This week's session notes - Week 9 (25 and 27 September 2018)

Hi everyone

On Tuesday, we started with a quick look at Assignment 3.

If we had stuck to our original deadline of Thursday 20 September, for Assignment 2, then Tuesday’s session would have been a workshop for Assignment 3. However, with students still working on Assignment 2, it is a bit premature to be spending too much time looking at Assignment 3.

Despite this, I spent a little bit of time clarifying what you needed to do for Assignment 3. In particular, I drew your attention to the analysis section of this assignment (which students sometimes miss!) Make sure that you spend an appropriate amount of time on this section as it is worth about 45% of the assignment marks.

We then chose our times for the class presentations for Assignment 2 (see the roster, on Moodle). If you weren’t in class this week, then you need to get your name on this roster as soon as possible. We will be doing the class presentations on Tuesday 16 October and Tuesday 23 October.

I also reminded you that we will be announcing the winner of the Great Jellybean Challenge competition, this Thursday. I need each student to email me with a number which you think is closest to the actual number of jellybeans in the jar. In the meantime, you can view the jar in the admin office in E block (but please remember that you are not allowed to open the jar or to remove it from the office).

We then tried our hand at Morra. This is a finger game, similar to paper-scissors-rock, in which two players try to out-guess each other. The players can choose between showing either one finger or two fingers. If both players make the same choice, then the first player (‘Morra’) wins two counters from the second player (‘partner’). The second player (‘partner’) wins if the two players make different choices: One counter if partner shows one finger and three counters if partner shows two fingers.

If we were just tossing a coin and calling ‘heads’ or ‘tails’ then we would be playing a straight-forward game of chance, in which strategy plays no part. In Morra, we have the opportunity to introduce some strategy, depending on choices that we make about which call we make and what choices we think our opponent might make.

For instance, if both Morra and partner make random decisions, then we might expect each to win 50% of the time. However, partner could introduce some strategy into the game: If partner shows one finger then partner will win either one counter or lose two counters. If partner shows two fingers then partner will win either three counters or lose two counters. It follows that if Morra plays randomly, then partner can win more times than losing, by presenting two fingers each time.

Morra’s response to this should be to show two fingers each time; Partner should then respond by varying the play by showing one finger often enough to get Morra to show one finger more often. The result should be an interesting game of strategy and bluff, between the two players.

This game should give us some useful insights into how strategy can influence decision making. Try playing Morra with your friends and family, and see if you can influence the result through your choice of alternatives.

On Thursday, we spent a bit of time looking at decision making. In particular, we were interested in the following:

* Decision making in business

* Decision making styles

* Decision making models.

You will need to think about some of this for Assignment 3. Make sure that you back up your discussion with good quality references from sources such as textbooks, journals and ProQuest. Now that you are up to Assignment 3, we aren’t really interested in low level internet sources, such as those which you may have used in Assignment 1. Make sure that you take this opportunity to utilise the Whitireia library (or any of the public libraries around Wellington, for that matter!)

We started our decision making discussion by asking whether we are sane, objective, rational and logical beings (as displayed in Rodin’s “The Thinker”) or subjective, imperfect and impressionable ‘zombie bunnies’ (or something in between)? The answer to this question has a big impact on our understanding of the decision making process, as you will see.

We then tried our hand at an online business decision making quiz (http://money.cnn.com/quizzes/2006/fortune/decisions/index.html), base on the work of Paul Nutt. Nutt studied 400 decisions made by US companies, over a 20 year span, to see whether he could gain any insights into the managerial decision making process.

Nutt’s findings included the following insights:

* That 50% of all decisions that managers make go wrong in one way or another.

* That “managers can recall their successes and failures, but they seldom, if ever, go back and study them”.

* That "decision-makers are prone to using tactics with poor track records, applying them in two-thirds of their decisions."

* That "decision-making practices with a good track record are commonly known” but not often used.

These findings paint a pretty grim picture of management practice, and they act as a reminder that it is important to pay attention to good PSDM practice.

We then used the McGraw-Hill Education quiz at http://www.mhhe.com/business/management/buildyourmanagementskills/updated_flash/topic10a/quiz.html, to learn more about our individual decision making style. Broadly-speaking, this quiz shows whether your decision making style is Directive, Analytical, Conceptual or Behavioral:

* Directive (quick, authoritative)

* Analytical (complexity and data)

* Conceptual (broad topics)

* Behavioural (concern for people)

You should read the feedback after you complete the test to understand more about each style.

I pointed out that all of the PSDM models that we have looked at this year, require you to make decisions as you go along. For instance, if we look at the IDEAL model, we need to make decisions as follows:

* Identify – Decide what the problem(s) are; decide what is important and what isn’t

* Define – Decide what needs to be done; decide parameters, inclusions and exclusions

* Explore – Decide on alternatives and assessment criteria

* Action – Decide on which actions to take, in what order, and how

* Look back – Decide on whether the problem has been fixed and, if not, what to do next.

These are only a few examples of decisions, as they apply to only a simple PSDM model, so you can imagine the complexity of some of the decision making that is taking place!

With this in mind, we looked at four simple explanations of the ways that decisions can be made:

I. The Rational-Economic (or Classical) Model - How decisions ought to be made

• Assumes the decision maker is completely rational and unbiased.

• Assumes all information and alternatives available.

• Assumes ‘best choice’ scenario.

• Assumes logical, sequential steps.

II. The Administrative / Behavioural Model - How decisions are actually made

• Assumes limited abilities of decision maker.

• Assumes that decision makers are bounded by their limitations.

• Assumes a limited number of decision making criteria and alternatives

• Assumes a ‘good enough’ solution.

• Assumes logical, sequential steps to get to the first satisfactory alternative solution.

III. The Implicit Favourite Model - How decisions are actually made (solo)

• “Implicit favourite" solution selected at start.

• Assumes we are neither rational nor objective and unbiased.

• Appearance of rationality

• Preferred solution selected as ‘best’.

• Decision is intuitive and unscientific.

IV. The Political Model - How decisions are actually made (groups)

• Assumes we are neither rational nor objective and unbiased.

• Characterised by influence, power, pressure, favours, bargaining and trade-offs.

• Group members negotiate (own agendas)

• Negotiation rather than information.

• Leaders and followers.

(If you use any of this material in your assignment then make sure that you used really good academic sources to back it up. Better yet, see if you can find some other explanations of decision making models and styles.)

Remember that Assignment 3 (Journal) can be submitted any time up to and including 1:00pm on Thursday 18 October 2018.

Our next class is on Tuesday 16 October when the first class presentations for Assignment 2 will take place.

Have a good mid-semester break!

Cheers

Phil