Decision Making Model Analysis

"Decision-Making Model Analysis"

By Richard Kohout

MGT/350

Professor: Scott Smith

"Decision-Making Model Analysis"

"A pint of sweat saves a gallon of blood". (General George S. Patton) Whether in war or business the outcome of a situation is based on the pre-planning and execution of a problem. Whether it is in the battlefield or the boardroom the lack of critical thinking can be very costly. Generals, much like Managers, in fact have to exercise good judgment and critical thinking to make the outcome a success. I will explain the fundamental steps necessary to utilize critical thinking in everyday situations. I will apply it to a recent occurrence in my job field and guide the reader through the process my group used to both logically and critically think out their decisions.

Although I looked at many different sources to apply to my situation, I narrowed it down to two and combined their content to show the steps required to make a decision. The steps are as follows:

1) Determine if matter is an ethical one or focus the process- agree on a strategic plan. (Koocher,Keith Spiegel)

The matter as is required was the opportunity to unify the Engineering Change (EN) process within my department. We wanted to better centralize the handling and execution of changes among the department.

2) Consult guidelines already available that may apply. (Koocher,Keith Spiegel)

EN procedures dictated that the person to whom the part number in question belonged to is the one who should handle the EN work and upgrades. Problem was various part numbers appeared on any given change and this caused multiple people to handle a change and no one set person to orchestrate the completion of the EN.

3) Consider as best as possible, all of the sources that might influence the decision. (Koocher,Keith Spiegel)

To accomplish this we invited all parties involved and included all resources such as; EN work sheets, copies of change procedures, and the EN themselves. We explained to management, showing examples of ENs that were causing the problems and set about to find resolutions that could fix the situation.

4) Evaluate consultants for abilities and expertise. Assess the external environment. (Bryson)

To help us better understand the situation, we consulted past members of an EN department. We asked them how we could improve the process and if attempts had been made in the past to try and centralize EN activity. We also wanted to know if the processes they had implemented and tried were successful.

5) Assess the internal environment. (Bryson)

To illustrate how we used this step, we showed in detail how the confusion generated from multiple users was affecting the process. We also started to explain how we planned to resolve the problem.

6) Generate alternative decisions- BRAINSTORM (Koocher,Keith Spiegel)

At this point we went around the table asking all present to suggest a viable solution or possible resolution. We came up with the following (these are the suggestions that we kept and actually incorporated.) 1) Centralize to one person to coordinate the change. 2) One person to open and close EN activity. 3) This one person too send out emails to affected persons and do follow-up until resolved. 4) Reduce