SEMI FINAL MODULE

CHAPTER IV

DECISION –MAKING

Learning objectives:
After reading this chapter, you will be able to:
1. Know and discuss correctly the environmental influence in decision-making.
2. Identify and elucidate appropriately the nine (9) characteristics of a good decision.
3. Recognize and demonstrate precisely the decision-making approaches and
techniques.
4. Knowing and distinguish correctly the decision making models in criminal justice.
5. Identify appropriately the different traits and values and their essentials in decision-
making
6. Know and discuss comprehensively the cultural influences in decision making.
7. Identify and distinguish the different decision making models.
8. Know and explain perfectly the effect of culture on decision making.

DECISION - MAKING CONCEPTS

Decision-making can be seen a problem-solving process that generates a solution that
is considered to be ideal, or at Ieast acceptable. Consequently, it is a mechanism that
can be more or less logical or irrational and based on overt or implicit knowledge and
beliefs. In dynamic decision making process, implicit information is often used to fill
holes (Brockmann, 2016). Typically, all, implicit and explicit, of information are used
together in decision making process.

A significant part of decision-making evaluating a finite range of alternatives that are

defined in terms of evaluative criteria. So the challenge would involve be to rate these
alternatives in terms or how appealing they are to the decision-maker while considering
all the criteria at the same time. Another objective may be to find the best alternative or
to assess the relative overall value of each alternative when all the parameters are
simultaneously considered.
The Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) focuses on solving these problems.
While very old, this held of decision-making has drawn attention from many researchers
and practitioners, and is still widely debated as there are many MCDA approaches that
can produce very different results when applied to execute the same data
(Triantaphyllou, 2000).

ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCE IN DECISION- MAKING

The environment of decision makers will play role in the decision-making process. A
factor affecting cognitive performance, for example, is environmental uncertainty
(Davidson, 2006).
A complex environmental is an environmental with a great number potentially different
states that come and go over time (Godfrey-Smith 2001). Studies conducted at the
University of Colorado have shown more complex environments associate with higher
cognitive performance suggesting the setting can affect a decision. One experiment
assessed complexity by the amount of small objects and devices present; less of those
items were in a simple environment. The higher measure of environmental uncertainty
has positively improved executive performance, making it harder to think about the
situation and make a rational decision.

CHARACTERISTICS OF DECISION-MAKING
(Monahan, 2000).

 Objectives have to be set first.

 Requirements must be graded and placed in order of importance.
 We need to build alternate acts.
 The alternatives must be measured against all targets.
 Tentative decision is the option which can accomplish all the objectives.
 The tentative decision is evaluated for more possible consequences.
 The preliminary decision is reviewed for more potential implications.
 Decisive action is taken and further action is taken to avoid any negative effects
from being issues and to continue all processes all over again.
 There are usually followed step decision model that could be used to assess an
optimal production schedule.
THE NINE (9) CHARACTERISTICS OF A GOOD DECISION

If you don't know how to handle tension or if the results are less than optimal, decision-
making can be the single-greatest weight on your shoulders. So, how do you know what
makes a strong decision Here are the nine attributes of a positive decision:
1. Decisions positively impact others.
 2. Decisions are replicable.
3. Decisions foster opportunity. (Empowers others to act)
4. Decisions include others.
5. Decisions are executable.
6. Decision is systematic.
7. Decisions are accountable.
8. Decisions are pragmatic.
9. Decisions involve self-awareness.

DECISION-MAKING TECHNIQUES
Decision-making techniques can be separated into two broad categories:
1. Group Decision-Making Techniques
2. Individual Decision-Making Techniques
Individual decision-making techniques can also often be applied by a group.

GROUP DECISION-MAKING
Also known as "Collaborative Decision-Making" a situation faced when
individuals collectively make a choice from the alternatives before them. The decision is
then no longer attributable to any single individual who is a member of the group. This is
because the result applies to certain systems of individual result classes such as social
power. Community and decision often vary from those taken by individuals.
Collaborative decision-making in workplace environments is one of the most
effective models for creating buy-in rom over stakeholders, building trust and promoting
1nnovaulon. In keeping with the concept of cooperation, collective decisions often
appear to be more successful than decisions made by a single person. In this way, such
collective agreements have the ability to deliver, better net output results than
individuals working alone (Larson, 2010).
Collaborative or collective decision-making would often be preferred under
normal daily circumstances and will produce more benefits than individual decision
making when there is room for proper deliberation, negotiation and dialogue. This can
be achieved using committee, teams, organizations, alliances or other social
collaboration processes.
For certain cases, however, this approach may also have disadvantages. Certain
methods of decision making may be better in serious emergencies or crisis situations
because emergency actions can need to be taken quicker, with less time for
deliberation.
 On the other hand, additional considerations must also be taken into account
when appropriateness of a decision-making framework. For instance, the likelihood of
group fragmentation may often decision occur, causing certain groups to make more
drastic decision in the direction of individual inclinations than those of their individual
members (Moscovici, 1969)
INDIVIDUAL DECISION-MAKING
In general, a person takes prompt decision. When in a group, keeping any one
person reasons for a wrong decision is not easy. Human decision taking usually saves
time, resources, and energy as individual make timely and rational choices. Although
taking group decision takes a lot of time, money and energy.

DECISION MAKING APPROACHES

We make the majority of the decisions, as individuals. It is important to look at

the approaches that we follow in our individual decision-making in the effort to take
more successful decisions.
As the outcomes of the decisions are not clear, it necessary to concentrate on
how a decision is made to increase the consistency of the decision. By looking at the
approaches t0 decision-making, we aim to highlight certain potential for change that can
be accomplished regardless of a particular decision strategy.
There are a variety of ways to describe decision-making methods but we will find
three broad groupings for our purposes. For certain cases, we all prefer to take actions
at one time or another using all of the methods. Think about which approach will better
describe how you make most of your choices, or prefer making your choices.

1. RATIONAL OR ANALYTICAL APPROACH

 Exemplified by systematic decision-making.

 Defines upfront success factors
 Looks for details and objectively explores how each solution meets each success
factor.
 Decision-making is organized and decisions can be taken under the assumption
of the desire solutions except for major unforeseeable or unpredictable
incidents. 
 Consideration of the implications of the final decision.
2. INTUITIVE DECISION MAKING APPROACH

 Relying on emotions and feelings.

 Careful planning is not possible or not desired.
  People will point to a "gut feeling" or "hunch" as the cause for a choice, reflecting
that explanation is not accessible through conscious thought.
3. RANDOM OR CHANCE APPROACH

 In this approach a decision is made on impulse, without thought.

 Flipping a coin or using a "decision wheel" would be representative of employing
this approach.
 It is sometimes considered a dependent style because, this approach can
promote denial of responsibility.

DECISION MAKING APPROACHES A CONSEQUENCE OF PERSONALITY

Any of our emotional and thought processes can be defined by personality, so it’s
natural to assume that our preferred approach to decision making is a feature of our
personality. There’s ample proof that our personality develops over time and evolves.
This may also imply changes in personality result from our approach to decision taking
that contribute to improvements in our thought processes.

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

Rational or Analytic Decision Makers

a. Have ready a decision-making process that you know works. This helps you to Jump
directly through a decision-making phase without having to postpone deciding the steps
you will be taking.
b. Gain knowledge of pitfalls and prejudices in decision taking so they can be avoided
making a decision.
Intuitive Decision Maker
a. Ask or accept broad questions well in advance of a decision. It helps the unconscious
mind to work behind the scenes to provide ideas and suggestions for a decision.
b. Know where and where your intuition is working and not. Intuition works best in
places we have a great deal of expertise in.
C. Increasing reflection. This makes insight more credible, as experiences are
interpreted and applied with thought to the subconscious that helps to categorize the
experience more accurately.
d. Play games which involve decision-making. Games that simulate life choices provide
a low- risk environment where patterns can be formed to improve intuition.
Random or Chance Decision Maker
a. Improved awareness and appreciation. Recognizing positive results as they arise
increases the probability of successful outcomes.
b. Apply know-how. It will increase the basis understanding good opportunities versus
bad ones.
C. Know the risks and the uncertainties. Choosing where the chances are in your
favour, is a way to maximize positive results.
SIMILAR DECISION-MAKING
 GOFER (Mann, L., 1980)
FIVE DECISION-MAKING Steps
1. Goals clarification: Survey values and objectives.
2. Options generation: Consider a wide range of alternative actions.
3. Facts-finding: Search for information.
4. Consideration of Effects: Weigh the positive and negative consequences of the
options.
5. Review and implementation: Plan how to review the options and implement them.

 DECIDE (Guo, K., 2008)

1. Define the problem
2. Establish or Enumerate all the criteria (constraints)
3. Consider or Collect all the alternatives
4. Identify the best alternative
5. Develop and implement a plan of action
6. Evaluate and monitor the solution and examine feedback when necessary
 OTHER
1. SEVEN DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES
(Brown, P., 2001)
a. Outline the goal and outcome.
b. Gather data.
c. Develop alternatives (i.e., brainstorming).
d. List pros and cons of each alternative.
e. Make the decision.
f. Immediately take action to implement it,
g. Learn from and reflect on the decision.

2. EIGHT STAGES OF MORAL DECISION-MAKING

(Pijanowski, J., 2009)
a. Create and nurture the relationships, norm and procedures that will influence
problems are understood and communicated. This stage takes place prior to and during
a moral dilemma.
b. Recognize that a problem exists.
C. Identify competing explanations for the problem, and evaluate the drivers behind
those interpretations.
d. Sift through various possible actions or responses and determine which is more
justifiable.
e. Examine the competing commitments which may distract from a more moral course
of action and then prioritize and commit to moral values over other personal, institutional
or social values.
f. Follow through with action that supports the more justified decision.
g. Reflection in action.
h. Reflection on action.

DECISION MAKING MODELS IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

For criminal justice, decision-making requires more than studying the rules and
applying the individual cases. Decisions are based on discretion, that is, the exercise of
human judgment in order, that decisions about alternative courses of action.
Professionals in criminal justice have little time to make important decisions which may
be the difference mean life and death. While there is no decision-making process that is
fool, proof, training, conditioning, and practice among Criminal Justice leadership can
help these professionals react more rationally and strategically in the heat of the
moment.
 DECISION MAKING CHALLENGES FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROFESSIONALS

Events of over-exposure, which are characterized as unpredictable, erratic,

volatile and under conditions of high stress, impair the capacity of a criminal justice
professional to make a reasonable, rational decision. Criminal justice practitioners will
experience a lag period in their decision-making skills during these events. Many
obstacles called psychological prisons may also have a negative impact on the
willingness of a police officer to take decisions.
The Consequences of Making the Wrong Decision
 Loss of life.
 Departmental or jurisdictional administrative costs.
 Negative media attention and public opinion.
 Demotion in position and/or loss of job.
 Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), family problems and other psychological
concerns.

Due to the aforementioned consequences, it is important that criminal justice

leadership provide the training needed to make reliable, ethical decisions in all
circumstances.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AN EFFECT MAKING ON THE JOB
Scenario-based conditioning and preparation required to prepare Criminal Justice
personnel are critical duty-focused decisions. Simulators for police training are
constantly dependent on criminal Police experts to refine the decision-making
capabilities of officers as finely as possible. In a built use scenario, some Simulators are
also require trainees experience near-misses or an impact. This will bring a truly
comprehensive experience.
In addition to simulator training, there are other tips that criminal justice
practiu0ners many apply to their decision-making processes, which can save a life like:

 To increase the number of options, look at a problem from multiple viewpoints

and angles.
 Assess the situation with a view to recognizing threats and non-threats; seek to
make rational decisions about how to respond accordingly.
 Visualize the way situations play out before they act. Challenge assumptions
about a situation.
 Seek support and advice from colleagues in circumstances that require it.
 Make choices about the most important information, and seek to commit it to
memory.
 Be mindful of and accept the feelings before making a conscious move to make
rational decisions.
  Practice verbal and non-verbal communication skills with colleagues to
communicate information about how to respond to a situation.
Criminal justice professionals are responsible for their own mental, emotional and
physical health which all affect their decision-making capacity. Criminal justice leaders
will also respect their team's ongoing mental and physical decision-making preparation.
This rigorous preparation makes a huge difference in the willingness of criminal justice
practitioners to take action in both operational and strategic situations.

DECISION MAKING STYLES IN MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Many people believe that decision-making is not a rational option but a product of
personality. With that, leaders must understand that personality cannot stand in the way
of Critical decision making. Good leaders will adapt their decision-making strategy to
match the demands of various circumstances the most influential leaders learn how to
tailor their decision-making style to suit specific circumstances. Different contexts and
situations call for individual management responses, and sometimes multiple decision-
making approaches. Leaders can earn how to make informed choices in a variety of
diverse situations by understanding the different ways of decision-making and being
mindful of warning signs.

FOUR STYLES OF DECISION-MAKING

1. DIRECTIVE DECISION-MAKING
Usually a Policy decision-maker sorts out the pros and cons of a situation based on
what they already know. Decision-makers in the directive are very rational and have
little tolerance for uncertainty, Instead of going others for more detail, their decisions are
rooted in their own intelligence, experience and reasoning. He upside to this style is that
decision-making is fast, ownership is transparent, and no extra communication needed.
Often, however, directive decisions can be taken impulsively, without all the necessary
details.

 When to use Directive Decision-Making

In situations characterized by continuity repeated patterns, and predictable events,
this style, decision-making is fine. For situations where there is a straightforward and
unchallenged cause-and-effect relationship, reserve guideline decisions; in other words
a correct response exists and is collectively understood.

 A leader's role in Directive Decision-Making

A leader has to sense the situation, categorize it as a Scenario that calls 1or a clear
decision and an appropriate response. Ensure best practices are in place for ongoing
procedures. Member to ask yourself when classifying the situation: Is this my decision
to make, and do I have all the details necessary to make this decision? Where
appropriate, delegate but remember to communicate in a simple, direct language. It’s
the role of a leader to realize when there’s no need for intensive interpersonal contact
and to make clear decisions based on the knowledge they already have.

 Signs you need to use a different approach

Once operations run smoothly it is easy for leaders to become victims of
complacency. Leaders must be mindful of the changing complexity of specific situations.
When you start making complicated jobs simply by using simple decisions, you need to
change your approach. Understand that changing Circumstances demand changing
styles of decision making.

2. ANALYTIC DECISION-MAKING
Before taking action, strategic decision-makers analyse a lot of details. Analytic
leaders, for example, rely on direct observation, data, and facts to back their decisions.
Like decision-makers in the guideline, however an analytic decision maker may see
information and advice from others to affirm or refute their own expertise. These
decision-makers nave high degree of uncertainty tolerance and are extremely adaptable
but they prefer to of the decision process. This style is n aspects decision-making
strategy that can be well-rounded

 When to use Analytic Decision-Making

In situations where there may be more than one right answer, analytical decisions
are helpful. Use this decision-making style to solve issues where the relationship
between cause and effect is discoverable but not immediately apparent. You use this
approach mainly to evaluate multiple options or approaches, and to use fact-based
management to direct effective action.

 A leader's role in Analytic Decision-Making

Unlike decision-making directives, before agreeing on a course of action, leaders
must evaluate all the details they have available. Assembling a team of experts to assist
with analytical decisions is advantageous; Leaders must therefore freely consider
contradictory advice and ideas. At the same time, to make the most of the analytic
decision-making process, leaders need to consider non-expert perspectives.

 Signs you need to use a different approach

Decision paralysis is the most important warning sign of Overuse of the logical
decision form. When you find yourself living in a state of over-analysis or over- thinking
without taking action or making a decision, this strategy must be removed.
3. CONCEPTUAL DECISION-MAKING

Compared with the guideline or empirical approaches, the relational decision-

making process takes a more collaborative approach. Conceptual decision-makers
promote innovative thinking and teamwork and take a wide variety of viewpoints into
consideration. These decision-makers are based on success and want to look well into
the future where comes to making critical decisions.

 When to use Conceptual Decision-Making

Apply logical decision taking to issues involving several conflicting ideas. This
decision style ideally suited to circumstances that are marked by unpredictability and
tailored to creative and inventive approaches. You see no immediate solution in these
situations but trends emerge over time. The use of a conceptual decision-making style
accounts tor long- term planning and the unknown variables.

 A leader's role in Conceptual Decision-Making

To be successful in analytical decision taking, leaders need to create an atmosphere
that fosters experiments designed to uncover instructive trends over time. Leaders will
need to make a point of growing coordination and interaction. Build groups of people
who can share new ideas and assist with difficult decision taking and execution.
Patience is the key and leaders need to take the time to reflect.

 Signs you need to use a different approach

If the decision you need to make includes a situation that needs structure and
established outcomes, a conceptual approach should not be employed. Often, decisions
that need to determine immediate consequences and situations in which there is no
space for error are not subject to logical decision taking.
4. BEHAVIORAL DECISION-MAKING
Behavioural decision-seek to make sure everyone is working together well. Like
the conceptual method, behavioural decision-is group-oriented, how the community is
given the choices available to them rather than brainstorming alternative solutions.
From there the community will discuss each choice's pros and cons. This decision-
making method takes into account several different viewpoints and views in the
process.
When to use behavioural decision-making

The behavioural style requires proactive communication, as with conceptual

decision-making. This style takes a more introspective approach by discussing solutions
that have worked in the past, rather than attempting to disclose new patterns.
A leader's role in behavioural decision-making
 Leaders in this style of decision-making need to open lines of communication.
Again, build groups of people who can contribute their opinions and promote democratic
debate. Don t only impose a course of action when using the behavioural decision-
making method Consider what decision generates the most unity the company, instead.

DECISION-MAKING MODELS
Based on the perspective the researcher takes on the role that culture plays in decision-
making, one of the following models is used to think about and forecast behavioural
trends in decision-making in a given community:
1. The Universal Model. Typically, the scientists who use this model believe there is
only a small difference in how people from different cultures make their choices. The
findings obtained from one party are usually related to humans.
2 The Dispositional Model. The adherents of the dispositional view recognize that
decision-making differences are cross-Cultural and support the cause of cross-cultural
study. They assume that the variations found the omnipresence of cultural inclinations
in individual’s minds, and are expected to appear in all situations and situational
context.
3. The Dynamic Model. Adherents often consider cross-cultural variations. They view
cultural knowledge not as a monolithic construct that continuously present, but as a
collection of discrete knowledge that is operational as a function of the situation. We
also promote the development and testing of complex models reflecting the processes
by which culture influences decision-makers.
THE EFFECT OF CULTURE ON DECISION MAKING
 Cross Cultural Variances
Western theories are known for the systematic use of logical analysis, a methodical
approach to solving complex problems by splitting them into their constituent parts and
defining the patterns of cause and effect of the constituent parts; While oriental
philosophies are well known for their focus on holism-the notion that the properties of a
given system cannot be defined or clarified solely by the parts of its components, but
the system as a whole decides how the components behave.
The individuals from high- and low-context cultures also differ in their communication
styles. The former prefers the less direct style, and thereby they are less explicit in
stating their feelings, desires, and contrary, are less likely to camouflage their message
and conceal their intentions.
 They culturally normative communication style also enhances people's
responsiveness transmitted message and influences the perception the communicator.
It influences hiring decision HR agents are more likely to recruit direct, assertive and
even aggressive applicants in cultures of low background high whereas the reverse
trend is found in cultures of background.

THE CONDITIONS ACCELERATING OR HINDERING THE SALIENCE OF CROSS-

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN DECISION MAKING

 Priming
The automatic cognition literature indicated behaviour is influenced by exposure to
elements of the social environment in a manner that occurs below consciousness or
purpose. We know from the common schematic representations of a certain society, the
stereo typed behaviours that later affect our decisions.
When a person is prepared with a definition, often through an implied order to think
about it, it stimulates all forms of relevant knowledge and affects decision taking.

 Time pressure
Cultural and personal information is accessible to all through cultures. Cultural
knowledge appears to represent a broad sampling of the events in life, whereas
personal knowledge is more based on individual or a typical experiences. The other
difference between their accessibility is the cultural and personal awareness. Cultural
community participants are prepared day after day with a collection of values,
behaviours, and behavioural habits that contribute to building up and storing cultural
awareness. Cultural awareness is therefore very available even under a heavy cognitive
load of work. Personal awareness is a record of a particular event and is not replicated
in too many ways. That is why a concerted attempt is required to access it, which takes
more time and effort. 
Independent individuals are expected to react individuals with interdependent self-
construction are individual to respond better to information based on assumed
prevention.
 Peer Pressure
Individuals in collectivist societies are less likely to behave when they do not
encounter social pressure according to their cultural values. According to what
collectivist culture dictates, Japanese and Chinese students are more likely to decide,
compared to American and Italian students, whether they will eat in fast-subject to the
norms adopted in their societies, and less likely to make choices dependent on their
personal attitudes. This peculiarity, however, is much more salient when they make
plans for eating with their friends, and less salient when they decide to eat alone in a
fast food restaurant. The probability that they will behave based on their attitudes
increases dramatically according to the above situation.
The Pressure to Provide Reasons for the Decision
When individuals need to offer reasons for their decision cultural awareness is
recruited. The need to include explanations evokes an information-processing approach
focused on top-down application of rules and standards, rather than bottom-up
processing based on personal experience. This can be clarified with the aid of the
supposition that, when asked to offer reason, individuals feel the need to adapt because
they do not to be outsiders. They feel more able to rely on their own experience when
they are not asked to justify their choices.
Chinese have been shown to have a slightly lower propensity to compromise,
which was previously when to be one of their signature characteristics when they were
not asked to give reasons for their purchase decisions. On the contrary, Americans
more likely to compromise when it is not their duty to provide reasons for their decision.
The Individual Tolerance for Cognitive Ambiguity
Widespread common cultural awareness offers a validated context for individuals
ambiguous interactions, providing their followers with a sense of epistemic protection
and protecting against ambiguity and unpredictability. The degree to which persons of
all cultures need firm answers varies. It is found that the people with high tolerance for
ambiguity are less likely to act with the consent of their society.
The universal effects of situational demands on decision mode selection across
cultures
Culture shapes the prevalence of cultural factors- nature of decisions,
motivations for decisions, and situational demands and affordances-and shapes how
functional factors are converted into decision-making modes-modes of measurement,
acknowledgement, law, position, and an impact-based decision making. Nevertheless,
societies do have a variety of common tendencies.
For example, when action is called for, members of both independent and
interdependent social orientations prefer to employ position-, rule-or case based
decision-making, as they are far more open and require less cognitive load, Whereas
calculation-based mode would be less frequent in both orientations for relationship
decisions.