Styles In Decision Making
Decision making is ancient art or technique, as old as the mankind. A Decision means making up one’s mind, or arrive at a conclusion, on an issue. Effective Decision making is an important leadership trait. A normal human being has some degree of inbuilt ability to Decide. Decision making is based on one’s own attitude, upbringing, perception, understanding of a problem, culture, environment, a given situation, and training, which, are factors responsible for developing a particular style. Decision as defined in Oxford dictionary is “About a choice or judgement that you make after thinking and talking about what is the best thing to do”. Further, Decision making is defined as “the process of deciding about important matter especially in a group of people for an organization”. A person who takes the decision is known as decision maker.
While putting my thoughts on the subject, I did not go by any management jargons, but, by practical aspects of Decision-Making Styles, in day to day routine, encountered by me, under various situations and with different people, as a senior business executive, consultant and trainer, in a very active and successful professional career of over five decades.
Decision-Making Styles could be classified as:
QUICK, SLOW, POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, DEFENSIVE, OFFENSIVE, INDECISIONS, AVOIDING DECISIONS.
The defined styles have only a thin line between each other.
1. QUICK DECISIONS — Quick Decisions create a rosy picture of Decision Making. Every thing moves on very fast. But Quick Decisions can be good as well as bad. If the matter is not properly thought over. A decision can be a disaster. A person can succeed, if he or she has sharp analytical ability. In modern management practices, this Style is most sought after, for success and results. We have been observing for a year and half how Covid-19 is being tackled in different countries especially in our county India. Decisions are been taken fast and quickly be these creating infra structure for medical facilities, managing medicines and medical equipment or supply chain systems. Recent example of enhancing the quantities of much sought after, medical oxygen, taking quick decisions to mobilize medical oxygen, cylinders, oxygen concentrators, oxygen plants from where ever available globally, inducting Indian Air Force transport planes for lifting cargo and delivering at various points across the county.
2. SLOW DECISIONS — Right from the inception, matters move at bullock cart speed. Files get stuck up at each and every table. Matters do not move, but have to be pushed through. This Style is generally followed by Govt. departments and incompetent executives in business and industry. The term RED TAPE is born out of this Style. This Style is harmful and retards progress. For example, it has been observed time and again that when banks are under pressure from the government , audit objections from the Reserve Bank of India , negative publicity by media etc , due to lack of enthusiasm in loan recovery process, resulting in speedy growth of non-performing assets . This slow process on NPA slows down decision to sanction fresh loan proposals. Bank’s profitability and industry’s growth, both suffer; and the nation’s economic development retards.
3. POSITIVE DECISIONS — Under this Style, every aspect is looked at favorably with an objective to help and solve the problem. Positive decisions are taken when overall environment is healthy, favorable for the subject and decision makers are peaceful. Matters move in right direction. This Style ensures that the objective is achieved. But this Style is rarely practiced. This Style can also be classified as “Good Decision Making”. Recently, in the conflict between Israel and Palestine, some well meaning countries intervened which resulted in positive decision making for cease fire and attempt to establish peace.
4. NEGATIVE DECISIONS — Negative means bad or harmful. As the term denotes, this Style is just opposite to POSITIVE Style. Negative style, ensures that many problems out of the main problem, are created. People, who are decision makers and decision receivers, have adopted aggressive postures In other words, a prestige issue and mountain out of a mole is made. Rules are applied in a manner, that, only negative interpretations are given. Prolonging the matter, harassment, taking revenge, proving a performer as a failure, causing financial losses , is the motive. For example, in the ongoing farmers agitation, both- govt, and agitators have adopted a tough attitude, besides, media reporting adds fuel to the fire. Matter is getting complicated with no advantage to any of the stake holders. Ultimately, the decision goes in the opposite direction, and main problem remains unsolved.
5. DEFENSIVE DECISIONS — Primary objective of the Decision maker, as per this Style, is to keep his position safe and secondary objective to solve the problem. He creates a file out of a file and tries to involve so many people in decision making process. This Style is also known as ‘SHIFTING the RESPONSIBILITY or PASSING the BUCK approach. One takes a Decision in such a way, that a scapegoat is always ready to take the blame. In management parlance, this Style is also known as INSULATION APPROACH i.e., the Decision Maker sufficiently insulates himself against any possible, shock or a vigilance enquiry.
6. OFFENSIVE DECISIONS — Offensive Decisions are taken, not only with a view to keep the main problem unsolved, but also with a view to hurt the feelings of the concerned person or party, so that, at least to create a mental torture, if not anything else. This Style of Decision making creates sadistic happiness for a person and unhappiness for many. This style spoils relationships and cordial office environment. Offensive Style, either suppresses a problem, or solves it temporarily. But, breeds bigger problems at a later stage. This Style is also known as DECISIONS with ULCERS. For example, a bureaucrat falls from favor of his political boss, is transferred 3 times in a month; ultimately, to a station where no residential accommodation is available, and his or her official car is withdrawn.
7. INDECISIONS — This Style is also known as DECISIONS by IGNORANCE. This Style is applied by those Executives, who are not capable of taking Decisions, either due to lack of knowledge of a subject, or incapacity to decide. They would keep papers pending for no reasons, get confused, mark papers to those, who are not connected with the subject, or put such queries, which are not relevant.
It would be interesting to mention that Hon’ble Supreme Court of India gave a ruling in third week of July,’01 i.e., ‘Indecisions are not abuse of power, unless repeated”.
8. AVOIDING DECISIONS — Yet, another important Style is to avoid taking a decision. If a representation is given to you, for creating an additional facility, you have already made up your mind not to oblige, due to financial considerations. But you don’t want to offend your employees. You put such queries, which would take a few months to gather the statistics. Subsequently, appoint a committee to go into the details. The Committee would consist of a sick person, who often remains on leave, a person who is generally on tour, two persons who are at logger heads with each other, and yet, another person, who by temperament, only agrees to disagree with others. This way, the committee would never meet. Even if it meets, once in a blue moon, members would fight and can’t arrive at a decision. Even if a decision is recommended, you put a noting on it, which can’t be understood by any body, and would confuse the matter, further. This approach is in tune with the famous quote of Fred Allen, i.e., “a committee is a gathering of people, who together can decide, that, nothing can be done.”
Know your Decision Making Style: Please keep a close mental watch on a particular day are two of your office routine, you will find your decisions fit in to one of the described styles.
QUOTE: “There will be time, there will be time, for a 100 decisions and indecisions. There will be time for 100 visions and revisions.”
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
