>> MIM Speaks
QUALITIES OF DECISION-MAKING
SEPT 28, 1997 -
THE STAR
By Azhari Karim
THE recent crisis over the value of the ringgit brought to the
surface the sometimes-taken-for-granted realm of
decision-making and its impact on the manager.
There are several levels of understanding at work here. Let us
look at the anatomy of decision making in a general situation.
The prerequisite is that there must occur an event or an
occasion for a decision to be made. Usually this can be in the
form of a problem.
The logical way is to size up the problem by either breaking
it into parts or by looking at it in its environment or
surrounding. This is followed by a consideration of several
options or alternatives to a solution. Then the person, using
his best and informed judgment, makes the decision.
The decision itself can take many phases - preliminary,
interim and final. The decision can only take its final form
after having gone through these thought-processes.
Bear in mind that a considered opinion is never part of the
decision-making process. It is merely an observation, albeit
an educated one, on the problem and its solution. An opinion
expressed on a matter can sometimes contain the genesis of a
decision.
The next level has to do with the nature of the decisions,
whether they are good or bad. Generally, decisions can be
either good or bad depending on outcome. In other words,
effective decisions can lead to good outcomes and ineffective
ones will result in a negative outcome.
In reality, however, it does not usually work this way. Good
or bad are relative. The results can be goad for somebody and
bad for another.
Then there is the time-frame of the decision which has to be
considered. A good decision may no longer remain so if it
cannot be carried out almost immediately. Time is of the
essence. Delay in any form can render the decision useless.
The above must be distinguished from snap decisions or the
so-called impulsive ones. Such decisions usually lead to
dangerous outcomes, often with tragic losses in money and even
lives.
The social norm has been for someone that can deliberate on a
problem and make a decision after the problem and its causes
have been studied in its entirety.
Yet a third level of understanding exists in respect of the
perception of others over each of the decisions made. Many
tend to admire the tough decisions and deride the so-called
weak ones. Such perceptions centre actually on the decision
makers themselves.
Throughout history, we have paid tribute to those who have
achieved much more on the basis of their decisions alone. We
are reminded of Sir Winston Churchill, who resolved to fight
the enemies on land, the sea and in the air. His commitment
helped to turn the tide of the Second World War in favour of
the Allies.
In the ensuing years, we were witnesses to the Berlin airlifts
that brought food and morale to the besieged people of the
city. Again, we saw how such tough decisions have influenced
the outcome of the situation during the Cold War.
In more recent times, however toughness as an instrument of
decisive policies have not brought the desired results. Take
the US decision to bomb Haiphong Harbour during the height of
the Vietnam War. It did not result in any significant
strategic win for the United States.
Compare this, however, to the brinkmanship decisions of
President John F. Kennedy in meeting the Soviet Union's
intransigent position over their Cuban missiles involvement.
The world watched with horror at the prospects of imminent
war.
From the above, it becomes clear that the personality of the
decision maker have bigger impact on the decisions than
anything else. This has, therefore, an important implication
for managers of today.
In this modern era where speed and timeliness are of the
essence the manager is judged on how he makes his decisions,
what effect the decisions will have on the company's
performance and when the decisions are taken.
Often, the decision will be his alone to take without the
benefit of advice or comments from peers or subordinates. He
may not even have in his possession all available data on the
problem. But decide he must.
The rule of thumb is, it is better to take a decision than not
to. The manager has to resolve to commit himself to the
decision. He has to display a high sense of integrity and
responsibility. It is also an exercise of leadership.
As a leader, the manager has to ensure that his decisions are
understood by his staff, the processes of decision-making are
followed, and the outcomes are effective and efficacious in
both the short and the longer term. This is one framework we
can follow.
The following is an examination of some of the decisions that
were taken at the national level when dealing with several of
the problems facing the country in the past months using the
framework as discussed earlier:
* The Coxsackie virus infection
The action taken to deal with the problem head-on deserves
praises. With all the resources in its hands the leadership
assumed the problem has to be localised as quickly as
possible. It did with effective results all round.
But it failed to explain certain steps it had taken, for
instance the results of some of the tests made the extent of
the spread of the viral infection and the delay in saying that
there had been some other causes for the infection.
Part of the success of the efforts taken on this matter must
be attributed to the fact that there was only one problem. No
other problems had been around to complicate the
decision-making process.
* The haze
This problem has affected the country almost every year.
Strangely enough, the leadership had not prepared to meet the
problem until the worst had occurred. By then, it had become a
national problem.
Even then, no positive steps had been taken to declare the
haze a national disaster. The blame was at first largely put
on a neighbouring country. Uppermost in the minds of the
leadership should have been public health and safety.
Instead there was too much talk about the Air Pollutant Index,
open burning, emergency regulations and cloud-seeding. It's a
case of doing too little too late. Steps were taken to deal
with the problem not at source but at the extreme end to
relieve the situation.
A more efficient way would be to declare a national emergency
to involve everybody - not just the Fire Services Department,
the police and the army. The outcomes of the measures taken
have yet to register any significant impact on the haze
problem.
* The ringgit crisis
The signs of the impending crisis have long been seen. People
had refused to believe in them. Instead, we were too
complacent in our belief that "strong fundamentals" will
triumph.
In fact, it should have dawned on us that with the globalised
commerce and the borderless world, no country can spare itself
from being influenced by currency trading of the kind
practised by speculators.
One position is to have allowed market forces to run the show.
Many have advocated a position of outright silence. The
leadership has chosen to declare war on the perpetrators of
the problem.
This was followed by the decision to postpone mega projects
that would have caused severe strain on our current accounts
deficit and to call for export opportunities.
In looking to the future, there is a need to remind our
managers of the dynamics of decision-making and how the
personality of the decision maker can influence the outcome of
a decision. While there can be some room for error at the
lower levels of leadership, there is none at the top.
|
