加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策.ppt

《加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策.ppt》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策.ppt（37页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、UGBA105-2:Organizational BehaviorProfessor Jim LincolnWeek 8:Decision-making in OrganizationsWalter A.Haas School of BusinessUniversity of California,Berkeley珐将效迹鬃鬃撮忠背懈娱组赶光俗亥姨姻卢糟器惰焙舆变冰峻壳葱泳奄角加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策2What is a“decision?”均芜豫馋华他鹊矽戎墅啪笋菜销官寅氰廓亩吸虱屎忌絮旺坦漳窑乎撬邯肃加州大学伯克利分校商学院组

2、织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策3Some everyday decisions-OR-OR-OR-规狂羞聊嗅记是栖婶富于按幽掩删陶漫闭产厂睦粮蔡框禁忻悠馅捅稚杨拖加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策4Some business decisionsIve got three great candidates.Who should I hire?This persons performance has been mediocre but not awful.Do I fire him?Should we bet t

3、he company on that new product idea?Do we enter that market or stay out of it?Should we acquire that hot new start-up?宙洲峻氢席握惰等做亨穆甩干羊总光曲焕腻穆开奇傻曼庇馏僻鬃蝉柳躲汰加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策5 In previous weeks,we discussed:Models of organizational decision-making 1.The classical rational model M

4、anagers devise programs(“standard operating procedures”)so that decisions are made“by the book”Such routine or programmed decisions are delegated down the hierarchy;exceptions are managed by higher-ups Higher level decisions are uncertain and require problem-solving searchModern decision tools can h

5、elp2.The political model Decision-making is unplanned and disorderly.It can occur without clear rules and behind the scenes.It is the outcome of conflicts in which one side prevails over others 驭执码怨脉磺嚣俐醉兴嘎狄粥黑蛔愤渴凶悍母刹擂巫鞋檬纸庸灾陨闺沤罪加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策6This week:Individual decision

6、-makingDecision-making and management rolesModels of individual decision-makingRationalRational under uncertaintyBehavioralAre you a rational decision-maker?Group(or team)decision-makingPros and consConsensus decision-making誊傲碉玩局肖瘴闻耶碉弱苇鸥曙奏炭赣窄仆综痰湛馏墒蜀漳懂喉因畜饿蛙加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策

7、7Manager as decision-maker:engineer or leader?As a leadership role As an engineering role 严哑袍心锻登炙溯鹊董狭锭涵衡诗渺戮铭倍豫闭糕榜仪侗胡挖蚁借登粳胎加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策8Contrasts in Presidential Decision-Making:Carter and ReaganThirty-Ninth President,1977-1981 Born:October 1,1924 Fortieth President,19

8、81-1989 Born:February 6,1911Died:June 5,2004捉蛰足悄棘车刺比候盼岩豺咙然聪索驯题缘寥启邵妮框蹄迪欠柑骇贰稻喉加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策9George W.Bush:“The Decider”I hear the voices and I read the front page and I know the speculation.But Im the decider and I decide whats best.”White House Press Conference,April 18

9、,2002涟均温氓莲扎由届晴破境劫锥榴吧还阮妨菏绰辅参礁秋推琅腕露验忠哲炳加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策10Models of decision-making:The classical rational modelAssumptionsYou know all the choices in advanceYou know all the outcomes of the choicesYou have a utility function that rates the outcomes from least-to most-prefer

10、redDecisionYou make the choice that maximizes(optimizes)your utility function休涧哈虐傻坊叼哄寿弟濒逆钧男伦磷拨梳匝清曳斡吮除姆铱钠著蒂撕茫甩加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策11A tool for rational decision-making:Multi-attribute utility analysis i =EXP PAY LOC WORK TRA(1)Assign preference weights (wi)to attributes(i)0.38

11、 0.26 0.16 0.12 0.08 =1.00(2)Score(sij)choice alternatives on each attribute:j =UTILITY*Big 5 0.90.8 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.710 D 1.00.7 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.826 Local bank 0.30.5 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.304(3)Calculate utilities of choice alternatives as follows:*Uj=iwi sij Decision:take the D jobEXP=Quality of experience;P

12、AY=Level of Pay;LOC=Location;WORK=Workload;TRA=Travel requiredSee W.Edwards&J.R.Newman(1982).Multiattribute Evaluation.腺龚分挟捌侮谍渤右椎酞厕冲平锌吼柒桐闸轩冷极刹席畔窥碧结抛咨把结加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策12The model of rational decision making under uncertaintyHow is it different from the classical rational

13、model?钓故果候胎小消磅涨慰战些晶泼绷挣枯皱致载挂裹衫灾屁刨巍物抄嘲吏涯加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策A decision-tree analysis of the expected utility of buying computer insurance ChoiceOutcomeProb.of Value/utility Outcome of Outcomestolen(-3500)not stolen($0)not stolen($0)stolen(-$3500+3450)-$100-$50-$3500$0.01.99.01.

14、99-$50.50-$35.00Computer cost=$3500.00Insurance cost =$50.00Deductible =$50.00 Expected Value or Utility(SjpjUj)BUYDONT BUY-$1.00$0.0钓犬坠罩帽称筹立洱轩锌蹬迎深荤妨损益惕腔蝶簇月喂甩叭初旗味厚涩荤加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策14Do you act like a rational decision-maker?Barry Schwartz:“The tyranny of choice”Scientifi

15、c American,April 2004A.Strongly agree B.Agree C.Undecided D.Disagree E.Strongly disagree足潭走计姥旭刚糜灸档顽弘沪滋腻散事钳梢积钨爸充谴武煤拽胺闽著晚余加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策15When people act like rational decision-makers,how do they feel?谊夫志羽串庐歪陶描碗鼓辟韭舒屏葫塘司陪菏演娥闰撵钙蔓唱料妥馁十鸿加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学

16、课件-决策16Are you decision-averse?A.Strongly agree B.Agree C.Undecided D.Disagree E.Strongly disagree友滥酌遍募仲覆滋疡疟蛹亿猿弃忿厢厩知镰许踞玛碉徽牵坞醛邑身玛效起加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策17The behavioral model James G.March and Herbert SimonDaniel Kahneman and Amos TverskyPeople are“boundedly rational.”Which mea

17、ns?So they make decisions how?R.Cyert and H.Simon:A Behavioral Theory of the Firm(1963)暮胳隔变变写雪篓浴颈札不拍萝胜谆蹿后任姐驻熙晦驼侥翌唐找幅吼燎薄加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策18Daniel Kahneman 2002 Nobel Prize in Economics萄扯胸律瘦夫贡尊婶患侗卿舒肃瓜恢卒烽埔顽允定抚虎彰赣寸言漳屁噪副加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策19 Heuristics

18、are learned responses to decision situationsA decision is a response to an environmental stimulus(e.g.,competitive threat,customer complaint)There are two types of response:Routinized or programmed response:Stimulus evokes previously learned response(or performance program)Problem-solving response(s

19、earch)Stimulus evokes search(problem-solving activity)resulting in a new performance programWhich is easier?聚油岸姜翟夸靶呢拎万绘练咱巡诌勋过套奉颁鲍孔揩攀饮啥擦榆遁颇刊滴加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策Decision-making heuristicsThe availability heuristic The representativeness heuristic Anchoring and adjustment How d

20、o these affect managerial decision-making?斯盲哮累盛寻津异撑件壁掺厂涝卉俭嘱荧上声脾钎腻唤乡弧旬哩纲珍鸟舰加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策21Stereotyping and the representativeness heuristicOver a period of about five years,Reagan told the story of the Chicago welfare queen who had 80 names,30 addresses,12 Social Securi

21、ty cards,and collected benefits for four nonexisting deceased husbands,bilking the government out of over$150,000.The real welfare recipient to whom Reagan referred was actually convicted for using two different aliases to collect$8,000.Reagan continued to use his version of the story even after the

22、 press pointed out the actual facts of the case to him.铁飞足焚湍粒薄柯溪我窘鳖秒裕器冷收秸膨讥漆禾糖贝肛涨稠势阅殖旬鳖加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策22Confirmation and hindsight biasWhat are they?咒就暑婿箱粥弊肠外宣住锐愈莎垣飞墒摹仓婆危饶隐纠霍怜建样诚倾愤纵加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策23囊辟博氨等符糠蚌蔷樱圣痴戎哉纂釜兵铱昼翰雍蚌芋篷绵打宵巴镣淄肥方加州大学伯克利分校商学院

23、组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策24Another bias:Escalation of commitmentThe tendency to persist in an unsuccessful course of action because of sunk costs.A bad decision results in a negative outcomeE.g.,investment lossRather than changing course of action,more is invested to try to recoup sunk costsT

24、he process continues.What are the psychological mechanisms?Risk-seeking after losses(prospect theory)Cognitive dissonance俯仗酷振测蹬辈叔唉尘土鸡耘酉丸浊炽屉炸蚂凸些雄粮虾颅倔岂象毗纤椿加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策Risk tolerance/intolerancePeople adapt to or become tolerant of risk.But one realization of downside ri

25、sk will increase risk aversionSoon after shuttle flights resumed in 1988(two years after the Challenger disaster),Adams moved on to unmanned missions,passing up a promotion:I just didnt think I could face the potential risk any more of going through something like Challenger.And that risk is there.T

26、he odds will sooner or later get us.”Frank AdamsMarshall Space Flight Centers Deputy Manager for Boosters算伎麦嚣腔仆哦辜周送或渤雕哀盼坠兑揩吉削糜农吉荚晒卑诬钻色粉忆廓加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策26Biases lead to bad decisions and unethical behavior Unconscious and unethicalbiases may derail decisions and undermin

27、e our managerial work.(1)They prevent us from recognizing high-potential people(2)They stop us from collaborating effectively with partners.(3)They erode our teams performance.(4)They can also lead to costly lawsuits.Steps managers can take to counteract these unconscious biases.(1)Regularly audit y

28、our decisions.(2)Expose yourself to environments that challenge your biases.(3)Consider counterintuitive options when making decisions.Mahzarin Banaji,Max H.Bazerman,and Dolly Chugh:“How(un)ethical are you?”Harvard Business Review,December 2003患肌循醉议卒箭鹰磐梁溜囊耪鲁辕查凳孝暇绦槐件煞倪府撑画适想潞赎这加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州

29、大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策GROUP(OR TEAM)DECISION-MAKINGPros and consConsensus decision-making痰审扼旱硒坠叛蛹察族侧摸厦哈咽研冠蝗溶昧芋闪的怨颖格邪桑梯踌晒窘加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策28Consensus decision-making Upsides:everyone is on board;fast&thorough implementationDownsides:Very slow to arrive at decisions;consensus

30、 may not be reached or is unreal;risk of groupthink Examples:American juries 根回 and 稟議 nemawashi and ringi system of Japanese decision-makingThe Delphi technique:a consensus-building toolIdentify a panel of expertsHave each solve the problem individuallyCompile all these commentsHave each expert giv

31、e feedback on all other commentsRepeat the last 2 steps until consensus is reachedTemple of Delphi in Greece澄摈竿巳架映悲胰曼尺哈抬坠他漆僳睦恨浸比秒疟簧自线具躲博消怔箱臆加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策29Google practices consensus decision-makingRule#8:Strive to reach consensus.Modern corporate mythology has the uniq

32、ue decision maker as hero.We adhere to the view that the many are smarter than the few,and solicit a broad base of views before reaching any decision.At Google,the role of the manager is that of an aggregator of viewpoints,not the dictator of decisions.Building a consensus sometimes takes longer,but

33、 always produces a more committed team and better decisions“Google:10 Golden Rules,”by Eric Schmidt,CEO of Google and Hal Varian,Haas Professor and consultant to Google,Newsweek,Dec.2,2005(Which suggests what kind of leadership?)蘸算哟菜锗飞乱显滑肤剑码罕遗波砷挣埂突俗酋臀泡晒杜蔬劈减絮龄洁礼加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学

34、课件-决策30The pros of group decision-making Teams make more accurate decisions than their average member Greater detection of errorGreater memory of facts Greater probability that someone will know the right answer Teams bring together a greater diversity of skills,information,knowledge,points of viewB

35、rainstormingTeams,especially diverse teams,are more creativeDecision acceptance is greater when people are involved in the decision-making process“Production teams”at NUMMI鼻闹魂小临簧见痕刨惯傈国抢凤腰棍抿连郸帜寝郭梭邱深舵骆璃吩柞屈短加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策31The cons of group decision makingTakes time The po

36、tential for conflict is highResponsibility is diffused Group shift/polarization(“risky shift”)Reduced learning?An audience enhances performance but lowers learningGroupthink灸帐漠梦绅宠图恒屠发邢妈撩肇尝馅藐平织较洁促枢锦换腹委鼠员隘隔磊加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策32Beware of groupthink!(Janis,1972)Definition:when

37、members fail to disagree,to bring up doubts and fears,or to bring up information that contradicts the teams decision.Suddenly,they are going in a direction that makes no one happy simply because no one wants to cause conflict.Components:Illusion of invulnerabilityRationalizations collectively devise

38、d to discount negative feedbackUnquestioning belief by members in teams inherent morality and stereotyped negative views of external detractorsDirect pressure on any individual who expresses doubts about the teams shared illusions or questions validity of the majority viewReluctance to deviate from

39、what appears to be team consensus despite misgivings,and tendency to minimize personal doubtsEscalation of commitmentPresident John F.Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs invasion:“How could we have been so stupid?”餐胡帖巫般尸狂寸堡茧幸牙滇筷当惶盒挪滥犊跑恭靡魔补窗芹性渗绚屈令加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策33链殷荐睫引罕洪奄房腆搏虞她盼

40、怒驮啡苫售童仗假聚或扯腋赫尉酱房抉村加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策34A contemporary exampleOn February 7,1999,the audit committee of Enron Corporations board of directors gathered in London to hear rather startling news.The companys auditors described Enrons accounting practices as“high risks.”David B.Du

41、ncan,who headed up the Arthur Anderson L.L.P.team at the company,informed the committee that Enrons accounting was“pushing the limits”and was“at the edge of acceptable practice”.However,none of the directors“objected to the procedures described by the auditors,requested a second opinion,or demanded

42、a more prudent approach.”-John A.Byrne(Feb 2002)Business Week逛嘴嫡照窃遮谢花锑烤幌卉士痔氯熄局拒扇鸵冀虽券磨元柔码羚亮冯韧疮加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策35The“risky shift”When people are in groups,they are likely to make riskier(more extreme)decisions,as the shared risk makes the individual risk lessMyers and Bisho

43、p(1970)put highly prejudiced students together to discuss racial issues.They became even more prejudiced.The reverse happened with unprejudiced students,who became even more unprejudiced.Entire football teams sometime get into aggressive or defensive moods as they either throw caution to the winds t

44、rying to score or desperately try to avoid being caught out.Juries given weak evidence will become very lenient after discussion,whilst when given strong evidence they are likely to give harsh judgment.悟悍赞良镇褒姓毕仰怕汐日蹿讣郭诊费宙怨倒士拓咸镇尖肘早据贯淳怜猖加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策 Bob Ebeling:Manager o

45、f the Rocket Ignition System at Morton-Thiokol“We did our level best,but it wasnt good enough.The decision to recommend a launch was pre-ordained by others,by NASA leaning on our upper management.The deck was stacked.”Video_“Groupthinking”http:/ 毡霞羌侵霞送荆限柿忠椎允毒么淀行鸿少溯海雌攒掺坏蕴色酚般毫祷信咙加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策

46、加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策37In summary Decision-making is hardLots of things can get in the way of making good individual decisionsEven more things get in the way of making good decisions in groups WEDNESDAY:“The collapse of Barings”Consider individual-and organization-level conditionsVideo:Rogue Trader 貌纲坎祝铲磷己炕焙监垛煎往嚼宁镐柱厄酸唁泌狈词傀竹挂崇嘘彝沂逸抹加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策加州大学伯克利分校商学院组织行为学课件-决策