Content area
Full Text
Decision-making is one of the most difficult processes that a team can undertake. Without a well-defined methodology for working through the decision-making process (Cervone, 2005), teams can easily become mired in a dysfunctional cycle of indecision. Even with a well-defined process, decision-making can be derailed by failing to set and maintain priorities or by ineffectively evaluating the significance of individual decisions that need to be made within the larger project scope.
Systematic vs intuitive decision-making
At the core of many issues related to the decision-making, particularly in a team context, is determining how to approach the problem. There are those who recommend looking at decisions as a rational, system-based process (Squara, 2013). This approach has a long history within management theory, going back at least as far as the work of Kepner and Tregoe (1965). A perceived drawback to this method is that it can be time-consuming.
On the other hand, theorists who are more modern often favor an instinctual approach such as Wright (2014), who believes that instinct or "gut" reactions should rule our decision-making processes. This stream of thinking is based on what we know about human behavior, which is that we tend to decide on most matters in an intuitive way even though we believe we are being rational (Ariely, 2009). A perceived benefit of this method is that decision-making in this mode can be accomplished quickly. The downside is that our instincts are often incorrect given the biases we inherently have.
In reality, good decision-making within a team is a careful balance of both approaches. Systematic, rational decision-making has its place in our processes but so does intuitive decision-making. The big question is "How do we know when to use which method? Which is most effective in a given situation?"
Three important factors in choosing an approach
An important consideration in answering this question has to do with the novelty of the situation. For example, Mintzberg et al. (1976) note that many decisions related to strategy are not structured and are often vague or ill-defined. Because of this, these...