MAG- UULAT

1- Rica Valenzuela
 What’s the every
decision you’re making
each day?
 According to Oxford Dictionary, decision
making is the action or process of making
important decisions. While in Merriam Webster
Dictionary, decision making is the act or process
of deciding something especially with a group of
people.
RATIONAL DECISION MAKING
Rational decision making has a systematic approach in
selecting the possible choices by the help of tools, processes,
or the knowledge of experts.
 The Classical Model: An Optimizing Strategy

This model employs an optimizing strategy to seek the best possible alternative
solutions or choices to strengthen the achievements of goals and objectives.
1. A problem is identified.
2. Goals and objectives are established.
3. All the possible alternatives are generated.
4. The consequences of each alternative are considered.
5. All the alternatives are evaluated in terms of goals and objectives.
6. The best alternative is selected- that is, the one that maximizes the goals and
objectives.
7. Finally, the decision is implemented and evaluated.
 The Administrative Model: A Satisficing Strategy

Herbert Simon was the first to introduce the Administrative Model in making
decisions where in the administrators is finding the satisfactory solution rather than
the best one. Here some of the basic assumptions:

Assumption 1. Administrative decision making is a dynamic process that solves

some organizational problems and creates others.
Assumption 2. Complete rationality in decision making is impossible; therefore,
administrators seek to satisfice because they have neither the ability nor the
cognitive capacity to optimize the decision-making process.
Assumption 3. Decision making is a general pattern of action found in the rational
administration of all major tasks and functional areas in organizations.
Assumption 4. Values are an integral part of decision making.
Decision-Making Process: An Action Cycle
 The Incremental Model: A Strategy of Successive Limited Comparisons

Charles Lindblom (1959, 1965, 1968, 1980; Braybrook and indblom 1963;
Lindblom and Cohen, 1979) first introduced and formalized the
inceremental model of decision making.
With this strategy, successive comparisons reduce or eliminate the need
for theory. The organization just focus on the problem then the nearest
possible solutions, no more other theories. They limit the number of
alternatives and ignore it. With this approach the complexity of the
decision making is reduced and manageable. It is also conserves time and
energy.
 The Mixed- Scanning Model: An Adaptive Strategy

Mixed-Scanning model, is a synthesis of the administrative model and incremental model.

There are two question that must be answer in using this model. First, “What is the
organization’s mission and policy?” And second, “What decisions will move the organization
toward its mission and policy?” The decision making in this strategy is focused on broad
ends and tentative means. The test of a good decision is that it can be shown to result in a
satisfactory decision that is consistent with the organization’s policy. The principles for
mixed-scanning model, Etzioni (1989) advances seven basic rules for mixed scanning, which
Wayne Holy and John Tarter (2003) have summarized as follows:
Use focused trial and error.
Be tentative; proceed with caution.
If uncertain, procrastinate.
Stagger your decisions.
If uncertain, fractionalize decisions.
 PARTICIPATIVE DECISION MAKING

Participative decision making is wherein two powers are involved which are
the power and influence of the leader and the power and influence of the
other members of the organization. In choosing this type of decision making
it aims to arrive at better decisions and enhance the growth and
development of organization’s participants (like improved communication
skills, improved motivation, improved sharing of ideas and goals and better-
developed group-process skills or the rapport) In this type, the followers are
welcome to ask questions and offer a tentative solutions or decision to the
subject unlike before that only the administrator are allowed.
 The Vroom Model of Shared Decision Making

This model originally created by Victor Vroom and Philip Yetton in 1973 and later modified by
Arthur Jago (1988). In their latest version it focusses on the participation of every member in
the group in decision making rather than the administrator who only decide.

Five leadership styles

Victor Vroom in collaboration with Philip Yetton (1973) developed a taxonomy of five
leadership styles, as follows:

AUTOCRATIC PROCESS
The leader makes the decision using whatever information is available.
The leader secure all the information that he/she gets from the members then make the
decision. In this process, the leader may or may not tell the problem is.
CONSULTATIVE PROCESS
The leader will tell the problem to the relevant members in a one-to-one
basis to hear each of their suggestions, then decide.
The leader will open the problem at the meeting and hear all the ideas and
suggestions of each members, then decide.
GROUP PROCESS
The leader shares the problem with the group then facilitates to reach
consensus on a group decision. He/she may share or give information but
does not try to “sell” his own idea to manipulate the decisions of other
members.
 The Hoy-Tarter Model: A Simplified Model of Shared Decision
Making

The Hoy-Tarter Model has evolved to a user-friendly model that

administrators can keep in their heads and easily apply when the
situation is appropriate. Wherein the research on participating the
teachers in decision making has generally supported the
desirability of empowering teachers in the process, but according
to that research that participation is not always advantageous,
that is, the effective of the teachers depend on the problem and
situation.
 Zone of Acceptance: Its Significance and Determination

In order to know if who should participate in the decision making process, everyone is
involve in every decision. Edwin Bridges, has suggested two rules for identifying decisions in
which it appropriate for teachers to participate:
The test of relevance. : Do the subordinates have a personal stake in decision outcomes?
The test in expertise. Do subordinates have the expertise to make a useful contribution to
the decision?
Also Robert Owens (2001) has added one of these and called:
The test of Jurisdiction. That the teachers must be involved in decision making even if the
organization has a hierarchical basis which only those who are assigned are welcome to the
jurisdiction. But Owens, explain that participation in the making of decisions that the group
cannot implement can lead to frustration at least as great as simple nonparticipation.
 Decision- Making Structures

Group Consensus – The administrator involves the participants in the

decision making process, then the group decides.
Group Majority - The administrator involves the participants in the decision
making process, then the majority rule.
Group Advisory - The administrator take the opinions and ideas of other
subordinate, discusses the implication then the group decides that may or
may not reflect the subordinate’s desires.
Individual advisory - The administrator talk to the subordinates one-by-one
then decides that may or may not reflect their opinions.
Unilateral Decision – The administrator decides without the consensus of
everybody.