NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Humble Decision Making According to Amitai Etzioni, decision making in future will be rather compared with an art than with science. With the emerging technologies the process of decision making has faced drastic changes. The flow of information became so huge that extracting data from numerous sources turned out to be a very complicated task. However, with all this confusion, new decision making models emerge in order to facilitate the daunting task of decision making. As it is claimed by the author, this new approach takes its origin in the past, as, in fact, it is a very old approach in a new dress (Etzioni, 1989).
This approach, a so-called humble decision making understands that people often face necessity to proceed with only partial data, which they have had no time to fully process or analyze (Etzioni, 1989). Earlier, the very approach to governing business decisions was rational. It implied that people in their decision making process should and could analyze and explore everything that might affect their decision, collect all data, compare all possible alternatives, and finally, choose the most effective one. The main aim was to reach an objective, no matter in which way and how the decision is made. Nowadays, this approach seems to be ineffective, as not always decisions can be made in such an aggressive way. Even those people, who adhere to rationalist position, are convinced in ineffectiveness of aggressive decision making, as they simply need to know much than ever before (Etzioni, 1989).
The subject at issue is that knowledge is not the same as information, and information is not the same as knowledge. From here it follows, that the process of decision making is affected by a variety of important factors, which could (and should) be treated as complicating considerations. Some of them are discussed in Janis and Manns Decision Making, and include defensive avoidance (when the decision maker delays decisions unduly), overreaction (when the decisions are made impulsively in order to escape the anxious state), and hypervigiliance (when the decision maker prefers collecting information as much as possible, and continues to collect it instead of making decisions) (Etzioni, 1989). Political factors are also quite important. Although rationalistic approach to decision making does have some sense, it has certain limitations, as it assumes that decision makers have unquantified power and wisdom and ignores the fact that other people also set goals and seek to push them through (Etzioni, 1989). However, it should be taken into account that modern decision making strategies, in order to be efficient, should involve coalition building, cooperation, and the whole panorama of differing personalities, perspectives, responsibilities, and powers (Etzioni, 1989).
As it is then claimed by the author, due to human intellectual limitations wholly rational decisions were often beyond our grasp (Etzioni, 1989). In result, two new approaches emerged, - incrementalism (or the science of muddling through, where the decision makers rather move away from trouble, than trying to move toward a goal), and the second one, openly opposed to analysis and reflection. Incrementalism has two obvious strengths. First, this approach cancels the necessity to obtain as much information as possible, as it focuses instead on limited areas. Secondly, it allows avoiding dangers of grand policy decisions by not making any (Etzioni, 1989).
Unfortunately, incrementalism is highly conservative, and therefore, is very ineffective. The second approach calls on decision makers to abruptly remake the world with undertaking no attempt to understand it. This approach is often called a go-for-it approach, and can be paraphrased as Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead! (Etzioni, 1989). Frankly speaking, this approach is more likely to ruin everything on the way, and end in shipwreck than in a victory. Another approach to decision making can be called rational ritualism, where the decision makers and their staffs take part in information rituals that can be called some sort of information dance, where the information used is quite poor and often over interpreted.
Although this approach is described not very often, it still occurs (even nowadays). However, all these approaches are not as effective as the one called humble decision making. This approach implies a mixture of shallow and deep examination of data, where a broad range of events, facts, and choices are examined in combination with the detailed examination of a focused subset of choices, events, and facts. This so-called mixed scanning is more effective, compared with rationalism, where the decision makers should fully examine all relevant information and possible choices, or with incrementalism, the approach that requires almost no choices at all. As the name implies, mixed scanning involves two different ways of making decision, and although it is much less detailed and demanding than rationalistic decision making, it is still broader and more comprehensive than increment ation and less likely to be limited to familiar alternatives (Etzioni, 1989). As it is claimed by the author, the oldest formal use of this approach is medical.
The doctors examine patients general health, and then fit the data to the patients particular complaints; then a tentative treatment is initiated, and in case of failure, the doctors try something else. To a certain extent this can be applied to the way the effective decision makers make their choices. In such a way, the rules for mixed scanning are much the same for both decision makers and doctors. The first procedure is focused trial and error. Evidently, it is the most widely used to adapt to partial knowledge. Focused trial and error comprises of two parts: to know where the decision maker should start the search for the most effective intervention, and to check the results at intervals in order to adjust and modify the intervention.
It assumes that there is some important information that the decision maker doesnt have and must proceed without (Etzioni, 1989). To a certain extent, it is not related to the question of understanding the world in a proper way by selecting logical way of conduct on the basis of facts, but rather the question of feeling the most effective way to the best possible decision despite the lack of information. This strategy is rather adaptive than rationalistic. The second issue relates to tentativeness.
It is an essential adaptive strategy as it implies the willingness, ability, and commitment to revise the decision makers policy in case necessary. As far as the decision makers are expected to view each intervention and action as something experimental and tentative, they declare that they fully expect to revise it (Etzioni, 1989). The third adaptive rule is procrastination. It is derived from the understanding of the limits of executive knowledge (Etzioni, 1989). Some delay in decision making process allows the decision maker collecting new information, processing additional data, and presenting new options. For example, sometimes a delay or missing the next board meeting may present new options, and justify the delay.
However, it should be treated with caution, as procrastination may be conductive to leaving the problem untreated. One common form of delay is decision staggering. As it is illustrated by the author, if the Federal Reserve was sure that the discount rate should increase by 3 %, it would not make the adjustment all at once. By making an adjustment of half a point at a time, it can see partial results under conditions similar to those in which the remainder of intervention strategy will occur.
The second corollary to procrastination is fractional ization, when, the important judgments are treated as series of sub decisions, instead of spreading a single intervention over time (Etzioni, 1989). Another adaptive rule is hedging bets. For example, the fewer information investors have about a company, the better and wiser it is to spread their investments among several stocks (Etzioni, 1989). Maintaining strategic reserves is one of the forms of hedging bets strategy.
Finally, the fifth adaptive rule is reversible decisions. It is a method that allows a decision maker avoiding overcommitment in case only partial information is available (Etzioni, 1989). Etzioni illustrates the rule of reversible decisions by the energy crisis of 1970 s, when the simplest response was to turn down the thermostat during the winter and raise it during the summer, where the additional virtue was being fully reversible in seconds (Etzioni, 1989). The article affected my views about quantitative business modeling and its utility in business decision making, as it provides a comprehensive analysis of all most widely used decision making methods, and presents a clear opinion about the effectiveness of humble decision making. Taking into account all important issues discussed in the given article, it is difficult not to agree with all its points. My views obviously conform to the views the reader can formulate after completing the given and other readings.
What is even more important, humble decision making position fully conforms to a Christian worldview, as it is based on ethical decision making and efficiently integrates the virtue approach, the approach of common good, and others that facilitate the decision making process, and provide an appropriately reasonable method to explore the aspects of decisions and weigh the considerations that may (or should) impact the decision makers choice of a course of action. Works Cited Etzioni, A. (1989). Humble Decision Making. Hardware Business Review, 122 - 126.
Free research essays on topics related to: etzioni, decision making process, decision makers, 1989, trial and error
Research essay sample on Decision Making Process Trial And Error
