'Models of Decision Making\r'

'One poor finale that I make more than than a stratum ago happened when I was a member of the military commission of a small, preliminary business familiarity someplace in Texas, which was only starting to burst in less than ten years of operation.  Having read from articles that IT had set by such an integral part of the business strategies of intimately companies nowadays because it made lots of m angiotensin-converting enzymey, assisted in terms of management and information, and that it kept records safer and faster, the thought made me think that IT was really what we needed.  We were on the brink of submission the next higher stage of business.\r\nWe did brainstorming around the next strategy to implement by the followers year, so that the business would be more no-hit and prominent for the next stage of business.  I suggested nearly investing with IT equipments, as this would beget extended our markets and operate to be able to reach out to more custom ers in further states.  The conclusiveness turned out to be a poor one because of misapprehension and negligence, as well as the wrong preference of strategy and application.\r\nMajor Analysis\r\nUsing the ‘ judicious form’ in making individual closings, the conclusiveness that I used in performing an IT coronation to the business can be outlined as follows:\r\nI. Forming the decision\r\nA.    Identifying the worry\r\n1. There was a hassle in terms of running(a) and corpses approach, as the manufacturing was not smooth and orderly, and the tasks were not done efficiently.\r\n2.There was a trouble when it came to supply kitchen stove management, especially that the ingredients should chip in already been ready by the time the orders were sent.\r\n3.There was a riddle when it came to efficient beautify management, so that the preparation did not flow smoothly and quickly.\r\nB. Generating alternative resolvings\r\n1. Improve useable system by improving strategies, tasks, and goals.\r\n2.Improve supply chain system by exchanging tighter coordination with the supplier companies.\r\n3. Improve IT system by using the investment finance.\r\nC. Selecting a closure\r\n1.The elect alternative should solve or quench as much problems as it can handle.\r\n2. The elect alternative should be strategically and financially acceptable.\r\n3.The chosen alternative should present values, information, and skills that could be avai guide from the existing environment.\r\nII.Negative consequences of the decision\r\nA.Negative financial consequences\r\n1. About 68% of the total procurable fund did not bring about the expect results.\r\n2.Overall profit landed at merely $97,000, with a loan amounting to $200,000 plus company expenses.\r\nB.Negative motivational consequences\r\n1.The staffs and the delegation lost motivation afterwards being announced that the company had lost more than half of the expect returns.\r\n2.The staffs and the committee lost motivation because the company approximately fell to bankruptcy.\r\nC.Negative personal feedback\r\n1. I lost my patch as the second adviser of the finance administration.\r\n2.I was nearly fired from the company.\r\nIII.Importance of the decision\r\nA.Importance to the company\r\n1. The decision would train solved problems in functional, supply chain, and efficient floor management.\r\n2.The decision would grow created a link and chance with strong IT companies in the environment.\r\nB.Importance to the higher staffs\r\n1.Improvement in the functional and efficient floor management would have led to higher profits and bigger returns.\r\n2. Improvement in profits and returns would have led to bigger opportunities and investments.\r\nC.Importance to me\r\n1.The decision, if it were successful, would have promoted me as the kickoff adviser of the finance administration.\r\n2. The decision, if it were successful, would have motivated me to do bigger projects amid the risks.\r\nThree decision theories, which were exercised in the supplying and implementation of the decision were the succeeding(a):\r\nFirst and foremost is the ‘rational model’, which centers on comprehensive reason and the sense of the alternatives.  The rational model arrives at a decision by red ink over the four distinct steps: first is identifying the problem; second is generating alternative solutions; third is selecting the solution; 4th and final is implementing and evaluating the solution (Baker III, 2001, p.1).  It presents the decision-making fulfil by helping me, first, in pointing out what exactly is the problem in the company; and so by cerebration of the alternatives that can be used, which would solve the issues that were at hand.\r\n cooperate decision theory that was used in the planning and implementation of the decision is the ‘political model’, which uses the system as a coalition, with procedural rationality having to consider the decision making process.  In this model, what controls are the following aspects: first is environmental uncertainty; second is mental imagery dependence; third is task interdependence; fourth and final is goal conflict (Rotman School of Management, 2001, p.4).  The rationality of the procedure appears to be most important.\r\nThird theory that was used in the decision making process is the ‘instance-based model’, wherein decisions are based on instances and the chosen alternative sprouts through ‘accumulated experience’ (Gonzalez& axerophthol;Lebiere, 2004, p.8).  Because we have known other companies that became successful after investing in the IT, such as caravan Group, then it became reasonable for us that our company leave also succeed in terms of IT investment.  We failed to dissolve that the internal and external environments are two in truth important factors.\r\nConclusion\r\nBased on my abstract in the recent pa ges, it appears that making judgments and decisions for a company should not rely solely on one person or group of persons.  There should be brainstorming from opposite groups that believe on different ways and strategies.  People make judgments almost as well hastily.  Each factor should be analyzed behind and efficiently, especially when it comes to the finances and the returns of the finances.\r\nAs for me, I have learned the lesson that it takes two to tango… not retributive two, in fact; the more there is then the better.  It is good to make decisions in pairs… but a great deal better if we do them in numerous pairs.\r\nReferences\r\nBaker III, E.  (2001).  Decision making.  Retrieved November 23, 2007, from Dr. H. Eugene Baker’s Homepage: http://www.unf.edu/~gbaker/Man6204/Decision.PDF.\r\nRotman School of Management.  (2001).  Contingency framework: models of decision making.  Retrieved November 23, 2007\r\n \r\n'