Category: Decision Making

Introduction

This paper explores the various strategies chosen by multinational oil industries for climate change. The oil business is a standout amongst the most dominant and worldwide business segments today and its exercises and items are specifically connected with rising ozone depleting substance emissions. Understanding its environmental change techniques and activities is of most extreme significance to those strategy creators going for productive cooperation of the oil business in the move to an atmosphere inviting world. Anybody intrigued by the governmental issues of environmental change will have taken note that oil enterprises have received disparate procedures towards environmental change and that talks, and activities related with those techniques are developing in time. This paper goes for refining the comprehension of such different procedures. It attempts to reveal insight into the procedures at work, the stakes, the basic qualities, what’s more, the choices for changes.

We spotlight specifically on their procedures towards science, governmental issues and general feeling. The fundamental contentions set forward as avocation by the enterprises are exhibited. The techniques are then translated as dispositions towards the moral problem that environmental change delivers for the oil business. We propose some finishing up remarks on the substantive and procedural moral elements of oil industry’s methodologies towards environmental change. Even though all oil partnerships go for a gainful movement, they contrast in their focused or co-usable aspect towards the imperatives that society attempts to force on the approaches to achieve their objective.

Climate change warning of Exxon Mobil and Shell on 1980’s

During the 1980s, oil organizations like Exxon and Shell did inside appraisals of the carbon dioxide discharged by non-renewable energy sources and gauge the planetary results of these emissions. In 1982, for instance, Exxon anticipated that by around 2060, CO2 levels would stretch around 560 sections for every million – twice the preindustrial level – and this would drive the planet’s normal temperatures up by about 2°C. later, in 1988, an inside report by Shell anticipated that CO2 could increase much prior, by 2030. Shell’s evaluation predicted a one-meter ocean level increase and noticed that warming could likewise fuel deterioration of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, bringing about an overall ascent in ocean dimension of ‘five to six meters.’ That would be sufficient to immerse whole low-lying nations.

Shell’s examiners additionally cautioned of the ‘vanishing of explicit biological communities or territory demolition,’ anticipated an expansion in ‘spillover, damaging floods, and immersion of low-lying areas,’ and said that ‘new wellsprings of freshwater would be required’ to make up for changes in precipitation. Worldwide changes in air temperature would likewise ‘definitely change the manner in which individuals live and work.’

After that, Exxon cautioned of ‘possibly terrible occasions that must be considered.’ Like Shell’s specialists, Exxon’s researchers anticipated wrecking ocean level increase, and cautioned that the American Midwest and different pieces of the world could progress toward becoming desert-like. The reports made by Exxon and Shell was terrifying and could damage a lot to mankind and the world but for their own profit they did not declare that publicly which was unethical, but it got leaked by a Dutch news organization in 2015.

None of the organizations ever assume liability for their items. In Shell’s examination, the firm contended that the ‘principle trouble’ of tending to environmental change rests not with the energy business, however with governments and customers. That discussion may have seemed well and good if oil officials, including those from Exxon and Shell, had not later lied about environmental change and effectively kept governments from sanctioning clean-energy strategies.

In spite of the fact that the refinements of an Earth-wide temperature boost were unfamiliar to a great many people during the 1980s, among the rare sorts of people who had a superior thought than most were the organizations contributing the most to it. Despite logical weaknesses, the main concern was this: oil firms perceived that their items added CO2 to the air, knew this would prompt warming, and determined the possible outcomes. And after that they acknowledged those dangers for our benefit, to our detriment, and without our insight.

The oil industry ethical dilemma

The main objective of oil companies is to make money and increase their profit either way. At one side, the general job of business is to take part in beneficial exercises. At other side, business is a social action and can’t have some other support than to serve the general public of which it is part. Since business is a social action, debates used to clarify it are socially bound. This pressure innate to business is the one caught in the idea of a business ethical dilemma. This idea is useful to more willingly comprehend the connection among business and society. Here, we use it to refine our comprehension of organization systems and practices towards environmental change. A moral dilemma happens in business when the most beneficial outcome of a business movement requires a procedure that is inconvenient to society. This business morals approach underestimates that business goes for a gainful business result. it may incorporate procedural observation in transit such outcomes are achieved. It isn’t benefit in itself that is ethical or unethical: it relies upon how this benefit is made.

The environmental change ethical dilemma looked by the oil business can be schematically described as an issue between the scan for a productive oil industry and the way that CO2 discharges make climatic changes that are possibly dangerous to society. On the top of that, discharging CO2 is an undesirable, unpreventable symptom of the procedure that makes a beneficial oil industry. The obliging of CO2 emissions is basically viewed as through its negative effect on benefits by the industries. Some industries have clean mentality between profit and social responsibility by making profit prior over CO2 emissions.

Conclusions

Environmental change represents a moral difficulty to oil organizations. They actualize different systems to address it. Some attempt to debilitate the situation so as to keep up an existing condition on their methods for doing, some recognize it and start changes in their methods for doing, and some attempt to evade the dilemma. From a business stance, starting today, every one of the methodologies considered in this paper have been very gainful to the companies that favored them.

A great deal has stayed at the dimension of talks. From a societal and moral viewpoint, deciding on the moral nature of a company’s conduct isn’t clear what’s more, not constantly conceivable. Chiefly, in light of the fact that there may be a disparity between what the organization says and what it does. This is the topic of ‘good confidence.’ No organization has yet unmistakably acquired costs due to its methodology, thus, it is difficult to pass judgment on whether the ‘proactive’ onestruly represent moral reasons. It is not necessarily the case that it is either fundamental or attractive that moral organizations acquire costs. The most attractive circumstances, for all, are clearly those in which it is increasingly beneficial for business to be moral.

References

1. Franta, B., 2018. Shell and Exxon 1980’s climate change warning, available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings
2. Dahan, R., 2001. Environmental performance and policy—an ExxonMobil perspective. In: Proceedings of the Paper Presented at the Oil & Money Conference, London, 29–30 October 2001.
3. Hamilton, K., 1998. The Oil Industry and Climate Change. A Greenpeace Briefing, Greenpeace International. Available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/∼climate/industry/reports/.
4. Le Menestrel, M., 2002. Economic rationality and ethical behaviour. ethical business between venality and sacrifice. Business Ethics: A Eur. Rev. 2 (2), 157–166.
5. Stevens, W., 1996. A Hot Center of Debate on Global Warming. The New York Times, 6 August 1996.
6. Flannery, B., 1999. Global Climate Change. Speeches to the European Affiliates of Exxon Corporation. Int. Assoc. Energy Econ. Newsletter. Third Quarter, 4–10.
7. van den Hove, S., Le Menestrel, M., de Bettignies, H.-C., 2001. Should Business Influence the Science and Politics of Global Environmental Change? The Oil Industry and Climate Change. INSEAD Case Study no. 4957.
8. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-%0dcent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings
9. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-%0dcent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings

Introduction

Decision-making is the central responsibility of executives and leaders. This includes the definition of the issue or concern and the awareness of the factors associated with it. This is a rational interpretation of what should be selected and may have an impact on the decision between choices.

A significant part of any judgment is its purpose or goal. This is special in regards to the appreciation of the results of a particular decision; instead, it has to do with the desire to conclude the decision in any situation. Of example, client complaints that imply the need to modify aspects of how administration is communicated, and decisions need to be taken to resolve them.(ukl G 2010)

There are various approaches to characterize an issue, for example, making a group to handle it and social occasion significant information by meeting workers and clients. (ukl G 2010)

Building up a Group to Define the Problem

It is a smart idea to have the option to move from alternative points of view towards the interpretation of decisions. Can this be achieved to take samples of the problem that may have been ignored in some manner or another? Including at least two people, decision-making can require a range of evidence, knowledge and experience. This can be done by forming a meeting to analyze and define the problem or question, and then to formulate a judgment that relies on their general reasoning. Getting a shared meaning and interpretation of decision-making supports the decision-making process by taking debate center stage and making it increasingly successful. (Yukl G, Lepsinger R 2005)

Social affair Data to Define the Decision

Many actions require a decent understanding of the present state to see all the consequences of future decisions. It therefore appears to be important to consider the views of all the meetings that will be affected by the decision. These may involve customers, employees, or service providers. Data should be collected on how individuals are now impacted by this problem. A few instances of significant information to accumulate incorporate proficiency levels, fulfillment levels, and yield measurements. Meetings, center gatherings, or other subjective techniques for information assortment can be utilized to recognize existing conditions that might be associated with the decision being referred to. However, data as could be expected ought to be assembled to manufacture certainty that a decision has been precisely and properly figured before extra examination and appraisal of options start. (Yukl G, Lepsinger R 2005)

Generate Alternatives

When a decision has been characterized, the subsequent stage is to recognize the options for decision producers to choose from. It is uncommon for there to be just a single other option; actually, an objective ought to be to distinguish whatever number various options as could be allowed without making too restricted a differentiation between them. The decision producer would then be able to limit the rundown dependent on investigation, asset confinements, or time imperatives. Regularly, doing nothing is an elective deserving of thought. (Yukl G, Lepsinger R 2005)

Conceptualizing

Conceptualization is a helpful way to distinguish between options. Creating preparations for future combinations of events may give rise to thoughts that can shape choices. Frequently, this is best done with a small collection of individuals with alternative points of view, knowledge, and experience. A proper way to deal with the consequences of conceptualizing will help ensure the decisions are not overlooked.

Another approach to assess choices is through a decision tree.

Decision Trees

The decision tree is a decision bolstering system that utilizes an ordered graphical description of choices. This method is a visual representation of actions so that decision-makers can have a clearer understanding of them. Decision trees tend to separate larger choices into smaller ones and are useful for the exploration of every single, open option. Decision trees have a beginning point and then branch out, with each branch talking to an alternative purpose, action or outcome. The drawbacks, advantages and risks of assets can be reported by any alternative.

Evaluate Alternatives

At a point when the decision-maker has specifically and explicitly identified the problem and the solutions that have emerged, the individual in question would then be able to carry out an examination that would be useful in determining and analyzing the matter. This usually involves the study of objective data, such as spending or income. Contextual information, on the other hand, is used to insure that consideration is given, for example, in terms to processes, connections consequences or ethical implications.

The initial phase of the inquiry describes growing source of information needed to understand the different choices and their potential outcomes. The collection of such knowledge often involves looking to see if there is no relevant information. The findings of the data sample were typically gathered, interpreted and integrated as a framework for consultations and meetings of decision-makers. (Pomerol JC, Adam F 2004)

Imagine Impact map model: this is the simple case of the impact diagram used to determine the option of action.

There are a variety of methods that can be used to better guide the inquiry and evaluation of future judgments. They vary from simple apparatuses, for example, benefit and disadvantage structures to increasingly complex models, such as decision trees and effect maps, which can collect more variables and include more detail.

A decision tree indicates options outwardly and makes ways of sub decisions to be made or vulnerabilities to be considered so as to gauge the result of a given decision. It incorporates an incentive for every other option, for example, money related result, and notes the probabilities that every result will happen. Decision trees at some point include the effects of numerical analysis, e.g. net present value, and rely on the actual or potential projections of an expected increase in sales that the project would ultimately achieve. One drawback to the use of decision trees is that they may turn out to be strongly entangled, while decisions made slowly through mind bugging or checking need more than. (Pomerol JC, Adam F 2004)

Consensus Decision-Making Pros and Cons

Decision-making seems like an approach to accomplish the most ideal result from the decisions made at work. In the event that you can expedite all colleagues board, you’ll have built up a decision that everybody likes, regards, and supports.

That is the hypothesis—yet it regularly crashes and burns. While all colleagues ‘concur’ to help the agreement decision, the decision may not, actually, be the ideal decision for the group or the business. (Pomerol JC, Adam F 2004)

Gathering Agrees to Support the Decision

Arriving at a resolution that everybody in the group bolsters is a positive, frequently viable, group methodology. With 100 percent understanding, you can push ahead with certainty, and you don’t need to stress over another representative attempting to undermine your endeavors.

1. Included Employees See Benefits. To get everybody to concur, it by and large (however not generally) implies that the decision made will profit each gathering inside the group or association. You’re not relinquishing great HR, for instance, to satisfy fund, or the other way around.
2. You Present a Unified Front. Leadership groups frequently need to settle on decisions that representatives don’t care for or support. That is a piece of leadership. You will locate it’s far simpler to persuade representatives who dislike the decision when they get a steady message from their managers and senior leaders.
3. Collective Spirit of the Team. At the point when you go to a gathering agreement, your atmosphere for workers feels very helpful. Everybody’s thoughts were heard, and you went to a decision that all colleagues could bolster. This intuitive procedure can achieve sentiments of altruism. Consenting to Bad Decisions

As a business essayist for the week by week magazine ‘Inc.com’, Erik Sherman commented, ‘People can create poorly conceived notions, yet it takes a board of trustees for a genuine catastrophe.’ He associates this idea to a 2018 occasion that showed up on news title texts the country over.

In the occasion, a gathering of 14 Idaho Middleton School District rudimentary instructors wearing socially harsh Halloween outfits in the wake of going to seven days in length group building occasion intended to cultivate shared regard and thoughtfulness. A few individuals from the gathering wearing ponchos and sombreros while another gathering wearing enormous cardboard sandwich sheets intended to resemble a divider bearing the words, ‘Make America Great Again’, as indicated by a USA Today report. The outfits were structured and made during the group building occasion.

As can be envisioned, the occasion upset numerous guardians and offspring of the locale. The embroiled instructors were set on paid regulatory leave and the school’s chief was supplanted.

The above Halloween calamity is a case of Group figure—the craving to arrive at an agreement can make individuals disregard signs that what is proposed is an impractical notion. The group pushes aside any information that may wreck the agreement decision. (Thomas GF, Zolin R, Hartman J 2009)

• Research clinician and creator Irving Janis first portrayed the hypothesis of Group think. He offers the eight stages associated with making the deliberate blunders of Group think.
• Fantasies of immunity lead individuals from the gathering to be excessively hopeful and take part in hazard taking.
• Unchallenged convictions lead individuals to disregard conceivable good issues and overlook the outcomes of individual and gathering activities.
• Legitimizing keeps individuals from reevaluating their convictions and makes them disregard cautioning signs.
• Stereotyping drives individuals from the in-gathering to disregard or even trash out-bunch individuals who may contradict or challenge the gathering’s thoughts.
• Self-restriction causes individuals who may have questions to shroud their feelings of trepidation or qualms.
• ‘Mindguards’ go about as self-delegated controls to conceal hazardous data from the gathering.
• Fantasies of unanimity persuade that everybody is in understanding and feels a similar way.
• Direct strain to acclimate is frequently put on individuals who offer conversation starters, and the individuals who question the gathering are regularly observed as backstabbing or traitorous.

Bargain Solutions

Nobel Prize champ John Nash, Jr. built up the idea that is currently called the ‘Nash balance.’ This is a circumstance wherein you can’t roll out further improvements without making a specific colleague happier. The decision may not be the best arrangement, yet it’s the most ‘reasonable’ alternative. (Thomas GF, Zolin R, Hartman J 2009)

Be that as it may, by its very nature, it’s not the most ideal result for any one individual or gathering. Accord decision-making can make a gathering consent to the most minimized shared factor—an answer or decision that fulfills the colleagues’ have to concur—however is unquestionably not ideal for the business.

Moreover, in business, only one out of every odd factor, office, individual or decision in an association is similarly significant. For example, the HR office may push for no cutbacks. This sounds extraordinary and is the thing that you’d anticipate from your HR group. However, by not cutting work costs, you need to reduce expenses in another zone.

The agreement decision is to cut assembling costs and not do worker cutbacks, however the outcome is a trashy item that in the long run makes the organization lose piece of the overall industry. Eventually, every one of the workers are more regrettable off. Maybe the catastrophe could have been maintained a strategic distance from by not regarding each division or worry as of equivalent worth.

Business Is Hierarchical

Without a doubt, associations, for example, Zappos run on this ‘holacracy’ hypothesis, in which the chain of importance is extremely level, yet that being said you just observe CEO Tony Hsieh addressing the press, and not John in client assistance. Notwithstanding what your proper structure resembles, a few people have control and others don’t have control.

On the off chance that your objective is accord decision-making, this power differential permits the ground-breaking to intensely impact the less ground-breaking to reach ‘agreement.’ Then, if the decision made is a disappointment, the ground-breaking can bring up that ‘everybody consented to this arrangement.’ at the end of the day, the atmosphere of accord decision-making permits the ground-breaking to evade duty.

Making the Best Decision

By and large, in business, a total and complete agreement isn’t important. You can arrive at decisions, and the whole senior group can advance the message, without requiring each representative to be content with the decision. Leadership includes chance taking, and some of the time that implies making a move or giving guidance that not all workers love. (Thomas GF, Zolin R, Hartman J 2009)

Conclusion

Consensus is not only a means of decision-making, but also a means of building trust, a sense of community, a sense of security and mutual support–especially in times of stress and crisis. It requires commitment, flexibility and willingness to put the community first. It is a process that is easier and quicker with training and ongoing dedication.

Introduction

What is perception?

Perception can be characterized as a perplexing procedure by which individuals select, compose, and translate sensory stimulation into an important and sound image of the world (Davison, Berelson & Steiner, 1964). In a similar vein, perception is tied in with getting, choosing, securing, changing and sorting out the data provided by our senses (Goldstein, Barber & Legge, 1978). The other significant idea regarding perception is ‘action.’ Action alludes to one’s activity, for example, moving the body because of the perceptual procedure. People have particular sorts of mental projects on the proper behaviour viably in various kinds of association; and there are two speculations of action that people hold. The first is regularly communicated as expressed convictions and qualities. The second one is really utilized and can along these lines just be construed from watching their practices (Argyris, 1999).

For instance: There are often contradictions among the people in the organizations in connection to pay and stipends, authoritative back up, approaches and techniques and the work environment itself. A person who shows an positive frame of mind may see above variables as great and helpful for workplace while the others may think of them as insufficient. Representatives likewise look at themselves on occupation task.

On the off chance that a job is allocated to one person who may consider the task in abundance to his job privilege despite what might be expected on the off chance that he isn’t given the job, he may consider it as disregarding him in distribution of responsibilities.

Why decision making?

We are all in a general sense decision makers. All that we do intentionally or unwittingly is the consequence of some decision. The data we assemble is to support us get events, so as to grow great decisions to settle on choices about these events. Not all data is valuable for improving our comprehension and decisions. To settle on a decision we have to know the problem, the need and motivation behind the decision, the criteria of the choice, their subcriteria, partners and gatherings influenced and the elective moves to make. We at that point endeavor to decide the best option, or on account of resource allocation, we need priotities for the decision to assign their proper offer of the resource

Background

How perceptions works in organisation?

The investigation of perception is significant in the organization since it is vital for the manager to see people effectively regardless of their status and see every one of the circumstance as near the genuine actuality or as it exists by interpreting the sensory reflects in right manner.Perception is result of sensation and is a lot more extensive in its tendency. It includes watching information, choosing, and arranging the information dependent on sensory reflects furthermore, interpreting equivalent to per identity traits of the perceiver. That is why no two people can see a worker in a similar way, for one he might be effective while for the other he might be seen as futile.

There are two variables, which affects human conduct. First is internally caused conduct – alludes to interior factors on which individual has a full control, furthermore the remotely caused behaviour refers to the conduct which has been caused because of external components and that the person

has no influence over it. Attribution theory recommends that when we assess human conduct, it is either inside caused or it is caused because of outside variables as clarified previously.

• Distinctiveness: For assessment purposes lets take a case of Z individual arriving late schedule for job. When we do interpretation there are two elements, one in the case of arriving late is common or irregular conduct. On the off chance that it is normal, it is credited to internal factor on which Z has full control. At the point when the conduct is irregular at that point it very well may be ascribed to external variables. In the previous circumstance individual could be directed properly in the later circumstance, the outside components can’t be revised. In the event that the external components are high, at that point late coming ought not be attributed to the individual conduct.
• Consensus: This factor alludes to group conduct. On the off chance that the whole gathering taking the same route arrived late on job, the causation is ascribed to external components. In any case by some shot in the event that Z just was late, at that point the causation would be internal.
• Consistency: If the conduct of Mr. Z is consistence, that if that he is always arriving late then attribution ought to be to internal elements. In such cases there is a high internal causation. On the off chance that Z arrived late once then the causation would be low furthermore, ascribed to external variables. More consistence the conduct, the more the eyewitness is slanted to credit it to internal causes. It has been seen that we have the propensity to under estimate the impact of external elements and overestimate the impact of internal elements or individual variables while doing perception. This phenomenon is known as the fundamental attribution error. There is likewise a self-serving bias error brought about by the people who will in general quality their own accomplishment to internal causation like capacity, diligent work and self-esteem and the disappointment, to external components like luck. This phenomenon is known as a self-serving bias showed by the people.

Hence, we can conclude that individual’s perception is main causation of the internal and external variables of human conduct.

How Decision making in an Organisation works ?

Decision-making includes the choice of a strategy from among at least two conceivable options so as to arrive at an answer for a given issue. Most strategic decision-making models that have been affected by economic theories affirm verifiably or unequivocally that a manager or just as a worker, as a specialist of a firm, ought to make decision that will accomplish the company’s objectives, one of which is the maximization of the organization’s esteem. This perception recommends a key distinction between strategic decision making models for firms and decision making models for representatives. That is, decisions of representatives might be arranged towards the individual-level maximization of specific goals, for example, professional success or social status as opposed towards the organization’s objectives, for example, augmenting the estimation of the firm. There can be variations in decisions made in groups or by individuals.

To settle on a decision in a sorted manner to produce needs we have to disintegrate the decision into the accompanying advances.

1. Define the issue and decide the sort of learning looked for.
2. Structure the decision hierarchy from the top with the goal of the decision, then the objectives from a broad perspective, through the intermediate levels (criteria on which subsequent elements depend) to the lowest level (which usually is a set of the alternatives).
3. Construct a lot of pairwise examination frameworks. Every component in an upper level is utilized to think about the components in the dimension promptly beneath with regard to it.
4. Use the priorities obtained from the comparisons to weigh the priorities in the level immediately below. Do this for every element. Then for each element in the level below add its weighed values and obtain its overall or global priority.

Continue this process of weighing and adding until the final priorities of the alternatives in the bottom most level are obtained.

Group Decision making V/s Individual Decision making

Group Individual

A group has capability of gathering more and full data contrasted with an individual while deciding. An individual settles on brief decisions. While a group is dominated by different individuals, settling on decision making is very tedious. Additionally amassing group mrmbers takes lot of time.

An individual while settling on any choice uses his own instinct and perspectives. While a group has numerous individuals, such a large number of perspectives and numerous methodologies and consequently better basic leadership. Individuals don’t escape responsibility. They are responsible for their demonstrations and execution. While in a group it is difficult to consider any one individual responsible for a wrong choice.

A group finds hidden ability and core competency of representatives of an organisation. Individual decision making spares time, cash and vitality as individuals settle on brief and consistent decisions. While group decision-making takes a lot of time, cash and vitality.

An individual won’t consider over each part intrigue. While a group will consider enthusiasm of all individuals from an organisation. Individual decisions are increasingly focused and rational when contrasted with gathering.

How individual’s perception affects decision making process?

All elements of problem identification and decision making process in an organisation are influenced by perception. Critical analysis of impact is as followed:

• Individuals specifically interpret what they see based on their advantage, foundation, experience, and mentalities. This factor enable individuals to speed-read others yet not without the danger of attracting a precise picture. Subsequently, individuals’ decisions will be disabled by wrong perception.
• Individuals draw a general impression around a person based on a single characterstic. This adversely influences their decision as they will judge on the basis of what good versus bad and not the person’s actual behaviour (Viswesvaran, Schmidt & Ones, 2005) .
• When an individual’s attributes that are influenced by correlations with other individuals as of late experienced who rank higher or lower on similar qualities is termed as contrast effect. This factor likewise influences decisions quality.
• People rely on generalizations every day because they help them make decisions quickly. They are a means of simplifying a complex world. This will affect decision making process as stereotyping will not give an accurate trait/value of an individual.
• At the point when individuals are excessively confident about their knowledge, experience or feelings ,it can cover us from reality and cause individuals to go for risks, certain they’re right in their decisions.
• This occurs because our mind appears to a disproportionate amount of emphasis to the first information it receives. This results in not to take the optimal decisions as once a anchor is set, different decisions are made by changing far from that anchor, and there is a predisposition toward interpreting other data around the stay.
• We have a natural tendency to do what makes us feel better, so we regularly just tune in to or regard the information that lines up with our very own perspectives. This leads us to dismiss any data that restricts our convictions. In any case, depending on material that substantiates pre-framed perspectives prompts biased decision making
• The tendency to confuse the probability that something will happen with the ease with which one can remember it is especially a problem for decision makers who are inexperienced or low in cognitive ability (Ofir, 2000).
• An increased commitment to a previous decision in spite of negative information which is often creeps into decision making and affects it adversely.
• Individuals in general accept dishonestly that we would have precisely anticipated the result of an event, after that result is really known. This will affirm the circumstance regardless of whether we trust that it was a wrong decision.
• Individuals tend to overemphasize the outcomes of our productive activities, while in the meantime misjudging the results of our harmful activities. It can make individuals settle on terrible decisions, as they believe they’re in a more gainful remaining than they are.
• Often when people are scheduling work they think of the best-case situation, then blindly presume the end result will follow the plan, without considering any elements – unexpected or otherwise – that might cause delays.
• An individual’s very own qualities, wants and way of life all shading their basic decision making abilities, which can fundamentally influence how an organization picks the correct option.
• Women place greater emphasis on non‐financial and personal goals and are more likely than men to see their contributions to the quality of the decision making cycle as their competitive edge (Carter, Williams & Reynolds, 1997).This difference in length of thinking in problems will lead to more accuracy in making decisions as well as much time consumed for taking a decision by women.
• There are differences in what problems to focus on, the depth of analysis, importance of logic and rationality, and preference for individual vs. group decision making.
• Individuals are typically substance to locate a worthy or reasonable answer for an issue as opposed to an ideal one. The way toward settling on choices utilizing rationality as opposed to a characterized prescriptive model in not sufficiently compelling in taking the best decision.
• Individuals make decisions by constructing simplified models that extract the essential features from problems without capturing all their complexity. So, people seek decisions that are satisfactory and sufficient. They tend to choose the first acceptable solution encountered rather than the optimal one. This may not ensure the best decisions.

This analysis explains us that individual’s perception regarding a issue varies from person to person. It helps them judging the scenario in negative or positive ways which affects the decision making process. The perceptions by the individual influence the quality of decision.

Conclusion

In organisations groups and individuals make decisions.Decision making often occurs in response to a problem. It requires interpretation and evaluation of information and alternative solution of actions.The quality of decision is influenced by individual’s perception.As problem definition varries person to person we can conclude that decision making by individuals is directly affected by their perceptions. Hence, decisions by individuals are majorly perception based.

References

1. Argyris, C. (1999). On organizational learning. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell
2. Carter, N., Williams, M., & Reynolds, P. (1997). Discontinuance among new firms in retail: The influence of initial resources, strategy, and gender. Journal Of Business Venturing, 12(2), 125-145. doi: 10.1016/s0883-9026(96)00033-x
3. Davison, W., Berelson, B., & Steiner, G. (1964). Human Behavior: An Inventory of Scientific Findings. Journal Of Marketing Research, 1(4), 72. doi: 10.2307/3150383
4. Goldstein, E., Barber, P., & Legge, D. (1978). Perception and Information. Leonardo, 11(2), 154. doi: 10.2307/1574023
5. Ofir, C. (2000). Ease of Recall vs Recalled Evidence in Judgment: Experts vs Laymen. Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, 81(1), 28-42. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2864
6. Saaty, T. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal Of Operational Research, 48(1), 9-26. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-i
7. Saaty, T. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal Of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83. doi: 10.1504/ijssci.2008.017590
8. Viswesvaran, C., Schmidt, F., & Ones, D. (2005). Is There a General Factor in Ratings of Job Performance? A Meta-Analytic Framework for Disentangling Substantive and Error Influences. Journal Of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 108-131. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.108
9. Wagner, J., & Hollenbeck, J. Organizational behavior (pp. 57-65).
10. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/the-drawbacks-of-goals/
11. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.managementstudyguide.com/decision-making.htm
12. 1(2019). Retrieved from https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00251740310509553?fullSc=1

Introduction

Decision making is the first and foremost task for any kind of business enterprise whether small scale or large scale business. It is an important part of the management because the correct and accurate decision-making technique lays the foundations for the growth and survival of the business in the future. It also involves making reliable decisions from various alternative courses of action. Sound and rational decision making is considered as primary task for every business enterprise. Hence, decision making is a continuous process in a business enterprise. Therefore, the management and Board of Directors in business enterprises use information collected from various mechanisms to make decisions from a wide range of activities. The aim of this study focuses on highlighting and describing the six elements which are necessary for taking decisions at the lower, middle and upper level of management. The industrial scenario identified in this context based on which decisions shall be taken is Kitchen Delight Restaurant which is a Food and Beverage industry.

Steps involved in rational decision making

The decision-making process in business enterprises like Kitchen Delight Restaurant is an important issue. The decision-maker must obtain sufficient information to expedite the accurate decision-making process. He must have a perfect conscience which will enable him to predict future outcomes with some certainty and precision (Hee and Yen, 2018). There are an umpteen number of situations from which decisions can be made and therefore the decision-maker must be potent enough in choosing the best alternative out of the situations available. For example, there are 2 projects available to a company which it can use for investment purpose. Project A shall yield a return of 5% in three years and Project B which shall yield a return of 6% in three years. There is sufficient information available to the company regarding the investment purpose. The investment type along with their rate of return is also known to the company. From the information available, the company can estimate the amount of revenue it can generate during three years and a competent and rational decision-maker will always choose an alternative project for the investment purpose as it gives the highest amount of returns that is 6%. Therefore, the rational decision-making process is concerned about analyzing the following 6 steps (Diana-Rose et al. 2016). The above scenario is applicable for a Food and Beverage industry and the decision making is made regarding promotional strategies of newly developed food and beverage products. The name of the company is Kitchen Delight Restaurant. The 6 steps which would determine the structure of rational decision making are as follows:

• Step 1: Defining the basic problem
• Step 2: Identifying the decision criteria
• Step 3: Allocation of weights to each criterion
• Step 4: Generating Alternative courses of action
• Step 5: Evaluating the Alternative courses of action
• Step 6: Selecting the Optimal Decision

The above steps are based on facts, figures and interpretations from various sources of data which helps a decision-maker of Kitchen Delight Restaurant to take proper decisions (Zulariff et al. 2018). Systematic evaluations must be followed at all aspects to cover various areas of decision-making criterion. Therefore, rational decision making refers to the process of clearly defining the selected problem, making a proper evaluation of the problem and choosing the best alternative which is available. Hence, the above steps are briefly described below.

Step 1: Defining the basic problem

The first step involved in making rational decision making for Kitchen Delight Restaurant is related to defining the problem for which the decision is required to be made. It is probably the most difficult and most important stage as it seeks to diagnose the main problem and simply not its symptoms (Raof et al. 2017). In a Food and Beverage industry like Kitchen Delight Restaurant, some of the major problems range from a rise in the level of unhygienic and inorganic products, failure to adapt to new technological methods, inadequate methods adopted which reduces value in a product and so on. Therefore it is the objective of the decision-maker to identify the actual problem which creates hindrance in the development strategy the business is trying to follow. It is often witnessed than identifying the problem is more important than finding a solution to it (Basri et al. 2016).

Step 2: Identifying the decision criteria

After the problem has been identified, the next important step for the decision makers of Kitchen Delight Restaurant is the establishment of a perfect decision criterion. The decision criterion is dependent on the fact that different standards as well as features from various sources are to be considered to make a perfect decision. Identifying such a decision is considered important which will enable the business enterprise to arrive at a particular statement (Yusuf et al. 2016). They will also assist to evaluate different kinds of alternatives in which a decision-maker chooses. In the case of the Food and Beverage industry, one of the major decision criteria which can be adopted relates to gaining knowledge about customer’s needs and wants which is extremely vital for profitability and judging the revenue pattern of the business enterprise. Various kinds of organizations employ several resources to identify the needs and wants of the consumers to stay ahead of their competitors.

Step 3: Allocation of weights to each criterion

After analyzing the decision criteria in judging those factors for the decision makers of Kitchen Delight Restaurant which are needed to be ascertained to make a decision, the next step is the allocation of weights to each criterion (Radzi et al. 2016). The method which is applicable for this purpose is making a relative comparison between different factors. The given factors will be compared directly with that of others. The criterion will make it easy for decision-makers to identify those criteria which are very much important and also identifying those criteria which are less important (Mohd Shariff et al. 2016). It is noted that the best weight is being assigned to those factors whose change will affect the working and functioning of various employees. In the case of the Food and Beverage industry, the maximum profitability is established with those criteria which are related to the Government regulations comprising of manufacturers of food, net contents of the package and so on.

Step 4: Generating Alternative courses of action

As soon as weights are allocated to different kinds of criteria, the next step is to provide various kinds of alternative courses of action. Generating a huge amount of alternatives will result in more enhancement of the existing process. It basically proposes to bring a change in current production process or it looks at changing the entire supply chain management because of inadequacy, lack of competency, employees who are not willing to work despite providing them with various amenities like proper working conditions, efficiency in wage structure and so on (Akanmu et al. 2017). In the case of the Food and Beverage industry, choosing the best alternative does not mean choosing a different stream of products altogether. For example, a restaurant specializing in continental dishes does not necessarily have to shift in producing Chinese dishes just because it has been incurring losses. Rather, it can modify its current production process in the form of bringing efficiency in the production process, reducing staff and transportation expenses. It can also adopt various measures that can reduce the cost of producing the product by adopting mechanisms like Activity Based Costing (ABC) method, Value Chain Analysis, Total Quality Management, Balanced Scorecard, proper inventory disposing mechanism and so on (Bahari et al. 2018). If an industry is successful in generating appropriate mechanisms in choosing the alternative course of action, then it can make rational decisions.

Step 5: Evaluating the Alternative courses of action

After ascertaining various alternative courses of action, the next step involves comparing various alternatives with each kind of decision which may seem necessary. It is undertaken to determine to what extent the alternatives have been set to fulfil various decision-making principles and decision-making criteria that were imposed earlier. It is observed that this step is probably the only step that consumes a lot of time as it deals with large chunks of information gathered from different sources right before comparing those (Iberahim et al. 2016). It is a time-consuming process that involves a lot of money. In the case of the selected company namely Kitchen Delight, a Food and Beverage industry the alternatives which can create a tremendous impact on the functioning are DANONE S.A., Amy’s Kitchen, Daiya Foods, Lightlife Foods and so on. The alternatives derived from the above courses will then be evaluated from different points of view like quality constraint, compatibility position, pricing strategy, advertising policy, sales and administration expenses (Noor et al. 2018). If there is more number of decision criteria are accomplished by the alternative, the alternative is more likely to succeed.

Step 6: Selecting the Optimal Decision

The ultimate step towards rational decision making involves selecting and making the best use of the chosen alternative available. An alternative will be treated as best only if it can fulfil all kinds of decision criteria based on their nature of importance in which they are managed according to their nature for instance from Step 3 (Fernando, 2019). It should also be noted that if the number of selected alternatives cannot fulfil the actual decision-making criteria based on the set in which they were arranged, then those alternatives will be selected which satisfies most of the decision criteria. An optimal decision is said to be that kind of decision-based on which the business enterprise is successful in generating a positive outcome in the form of an increase in sales and revenue structure, reduction in cost structure and outperforming various competitors. In the case of the Food and Beverage Industry, optimal decision structure arises from making a perfect quality analysis in terms of making a proper evaluation of the structure of the product. It examines the nature of aroma, colour, and taste of the ready-made product and so on.

The decisions can be rectified by using techniques such as

• a) Making use of specific tests and rules towards the process of decision-making. Two types of rules can be used to remove any kind of problem and helps in bringing clarity decision making. The first rule is the Rule of Priority which involves arranging decisions based on the nature of their priorities. The alternative source will be selected by assessing them step by step. The best alternative must be able to fulfil all kinds of decision criteria. The second rule is the Rule of Minimum Condition which is based on Accept and Reject principle. The decision-maker sets up a few of the basic conditions for a project which must be fulfilled for the project to be accepted. The alternatives which cannot fulfil those basic conditions will automatically be rejected. As mentioned above, a project is worth investment and it is accepted only when full information is available about the project and the returns which it offers will benefit the company in the long run.
• b) Taking various types of decisions based on group analysis- In an organization like Food and Beverage industry, it is often seen that decisions are made based on group dynamics and group behaviour (Kele et al. 2017). One such method applied is Brainstorming. It is a technique that creates unique ideas without the fear of criticism. It is a type of group-decision making system in which negative outcomes on any kind of alternative courses are not taken into account before studying every alternative. Brainstorming focuses on extracting ideas from members of each group in an open environment. The group which constitutes brainstorming activities normally consists of five to eight people. Every member of the group is required to produce their activity as per their turns.

Conclusion

Decision making normally involves making decisions based on two or more alternatives. The decision-maker should be competent enough to make sound decisions because the survival of a business entity depends on the decision making process of the entire management and Board of Directors. There are several kinds of problems that affect the functioning of business and therefore the decision-maker must identify the possible perils which can distort the functioning of the entire business enterprise. It should also be noted that decisions that are taken by the management should be free from bias and should also be directed towards the achievement of goals and objectives of the business. Management should also aim to increase the productivity of employees by offering them with proper working conditions; sound and transparent wage structure, offering various allowances and bonuses.

Do we need a role model in our lives? What qualifications should role models have? Having a role model in our lives is very important because they inspire us in making decisions and keeping our spirits up, also, the attitude of a role model influences the people that look up to them. There are different characteristics a role model must possess, for instance, being hard-working, respectful, and creative.

The first role model characteristic is hard-working, where they show their commitment to the desired goal and invest the time and effort to achieve success. They have to be hardworking, because it’s such an essential quality to have when trying to achieve lifelong goals, otherwise they won’t get too much done. For instance, Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid, Ruler of the Emirate of Dubai, who transformed the desert into a global city of the future in just a few short years, built a successful building like Sheikh Khalifa tower the current world’s tallest skyscraper, and The Dubai mall it is the second-largest mall in the world. Another good example of hard-working is Sheikh Zayed Bin Sultan who was the Ruler of the U.A.E, a great leader, respected by rich and poor, and an inspiration to many. He invested in his people and also, constructed housing facilities, schools, health services, the airport, and roads.

The second is to be respectful, in order for a role model to be influential he must show respect for others, being respectful is important when working with people because everybody is different, each one has their own goals and dreams, it’s important to respect that if the role model going to be working or dealing with them. For example, Prophet Muhammad, the last messenger of God, who himself was a very kind and loving person, treated every one, young and old, with kindness and respect. He said, “Verily, it is one of the respects to Allah to honor an old man.” (Islam)

Another example is Bill Gates, a technologist, business leader, Microsoft inventor, and philanthropist. Who urged Donald Trump to respect others and said “Donald Trump should treat people – especially women – with more respect and continue investments in poorer countries for the sake of global security” (Reuters)

The third characteristic is creativity, role model tends to see the bright side in different situations because they are creative in funding the satiation to every problem. For instance, Steve Jobs the co-founder of Apple Computers was a creative and successful billionaire. Jobs always pushed the boundaries of what was possible at Apple computers, and never stopped until his vision was a reality. The world of technology most certainly wouldn’t be the same as it is today if Jobs never came along and founded Apple. Jobs said “I’m as proud of many of the things we haven’t done as the things we have done. Innovation is saying no to a thousand things.” (Griggs)

Also, Zaha Hadid, the “Queen of the Curve”, is well-known for her use of geometric shapes to create dynamic, fluid structures. One of the famous buildings that she designed is The Morpheus Hotel in Macau, Informed by the fluid forms within China’s rich traditions of jade carving, Morpheus’ design combines dramatic public spaces and generous guest rooms with innovative engineering and formal cohesion. (González, Archdaily)

In conclusion, a role model is someone who others aspire to be like, and everyone must have a role model. There are different types of role models in society today, who play great social roles. And these role models have different qualities that influence and help others when they need it, for example, hard work, respect, and creativity.

Introduction

Decision making models are the frameworks that allow organisations to understand the issues and take systematic decisions after reviewing the whole situation or scenario. Different businesses can adopt diverse range of decision making models depending upon the objective and the kind of problems they are facing. The significance of decision making style is high on the growth perspectives of organisations and it determines the level of understanding among the companies regarding the nature of their business (Verma, 2014). The decision making should always involve various dimensions so that the final decision can become effective and efficient with regarding to addressing the identified issue or problem or initiating the changes (Patrick, Steele, & Spencer, 2013). In the current scenario, the decision making models applied in the organisation in different contexts are analysed and presented. The case study of several organisations and the impact of selected decisions on organisations, in terms of advantages and disadvantages, are analysed in the present report. The selected models are rational decision model and ethical decision making model and the discussed companies are Starbucks and Nestle.

Case study

Two cases taken in the present scenario includes the description of Starbucks and the rational decision making model is understood with the help of selected organisation. The case is that Starbucks have large amount of customer base and coffee industry is facing lots of competition from the rivals and as well as from the alternatives. Just to deal with such situations, the big data is incorporated for rational decision making to keep customer retained and satisfied with the services and product line. Aligning with the customer centric approach is essential for organisations to become highly effective and for the same purpose the role of rational decision making model is put into application.

Secondly, the ethical decision making model is applied on Nestle especially the way it incorporate effective decision making in improving its image, establishing better external communication and strengthening the positioning. Nestle deals in different kind of product range and to increase its market base adopt several strategies which sometimes raise questions on it ethical values and responsible business behaviour. The application of ethical decision making model can help in understanding the problems associated to Nestle and solutions to overcome the identified issues. Thus, the technicality of decision making along with the application and advantages are discussed below.

Two Decision model: Application

The application of decision model largely depends upon the identification of root cause behind the problems (Abubakar, Elrehail, Alatailat, & Elci, 2019). If one is clear with the business then its application become effective in generating the right kind of sustainable solutions. Managers need to understand the consequences of decisions on the identified problem and accordingly the internal strength could be increased (Neguluscu & Doval, 2014). Every model has its own advantages and contributions in shaping the decision making of the business entities. In order to get the leverage or ideology behind the model, firstly the problems should be identified, its root cause should be known and afterwards the model can be put into application.

Rational decision making model

In this decision making model the companies take decision in a very practical manner and focuses upon the gathering of required information to improve decision making. In rational decision making, the whole focus is paid on the immediate issue an organisation is facing and identifies the best possible solution without deviating from the objectives of the business entity. In modern society the decisions taking process is quiet complex activity which needs different activities and solutions to ensure the effectiveness of decisions (Chiheb, Boumahdi, & Bouarfa, 2019). Starbucks have incorporated the application of big data technology to strengthen the rational decision making model. The elements to be considered in rational decision making model are intelligence, design, choice, and implementation. Big data is a technology where the collection, storage and management of diverse range of data become simpler process and then it can be blend into decision making. To ensure the positive impact of the decision, the alignment between these three activities is required. On the basis of gathered information, several other kinds of alternatives could be identified and then their feasibility could be linked with the possible consequences. Thus, the intelligent phase means knowing, design phase means identifying the alternatives and then comes the choice phase which should be linked with the objectives. Starbucks is one of the large organisations all over the world known for its best service quality and product range. In the intelligence phase, Starbucks gathered information from different sources like Twitter, social media, reading cookies and analysing the search patterns; it all happens with the help of big data (Chiheb, Boumahdi, & Bouarfa, 2019). Once the data is gathered then the cited organisation determines its strategies on the basis of assessment of customer behaviour. Starbucks is incorporating technology in every aspect of business and most importantly, it is integrating various disciplines so that the advantage of technological advancement can be gained. Furthermore, the strategies are designed in the direction of designing new products, adding ingredients which are healthy and contain nutritional values.

Ethical decision making model

Ethical decision making model is the one where companies show commitment to comply with ethical responsibilities and don’t pay much attention to ethical dilemma in taking the final decisions. The ethical decision making is the one where managers do best for the stakeholders and focus on transferring benefits to all the parties by its decisions. This decision making model is highly popular among the companies to ensure their sustainability and ensuring high level positive perception towards the brand. It is being identified that the ethical decision making model ensures the interest of public as well as several other stakeholders. Nestle, faced criticism during the baby formula promotional controversy and found troubles in maintaining its brand image (Fraustino & Kennedy, 2018). A study revealed that the role of crisis communication management technique is high in evolving the ethical decision making model (Fraustino & Kennedy, 2018) . It shows that when companies ignore to be ethically driven organisations and crisis happens then such technique should be mixed with the ethical decision making model. There are three stages of crisis communication which include pre crisis, crisis and post crisis stage. In Nestlé’s case it was found that it was involved in unethical promotion of its baby formula product in developing nations. The cited organisation was involved into unethical practices to allure people to buy such product. Nestle hired female employees who were dressed in nursing dress while marketing the product. It creates the impression among the customers that the baby formula is recommended product by the doctors which was actually a part of manipulation marketing. It become one major activities termed as unethical (Fraustino & Kennedy, 2018).

The problem becomes worse when the infant started to die or become ill due to the properties of baby formula and the way it should be used. It creates negative business environment for Nestle and when the cited company was asked about its practices, it remains hostile. It even leads towards the boycott of the brand and cost 1.5 billion dollars (Fraustino & Kennedy, 2018). Thus, the whole scenario suggests that in effective decision making the assessment of scenario is needed. The ethical decision making model also rely upon the proper communication where the involvement of companies in spreading information should be high. With these efforts the situation could remain under control and positive results could be obtained. The situation of ethical dilemma is also real for the companies where sometimes manager found it tough to segregate the ethics, profits and values and take wrong decisions which affect the image of an organisation.

Advantages and limitations

Rational decision making model is highly advantageous in terms of assessing the situation first and then taking the decisions (Uzonwanne, 2016). The rationality of the situations should always be known to the organisations so that the right framework for the decision making could be designed. The chances of errors could be reduced, lead towards the informed decisions, and allow understanding all probabilities and possible consequences. This kind of decision making tool generally takes time and prevents managers to take quick decisions. Under such circumstances, sometimes the problems gets bigger and organisations face serious consequences (Julmi, 2019). With the big data technique, Starbucks successfully understand its customer behaviour and take right decisions in positioning its brand. The determination of product development, coupons and discounts and personalisation become stronger due to rational decision making through data storage and analysis. Only limitation of using big data in rational decision making was associated with data sorting and the cost associated with the same. The technology, human expertise and time all should be available in abundance to generate perfect blend between big data and rational decision making for Starbucks.

The advantage of ethical decision making model is that in the current scenario where sustainability is highly required; ethical decision making allow ascertaining all the possible consequences of business environment. Further, the companies nowadays are looking for the building positive relationship with the customers and other stakeholders (Alvani & KarimiJahromi, 2016). Now, if the ethical decision making is put into application then it allow gaining the trust of stakeholders and confidence of customers towards positive and long term relationship. The ethical decision making model allows identifying the loopholes in value system of companies and accordingly the changes in decision making could be introduced. The limitation of ethical decision making model is that the level of dilemma in profit making and brand building remains very high. Maintaining the profits is also a challenge in front of the companies which should not hamper the ethical business activities; thus, this dilemma is one major problem. The managers also don’t have enough knowledge and training to handle the ethical decision making and they show more inclination towards the profit making approaches (Selart & Johansen, 2011). Thus, with these limitations the application of ethical decision making gets affected. Nestle failed to comply with these principles of ethical decision making and only focus towards the profit minting approach. It works for Nestle in the beginning but later on the hefty penalty of 1.5 billion dollars and loss of reputation affects its market image at global level.

The findings of the entire discussion suggest that no matter what decision making model is applied by the organisations, the reasons and the consequences should be identified in detail. Starbucks realises that the competition is on height and it decide that it should understand the consumer behaviour in order to gain competitive advantage. To comply with the same, technique of big data was applied by Starbucks. On the other hand, the problem of Nestle was the distorted brand image or reputation after involving into the unethical practices. Thus, to deal with the same Nestle inclined towards the ethical decision making model. It brings improvements in its external communication tactics and spent heavily in winning the confidence of stakeholders by showing commitment towards the ethical values.

Conclusion

On the basis of above discussion, it become clear that the decision making techniques are wide in nature but the kind of issues an organisation is facing should determine the application of decision making model. Here the rational decision making and ethical decision making model is applied on two giants Starbucks and nestle respectively. It is found that Starbucks is gathering relevant information of the market situation to take rational decisions to improve its business. It is relying on big data techniques to gather the required information and designing better strategies. Furthermore, Nestle skip the basis component of ethical decision making model i.e. communication. Nestle found itself stuck in the unethical practices and faced criticism and still show casual behaviour towards the situations. It leads towards the boycott of Nestle and result in decline in profits. Thus, an effective decision making model largely depends upon the transparent communication and gathering relevant information. These models should be integrated well with organisational issues and the objectives companies want to be served from these models.

References

1. Abubakar, M. A., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M. A., & Elci, A. 2019. Knowledge management, decision making style and organisational performance. Journal of innovation and knowledge , 4 (2). pp. 104-114.
2. Alvani, S. M., & KarimiJahromi, S. 2016. Ethical decision making in issues management. IOSR Journal of humanities and social sciences , 21 (7). pp. 34-39.
3. Chiheb, F., Boumahdi, F., & Bouarfa, H. 2019. A new model for integrating big data into phases of decison making process. Science direct , 151. pp. 636-642.
4. Fraustino, J. D., & Kennedy, A. K. 2018. Care in crisis: An applied model of care consideratins for ethical strategic communication. Journal of public interest comunications , pp. 1-23.
5. Julmi, C. 2019. When rational decision-making becomes irrational: a critical assessment and re-conceptualization of intuition effectiveness. Business research , 12. pp. 291-314.
6. Neguluscu, O., & Doval, E. 2014. The quality of decisions making process related to organisations effectiveness. Procedia economics and finance , 15, pp. 858-863.
7. Patrick, J. H., Steele, J. C., & Spencer, M. S. 2013. Decision making processes and outcomes. Journal of aging research , pp. 1-7.
8. Selart, M., & Johansen, T. S. 2011.. Ethical decision making in organsiations: The role of leadership stress. Journal of business ethics , pp. 129-143.
9. Uzonwanne, F. 2016. Rational model of decision making. In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance (pp. 1-6). Ede: Springer.
10. Verma, D. 2014. Study and analysis of various decision making models in an organisation. IOSR Journal of business and management , 16 (2). pp. 171-175.

In the context of smarter mobility, decisions need to be made on various different levels: strategic, tactical and operational. The strategic level includes processes and activities for setting long term goals, policy development and visions. At the tactical level decisions are made on projects, funding and establishment of networks and partnerships. At the operational level it involves the implementation of projects and provision of solutions to many complex problems.

Therefore, is distributed decision making the answer to the many decision making challenges for smarter mobility?

Distributed decision making is hard, it requires the distribution of information, authority and resources. There can be fundamental difficulties in making and coordinating decisions that will serve the interests holistically and also the operators within it. There can be tension between the need to control operators involved and the need to let them respond to the demands of their own immediate situation.

At its simplest, a decision situation faced by a one person decision maker involves a static world about which everything can be known and no formal representation of knowledge is required. Distributed decision making means the opportunity for more views to evolve and be heard. Yet it can be problematic if the shared past and present experience leads the players to think similarly while taking confidence in numbers. (Lanir, 1982).

The individuals in a distributed decision making system need to have a shared concept of the vision and objectives at a fairly high level of generality that allows them to work effectively in the constrained environment for which they have more detailed knowledge. Achieving this requires both training so that distributed operators share conceptions and distributing current information so that they can stay in touch conceptually. (Carley, 1986).

However, from an operational standpoint, the system has the ability to use individuals and materials interchangeably, as well as its relative insensitivity to the loss of any particular units. As a distributed decision making system, benefits include the existence of a shared organisational culture, the ease with which components can interpret one another’s actions and the opportunity to create widely applicable organisational policies. One of its main advantages is the ability to develop task specific procedures, policies and communications.

Distributed decision making for Smarter Mobility has the additional complication of requiring decision support systems as decision aids.

Computerised decision making aids have the ability to handle large amounts of information rapidly (Behn and Vaupel 1983) and can be very effective in supporting distributed decision making systems. They can incorporate the wisdom of the most accomplished experts regarding a particular category of problem. However, for them to work effectively for the distributed decision making system depends on their capabilities and on the appropriateness of the faith placed in those capabilities. Therefore, any enhancements to the expert systems should improve their usefulness for distributed decision making provided operators within the system understand what they do and how well they do it.

It was demonstrated in the report that the modelling of a mathematical decision aid provided information on transport emissions in a highly populated urban area, to inform decision making on transport issues. Also, the application Stochastic and Evolutionary games and multi Bayesian agents demonstrated the ability to tackle an urban traffic flow control problem, although there were some limitations identified.

In relation to stakeholder engagement in a distributed decision making system, the principles of Game Theory can provide a useful aid to create stakeholder synergy. This focuses on decision making settings where each other’s decision can influence the outcome and well-being of the other players as well as all players in some cases, therefore each player has to think of how the opposing player will act in order to maximise their payoffs/ benefits.

Conclusion

A general conclusion therefore is that Distributed decision making has the potential to address smarter mobility, as it captures the cumulative change in the nature of multi person decision making that has been wrought through advances in technology. The progress in development has increased the distance over which individuals can maintain contact, the speed with which information and instructions can be shared, the amount of information being created and the information load, the opportunities for monitoring operator’s behaviour and the automation of instructions.

For smarter mobility, one of the most distinguishing features of distributed decision making is that it comprises the diversity to manage the flow of information between people and transport as well as the capability to facilitate hierarchic governance (centralised decision making) and market/network governance (decentralised decision making).

However, the design and specification of a distributed decision making system needs to bear in mind the reality of the individuals at each node in it. A key component at the core of distributed decision making systems are the people who have to get the work done.

It needs to ensure that the design process is not dominated by issues with the most recent complication. Also, if the designers are unfamiliar with the world of the system operators, they need to learn about it to ensure that problems are dealt with effectively. In addition, and in accordance with case studies undertaken, for distributed decision making systems to be effective they must disseminate responsibility for their various functions. This dissemination needs to include the collection, sharing and interpretation of information as well as the decision to undertake various classes of actions.

Introduction

The oil and gas industry is a company providing the necessary items and services that are required by the international oil and gas sector to explore extract and transport oil and natural gas at the refinery and then finally to the consumer. Schlumberger is the largest oil manufacturer company in the world and the most recognized service companies on the market since 1920 and in South America since 1929.

Decision making

It is a process to take or make important decisions for a company. The decision making process help the organization to detect the problem and gave possible solutions of a problem. The step by step decision making process can help organization to take internationally and thoughtful decision by collecting relevant information and defines alternatives solutions for a problem.

Basic model for decision making

The decision-making process begins with the examination of the nature of the problem then followed by the generation and assessment of possible options and ends with the choice of an option. It consists of 5 steps:

• Stage one: examination of the nature of problem
• Stage two: generation of possible solutions
• Stage three: selection among the possible solutions
• Stage four: performance of the decision
• Stage five: follow-up and control

People who are involved in decision making

The decision making groups are formed with the mixed employees of different departments. Their numbers vary from 5 to 8. These include different employees of different departments of the organization for example finance department management department legal department safety department maintainer department etc. These groups are made like 2 members from Maintance 1 from finance 2 from legal department 1 from safety officer or safety advisor and 2 within managerial position.

Effective decision making

Effective decision-making can be achieved by finding options as well as interpreting information about key events that may affect the performance of a company. Therefore the overall performance of the organization must be taken into account or results. By trying to evaluate only products processes and results tend to underestimate the role of how decisions are made which can affect the quality of the decision-making process without taking into account all the affects of the stakeholders.

Problems and challenges

The way oil services companies manage their decisions with large things such as facilities have been identified as a big challenge. For industrial person decisions are made on the basis of maintenance inputs data and management frameworks but where decisions involve significant things such as facilities decisions are generally related to costs mainly due to the lack of supporting data and historical documents. In this case managers look for the most practical solution without taking into account all internal and external constraints.

Three main operational facilities:

1. Asset Management: These are activities that are a systematic and coordinated organization that favorably and sustainably manages asset systems performance risks and expenses in order to achieve its strategic plan.
2. Facility management: It is defined as a multi-discipline practice to provide the functionality of the building environment by delivery of support services to organization.
3. Facility manager. It is defined as the person in charge in an organization to which senior management desire to communicate and control all required activities and services of an organization both inside and outside.

Example according to Schlumberger:

The facilities were in operation until 2015 when low oil prices led to a low in activity and low in financial gain was affected by high maintenance price. Based on recent market conditions Schlumberger achieve in very clear and detailed manner to justify the assets of large facilities and reduce its impression in order to control costs and expenses in order to return to financial gain.

1. Examination of nature of problem:

The purpose of this step is to provide guidance and a basis to low the risk of generating not a suitable solution or excessive use of organizational resources. It is achieved by other steps. These are:

• Detecting the problem: Schlumberger has to examine the possibility of integrating resources and optimizing the use of common facilities or existing facilities. This creates a systematic approach to choosing from existing facilities assessing different phases to provide a view beyond a cost analysis or financial analysis.
• Fix objectives: In order to set an objective to provide the success of the decision model a checklist has been suggested. The checklist calculates whether the proposed overall objective falls within the SMART objectives category or not.
• Recognize the problem: This step indicates whether the detected problem is strategic or non-operational. If the problem is strategic the normal sequence of the decision model must be followed. However if the decision is operational it is possible to proceed to the third step.
• Set up Decision making group: This step helps to indicate the optimal decision-making group respecting the nature of the problem and the organizational situation. The decision group was formed with a mixed group of employees from multiple departments. The group has eight participants.

The idea behind this mixed group of different sectors or departments of society is an attempt to create a more objective vision while achieving to find the best solution to apply.

2. Creation of possible solution:

This step has further two steps. The first one is to collect and examine information about each option and the second one is to apply methods to create favorable scenarios.

• Collect and examine of data: Due to the lack of available historical data a SWOT analysis was carry out for each institution to identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats or danger of each.
• Apply creative solution generating techniques: After several meetings and group discussion in which the decision-making group was actively engaged in creative solutions some scenarios were presented in which each scenario will be assessed according to its convenience and acceptability.

3. Selection among possible solutions:

The objective of this step is to evaluate the possible solutions according to criteria in order to reach a favorable solution. This requires identifying the evaluation criteria and then comparing the multiple alternatives using the chosen criteria. These steps are presented as follows:

• Identify evaluation criteria: It evaluates the criteria in which possible solutions are compared. It is based on the decision making group where the decision is will be considered as acceptable.
• Convenience test per each facility: Of the three convenience tests the facility has to need the skills and resources to apply the required changes which allow it to function as an integrated facility.
• Desirability test for facility: The criterion for this is acceptability or desirability. Some problems may be experience because of historical data frictions. Some installations will lead to a positive solution and others to a negative solution. The negative is discarded quickly.
• Applying decision rule: The purpose of this step is to examine the decision rule to reach at a solution. To do these two alternative tools will be used to calculate the favorable solution. The first tool will be a decision tree. From the execution of this tool an optimal alternative will be drawn.
• Choosing a solution: Once all the information was collected it was then possible to calculate the favorable solution for optimizing Schlumberger’s installations

4. Implement decision:

The execution phase involves planning and carries out the required activities so that the chosen solution actually solves the problem. As the plan of this solution requires time so this will only present the decision group stage.

It should be noted that the solution is not only to transform the facility into a coordinated hub covering all wire line services in Schlumberger, but that will also be enlarged to other solutions to be put into effect for the others facilities based on brainstorming and discussion session carried out through the decision model.

5. Follow up and control:

This step indicates that facility manager’s make sure that the plan is actually followed. It is essential that facilities management can support the properly implemented structure with the shared application to control and collect all information from multiple tasks and services.

Conclusion

Decision making is difficult factor for all the business. Some decisions are obvious and can be taken easily and some decisions are complex and take much more time. Some of the decisions are taken by the groups. In Schlumberger, decision group are made from different employees of different departments. This help in the effective decision making. The group follows the different steps of decision making (harc analysis and risk control) to achieve their desire task. It helps to minimize the loss and maximize the profit.

Ethical issues that have a beset humankind since we human after started living together because of tranquil, orderly and productive communities must have certain rules and are not sustainable without any order which tells everyone what to do and what not to do. As the community growing larger after the certain period there have been a lot of changes in the rules which are formalized into codes of conduct to make sure that everyone in the community has to know and understand what are their rights and duties which they made some laws on the top of it. If anyone violates their ethical rights of the community, which in turn changed the lives of those communities. So, like this each community from different regions formed their own code of conduct which are necessary for their well-being of their family members and others also. After acquiring certain skills through formal educational process, everyone who is expert in their own became a professional and then established individual ethical rights and duties for their protection.

The Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) was first made for the code of ethics in the year 1972. Twenty years later in the year 1993, they changed to code to new code and in the article Anderson et al. (pp.98-107) explains how to use the new code because of a lot of development in the technology. The co-authors also worked on drafting on the code of conducts and it includes four parts of the organization: general moral imperatives; specific professional responsibilities; importance of organizational leadership and compliance.

In the existing IT literature, there are four difficulties. First, it is not well grounded in the early IT ethics literature and with some exceptions. Some points are missing in ethical behavior in the fundamental concepts and description. Secondly, immediate attention needs for issues like system failures, hacking, paid to software theft, security lapses which tells the disorganized topology of IT ethics literature. There should be some guide practitioners and researchers and to illustrate for our students which might face in the future so that if there is any issue, they could solve using this as a reference. Third the IT literature mainly focuses on the managers, employees and system designers of what should do. Last one it describes about organization responsibilities. It tells us to act based on situation rather than suggesting a methodology.

The literature is concerned with ethics before 2000 years ago, made three distinctions in the IT literature, which is used to organize the literature, to identify any situation analysis on the literature where IT ethics should be aware of these distinctions. They are like phenomenology vs. positivism, rules vs. consequences, and individuals vs. collectivities.

• Phenomenology vs. positivism. Here the phenomenology describes what should we answer when ethicists are phenomenologists, they take what is good in the situation, which was derived from logic and situation of the language. On the other hand, positivists argues that we should observe from the real world where we derive the ethical principles.
• Rules vs. consequences. Ethicists who follow the rules correctly believe that these rules are applicable universally for all so that good actions can be performed. Here the rules are based on religious beliefs, aesthetic beliefs or intuition. Ethicists who focus on the consequences believe that instead of following the rules which are not specific enough to guide the action and investigate the consequences of the problem and find the way to produce the best results or consequences for any situation.
• Individuals vs. collectivities. Some ethicists believe that decision is made on individual which gives the proper subject of ethics and understands that individual has moral authority and has self-analysis. Regardless of society it allows to set their own ethics, their own rules. Others argue that decision must be made on larger collectives such as society, polity or organization. It believes that decision made by group will be the best then becomes a rule.

Several assumptions have been made regarding legality and ethics in information technology center on the computer security area and to get privacy for the network in workplace, home and on the Internet.

Laudon in the year 1995 discusses about the ethical thinking and describes the four distinct rules that have emerged over the years, which are classified as below:

1. The collective rule-based way of thinking,
2. The individual rule-based way of thinking,
3. The collective consequentialist way of thinking, and
4. The individual consequentialist way of thinking.

The collective rule-based describes that behavior of ethical thinking is applicable for everyone and universally. Plato and Socrates were discussing on positing the ‘goodness’ is itself a concept or form just like ‘table’ and ‘chair’, which was thought it could not be grasped by humans correctly. The ethical points are to discover though dialogue, literature, the nature of the goodness and language and once it was understood to base actions and goals upon it. Kant and many others followed the similar line. For example, Kant once answered to the question, ‘Can I through my beer can on the roads after I consumed while I was driving?’. The answer is ‘No’ because if it used by everyone, it is impossible to drive on the roads. It could be led to a ‘reductio ad absurdum’. So, we should make a rule such as, ‘Thou shalt not throw beer bottles (or any cans) while driving on the road’. The cynics responded: ‘So what? Just because one person through a bottle on roads doesn’t mean everyone will do the same’. In the IT field, the collective rule-based is applied as if everyone copies the same software developed by one company, there would be no software developed further.

The individual rule-based argues that everyone will come to know what is right by looking in deep of universal and timeless truths derived from religious beliefs, intuitions and self-analysis. Here in this case, Ross answered to a question, ‘Can I steal the software from my company and use the same software at home?’. The answer is ‘No’ because right and duties of humans is to protect the things of others and no organized society tells us to steal of others private property for self-use. Regions like Christian and Jewish ethicists also argue that violation of the commandment ‘Thou shalt not steal’. The cynics responded that ‘So what? Every religion has different rights and duties and universal human rights doesn’t exist’.

The collective consequentialist way of thinking begins with Aristotle argues that should have to study the laws, actions, different people and their cultures and make a universal database of good laws, actions and mores. In answer to the question, ‘Could an employer monitor the email of his employees using any software or company equipment’. The answer to this question would probably be ‘No’, because in such scenario’s actions will be inconsistent with the law of maximizing the liberty for everyone. The employee can have private communication with his friends/colleagues and employer shouldn’t concern about it. The cynics responded: ‘So what?’. They would argue that it’s not employer business for maximizing the liberty for everyone and under some circumstance they could monitor the emails on individual interests. Many scholars and writers who interest on IT ethics come under the collective consequentialists and describes that when we have to take an ethical decision when we face some issues in IT field, we should concern some larger collectively in the person’s firm or professional society and take advice from them and just follow their advice.

The individual consequentialist way of ethical thinking is established from the analysis of individual levels. All Internet experts having a strong libertarian ethic argues that everyone should be able to do what they want and when they want. The answer to this question, ‘Should we monitor the appropriate language used by the individuals in the contents of the discussions group and in censor disruptive members?’. In answer to this question would be probably ‘No’, because if the language used in the content doesn’t threaten to disrupt the conversation groups.

Lynch in the year 1994 discusses the importance that the efficiency and speed, where all local and global networks, software programs, electronic information systems and databases which process the data are break opening for the people to face new responsibilities and rights in their use of information and reconsider standards of conduct in the invention of new computer systems. In stressing electronic networks, Lynch also identifies electronic media as a source of power where most of the people meet online, make conversations about some topic, send and receive emails and so on. After the introduction of the new methodology of communications, many new standards of conduct have been explored and which in-turn transformed the behavior of the individuals. In the cyberspace new rules have been defined around the world in the transmission of data. Copyrights laws have been introduced to save the electronic data not to use by the others where the data has been carried throughout the internet. The data is available on the internet contains political, social and economic advantages which is available to the people which need to access by the respective members. Lynch also addresses the geographical information on the individuals must be accessed by the state, federal and local agencies and right to privacy that these individuals assume they should have. Questions are asked such as ‘What is a public record?’, ‘What are the agencies required to provide?’, ‘May user fees will be charged?’, ‘What is a reasonable search?’, ‘Must all the agencies provide the records in digital format or paper format?’, have to considered in the electronic information systems.

Mason in the year 1986 contends that in many Western societies, more people are working in the distributing, collecting and handling information than in any other occupation. Here the mind expands and increases the capacity in achieving the goals which is the nature of information of information. Here the information develops the intellectual capital where human beings build their lives and to secure dignity of humans. Building intellectual capital will be vulnerable in different ways. Some of the examples of these vulnerabilities in the intellectual capital like losing their personal information and some information is not compensated for the intellectual data. Here people can deny to personal data to others which are value to them, and individuals found that life of an individual depends upon the error.

Mason also discusses about the threats that are happening in the human dignity in the ‘social contract’ in the age of information, but the author in the article describes about the four ethical issues which are being threatened to the society. The ethical discussed in the article are privacy, accuracy, property and accessibility, we also call them as PAPA. These ethical issues argue that surrounding privacy discuss about what we can share with other individuals and what information can be made private under what conditions and under what safeguards must be taken. The ethical issue argues that surrounding the accuracy would discuss about the responsibility of the data or information that is gathered and stored at one database which is accessible for only authorized members only. He should be responsible for the providing authenticity, make believe to the customers and responsible for the reliability of the data. The ethical issue argues that surrounding property would discuss about the data or information stored on the Internet, authenticable user has the rights and access to the data. He can modify or update the data and transmit to any other person if he wants to do for trusted persons. The ethical issue argues surrounding the accessibility of the information is the privilege or right of respected individual or organization to access the data under some conditions and with safeguards. He also concludes that our moral imperative should be clear. We must make sure all the information that is generated and maintained in the information technology sectors are used for the development of the mankind dignity. To get success in all the above, we must introduce a new social contract in which everyone has right to full fill the human potential of individuals.

Many people worked for the development of the moral development of the employees working in the information technology. Dr. Lawrence Kohlberg and Heron discuss that many employees in the information technology sectors are facing ethical dilemmas and many corporate organizations are involved in the issue which we can see in many computer-based technologies and other IT. His study mainly focusses on the financial and mental issues that we can see after the well development of the information technology. Nowadays we have access to laptops, mobile phones and many social websites where we are access to a lot of things. The ethical challenges that we face after potential of the things that we use today are such as property may be theft, loss of identity, privacy is lost, and your system may be hacked. For example, a person illegally downloads a music from unauthorized website and another person records the music. Her the person who records the music will face financially and the person who downloaded the music will face some legal actions which leads to jail or fines. For both professional and personal actions, students need to apply ethical based reasoning to decisions. It is important for each student understand the moral reasoning with the current technology and society is also responsible for providing the moral reasoning to all individuals. His study in the research helped the professors and teachers to teach the moral reasoning from the school itself in decision-making.

He made a descriptive quality survey which helped all the students which helps the behavior towards the Information technology usage which in turn helps the professors make some changes and help them to grow in the future and not face any issues in ethical decision-making. Here the survey is instrument is designed to validate the student’s level of reasoning at different stages of moral development. It has six scenarios which leads to ethical dilemmas where the students might face in the Information technology. He discussed in the survey about students sharing usernames and passwords. Here the students were asked to take an action and define it is ethical or not and explain their answers. The above scenarios which are made by many scholars which helped the Professors to get to know how to deal with students and precautions and extra knowledge need to be shared about information systems in the schools.

L. Kohlberg study also helps the employees in the Information Technology sectors by conducting a survey conducting with minimum number of 100 employees from various corporate organizations in the Western Pennsylvanian regions of the United States, and also took the attributes of the employees such as personal information like age, gender, stage, career. His education on the cognitive moral development of IT professionals and as based on the Defining Issues Test (DIT-2) of Rest (1986), whose work stemmed from the University of Minnesota’s Center for the Study of Ethical Development.

Heron concluded that every employee in the IT industry must have a knowledge on the different levels in the moral cognitive development of the Information Technology Professionals which in turn helps to apply these basics ethics in their future IT industry. Furthermore study, they made a statement regarding the cognitive moral development of the Information Technology doesn’t include a gender, but they introduce only general information of the employees like age, gender, career level, education level and ethics training. But they found a significant correlation at p=0.1 level between the p-score and all the variables, except gender.

In the history of Information System, self-discipline needs to be engaged in apparent diversity and its objective is to understand the overall diversity in information system research. All the authors from the research in information systems: an empirical study of diversity in the discipline and its journals described the five characteristics keys of diversity based on the prior literature. They are discipline reference, topic, level of analysis, research, research method and approach. First, they examined all the articles from the year 1995-1999, they acknowledged few of the top journals of information systems field. It emerged as key reference discipline in the late 90’s. These researches had an impact on the work life of the employees and society in general as the new technologies in the information technology were introduced as they were many changes in the IT field.

In the present field of information technology, all these literature needs more research in which it helps to understand impact it is making in information systems to all individuals in the society. It needs to observe all the studies and made a correlation in between moral discipline and ethical decision-making by impacting the society of the individuals. They need to maintain a definitive literature to all scholars, students and practitioners for ethical thinking which impacting the information technology in both corporate organizations and also individually.

Conclusion

All IT professionals, scholars and students who are involved in IT fields must learn from cynics raising a question ‘So what?’, that no set of facts or suppositions and ethical rules can be made from the opinions of everyone’s personal belief.

All scholars must have an idea how to use language in describing the IT and interaction with the society. Always be prepared for struggling between collectives and individuals especially for the IT employees. We must have more understanding as humans’ beings first and then IT professionals of the rights based on ethical decision-making.

Information technology has brought a lot of changes and brought some ethical issues. Everyone must learn the moral reasoning in decision-making of Information systems which are legal and what are illegal.

References

1. Heron. Moral Development and Ethical Decision-Making of Information Technology Professionals. Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 2007.
2. Laudon, K. Ethical Issues in Electronic Information Systems. New York, 1995.
3. Lynch, M. Ethical Issues in Electronic Information Systems. Stern School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, 1994.
4. L. Kohlberg. Author: The Philosophy of Moral Development. Harper & Row, New York, 1981.
5. D. K. Lapsley. Moral Psychology. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1996.
6. Dr. Angelina Kiser. Assistant Professor and Management Coordinator. University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, TX, 2009.
7. Mason. Four Ethical Issues of the Information Age. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 1986.
8. Eileen E. Morrison. Director of the Bachelor’s Degree Program. School of Health Administration at Texas State University San Marcos, Texas, 2009.
9. Iris Vessey, V. Ramesh & Robert L. Glass. Research in Information Systems: An Empirical Study of Diversity in the Discipline and Its Journals, 2005.

Groupthink is a psychological state that occurs in a group of people. These people somehow desire to have order and a certain understanding in the group. Sometimes, this results in irrational or wrong making of decisions. This could even result in pathological disagreement in the group, mainly in decision-making. That is why it becomes a major factor in many poor made decisions. It is basically that “loyalty requires each member to avoid raising controversial issues“ (Janis, 1982) in a group. The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2010) defined group think as “a pattern of thought defined by misconception, forced fabrication of consent and agreement to group values and ethics”. That is why it is said that groups bring out the best as well as the worst (Janis, 1982). This groupthink theory was discovered three to four decades ago and has been accepted ever since. Some believe it is just a myth and others believe that it has some truth to it. Whether this theory is accurate or not, has not been confirmed yet. As of now it has been more effective in large groups rather than small, which it was based on originally.

Symptoms of Group Thinking

Symptoms of group thinking are traditionally regarded as part of a single process related to poor decision-making by groups. This study investigates the symptoms of group thinking and reflects two different processes that vary depending on the trust that people have in a decision approved by the group. It is also claimed that previous studies with qualitative approaches can lead to an unreal correlation between group symptoms by creating a past perspective meaning when people have evidence that they have made the wrong decision (Henningsen, 2006). The eight symptoms of groupthink are:

1. A mirage of being unaffected: the group members fail to feel fear and start taking risks without thinking.
2. Unbalanced decisions: members disagree and start thinking individually.
3. Faith in essential morality: members do not listen and explain away their reasons instead of listening to the whole group.
4. Typecast views of other groups: the group makes up negative remarks of others that are outside the group.
5. Direct pressure on those who object: members pressure any in the group who try to disagree with the wrong typecasts, misconceptions, or unneeded commitments of the group, taking such opposition as disloyalty.
6. Self restriction: members withhold their objections and counter-arguments.
7. Believe to be united: everyone behaves as if all the group members have consented to the decision when most of them do not voice their objections.
8. Withholding information: some members think that they are protecting the group from outside groups by keeping secrets that might threaten group’s authenticity (Montier, n.d.).

To consider the symptoms of groupthink in a local group, we can take an example of a team that has to do a project together. For example, if an organization asks a project team to create new software for the period 2000 as a customer service specialist, the team collects software requirements and starts building a product. During the test phase, a member of the project team detects an error that causes software to crash even though there are more than 20 people who might be using the app. The problem is that they have to postpone the project for three-weeks. Right after that the project team participants are thanked by the sponsor for the work and promised a bonus of 20% if they finish their work earlier than expected. Project team participant that detected the error to the problem reports to the project manager who shares that information with the team. Team members have actually showed sign of ‘shared morals’ that the defect repair does not justify the delaying of the project, because people will not use the software in groups of more than 10 at the same time. The project team continues to work with the software and finishes the software in two weeks. A day after the release of the software faults occur and the customer considers it not usable anymore (Bloch, 2012).

In this example, the problem was that the project team and the managers knew of the time needed to create software that works flawlessly. The team agreed that at least two years of creating, testing and implementing software of this complexity are usually required. However, the project team and management payed attention on the deadlines set by the sponsor and others opinions to complete the commitment in unrealistic terms. Based on the symptoms of group thinking, the project team showed the illusions of invulnerability, being very optimistic and taking risk knowing that they cannot complete project without any significant problems. Group thinking plans can have irreparable consequences if the signs of stress are deceived or ignored due to internal or external pressure (Bass, 1991). Groupthink can occur in any group, mostly those that have less group discussions and ignore differing views of group members. Some say that group think makes groups that practice stopping themselves from objecting and making sound decisions, to rule out team members from considering alternatives.

The reason that happens is defective decision making. To overcome such affects of group thinking as mentioned in the above example, the project team should practice incredulity. It is not easy to achieve as one might have to face the rest of the groups criticism, but it is necessary nonetheless (Welch, 1989). Cohesiveness is also a solution to avoid bad decision making in a local group structure. It occurs when the members have common interests. This helps them bond and work to reduce conflict as much as possible. Shared leadership is also a solution. That is decision is not made and approved by just one person but multiple decisions are made by different members. Shared leadership is affective when the members respect the others authority and consent to his vote.

Groupthink on a National Level

Groupthink theory has been observed in large groups and is most effective there. To see it on a national level we can take an example of the world war. Soldiers of different nations fought each other in the events of the war. Due to heavy bombing and violence the groups of soldiers who had to make group decisions were affected by group think vigorously. In another example, in 1974, the Watergate scandal was also a result of groupthink.

The Watergate outrage became the subject of the American political and academic community. Analysts have tried to take this route of domestic politics, hinting that the group must act within the structure of the group of President Nixon and his advisers. Green and Connolly figured it out first hand that the group’s thoughts were linked to the hiding of Watergate (Connolly, 1974). Raven made a very detailed attempt to use group reflection to hide Watergate (Raven, 1974). There were many symptoms, but he also concluded that the reason for failure was that there was not enough cohesion in the group. The core team of Nixon and his other team were analyzed using sociometric methods. Crow points out that the Nixon group can still be regarded as a very cohesive group – despite their personal oppositions they all wanted to be part of this group with all their heart and soul and stand in the center of this group. They depended heavily on their leader, and this is what united them (Raven, 1974). Raven, who is not completely satisfied with the group-thinking hypothesis as an explanation of what has happened, also offers other theoretical perspectives of group dynamics that may be useful in this respect. Wong McCarthy presented the results of a detailed analysis of the contents of the White House transcription records, which also reveal too many symptoms of group thinking (Wong-McCarthy, 1976). In the second edition of his book, Janice also examines the Watergate case and again explains the group’s thinking, focusing on a much smaller group: Nixon, Holddeman and Erlichmann. Group cohesion is an effective way to avoid the theory of group thinking.

The attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 is an excellent example of collective thinking. A number of factors, such as misconceptions and general arguments, have led to the recklessness of US naval officers on Hawaii. The United States intercepted Japanese messages and discovered that Japan was armed to storm somewhere in the Pacific. Washington took action by security personnel in Pearl Harbor, but their warning was not taken seriously. They assumed that the Japanese empire was taking action in the event of the usurpation of their embassies and consulates in hostile areas. The US Navy and the US Army in Pearl Harbor also shared the reasons why the attack was unlikely. Some of them include:

• “The Japanese will never launch a large-scale surprise attack on Hawaii, because they will understand that this will cause a total war in which the United States will certainly win”.
• “The Pacific Fleet, concentrated in Pearl Harbor, was an important deterrent against air and sea attacks”.
• “Even if the Japanese were reckless to send their couriers to attack us, we could certainly find and destroy them on time”.
• “No warship anchored in the shallow waters of Pearl Harbor can never be sunk by torpedoes launched by enemy aircraft”.

The Americans under estimated Japanese imperial army and due to group thinking had a huge loss at Pearl Harbor. Their illusions and belief in morality lead them to regret the decisions made. Collective rationalization was also a symptom. The attack could have been avoided if the US army had not relied on their rationalization and taken precautions instead. They required someone to object to their decision despite the lack of ranks.

Conclusion

The debate on groupthink and decision quality has continued since decades and will continue on. In the meantime we can conclude that groupthink theory has made a main contribution to the decision making process by taking it from rather abstract into very tangible judgment on quality of decision process and outcomes in the eyes of important events, for example in huge international crises. Also very important is the complex blend of small-group dynamics. Janis’s work on groupthink has inspired many interdisciplinary hard works. Groupthink and other psychological concepts provide a very useful equalizer to the strong biased level of organizational example. In this respect, it is ironic to see that despite Janis’s own typical carefulness in outlining each step in the deductive sequence of a case analysis (in particular in his Watergate case study), the very popularity of groupthink may, in fact, act as an deterrent to careful knowledge base integration (Courtright, 1976). This emerges clearly from the unscholarly adoption of sections on ‘the dangers of groupthink’ in much policy analysis and management handbooks. In the meantime, it is worthwhile to establish with greater precision the anterior and dynamics of groupthink, and arrive at decisions based on better grounds i.e. when, how, and why group think occurs. From there on, we can follow Janis’s lead in trying to prevent groupthink, as well as further research its expected positive purpose in exact types of decision situations. This should be done by social scientists from different disciplines using different methodological analysis.

Bibliography

1. Bass, B. M., 1991. From transactional to transformational leadership.. In: Organizational Dynamics. s.l.:s.n., pp. 18(3), 19-31.
2. Bloch, M. B. &. L., 2012. Delivering large-scale IT projects on time, on budget, and on value.. Harvard Business Review.
3. Conolly, G. a., 1974.
4. Courtright, J. A., 1976. Group think and communiction processes, Iowa: University of Iowa.
5. Henningsen, D. M. E. J., 2006. Eaminig the symptoms of Groupthink and retrospective sense making. In: Small Group Research. s.l.:s.n., pp. 37(1), 36-64.
6. Janis, 1982. In: s.l.:s.n., p. 12.
7. L., I., 1991. Victims of Group think. In: Political psychology. s.l.:s.n., pp. 247-278.
8. Montier, J., n.d. The Little Book of Behavioral Investing . In: s.l.:s.n.
9. Raven, 1974.
10. Raven, 1974. p. 311.
11. Welch, D. A., 1989. Crisi decision making recnsidered.. Conflict of Resolution, pp. 33, 430-445.
12. Wong-McCarthy, 1976.