What Is Individual Decision-Making?

Individual decision-making does not involve a group or even more than one person. Individual decision-
making is quick and generally cost-effective, because it does not require gathering others and scheduling
a meeting or multiple meetings or sending a single email. Individuals have a tendency to think and
question before performing, which is fruitful in analysis and forecasting of an individual’s behavior, says
Prachi Juneja writing on Management Study Guide.

An individual generally makes prompt decisions, while a group is dominated by various people, making
decision-making very time consuming. Moreover, assembling group members consumes lots of time.

Individuals do not escape responsibilities. They are accountable for their acts and performance. In a
group, it is not easy to hold any one person accountable for a wrong decision.

Individual decision-making saves time, money and energy as individuals usually make prompt and logical
decisions, says Juneja, while group decision-making involves lot of time, money and energy. But Juneja
takes the time to discuss the situations under which group decision-making is better than individual
decision-making. In other words, there are also cons to individual decision-making. These include:

A group has the potential to collect more complete information, compared to an individual, while
making decisions.
An individual uses his own intuition and views. A group has many members, so its many views and many
approaches result in better decision-making.

A group discovers the hidden talent and core competency of employees of an organization.

An individual will not take into consideration every member's interest, while a group will take into
account interest of all members of an organization. Difference # Individual Decisions:

1. Decisions are taken by a single individual.

2. Individual decisions are less costly. They are based on limited information gathered by managers.

4. Individual decisions are taken in situations of crisis or emergency.

5. They do not involve moral commitment on the part of members to accept and implement them.

6. Individual decisions do not affect morale or job satisfaction of employees. They introduce one-man
control.

8. Individual decisions do not promote interaction amongst superiors and subordinates.

9. Decisions are usually based on clear policy guidelines.

10. Though decisions are based on individual thinking, they are high-quality if the individual has
expertise and experience in making such decisions. . Individual decisions are usually taken in competitive
business situations where people are not open to suggestions.

Difference # Group Decisions:

1. Decisions are taken by a group of persons.

2. Group decisions are costly in terms of time and money.

3. They are based on extensive information collected by members of the group. Group decisions are
taken when there is sufficient time to make decisions.

5. Group decisions are easier to implement as group members feel committed to them.

6. Group decisions positively affect morale and job satisfaction of employees.

7. They introduce self-control. They promote superior-subordinate interaction and healthy relationships
amongst them.

9. Group decisions are taken when the problem requires creativity and expert knowledge of a group.

10. It usually results in high-quality decisions as they are based on extensive brainstorming. They provide
the benefit of synergy.

11. Group decisions are usually taken in supportive business situations where group members
encourage problem-solving together. Creativity in Decision Making

Learning OUtcomes

 Discuss ways to promote creativity in decision making

If a decision maker is going to produce novel alternatives when solving a problem, then he or she is
going to need a little creativity to help the process along. Creativity allows the decision maker to more
fully appraise and understand the problem . . . sometimes in ways others can’t see it.

Creativity is the ability to link or

combine ideas in novel ways, and their unique alternatives have to be considered useful to others.
Creativity is also known as divergent or lateral thinking. Lateral thinking moves away from the linear
approach that’s advocated in rational decision making. Some researchers feel that employee and
manager creativity is the hallmark of an organization’s success—that solving old organizational issues in
new ways creates organizational effectiveness.

If creativity is the key to organizational effectiveness, then how do we get some of that? Is there a way
that organizations can foster creativity for the benefit of decision making?

First, it’s important to note the characteristics of creative people, so we can understand what we’re
aiming for in our creative environment. Creative decision makers seem to have an ability to sift through
the massive amounts of information that can be reviewed when making a decision, and decide what
information is and isn’t relevant. Still, they listen to all sources to understand where problems are
emerging. And when they’re ready, they present a solution that’s bold and well informed. They don’t
rely on the rational decision making model . . . they rely on something more than that. Creativity.

Four characteristics that creative leaders seem to have in common:

 Perseverance in the face of obstacles and adversity

 Willingness to take risks

 Willingness to grow and openness to experience

 Tolerance of ambiguity

 Effective use of analogy to apply a known situation to an unknown situation

Organizationally (and individually) speaking, there are certain factors that, when they exist, tend to
point to a more creative atmosphere.
  Questioning attitude. Organizations that don’t invite the questioning of values, assumptions or
norms are not likely to be very creative. Organizations need to continually question the long-
held beliefs of their industry if they’re going to stay ahead of the curve and come up with
creative ways to bring services and products to their customers.

 Culture. Our traditional values are sometimes at odds with the creative solutions we might
come up with to solve organizational problems. If an organization’s culture puts too much
emphasis on tradition, they’re likely to stifle creativity around problem solving.

 Leadership. Similar to culture, leaders who are bound to traditional characteristics of the leader-
follower relationship, who don’t promote questioning attitudes or invite their employees to
challenge the status quo, will not do much to foster a creative environment.

 Attitude toward risk. Finally, employees who are afraid to try something new will never put
their creative solutions into action! Just as one of the characteristics of a creative leader is a
willingness to take risks, so must employees feel comfortable doing so in an organization.

Overall, creativity is likely to flourish in an environment that’s open and encourages participation.
Keeping everyone on an even playing field, with no organizational encouragement for an “us versus
them” type of environment will increase dialogue and keep ideas flowing.

Practice Question

<br />

The Three Components of Creativity

Studies show that most individuals have the

capability of being at least moderately creative, so if organizations want to help individuals develop their
creativity, they can leverage the three components of creativity. The three components of creativity
suggest that creativity lies at the intersection of motivation, expertise and developed creative thinking
skills.

Expertise—technical, procedural and intellectual knowledge—is the foundation for all creative work.
You wouldn’t expect someone who knows very little about software programming to come up with
creative solutions to problems. The potential for creativity in a given area is enhanced when the
individual has an exceptional grasp of the information around a problem or issue. Organizations can
have a positive impact on increasing employee expertise with training, mentorship programs, etc.

Creative thinking skills encompass all those personality traits we talked about earlier that are common
to creative leaders. Organizations, when cognizant of the traits that foster creativity, can interview and
select candidates for hire that have these characteristics.

Motivation here means that an individual wants to work on a particular task because it’s interesting and
engaging. An individual who is more intrinsically motivated is likely to have an easier time developing
creativity than one who is more extrinsically motivated. Motivation determines the extent to which an
individual will engage his expertise and creative thinking skills.

Brainstorming and Cooperative Exploration

Organizations can also stimulate creativity by employing the practices of brainstorming and cooperative
exploration.

Brainstorming is a creative process in which individuals generate a large number of ideas without
censorship. No idea is a bad one! If you’re looking to bring new customers into a retail store, the idea of
“training monkeys to ring up purchases” is on the table until it’s time to review and determine which
ideas are actually viable. The benefit of brainstorming is that a group of people can build on each other’s
ideas, no matter how ridiculous, and perhaps eventually come up with viable solutions.

Cooperative exploration requires individuals to consider a problem from different points of view.
Individuals taking part in a cooperative exploration might find themselves arguing for points that they do
not believe. But the process requires that individuals work the problem from all angles to ensure that
they received the best point of view.

Biases

Biases filter our experiences and affect the way we understand the world around us, only allowing us to
see what we want to see. It is a human tendency to draw a conclusion without considering all of the
evidence. As we gather information, the brain naturally references memories and facts to interpret it
based on what we already know, but the information we receive is rarely entirely accurate, complete, or
unbiased. Always consider the likely accuracy of the data, what might be missing, and what biases exist
in the observer or reporter.

Choice

The more choices we're given the more tired and less effective we become. In the time between getting
up in the morning and going to bed at night, we make thousands of decisions. Each choice we make
chips away at our mental energy. When it comes time to make important decisions, we may be mentally
and emotionally depleted, leading us down the path of least resistance. Don't get caught up in the small
stuff. If you over analyze your daily choices you're exhausting energy that could be focused on the most
important ones.

Attention

With so many demands on your time around the clock, it's tempting to try to do it all, and all at the
same time. The truth is that multitasking actually slows people and organizations down. The brain is
optimized to focus on one task at a time. Spreading our attention across multiple tasks becomes
draining and leaves little energy for those tasks that matter most. Making quality decisions requires
quality thought. Pay attention to what you're doing. Turn off distractions like email, the phone, and
anything else that may take your mind elsewhere.

Fear

Fear is the most common thing that gets in the way of quality decision making. Fear of failure, fear of
making the wrong decision, and fear of our own inadequacy all affect the actions we take and decisions
we make. If you frequently question your ability to make sound decisions seek out a coach or mentor
who can help you boost your confidence.

Noise

Organizational noise comes in endless streams of reports, metrics, memos, slide decks, emails, tweets,
messages, and posts. At the individual level, there is internal noise, which manifests from our biases,
fears, and competing priorities. Take daily breaks from the noise by engaging in meditation, exercise,
and play.

factors leading to poor decision-making (based on our experiences)

1. Generalizing based on a few select experiences

2. Assuming patterns of history will always repeat
3. Vision-ing our future can bias our experiences and then can become self-fulfilling prophecies
4. Reflecting on our past experiences produces flawed memories, we can’t replay choices we never
followed
5. Some of what we go through involve randomness and luck
6. We can’t re-experience what we have already been through
7. Association/Correlation Does Not Prove Causation. In other words, just because two things are
related doesn’t mean one caused the other.
8. Research demonstrates our recall is biased. Our Life Events Take on “NEW” Meaning Over Time
 In the cooperative exploration, the
following positions are taken by the participants:

 Neutral. Individual does not take sides, and just considers the facts.

 Emotional. Individual only considers the emotional aspects of the issue—who gets hurt? What
emotions may be triggered?

 Negative. Individual only considers the negative—what will go wrong and what if the solution
doesn’t work.
  Positive. Individual only considers the positive aspects of the issue.

 New solution. Individual only considers the new creative possibilities, or the “what ifs”

 Holistic. Individual considers the entire issue, asking “What’s the big picture?”

By encouraging participants to consider these different viewpoints, the model encourages lateral and
divergent thinking.

Creative thinking and creative decision making can keep an organization ahead of its competitors. Now,
let’s talk about how different organizations put all these aspects of decision making together and
actually make decisions with them.

What other ways do organizations help or hinder the decision making process? Here are a few:

 Performance evaluations. Employees want to deliver on what’s expected of them. For instance,
if managers don’t want to hear anything negative, employees will do their best to stifle any
negative information. This can lead to the evaluation of limited numbers of alternatives.

 Reward systems. An organization’s reward system can affect decision making processes by
suggesting to their employees which selections are preferable. An organization that rewards risk
aversion will not be considering too many alternatives that have a measurable amount of risk.
One that promotes and supports risk will have the opposite result.

 Formal regulations. An organization sometimes outlines the function of a job a little too clearly,
leaving little room for personal interpretation. Retail workers, like a cashier or stock person,
have little autonomy to come up with solutions to address problems they face every day.

 Time constraints. Organizations are impatient! They set deadlines for reports, budgets,
performance evaluations…and frequently those deadlines don’t allow enough time for creative
alternatives to grow.

 Historical precedence. Organizations do a have a past history of decisions and their results, and
even the newest manager can draw from those lessons when making a decision.

Successful organizations do their best to minimize the structural and hierarchical obstacles and clear the
way for innovative decision making. As Marcia Blenko, leader of Bain & Company’s Global Organization
Practice, wrote,[1]