I synthesized some interesting research when I was developing a Decision Making Course. If you are a manager or supervisor in your organization, you must make a number of decisions. It is also your responsibility to make decisions that are in the best interest of not only your department or section, but the entire organization. You must consider the good of many, not of a few. Often, people will be angry with you because of the decisions you make to help them!
Let’s explore four decision-making styles.
Democratic decision-making is when the leader gives up ownership and control of a decision and allows the group to vote. Majority vote will decide the action. Advantages include a fairly fast decision, and a certain amount of group participation.
The disadvantage of this style includes no responsibility. An individual is not responsible for the outcome. In fact, even the group feels no real responsibility because some members will say, “I didn’t vote for that.” Lack of group and personal responsibility would seem to disqualify this style of decision-making, although this style does have its place in business.
Autocratic decision-making is when the leader maintains total control and ownership of the decision. The leader is also completely responsible for the good or bad outcome as a result of the decision. The leader does not ask for any suggestions or ideas from outside sources and decides from their own internal information and perception of the situation. Advantages include a very fast decision, and personal responsibility by the leader, for the outcome. If an emergency situation exists, the autocratic style is usually the best choice.
The disadvantages are varied and sometimes include less than desired effort from the people who must carry out the decision. If the employee is personally affected by the decision but not included when the decision is made, morale and effort may or may not suffer. It is not always predictable. If the outcome for the decision is not positive, members of the organization begin to feel they could have done a better job themselves and the leader may lose credibility.
Collective – Participative
This form of decision-making is when the leader involves the members of the organization. Other perspectives of the situation are discovered because the leader deliberately asks and encourages others to participate by giving their ideas, perceptions, knowledge, and information concerning the decision. The leader maintains total control of the decision because, although outside information is considered, the leader alone decides.
The leader is also completely responsible for the good or bad outcome as a result of the decision. The advantages include some group participation and involvement. This is especially valuable when a person is affected negatively by the decision. In most cases, the individual is informed before the decision is implemented (no surprises) and usually feels good about personal involvement. If the leader is a good communicator, and listens carefully to the information collected, he or she will usually have a more accurate understanding of the situation and make a better decision. The disadvantages of this style include a slow, time-consuming decision; less security, because so many people are involved in the decision.
Consensus decision-making is when the leader gives up total control of the decision. The complete group is totally involved in the decision. The leader is not individually responsible for the outcome. The complete organization or group is now responsible for the outcome. This is not a democratic style because everyone must agree and “buy in” on the decision. If total commitment and agreement by everyone is not obtained the decision becomes democratic.
The advantages include group commitment and responsibility for the outcome. Teamwork and good security is also created because everyone has a stake in the success of the decision. A more accurate decision is usually made, with a higher probability of success, because so many ideas, perspectives, skills and “brains” were involved in the creation. The disadvantages include a very slow and extremely time-consuming decision. It is also a lot of work getting everyone in the organization involved. It takes skill and practice for a group to learn how to work together.
Please “Like” and share your comments. Additional training resources are located here.