Romeos Disclosure of the Firms Confidential Information - Case Study Example

Personal case study reflection Name: Institution Introduction The main aim of this report is to reflect on various decisions made at my place of work and the consequences they had on the team members and the firm as a whole. The paper will utilize appropriate theories and models of decision making in analyzing the decisions that had to be made and the issues that lead to the decisions being made. Additionally, the reasons as to why the issues arose and how different they should have been handled will be discussed. I work with an auditing firm as one of the assistants to the project manager. Our project manager had attended a conference on corporate social responsibility in Dublin. The conference was to last for one whole week and this called for someone to be left in charge of the project. I came out as the favored candidate to hold this position since Romeo, the other assistant and my close friend, had continually showed laxities in his job. The decision by the manager was inspired by various factors and issues and had implications on all the members of the group. The project manager spelt out all the issues I had to handle and she particularly insisted that I see to it that a contract presentation to certain important clients is delivered appropriately. She pointed out that the contract was worth a lot of money and could be the basis of the company’s success in the future. She also pointed out that a rival company was to present a contract to the same clients to. Her decision to have me as the head of the team was inspired by my hard work and the belief she had in me despite my being new to the company. The contract and her decision formed the basis of other decisions that followed. The decisions The first decision The first decision involved Avril, the project manager. She was to attend a meeting in Dublin and therefore had to leave someone in charge. Her decision to have me as the acting project manager was deemed necessary since the contract presentation was due in the same week that she would be away at the conference. She saw it fit that I be in charge of the team since Romeo, who had more experience and seemed more favorable was showing disinterest in his job by coming late and continuously having long lunch breaks. This was a clear indication that he was not ready to take up the role of project manager given the seriousness it called for. This decision was rather rational. The rational model of decision making assumes that all information is available and that the decision maker has only one objective. In addition to that, it assumes that his/ her objectives are in line with those of the firm. In this case, Avril’s main objective was to have the contract presentation done successfully and to have the team’s psyche and morale boosted. In addition to that, her other objectives were to ensure that the firm is a success and this could be done by winning the contract and ensuring that the workers are motivated and psyched up. Lastly, before making her decision, she had two alternatives to choose from. The alternatives were me and Romeo. Rational models bring out decision making and thinking as being based on a set of the decision maker’s personal goals. The model consists of a policy that will achieve the goals to the greatest extend (Baron). According to Angelogiannos (2012), normative decision theory is a subjective utility theory and considers rational behavior in decision making. The rational decion making model has three stages which include identifying and defining a problem, generating an alternative solution and selecting and implementing the solution. In Avril’s case, the problem was finding an appropriate holder of the project manager’s position. She generated alternative solutions in Romeo and me and finally, she chose me over Romeo in the last stage. The issue in this decision was to select the most appropriate holder of the position. The issue arose as a result of the manager having to go away on a meeting. In addition to that, she had to make an appropriate decision given the expected contract presentation and the prevailing behavior of the most favorable and experienced candidate, Romeo. His lack of psyche and morale at the job place made him unfavorable to hold the position. Her intuition told her that I would be the perfect acting project manager. According to McKee (2010), highly rational people utilize intuition in making decisions. Intuition draws upon past experiences and accumulated judgment. According to Kinicki (2008), critical thinking is very important in decision making. He further points out that good leaders are normally critical thinkers and that they have a good understanding of reasoning mechanics. McKee (2010), points out that critical thinking critical thinking is a is “a disciplined intellectual process of evaluating situations or ideas and making appropriate judgments or taking certain actions.” He further states that critical thinking results to quality thinking which in turn result to quality decision making. By applying critical thinking in handling this issue, I could have found out the main reasons why Romeo’s interest in his Job in weaning. Avril does not think critically about Romeo’s sudden tendencies to come late to work and extended lunch breaks. By utilizing critical thinking, she could have pinpointed the implications of such behaviors could have when she is not around. Given the short of period of time, this decision did not require the use of the eight stage decision making model The second decision. The second decision was to have a team building exercise. Avril decided that a team building exercise was necessary since she had noticed that the staff’s morale had dipped following the moving away of some 2 other staff members. This decision followed the bounded rational model which according to Angelogiannos (2012), assumes that decision makers have cognitive capabilities of processing information and that decision is subjective to weighing alternatives. In addition to that, the model recognizes the effects of uncertainty and seeks to satisfy rather than optimize the criteria of decision making. Decision making is often costly under this model. Avril pointed out that the process of morale boosting had to happen as soon as possible and in a way that would be cost effective. Having had a prior experience of the impact team building exercise has on staff morale; I used the concept of intuition as outlined by McKee (2010) to agree that team building was necessary. It was then deemed necessary to have a team building exercise. By utilizing critical thinking, Avril and I were able to pinpoint areas that needed improvement. Apart from allowing limited information and limited decision maker cognition and costs, the bounded rational model is useful for non-routine and uncertain decisions. The decision to have a team building exercise was unroutine and its outcome could not be accessed directly. At the time of making the decision, it was still unclear whether it will have a positive impact on the staff or not. According to Teale ( 2003), the likelihood of a negative outcome from a decision that has a possible uncertain element is usually on the down side . Avril being a decision maker did not utilize the principle of probability in identifying the possible outcomes following this decision. The decision to have a team building exercise utilized utilitarianism in the sense that it focused on producing the greatest amount of good to the greatest number of people. Avril’s aim was to motivate a larger portion of the staff members thus promote their general happiness and morale at work. The utilitarian approach looks at an action in terms of the outcomes it will bring forth. The approach views the most ethical action as that one which produces the greatest benefit to a greater number of people. Avril views the exercise as the most ethical action that will result to the greatest benefit to most of the staff members. Team building exercises seek to unite a team and address the weaknesses of the team. In deciding to have a team building exercise, Avril had probably noted some weaknesses in the team. Team building requires appropriate planning and figuring out the challenges the group faces. By utilizing critical thinking, I could have figured out the exact challenges in the team and figure out the most appropriate activities that would address the issue. Spending some time thinking about the team’s weakness and strength would prove useful in coming up with the most appropriate exercise. The third decision. After The third decision involved Romeo who after finding out that Avril had overlooked him, decided to sell the firm’s secrets to the rival company. Given that Avril was not around, the decision regarding the most appropriate action to be taken in this scenario rested on me. The first thing I decided to do is seek the views of all the staff members on the most appropriate action to take. The dilemma in this situation directly fell in the ethical domain. A group decision model was necessary in this situation and that is why I decided to seek the views of all the team members. Involving the team in itself had its advantages and disadvantages. On the side of advantages, it resulted in the accumulation of more knowledge about Romeo and the circumstances that triggered him to sell out our secrets. In addition to that, it enabled me to get a broader perspective of the issue at hand and get the support of the team members by letting them participate in the process. Disadvantages of involving groups in a decision include reduced speed in reaching a final decision and having to choose which option is optimal (Kinicki, 2008) . In this case, different team members were of different views. Emily was of the view that Romeo made a regrettable mistake and that he should be forgiven while Sean was of the idea that Romeo is not a really bad guy. Avril’s secretary on the other hand pointed out that the matter should be reported to Avril while Michael opined that it was a simple issue that came about as a result of Romeo’s feeling of being betrayed by the company. The final decision here required an ethical decision to be made. A utilitarian approach would require that I consider the effect of the final decision on all the parties. By utilizing this approach, I could be able to come to the decision that would satisfy the greatest number of people (Cengage). Critical thinking in this situation was more appropriate as opposed to intuition. However, critical thinking in itself presents a set of traps that include status quo, anchoring, confirming evidence and framing (McKee 2010). Utilizing the model of effective decision making would have ensured that an appropriate decision is reached (Hubbard & Beamish, 2010). Utilizing this model could have ensured that the right evidence implicating Romeo is obtained and therefore enable the making of a sound ethical decision. Conclusion In conclusion, this paper used various decision making theories to reflect on various decisions made at my place of work and the consequences they had on the team members and the firm as a whole. There were three main decisions in the paper with the first decision involving my appointment as the acting operations manager and the second decision involving having a team building ‘exercise. The last decision involved taking action following Romeo’s disclosure of the firm’s confidential information. The report analyzed the issues that led to the decisions. The first decision which involved my appointment utilized the rational model of decision making which assumes that all information is available and that the decision maker has only one objective. The second decision on the other hand followed the followed the bounded rational model which assumes that decision makers have cognitive capabilities of processing information and that decision is subjective to weighing alternatives. The last decision was more of an ethical dilemma and required that a decision that will result to greater satisfaction to all the team members be reached. References McKee, A. (2010). The Human Side of Planning: Decision making and critical thinking. In Management: A focus on leaders, 1st Edn., (Pp. 176 – 209). Sydney: Pearson Australia. Teale, M., Dispenza, V., Flynn, J. & Currie, D. (2003). Group Processes. In Management decision-making: towards an Integrative Approach, 1st Edn. , (pp. 273-300). United Kingdom: Pearson Education. Hubbard, G. & Beamish, P. (2010). Strategic decision making. In Strategic management, 4th Edn., (Pp. 197 – 217) Sydney: Pearson Australia. Angelogiannos. V. G ( 2009). Emotional Intelligence: A Frontline View of Decision Making in a Greek Bank. Phoenix. Proquest Kinicki. A (2008). Decision making and managing conflict. Retrieved from http://toolkit.smallbiz.nsw.gov.au/part/8/42/200 Cengage. ( 2013). Managerial ethics and corporate social responibilty. Retrieved from http://www.cengage.com/resource_uploads/static_resources/0324405715/8910/0-324-40571-5_04_REV.pdf Baron. J (2000). Thinking and deciding. New York. Cambridge University Press Read More