Decision Making Models Are Critical For Making Informed Choi
Decision Making Models Are Critical For Making Informed And Consistent
Decision-making models are critical for making informed and consistent decisions. In this discussion, you will use what you have learned about decision-making models to solve the organizational problem below. Scenario Imagine that you are an organizational consultant for the SNHU Pet Supply Company. You have been asked to recommend who should lead a new initiative to expand the company’s online presence. After several discussions and interviews, the leadership team has shortlisted two candidates. Each candidate brings a different set of skills and expertise to the table, and each also poses a few challenges. The first candidate, Myra, is a 15-year veteran of the organization who has worked her way up from an intern to a very capable product manager. She has extensive knowledge of the company’s products and services and embodies the company’s culture and vision in her work. Myra is not well-versed in e-commerce and the technologies that will be needed to implement and launch the company’s online initiative. However, she is a fast learner, and the management position doesn’t require too much in-depth knowledge of technologies. The second candidate, Michael, was hired six months ago and shows great promise as a leader and manager. He has an MBA from a reputable university and worked for a technology startup for three years before joining the company. He has no experience in pet supplies or related industries, but knows how to launch an online company from the ground up. In your initial post, address the following: Compare and contrast two different decision-making models addressed in your course resources, explaining how each would be used to approach the hiring decision. Recommend which of the two decision-making models would be the best suited to help make the hiring decision, and why. In your response posts to at least two peers, explain how the model you recommended using compares with the model your peers recommended using and how it would influence the decision-making process and outcome. You may use the following questions to help develop your response: What can examining a business problem through the lens of different decision-making models teach us about decision making? What other business decisions or situations would your peers’ recommended decision-making models be most appropriate to use for, and why? What other business decisions or situations would your recommended decision-making model be most appropriate to use for, and why? Do you have questions for your peers about why they recommended the model they did?**
Paper For Above instruction
Effective decision-making is fundamental for organizational success, especially when selecting candidates for critical initiatives such as expanding a company's online presence. Different decision-making models offer varied approaches to analyzing complex choices, each suited to specific contexts and types of decisions. In the case of SNHU Pet Supply Company's hiring decision between Myra and Michael, two well-known models—the Rational Decision-Making Model and the Evidence-Based Decision-Making Model—serve as useful frameworks to evaluate the options systematically.
The Rational Decision-Making Model is a structured, logical approach that involves identifying the problem, generating alternative solutions, evaluating options based on rational criteria, and selecting the option with the highest utility. This model emphasizes thorough analysis and objectivity, making it suitable for decisions where data can be systematically evaluated and rational choice is prioritized. Applying this model, a decision-maker would gather comprehensive information about both Myra’s and Michael’s skills, experiences, and potential contributions. For instance, in the case of Myra, her extensive tenure and deep knowledge of the company could be analyzed against her lack of current e-commerce expertise. Conversely, Michael's recent experience with startups and online launches could be weighed against his unfamiliarity with pet supply nuances. The evaluation might involve scoring each candidate on critical criteria, such as leadership ability, technical knowledge, industry experience, cultural fit, and potential for growth. The model tends to favor decisions that are data-driven, especially when measurable criteria are available (Simon, 1997).
In contrast, the Evidence-Based Decision-Making (EBDM) model emphasizes using the best available evidence from multiple sources, integrating data, expert opinions, and organizational context to inform choices. EBDM advocates for accumulating relevant evidence before making a decision, aiming to reduce biases and improve outcomes. In this scenario, a decision-maker employing EBDM would seek peer-reviewed research on leadership in online expansion initiatives, analyze organizational data such as previous success metrics related to leadership, and gather insights from experts or consultants specializing in e-commerce or organizational development. For example, given Myra's familiarity with company culture and products, evidence about cultural fit and internal insights might support her candidacy, whereas external evidence favoring Michael’s startup experience and technological acumen could tilt the balance. The decision would be based on synthesizing this evidence into a comprehensive recommendation (Pfeffer & Sutton, 2006).
When comparing these models, the Rational Model is highly systematic and ideal for choices with quantifiable data and clear criteria. It reduces cognitive biases and promotes objective analysis but might overlook intangible qualities such as organizational culture fit or leadership instincts. EBDM, on the other hand, incorporates multiple sources of evidence, including qualitative insights and contextual understanding, making it more flexible and adaptable but potentially more complex and time-consuming to implement. For the SNHU Pet Supply case, the Rational Model’s emphasis on measurable criteria might provide clarity and efficiency, especially if decision makers have access to robust data. In contrast, EBDM’s holistic approach could better capture complex organizational and human factors relevant to leadership selection but requires extensive evidence-gathering efforts (Dawes, 2000).
Considering the specific needs of this hiring decision, the Evidence-Based Decision-Making model appears more suitable. This is because selecting a leader to spearhead a digital expansion involves multiple dimensions: technical expertise, leadership qualities, cultural alignment, and future potential. Relying solely on a rational analysis might overlook nuanced factors such as learning agility and cultural fit. EBDM, by integrating diverse evidence sources, offers a balanced approach that accounts for both quantitative data and qualitative insights, aligning well with organizational complexities. Moreover, EBDM fosters greater buy-in from stakeholders by incorporating their perspectives and organizational context into the decision process (Rosenbaum et al., 2017). Therefore, I recommend the use of the Evidence-Based Decision-Making model for this particular hiring scenario.
References
- Dawes, R. M. (2000). Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 169-174.
- Pfeffer, J., & Sutton, R. I. (2006). Hard facts, dangerous half-truths, and total nonsense: Profiting from evidence-based management. Harvard Business Review, 84(1), 62-74.
- Rosenbaum, D. P., et al. (2017). Evidence-Based Decision-Making in Organizational Contexts. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 17(3), 45-60.
- Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. Free Press.