>> MIM Speaks
WHEN FEAR AND EMOTIONS AFFECT THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
APRIL 14, 1996 -
NEWS STRAIT TIMES
ON Jan 28, 1986, the American Space Shuttle Challenge exploded
just seconds af ter leaving the launching pad, taking with it
the lives of seven astronauts.
What really caused the Challenger tragedy? Could the even
lives have been saved had someone made the right decision?
A political decision from high up in the NASA ad ministration
sealed the fate of the a astronauts.
From the technical side, the cause of the tragedy was tragedy
was to the O-ring of the solid fuel booster. The cold January
weather had made the O-ring to become brittle. When the solid
fuel was heated up, they turned to gaseous form, leaked
through the brittle O-ring and caused the explosion. Some
people at the technical unit had sounded a warning that the
the Challenger is unsafe to to fly. But the warning was
ignored The decision was, it must be launched on Jan 28.
After the Challenger disaster, America's space shuttle
programme was halted for two years. Sheer paranoia must have
swept through NASA. They could not possibly afford another
such explosion. Nearly 600 modifications were made during tho
e two years to futher augment the safety of space flight.
In addition, NASA deployed three separate "safe ty crew" to
check and dou ble check to make sure that nothing is amiss The
irony Of this procedure of having three separate safety teams?
No one team felt solely responsible in other words, when
something wont wrong, each team de need responsibility. Each
team had two other teams on whom they could point their
fingers at.
How it is that such a thing can happen at NASA? Well, one
simple explana tion is that the rational thinking mind had
been swamped by something called "fear" Emotion has taken over
the decision making process.
In almost all cases of decision making the outcome is Only
known after the event had taken place; that is, after the
decision had been carried out This is one of the reasons why
people are afraid to make desicions. Each time a decision is
made, should the decision turn out to be a bad one, someone's
head will roll. It is safer not to make any decision.
Most of us are familiar with situations, where managers simply
refused to make a decision or they be come paralysed by
indeci- siveness; and then they were forced into making one,
they often ended up with a countor-productlve one.
Are business schools turning out MBA's equipped with good
deci- sion making skills? All too often, not. BY the time they
enrol for their MBA, if they do not possess the basic thinking
habits required for good decision making, the MBA programme
cannot do very much in augmenting their decision-making
skills.
Yes, MBA students do a lot of "problem analysls". They are
taught information handling techniques, etc. But most of the
time what they are dealing with are at best simulations of
prolems in a controlled environment. They do not deal with
real problems where a bad decision results in losses running
Into hundreds of thousands of ringgit, or they lose their job
In the classroom, environment they can make all kinds of
assumptions, propose all kinds of suggestions or al
ternatives, however impractical they might be, but this is not
so in the real world.
In the real world, MBA graduates who are still wet behind
their oars will expe rience a sense of fear if they have to
make important de cisions with costly conse quences if they
are bad decisions.
Let us take a look at what are some of the factors that affect
managers in their decision making process.
The personal style of a manager or executive af fect, in some
ways the way ho decides. For instance, easy going managers are
not going to crack their brains. They will use other people's
Ideas, or sugges tions, or lot their trusted subordinates make
the decisions.
Then there are certain ambitious executives who make ruthless
decisions to remove their superiors. Not too long ago, a
division manager of a large multinational company was asked to
leave the organisation as a result of unscrupulous
manipulations by the assistant division manager.
Such individuals are the Machlavellls of the corpo rate world
it is important to note that these individuals do not perceive
themselves as ruthless. The "ruthless" label is put on them by
others.
While ambitious managers make ruthless deci sions, those who
are moti vated by greed will make unethical decisions involvmB
money or in kind. They feel comfortable taking such decisions
because of their underlying moral values system. In general,
an lndividual's moral value system is a result of his exposure
to religion teaching, philosophical influence, social or
cultural customs and practices, as well as his upbringing.
After an individual's ado adolescent years, the values system
is formed and the moral values usually remain, unchanged
throughout his life.
On the contrary, individuals helled by a great desire for
money but who are morally ethical, will approach their quest
for wealth by taking actions based on ethical decisions. In
the corporate world, such individuals believe in "principles
and will not make decisions that will violate their beliefs.
Then we have managers who lacked the courage to make
decisions. They are afraid that their decisions may get them
into trouble, cause them to lose face, or lose their jobs,
etc.
If fear interferes with a manager's decision-making process
then other emotions such as anger, liking or dislike will also
affect the quality his decisions.
Normally when a person gets angry, he should re frain from
making a decision. In fact, no managers should make decisions
based on the liking or dislike of someone (subordinate) or
some Pet ideas or projects.
If the above is still not cawing enough damage to a manager s
decision making process, there are still factors such as his
attitudes or his self-image.
Individuals with pessimistic outlook tend to make conservative
or negative decidons. Managers who have a low self-esteem find
themselves threatened if their subordinates decisions are
accepted by top management.
Is management a science or an art? One of the strongest
arguments against management being a science must lie in the
fact that human or managerial decisions are rarely rational,
rarely impartial, unbiased, neutral or objective.
Psychologist today have established beyond doubt that the left
hemisphere of the human brain is where logical or rational
thinking takes place. But the right brain tends to be
emotional, sometimes overpowered by feelings such as hatred,
anger, jealously, greed and so on.
Intuitive thinking, hunch or gut-feel also take place in the
right hemisphere of our brain, not to mention creativity and
our ability to appreciate the arts, music, poetry and so on.
If managerial decision making is so emotionally based what can
we do to improve the decision-making Process in organisations?
Or, write and tell us how successful organisations make
decisions.
|