The purpose of this paper is to analyze the decision -making process that was

involved in appointment of company president, in the company where I personally

worked. Mr.Zutshi, the company president faced a very critical decision making
situation while appointing new successor for the company, after his retirement. A
Chief executive officer's decision has considerable impact on the performance of
the organization. Decision-making is one of the most important recurring
responsibilities facing managers in organizations. A high-quality decision helps an
organization accomplish its strategic goals and also meets the needs of the
organization's employees, executives, stockholders, consumers, or suppliers. In his
book called "Decision Making," Paul Moody (1983) defines decision " as an action
that must be taken when there is no more time for gathering facts." The Problem is
how to decide when to stop gathering facts. The solution varies with each problem
we attempt to solve, for gathering facts costs time and money. Peter E.
Druker (1967), lists five elements of decision process in his book, The effective
Executive:1) Clear realization that the problem is generic and can be solved only
through a decision that establishes a rule, 2) Definition of the specifications of
the solution, or the boundary conditions, 3) Derivation of a solution that is "
right," that is, one that fully satisfies the specifications before attention is
given to the concessions needed to make the decision acceptable, 4) The building
into the decision of the action to carry it out, 5) The feedback that tests the
validity and effectiveness of the decision against the actual course of events.
Druker goes on to explain that a decision is a judgment and, as such, is rarely a
choice between right and wrong. At best it is a choice between " almost right" and
" almost wrong."
Paul Moody (1983), has written in his book, Decision Making, that, "if
a company has a long-standi...In the case study- The Cosmetic Queen and the
Software King, Nahavandi in the textbook (pages 158-159); I compared the two
leadership styles in terms of LPC and situational control, examined their
similarities and differences, summed up their effectiveness as leaders, and
indicated my preference.
Not withstanding their success, Mary Kay and Bill Gates were opposite
in their style of leadership and practice different approaches to their business.
As a relationship motivated high LPC leader, Bill is bored, aloof and self-
centered, somewhat autocratic and is only concerned about outcomes, which puts him
in the high situation control on Fiedler's Contingency Model. As a task motivator,
(low CPC) leader, Bill is tense, task focused, overbearing, over controlling and
insists on getting things done his way. He is directive, task focused, serious, and
has little concern for others. Bill's does not care about the personal well being
of his employees only about their ability to get the job done. Bill's initial goals
when he founded his company remains the same, he focuses on innovation, systems
advancement and people last. He is driven by competition and the desire to be
dominant in the industry. He faced a novel and unstructured situation, but
continues to see his company strive successfully.
Mary Kay Ash on the other hand as a relationship motivated high LPC
leader, falls on the moderate situational control in Fielder's contingency model.
She was considerate, open to ideas and suggestions and concerned with resolving
conflicts. Mary was confident, supportive, removes obstacles, and stayed out of the
way. She admired, loved, and cared more about the women and their families who sold
her cosmetics. One could easily conclude from what is said about her, that her
initial goal was to help women become financially successful and be able to plan
their lives around their family. She founded a company that was not Decision
Making Model Analysis Paper
As observed by Kirby and Goodpaster, "Another way to understand that
thinking is of a higher order than breathing is to realize that many philosophers
since Aristotle have defined humans as 'thinking animals.' In other words, horses
and horseflies breathe, but thinking makes us human (3)."
This paper examines the steps I recently used in making an important
decision using the Vigilant Decision Making Model from www.alphanet.org. This model
is particularly helpful in making decisions regarding self assessment with career
options. The Vigilant Decision-Maker Process contains the following five steps,
Appraising the Challenge, Assessing Yourself, Surveying Alternatives, Evaluating
Alternatives, and Achieving Commitment. Using this model I will explain each of the
steps, and describe how critical thinking impacted a resulting decision that
resulted in my deciding that staying with my current company was the best
employment option for me.
The first step in the Vigilant Decision-Making Process is Appraising
the Challenge. This main focus of this step is to 1) determine the importance of
informed decision making and 2) to acknowledge the consequences of making a
"passive decision" (Decision Making Model, 1). The importance of the first step is
to recognize the importance of taking an active part in making your career
decisions. Problems can occur when you underestimate the task at hand or just
assume that things will work out. This leads up to knowing yourself and Assessing
Yourself.
Everyone knows that good career decisions require an unusual degree of
self-knowledge (The Vigilant Decision Making Process, 1). Assessing Yourself is the
2nd step of the Vigilant Decision-Making Process. In order to make the right career
decision for ourselves we have to understand our own skills, values, strengths,
weaknesses, i
...