Leaders play a critical role in the decision making processes within companies are organizations, as they are expected to weigh in on the alternatives or options that they are supposed to consider as part of their capacities to make decisions (Taylor, 2011). In most cases, this creates the need for them to adopt specific decision making approaches that would allow them to examine the choices that they produce depending on the expected impacts. On the other hand, it becomes essential for the leaders to reflect on a generalized understanding of what they expect from the decisions that they make regarding the expected output. Generally, this would mean that the leaders find themselves in a favorable position allowing them to build on their respective capacities towards ensuring that their decisions remain positive while focusing on the projected outcomes in a company or organizational setting.
From a comprehensive perspective, decision making creates a front through which a leader can weigh the advantages and disadvantages of having to consider one option over the other. As opposed to problem-solving, decision making allows a leader to consider some of the possible outcomes associated with a specific decision made as part of the company or organization. One of the critical aspects note is that a leader may focus on intuitive or reasoned process to help in making the decisions expected. The focus of this report is to reflect on the general understanding of the decision making process with the sole intention of having to examine how one's thought process impacts this process. The report will seek to explore some of the stages that a leader considers as part of making effective decisions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Definition of Decision Making Process
The clear understanding of the decision-making process is that it reflects on the process of having to select between two or more alternatives while reflecting on the generalized impacts or outcomes expected from each of these alternatives. When making a decision, a leader finds him or herself in a situation he or she is supposed to embrace a thought process that helps in reflecting on the impacts associated with one decision over another. The expectation of embarking on this process is that it helps creates a better understanding of the alternatives that have been presented to help achieve positive outcomes. In other words, this means that an individual would be in a much better position for having to make confident decisions if he or she embraces a productive thought process.
The decision-making process also involves a stage in which one is expected to gather as much information as possible regarding the alternatives presented (Thomas & Saaty, 2000). The information collected is viewed as being essential for the entire process, as it means that the quality of decisions that one would be able to make would match the expected outcomes and objectives. Availability of information indicates that the person involved in making decisions would be in a better position through which to assess the alternatives before making an informed decision. In other words, this means that the person involved would be in a better position of having to make use of the information gathered to ensure that the decision made remains effective to match the best possible outcomes depending on expectations.
Thought Process Stages of Decision Making
The thought process associated with decision making focuses on several key stages, each of which is viewed as being critical towards building that positive framework through which to maximize quality decisions. The following is an in-depth analysis of the thought process stages that can relate to decision making.
Stage 1: Identifying the Decision
The first stage in this thought process is recognizing the need for having to make a decision focusing on a given issue occurring within different perspectives. The first stage is seen as being important, as it helps in setting precedence for the entire process, as it defines the expected decision that must be made within a company or organization. In this stage, one can weigh in on the nature of the conclusion that he or she is expected to make as part of building overall efficiency in the quality of decisions made.
Stage 2: Gather Relevant Information
In the second stage, the key factor to note is that one would only be able to make a practical decision depending on the availability of information to help define the alternatives effectively. In this stage, one can determine the best sources of information, the quality of information that is needed, as well as, how to get such information. It is important to note that the process of gathering information as part of the decision-making process focuses on both internal and external ‘work’ (Mu & Pereyra-Rojas, 2016). From the internal perspective, one can undertake a self-assessment, which is seen as being critical towards evaluating some of the possible strengths to consider when making decisions.
Stage 3: Identify the Alternatives
The third stage in the decision-making process involves the identification of alternatives with the sole intention being towards finding the best replacement to match the expected outcomes. When adopting specific decisions, one is expected to reflect on whether the decision made is the best when considering the projected goals and objectives associated with the decisions made. In most cases, one finds him or herself in a situation the possible alternatives to consider as part of the decision making process are notable in number, which exposes the person involved in the decision making process to a wide array of alternatives. The expectation for this step is that the person concerned must list down all the possible options and the desirable outcomes expected for each of these alternatives. That will play a critical role in ensuring that one can make decisions in a much more effective manner matching the best possible expectations.
Stage 4: Weigh the Evidence
Evidence consideration is another critical step that must be evaluated significantly as part of ensuring that the decision made remains effective based on the set-out outcome and expectations (Neal & Spetzler, 2015). The information gathered as part of the decision-making process reflects on a given position, as it serves as a source of evidence to support a specific approach or outcome. From that perspective, it becomes clear that indeed weighing of the evidence is essential in building overall capacity towards advancing a generalized outcome. After considering the evidence, the person involved would be able to place the alternatives in priority while focusing on the existing evidence to support a specific position, based on what the person involved intends to achieve.
Stage 5: Choose among Alternatives
After a process of having to weigh the existing evidence, one finds him or herself in a better position through which to select the alternative that best suits the expected outcome while projecting the general expectations from the persons involved in the decision-making process. In some cases, persons may find themselves choosing a combination of alternatives with the sole focus being towards building overall capacity towards delivering on the best possible outcomes. The alternative that had been placed at the top of the list in stage 4 serves as the best possible alternative considering that it is well supported using relevant evidence to help build on its credibility (Taylor, 2011). Additionally, this also means that the alternative tends to have the highest levels of probability towards matching generalized outcomes.
Stage 6: Take Action
In this stage, the expectation for the persons involved in the decision making processes is that he or she would take action on the alternative that has been selected in stage 5 with the focus being towards implementing this alternative (Thomas & Saaty, 2000). After the initial selection of an alternative, the person involved in the decision-making process would be expected to take necessary action on how to implement the alternative, as has been presented to match the best possible outcomes. That means that the person involved would reflect on an implementation approach through which to ensure that the decisions made reflect on the best possible outcomes for the persons involved. The implementation of the alternative selected may present a wide array of challenges for the person involved, but one is expected to maintain the highest standards to match positive outcomes.
Stage 7: Review Decision and Its Consequences
The final stage in the decision-making process involves having to review or evaluate the decision, as has been implemented in stage 6, as well as, evaluating the consequences associated with the decision (Neal & Spetzler, 2015). The evaluation of the consequences will help in determining whether indeed the decision made has been effective towards ensuring that the person involved achieves his or her set out goals and objectives. Additionally, this would also mean that the person involved would be in a somewhat active position through which to reflect on the quality of decisions made to determine whether the decisions were the best. If the need or expected outcome has not been met by the alternative that one has decided on, it becomes essential to go back to stage 1 of this process to come up with a new alternative.
Sub-Conscious Stages of the Decision-Making Process
On the other hand, the decision-making process is viewed as being useful if one goes through several sub-conscious stages, each of which allows the mind to settle on a given decision. One of the most significant challenges that people often encounter concerning the decision-making process is that it becomes hard for them to settle on a given decision if their subconscious does not believe in the quality of the decision made. From that perspective, it becomes clear that indeed the sub-conscious stages of the decision-making process are essential towards building that proactive avenue through which to ensure that the decisions made remain effective. Additionally, this process is seen as being effective, as it helps in building that positive avenue for defining the prospective outcomes associated with a decision implemented.
The following is an analysis of the sub-conscious stages occurring within the decision-making process.
Stage 1: Define the Situation
As can be seen from the conscious stages of the decision-making process, one tends to focus more on the solutions rather than focusing on the situation that creates the need for the solution. Definition of the situation occurs as a subconscious outcome in which persons tend to define the situation depending on the outcomes expected based on the set out solutions (Mu & Pereyra-Rojas, 2016). Subconsciously, one finds him or herself that defines the situation effectively; thus, acting as a guarantee that indeed the solutions implemented would match the general expectations. That means that the person involved in the decision making process experiences some form of limitation regarding the general process of having to reflect on the possible outcomes associated with a given decision.
Stage 2: Reasoning
The second stage that occurs as a subconscious outcome is reasoning, which is one of the critical aspects of significant consideration in trying to achieve the best possible results. Reasoning helps in creating an avenue through which persons can weigh in on the decisions made to determine whether indeed these decisions are expected to have the best possible outcomes. However, reasoning is not categorized as one of the stages of decision making considering that one is not supposed to dedicate an exact amount of time to reasoning. Instead, reasoning occurs on a systematic basis to help in matching overall projections of the decisions made while highlighting the expected value from these decisions.
Stage 3: Reevaluation
Reevaluation is a subconscious stage in which one is expected to reevaluate the evidence, as has been presented to help in the actual determination of whether the evidence matches prospective outcomes. As can be noted from the stages associated with decision making, the evaluation of evidence is seen as being important, as it helps in ensuring that one can make a decision that is viewed as being effective. However, one is expected to evaluate the evidence several times subconsciously, as this would serve as one of the ways through which to minimize the overall risks of exposure to decisions that lack merit. The reevaluation of the evidence will occur as a critical outcome touching on issues such as defining the prompt nature of the actions to help in the implementation of the alternatives selected. The outcome of the reevaluation of evidence is that it helps build overall capacity to enhance the overall achievement of set out goals and objectives.
Effects of Stress, Positive, and Negative Thinking on Decision Making Process
Feelings of stress tend to have a significant impact on the way people make decisions considering that it affects their ability to weigh the risks and reward that can be associated with the decisions made. In most cases, this means that it becomes difficult for the person involved in the decision-making process to make a decision that will be effective based on the situation at hand. Stress creates a situation where persons tend to focus more on the upsides of the alternatives that they are considering while ignoring the downsides; thus, impacting on the quality of decisions.
Positive thinking helps towards improving one’s ability to make quality decisions, as it creates a front through which one can view the decisions made from the perspective of positive outcomes. Consequently, this means that a person is much more likely to focus more on examining or evaluating the quality of decisions made with the sole intention being towards matching possible outcomes. The influence of positive thinking on decision making can be seen from the perspective that persons involved in the decision-making process often experience a significant shift in their understanding of given situations. That can be seen from the perspective that it helps build on the overall capacity for the persons allowing them to examine the benefits and challenges associated with a given decision. Generally, this means that positive thinking acts as a guarantee that a person would be able to make decisions that would be expected to have positive impacts.
On the other hand, negative thinking affects one’s ability to make quality decisions, as it creates a situation where it becomes hard or challenging for persons to reflect on their instincts and reasoning when making decisions. The impact of negative thinking on the quality of decisions made reflects more on the fact that it becomes hard for persons to build on their understanding of the situation to help in the decision-making process. Negative thinking creates a situation where one him or herself as being limited concerning projected outcomes while focusing on the fact that one does not anticipate positive results. The outcome of this is that people will often make wrong decisions that go against their instincts or judgment of the situation at hand.
Characteristics
Compensatory vs. Non-Compensatory
When making decisions, one is expected to focus on decision strategies, which act as a guarantee that indeed the qualities of decisions match the expected outcomes. Decision strategies are divided into two main categories, which are compensatory and non-compensatory strategies. A compensatory strategy refers to specific approaches in which one is expected to weigh the value of different attributes associated with a given decision or alternative when focusing on the decision-making process (Mu & Pereyra-Rojas, 2016). The compensatory strategy indicates that a low-value attribute of a decision or alternative will be boosted by a high-value attribute of the same decision. Consequently, this means that the evaluation of decisions would not only be expected to focus on a limited perspective, as the decision may present attributes that would be considered as being different to help boost on their value.
On the other hand, a non-compensatory strategy goes against the expectation of the compensatory strategies considering that they do not allow for the compensation of an attribute that is viewed as being low when compared to other similar attributes matching reasonable expectations. An example can be seen when deciding on whether to buy a product. When using a compensatory strategy, a buyer is not only focused on a single attribute of the product that he or she intends to buy. Instead, he or she focuses on multiple attributes to determine the low attributes, which would be compensated by the high attributes to the same product. However, this is not the case when using a non-compensatory, as the buyer would only focus on an attribute such as price to determine whether indeed to purchase the product within the market.
Attribute Weights vs. Alternative Wise Processing
When comparing attribute weights and alternative wise processing, one of the key factors to note is that attribute weight reflects more on a specific attribute that will help in ensuring that the decision maker can make an effective decision. The consideration of the single attribute means that it becomes much easier for the person involved to use this as a single factor of concern when making quality decisions. However, alternative wise processing seeks to create an approach in which the person involved in the decision-making process would be expected to evaluate all existing alternatives before making the decision. When evaluating the existing options, the expectation is finding a decision that incorporates all the relevant attributes that the person involved may expect as part of the decision-making process matching possible outcomes.
Pairwise Comparison
Pairwise comparison operates a decision strategy in which one can engage in a subsequent process of having to examine and compare alternatives in pairs with the sole focus being towards ensuring that one would be able to compare and contrast the alternatives effectively. In this approach, the alternatives are grouped into pairs with the sole expectation being towards ensuring that the pairs match to help in effective evaluation. The evaluation of the alternatives occurring in pairs makes it much easier for the persons involved in the decision-making process to determine how each of the alternatives may be considered as being superior over others (Thomas & Saaty, 2000). Additionally, the comparison helps in ensuring that the alternatives selected are the strongest within their respective pairs to assist in meeting expected outcomes when making decisions.
Conclusion
In summary, leaders play a critical role in the decision making processes within companies are organizations. Decision making allows a leader to consider some of the possible outcomes associated with a specific decision made as part of the company or organization. A clear understanding of the decision-making process is that it reflects on the process of having to select between two or more alternatives. The decision-making process also involves a stage in which one is expected to gather as much information as possible regarding the alternatives presented. The first stage in this thought process is recognizing the need for having to make a decision focusing on a given issue. In the second stage, the key factor to note is that one would only be able to make a practical decision depending on the availability of information to help define the alternatives effectively.
The third stage in the decision-making process involves the identification of alternatives. Evidence consideration is another crucial step that must be evaluated significantly as part of the decision making process. The final stage in the decision-making process involves having to review or assess the decision. Definition of the situation occurs as a subconscious outcome in which persons tend to define the situation depending on the results expected based on the set out solutions. Reasoning helps in creating an avenue through which persons can weigh in on the decisions made to determine whether indeed these decisions are expected to have the best possible outcomes. One is supposed to evaluate the evidence several times subconsciously, as this would serve as one of the ways through which to minimize the overall risks of exposure to decisions that lack merit.
References
Mu, E., & Pereyra-Rojas, M. (2016). Practical Decision Making: An Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Using Super Decisions (Vol. 2). Springer.
Neal, L. & Spetzler, C. (2015). An organization-wide approach to ethical decision making . Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/05/an-organization-wide-approach-to-good-decision-making
Taylor, J. T. (2011). Making Effective Decisions: Five Levels of Decision Making . Retrieved from http://www.teambuildingusa.com/articles/making-effective-decisions/
Thomas, L. S., & Saaty, T. L. S. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process. In Analytic Hierarchy Process Series, 6 . RWS Publications Pittsburgh.
