The human decision-making process has been described by the development of several frameworks. The alternative for the maximize utility of the decision is selected by a fully informed, as well as, knowledgeable decision maker in the Rational Model. A satisfactory decision alternative is sought by the decision maker due to the causes of time, information, and space constraints according to the Bounder Rationality Model. It is hypothesized by the Organizational Model that available procedures are used by the decision maker for the solution of problems of decisions in a continuously updated organizational memory.
Conflicting values and interests are confronted by the decision makers in the Muddling through Model, and an incremental improvement in the outcome is achieved by the selection of alternative with minimal organizational changes. An intermeshing of problems, solutions, and decision maker interest are represented by decisions that are forced by social and political factors in an anarchistic environment according to the Garbage Can Model.
The criteria are met best by the identification of alternative with the use of relationship that is made between the criteria, events, and alternative by the decision maker in the Classical Decision Theory Model.
During the selection process, conflicting constraints can be confronted by the decision maker, as intangible or tangible criteria would have to be dealt in uncertain events. The situation is assessed, a single alternative is generated and evaluated, and alternative for a satisfactory solution of the problem is selected by the decision makers according to the Naturalistic Decision-Making Model.
Outcomes of the decision-making process are focused by some of the proposed models like Classical and Rational Decision Theory formulations. A limited set of decision activities is highlighted by other models like Bounded Rationality Models and Naturalistic Decision-Making Models. A comprehensive and integrated view of decision-making has been offered by none of the proposals. In addition, not all the situations of the decision-making can be applied with any formulations of these proposals. For instance, operational and tactical decisions can be applied with the Organizational Model.
However, strategic decisions cannot be applied with this model due to incomplete understanding of the problem, as well as, limited availability of the knowledge of the problem. In this regard, the most popular model of the human decision-making process has been the three-phase paradigm of design, intelligence, and choice by the Simon. Virtually, all other proposed frameworks have been implied by this most general paradigm. However, an implementation phase of the Simon’s formulation has been concluded with the expansion of such scrutiny. Reality is observed by the decision maker during the intelligence phase.
A fundamental understanding regarding the existing problems, as well as, new opportunities is gained by the maker. In addition, the general quantitative and qualitative information is acquired by the decision maker for the addressing of different opportunities, as well as, the problems. In the design phase, a specific and precise model is developed by the decision-maker, by which, the discovered problems and opportunities are examined systematically. Decision alternatives, uncontrollable events, criteria, and numerical, as well as, symbolic relationships will be consist in this model.
The ensuing choice phase constitutes of the generation of recommended actions from the evaluation of the specified alternatives by the usage of explicit models logically. The analyses and recommendations are pondered by the decision maker during the subsequent implementation phase. In this regard, the consequences are weighed, and sufficient confidence is gained in the decision-making process. In addition, an implementation plan is developed, financial, human, and material resources are secured, the plan is put into the action.
After the implementation of the final choice, the new reality should be observed by the decision maker. In addition, intelligence, design, choice, and implementation should be regarded and followed by the decision maker. Moreover, the need for revisions at preceding phases might be suggested by the phase’s analyses. For instance, adjustments of the previous design might be necessitated by the analyses during the choice. Conceptually, individual or group decision-making is applied with the decision-making process in the same manner.
In practice, the communication-intensive aspects of cooperative problem solving must be accommodated by the group decision-making. In addition, voting, ranking, rating, and other consensus-developing methodologies should be supported by the usage of structured techniques. Group and organizational collaboration support should be provided by the development of this consensus. Decision-making model can be operated by the use of a variety of measures. Outcomes are dealt by some measures, and process outcomes are involved by the others.
Positive decision outcomes can include: Increases in returns, costs reduction, and increment in the flow of information are some of the examples of the gains in the performance of the organization. When the understanding of a person regarding a current problem, as well as, its solution is developed, the decision-maker’s maturity develops. In addition, the improvement of the general problem-solving skills also results in the maturation of the decision-maker. Objectively, recording can be done regarding the number of opportunities, problems, as well as, alternatives.
Experts, as well as, person’s evaluations can assess such efforts and subjective assessments. In expert’s evaluations, practice would be observed by the experienced decision makers and the examinee’s efforts will be rated. In this regard, a structured rating form will be used for its support. The examinees are used by the directed self-examinations, and a facilitator is used for the purpose of guidance. In some decision-making situations, the improvement of the organizational performance becomes impossible due to the competition, internal restrictions, external constraints, and several other factors.
Under these circumstances, the main decision outcome will be the learning, training, and various other beneficial side effects during the maturation of the decision maker. Process Enhancements in the ability of a person or group are involved in the process improvements for the implementation of the phases and steps in the decision-making process. Experts, as well as, person’s evaluations can assess such efforts and with the help of subjective assessments.
In expert’s evaluations, practice would be observed by the experienced decision makers and the proficiency of the examinee during each phase and step of the decision-making process will be rated. In this regard, a structured rating form will be used for its support. The examinees are used by the directed self-examinations, and a facilitator is used for the purpose of guidance. The use of accounting tools is involved in the process tracing, in which, the decision aid is embedded for the recording, as well as, reporting of the actions of the examinee during the decision-making process.
In addition, the process enhancements may be manifested through: The time that is needed during the structuring of the problem by the user is reduced in a hike in personal efficiency. In addition, in a given time period, the number of alternatives is increased during the evaluation of the user, which is also an example of the hike in personal efficiency. The time of the decision-making is reduced, and the amount of pertinent information is increased from the decision-making is an improvement in the personal productivity.
Objectively, recording can be done regarding the time and number of evaluated alternatives. Expert, as well as, direct self-evaluations by the activity of an individual or group can assess the amount of pertinent information, wisdom, and knowledge, that is, subjective assessments. In any particular management situation, more importance might be given to the support for some phases, as compared with the support for others. The process should be improved for at least the relevant phases by a given aid in the decision-making process.
The decision outcome and process measures have been summarized in the Table 1. In addition, the measurements have been obtained by the available approaches, which have also been summarized in the table. As such, a series of guidelines has been offered by the table for the operation of the decision-making process. For instance, the implementation phase of the decision-making process consists of confidence and commitment of the decision maker. The performance of the decision maker during these steps is measured by the process tracing, expert ratings, and directed self-evaluations, as indicated by the Table 1.