How
do you know a decision is good or bad? How can you evaluate if the way your
company is deciding is the correct and more efficient way? One way is to answer
these questions is to look at how your employees within the company are actively
engaging. In the HBR: How Companies Can Make Better Decisions Faster, Marcia
Blenko discusses a correlation between decision effectiveness and employee
engagement. Employee engagement is “the extent to which employees are motivated
to contribute to organizational success, and are willing to apply discretionary
effort to accomplishing tasks important to the achievement of organizational
goals” (Wiley, (2010). Blenko worked with 750 different companies around the
world and her research indicated a high correlation between how engaged and
able employees were in making decisions quickly, and then measured how
effective the company’s decisions were financially. Company’s that were able to
actively engage with employees within their organization were operating at a
“higher metabolism” and were very successful (Blenko, (2010).
I
also have found that there is a connection between how actively involved and
engaged employees within their company with good decision-making. In my
personal experience working for an organization where I felt valued were ones
that asked for my insight on a matter being investigated. No matter the
position if I was a waitress, a receptionist or a financial aid counselor if
one of my superiors came to me for more information and to help them evaluate a
process I felt very engaged because they allowed me to be involved in the
decision making aspect. Having a say in how a change or process was going to be
implemented not only gave me a chance to give my thoughts and concerns, but
also accept the change with more ease. The fear of the unknown was reduced
because I was involved and aware of why the change was happening and how it was
going to happen.
Engaging
employees involved in the processes being changed definitely has a more
positive effect in the overall implementation. Employees working in the
trenches can help better determine if the changes needed are actually needed
and they are also able to use their expertise knowledge to provide their
management with the information they need. This type of engagement promotes a
team mentality and a more diverse response to an already complex situation. If
a leader wanted to reflect on their organization to determine if their
employees are actively engaged he or she could hand out a survey where
employees do not put their personal information on the questionnaire, and
answer questions directed to employee engagement. If the survey revealed
employees didn’t feel actively engaged they could then try to either bring a
third party into to help boost morale, or just start looking at how they make
decisions and change the way in which they operate.
Although
it appears it should be easy to make good decisions there are many obstacles
when it comes to deciding. As we are evolving globally technology is making
life easier and communicating harder because we are relying on technology to
simplify decisions while it can create more confusion along the way. Some of
the disadvantages leaders face today is a lack of understanding why a decision
is made, needs to be made or any other specifics of a change process. This
complex environment is led by virtual technology, which has created an
obstruction in communication. Some of the dilemmas include “fewer face-to-face
interactions, more cross cultural, cross gender biases and perceptions, less
resource, more virtual working, greater demands and expectations, and risk of
public shame should things go wrong” (Robinson, & Sharp, (2013). All of the challenges with using
technology to expedite processes can increase the chance of misunderstanding
one another. In the past meetings were held face-to-face, and should a matter
be misunderstood they could further explain themselves creating a greater
understanding. Other challenges include people reacting to problems instead of
preparing for them. The reactions don’t include a well thought decision making
process which usually only resolves short-term problems instead of important
long-term objectives. Bad decisions can result form lack of expertise knowledge
because people deciding have no clue what they are doing.
In
order to try and improve or prevent bad decisions form being made Marcia Blenko
has adopted four important steps to making good decisions. The first is the
quality of the decisions. She asks was your decision good or bad and why. The
second is the speed in which you decide and how effective the choice was. The
third is the yield or extent in which you executed the decision, and were the
results what you intended. Lastly the forth is the effort put into making the
decision. These are great qualities of good decision making however; I think a
component that should be added is asking people directly involved with the
outcomes of the decision to give their input. The reason I feel this should be
an important aspect is because I feel like to often people at the top are
making decisions that directly impact people performing the job and they are
not the best solution. (Blenko, (2010)
For
example in my line of work there are many issues with the new software system
that ERAU implemented and because of it we face issue after issue. The software
was not built for a term-based college as it was intended for a semester-based
college. In financial aid we are required by the Department of Education to follow
certain regulations and one of them is not awarding overlapping terms.
Therefore, we created a track system to allow students opportunities to enroll
on tracks designed to prevent us from violating federal regulations. The issue
is trying to customize the system creates many issue for our students, such as
their financial aid will be delayed in disbursing for many days to weeks. This
is extremely tough on our students because they are in need of funds; hence
they applied for financial aid. Had upper management been concerned with the
issues we face they might have developed a better more efficient way of
changing our software. Now we are just have to deal and handle it as issues
arrive. This type of firefighting leaves my manager struggling on only urgent
issues unable to focus on important ones that will be beneficial for our students
in the long run.
Moving
forward I am going to use the four components Blenko has provided as well as
the fifth characteristic I added when addressing my life in general. I find
myself deciding impulsively at times, and I fail to think my decisions through.
The Leadership Program has highlighted many weaknesses within myself and
because of my new self-awareness I feel like I am already improving my ability
to make good decisions. For example I have began to think every major decision in
regards to what will happen in the long run and what consequences could
potentially follow. Every reaction creates another action so if I can apply a
thorough decision making checklist I believe I will become a faster better
decision maker down the road.
References
How Companies
Can Make Better Decisions, Faster [Video file]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxpg6D4Hk8&feature=player_embedded
Robinson, M., & Sharp, T. (2013). Making good
decisions. Training Journal, , 50-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/1398472045?accountid=27203
Wiley, J. (2010). Employee engagement. Human
Resources, , 29-32. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/228197372?accountid=27203
No comments:
Post a Comment