb’s Garden Products, some of the next steps to be taken are the enhancement of the fact that Martha does not confirm the suspicions of the customer therefore raising an alarm towards the lack of viability of the fertilizer. The next step would be to allay the fears of the customer by confirming the fact that the fertilizer has been in use for 35 years hence if it were the cause of the death of the pet, then it would have caused more damage since it was created (Robbins, 2004). This would quell the fears of the customer while at the same time convincing her that her pet died from other reasons. Though this might work to the advantage of the company, the management should realize that many other customers might complain culminating in the brand being written off, consequently leading to overwhelming losses for the company. The managers should change their perception and source for decision-making models that can enhance the effectiveness of the formulation of a decision that can satisfactorily solve the customer’s complaint.
Many people approach the decision-making process with a lack of seriousness, thereby leading to the failure of the many decisions made. The management of many companies is especially affected by this problem because most of the decisions are made in a hurry due to time constraints whereas much time is not put into their evaluation hence leading to their failure. Sometimes an employee is faced with different decisions when a customer makes a complaint as is in the case of Herb’s Garden Products (Erdogan & Bauer, 2010). As an employee of the company, Martha can make strategic, tactical or operational decisions in response to the customer’s complaint. Conversely, she is faced with different challenges in her decision-making process and she has to overcome them for her own and the company’s sake. Other companies faced with such a situation as the one facing Herb’s Garden Products should utilize the rational decision-making model. In conclusion, the management of Herb’s Garden Products should change their perception if they are willing to find the right solution for the problem facing them.
Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T. Organizational Behavior. Flat World Knowledge. Retrieved May 23, 2010 from https://www.flatworldknowledge.com/sfitzgerald/organizational-behavior-and-te
Robbins, Stephen P. Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Ptr, 2004. Print.
Johns, Gary. Organizational Behavior. Canada: Pearson Education Canada, 2008. Print.
People must utilize decision strategies to go through their complex lives. Without these strategies, decision-making would be a huge challenge. Such strategies are identified under organizational engineering that encompasses the understanding, measuring, prediction and guidance of the behaviors of different groups of individuals (Salton, 2000). Organizational engineering is made up of the method and mode dimensions that gave rise to the four strategies employed in engineering and measuring group behavior. A normal person can apply any of the four strategies but most people prefer the utilization of one or two strategies. The four strategies are Relational Innovator, Hypothetical Analyzer, Logical Processor and Reactive Stimulator. In the case of the assignment at hand, the two strategies chosen are Hypothetical Analyzer and Logical Processor.
The hypothetical analyzer solves problems by analyzing all the available alternatives during the decision-making process. He takes part in the segmentation of complex problems into simple problems as a means of solving difficult and challenging problems (Kartinen, 2004). Conversely, relational innovators generate ideas. They integrate divergent ideas into coherent systems and theories with the premise of exploring alternative and new methods. When the two strategies are combined, they provide perfectionists who experience little or no trouble in the generation of novel ideas. After the conception of the ideas, they are vigorously examined as well as refined before being presented for adoption. This style enables people to think out of the box. When the strategic processing styles and strategic plans are combined together, they affect decision-making and communication at work in different ways.
The generation of new ideas enables the existence of good communication skills between the generators and the executors of the ideas. Thus, the perfectors have to ensure that their communication with those that will execute their ideas is high enough to enhance the success of the new and novel ideas. The correct decision-making process ensures that the ideas and decisions made are evaluated before they can be provided for adoption (Salton, 2000). This clearly indicates that the perfectors enhance a good decision-making process because the new ideas they come up with have to be highly examined before they are presented for implementation. These individuals ensure that the decision-making models put in place at work are directed towards the realization of the best results possible as they are in favor of ensuring that everything is prefect and running smoothly. When result-oriented decision-making tools are incorporated into the company’s decision-making process, good results are augmented culminating into the achievement of success and the intended goals and objectives of the company.
In the decision-making process at work, decisions may not be made easily due to the complexity of the problems being worked on. If the problems are segmented into simpler problems, the decision-making process can be made easier (Kartinen, 2004). This is where the hypothetical analyzer comes in because this individual’s main emphasis is analyzing all the available alternatives during the decision-making process as well as segmenting the complex problems into their simpler forms. When he actively participates in the decision-making process, decisions are made at a faster speed and only the best alternatives are chosen for implementation as final decisions. This ensures that the right choices are made and implemented at real time. Communication is very important in the creation of lasting interpersonal relationships at work. Without communication, the working environment of any company becomes unviable.
However, when employees work towards creating better communication avenues, work can be done more efficiently, effectively and on time. The relational innovators generate ideas, and for them to pass the ideas to the other employees, they have to augment the communication lines and methods utilized at work (Salton, 2000). This means that they enhance good communication in the workplace ensuring the cooperation needed to achieve the company’s long-term and short-term goals. The creation of the best communication lines encompasses the generation of ideas, which can only be arrived at when people think out of the box hence the perfectors are the best people who can build communication lines because of their attribute of thinking outside the box. They do not focus on what is known but they focus on what can be created. The vulnerability of the pattern to idea loops can affect the decision-making process negatively because when the employees are not cooperating in carrying out their duties, the decision-making process is converted into a slow and difficult process.
Organizational engineering is one discipline that is ignored by many people, and more so by the management of most companies, but it is very important especially in the identification of the strategies that can be utilized in the decision-making process (Kartinen, 2004). Though the discipline comprises of two dimensions, the two dimensions can be divided into the four strategies which when combined in pairs give rise to the strategic plans that can affect communication and decision-making process at the work place. The best strategies out of the rest are the Hypothetical Analyzer and Logical Processor. When the two are combined, they give rise to the perfector strategic pattern. In conclusion, the perfector strategic pattern not only affects communication and the decision making process positively but also negatively.
Kartinen, Paul. Organizational Engineering: Management Is Out! Engineering Is In! New York: Universe, 2004. Print.
Salton, Gary J. The Manager’s Guide to Organizational Engineering. Amherst: HRD Press, 2000. Print.