Managers distinguish between two aspects of the effectiveness of management decisions. One (target) reflects the extent to which the organization’s goals are achieved, and the other (cost) reflects the cost-effectiveness of methods for converting resources as a result of implementation production process. Identifying goals and courses of action to achieve them is the subject of strategic planning. The choice of technologies for converting resources into given results is a tactical task.
When solving the problem of choosing a single management decision there are many difficulties encountered.
In this regard, it is used principle of progressive reduction of uncertainty, which consists in sequentially narrowing the set of solutions (alternatives) (Fig. 6.2).
Rice. 6. 2. Sequence of stages of narrowing the set of solutions
Many alternative solutions narrows to set of acceptable (admissible) solutions based on restrictions. Acceptable (acceptable) solutions that satisfy a set of constraints are called. The procedure for obtaining a set of acceptable solutions from the original set can be performed by logical thinking or formally, depending on the degree of formalization of information. The set of acceptable solutions narrows down to sets effective solutions based on preference analysis. The resulting set of effective solutions contains the only optimal solution.
Definition the only optimal solution from many effective ones, can be carried out using additional information. If information is impossible to obtain or its acquisition is irrational due to limited time and large expenditures of resources, then the decision maker conducts an informal analysis of the effectiveness of decisions and determines the optimal solution, i.e., correlates the importance of goals and various positive and negative consequences of decisions.
The implementation of the procedure for making management decisions requires special information, legal, organizational and economic justification.
All types of justification are strictly interconnected, and together they constitute a system of choice and decision support.
Rule systems, which guide the process of choosing management decisions, can be divided into two groups.
1. Algorithmic selection strategies- These are systems of clearly defined rules that make it possible to select an alternative in a finite number of steps.
2. Heuristic (informal) selection strategies is a set of rules, principles and techniques of an intuitive nature that are much less clearly defined and do not always allow one to obtain the optimal solution. Heuristic (informal) methods applied by some managers, using their analytical abilities. Dignity of these methods is that they are adopted promptly, flaw– they do not guarantee against making wrong decisions.
Distinguish two types of heuristic strategies: internal strategy, consisting of two types of analysis, and external.
First view internal analysis based on direct comparison various factors– between gain and loss, risk and size of gain, etc. The decision maker determines these relationships, and on this basis evaluates the global attractiveness of the choice.
Second type of internal analysis consists of comparing factors with certain external criteria and checking whether they meet this criterion. The global assessment of the attractiveness of a choice depends on the relationships between the properties and their criteria.
External strategy consists of the decision maker comparing similar properties of two or more situations. This comparison has external character. This strategy has several characteristic features. Firstly, it allows you to eliminate from further analysis those characteristics that are the same for different situations global attractiveness of choice, which reduces the number of comparisons and the difficulty of the choice situation. Secondly, the decision maker compares homogeneous characteristics, for example, payments with payments, probabilities with probabilities, which is quite natural and does not cause any particular difficulties.
External and internal strategies are in principle classes of strategy. Within each of them (classes), several types of strategies can be distinguished depending on certain heuristic rules used by the decision maker.
The choice of criterion for evaluating options for solving a management problem is a strategic decision on which the outcome of many decisions depends.
Management decisions there are individual And group (collective).
At individual choice of management decisions differentiate three types (types) of strategies: cautious (pessimistic), optimistic And rational(calculated for average conditions).
At cautious strategy the decision maker is guided by the motto "expect the worst"(Wald criterion).
At optimistic strategy actions, the decision maker is guided by the motto "expect for the best"(Savage criterion).
Rational strategy guided by the motto "count on the most likely conditions"(Laplace criterion).
Individual choice this or that type of strategy depends on the nature of the problem being solved, the formulated goals and individual characteristics thinking of the decision maker.
Each type of strategy can be put in accordance with a set of criteria for choosing the optimal solution. Therefore, the decision maker’s choice of a specific behavior strategy narrows the possible choice of criteria to a group corresponding to this strategy. The selection criterion uniquely determines the rule for selecting the optimal solution. It should be noted that the uniqueness of the selection rule does not guarantee obtaining a single optimal solution; there may be several of them.
Pessimism criterion is a typical representative of a set of criteria corresponding to a cautious strategy of behavior. In order to use general rule choosing the optimal solution in a particular case according to the criterion of pessimism, it is necessary to determine the coefficient of importance of decisions. For each goal, there is a preference score for that solution in each situation. Since the criterion of pessimism corresponds to the rule "calculate for the worst case", then as the coefficient of importance of a certain decision you should choose worst value preference functions for all situations. If the preference function is measured such that it best value corresponds to the largest number, then, obviously, the smallest number corresponds to the worst. Thus, the optimal solution according to the criterion of pessimism is determined by finding for each solution the worst estimate for all situations, and then the best estimate is determined from these worst estimates, which indicates the optimal solution.
Optimism criterion corresponds to an optimistic choice strategy. In this case, decision coefficients are defined as the best estimates of preferences across all situations.
Criterion for maximum average winnings is a representative of a group of criteria corresponding to a rational strategy. From a substantive point of view, the decision importance coefficients are average winnings, obtained for each decision in all situations. Sometimes the decision maker finds it difficult to reasonably select the criterion for obtaining the optimal solution. In this case, it is advisable to analyze various criteria. To do this, it is necessary to select optimal solutions using different criteria, determine whether these solutions coincide or differ from each other, and evaluate the influence of the criteria on the selection of the optimal solution.
Such an analysis allows the decision maker to more meaningfully and logically select criteria and the corresponding optimal solution.
Under group choice understand the procedure for making a collective decision based on the coordination of individual preferences of group members. The rational organization of decision-making procedures, i.e., the technology of work of a group decision-maker, requires taking into account the behavior of group members and the influence of various factors on this behavior (the nature of the problem being solved, the sequence of expressing opinions, the condition for forming a coalition, emotional state participants, etc.).
Group choice decision theory focuses on problems of rational choice.
The main focus of the group selection field is not how the selection process should proceed, but how what requirements and properties must have the result of coordinating individual preferences into group preferences. This approach, despite its incompleteness due to the exclusion of problems of behavior of participants in the choice, allows a comprehensive approach to the problem of group choice, including multi-criteria selection, processing of results expert assessments, processing of empirical data for the purpose of grouping, classification and identifying factors.
The main point in collective methods for choosing a management decision is determining the circle of people participating in this procedure. Most often, this is a temporary team, which includes several people, usually managers and performers. The main criterion such a group is competence, ability to solve creative problems, constructive thinking and communication skills. Collective forms of group work can be different: meetings, meetings, work in a commission, etc. The most common method of collective work is "brainstorming", "brainstorming"(joint generation of new ideas and subsequent decision-making).
Delphi method. This method is a series of sequential procedures aimed at forming a group opinion of experts from various fields through their sequential questioning.
The main features of the Delphi method are:
Anonymity;
Adjustable feedback;
Formation of a group assessment based on statistical processing of individual expert assessments;
Multi-step nature of assessment.
Delphi method is a multi-level survey procedure. After each round, the survey data is finalized, and the results are reported to the experts, indicating the location of the ratings. The first round of the survey is conducted without argumentation; in the second round, the answer that differs from the others is subject to argumentation. After the assessments have stabilized, the survey is stopped and the decision proposed by the experts or an adjusted one is adopted.
The essence of the Japanese so-called ring decision-making system (“kingise”) is that a draft innovation is being prepared for consideration. It is handed over for discussion to persons on a list compiled by the manager.
Each participant must review the proposed solution and provide their comments in writing. After this, a meeting is held. As a rule, those specialists are invited whose opinion is not entirely clear to the manager. Experts choose their solution according to individual preferences. If they do not coincide, then a preference vector arises, which is determined using one of the following principles:
· Majority voting principle. In group choice, coalitions can be formed - associations of participants into groups with coinciding goals. The majority principle states that a group's preference must correspond to the preference of a coalition that has more than a certain threshold of members (votes). This principle is used when democratic way of making decisions.
· The dictator principle. According to this principle, the preference of one person of the group applies. IN in this case group preference corresponds to individual preference. The principle of dictator and majority vote does not take into account the interests of all members of the group. Their use in the absence of other restraining factors can lead to the disintegration of the group of decision makers.
The formation of these two principles does not contain the basis for ensuring the sustainable existence of the group.
· Cournot principle– is used in the case when there are no coalitions, i.e. the number of solutions is assumed to be equal to the number of experts. In this case, it is necessary to find a solution that would meet the requirement of individual rationality without infringing on the interests of each individual.
· Pareto principle– used when making decisions when all experts form a single whole, one coalition. In this case, the optimal solution will be one that is unprofitable for all members of the group to change at once, since it unites them in achieving a common goal.
· Edgeworth principle- generalizes the principles of Cournot and Pareto. It is not profitable for each coalition to change its decision, since there is no better one.
The principles of coordination can be specified based on consideration of the nature of the relations between coalitions of a group of decision makers.
Are being considered three types of relationships between coalitions: status quo", confrontation And rationality. At regarding the status quo coalitions are trying to maintain the existing situation. At regarding confrontation coalitions act to harm each other. At regarding rationality Coalitions act in their own interests to obtain the maximum result, which does not necessarily cause harm to other coalitions.
The management cycle can be conventionally presented in the form of two main stages: developing a decision and organizing its execution. This division is quite arbitrary, but it is necessary for a more thorough analysis of management operations that are different in nature. In the first case, we are talking about knowledge, researching the problem and formulating the conclusions obtained in the form of a solution, in the second - about organizing the activities of performers to implement it. Very often, both stages of the management cycle almost merge and occur simultaneously, for example, when making operational decisions, in conditions of limited time, in emergency situations. And yet, for educational purposes, it is necessary to distinguish them as independent problems.
Development of management decisions - this stage of the administrative process (and function) plays a structure-forming role in public service activities, occupies a central, hierarchically important place in it, determines both the effective parameters and the procedural content of public administration.
The implementation of this function, the actual technology for developing a solution, includes several successive stages:
1) defining the problem and formulating the goal; . 2) development of solution options;
3) their assessment and justification for choosing the best in specific conditions;
4) making (approving) a decision.
The first of these stages is associated, as a rule, with the study of the management situation. Changes in it cause problems to arise, and a new problem situation is an objective prerequisite for the need to make a decision.
The implementation of this function involves the choice of a decision-making model. The most common are rational and incremental (from the English 1psegetep1 - increase, addition). However, the names are rather arbitrary and borrowed from Western literature on management.
The rational model consists of a number of decisions that must be made in order for the state (municipal) governing body to fulfill its set (taken) goals.
Below is a diagram that depicts the decision-making process cycle. This is an adaptation of the rational model as it is applied to solving problems in the field of public administration and commercial activities.
Feedback, analysis and evaluation
Practical implementation of the chosen solution
Choosing the right solution
The work begins by formulating the problem or question that needs to be considered. At this stage, you need to decide: to deal with this problem or do nothing. If you decide to deal with a problem, you need to clearly outline it and fully understand its nature. An analysis based on a partial understanding of the problem is likely to be erroneous and will not prevent the uncertainty of the situation. Questions social life consist of many variables, and this means that it is difficult to get a correct idea of cause-and-effect relationships. It is therefore not surprising (especially if a political aspect is added) that some problems are thought through and rethought.
Two points are important here: the choice of methods for studying a problem situation and the collection of relevant information.
If only a professional range of issues are being resolved, then this allows us to proceed from the analysis of departmental information. In this case, the methods will be conventional: analysis of statistics, documents, work results. Through logical analysis, they determine whether the situation is worse or better for the period being assessed, thereby preparing information for intra-organizational administrative decisions.
If you have to make a more complex decision - political, political-administrative, external, then it is important to take into account that the population is practically indifferent to departmental indicators. Consequently, the focus should be on assessing the real influence of the government agency on the situation, development, and changes in the object of management.
1. The following can be recommended as a reminder (signal task) to employees of the information department:
Using the available facts, conduct an initial analysis of the situation. Highlight indicators indicating a change (deterioration) of the situation;
When processing information, base your conclusions not on simple “photographing” of reality and facts, but find out what resulted in changes (deterioration) in parameters: or
as a consequence of a control action, or the object’s self-regulation mechanism has worked, or some other state or public institution has influenced, or some spontaneous
process, etc.;
try to determine the source of changes, the element (sum of elements) in the control action that determined the new parameters. This may be the quality of the goal (unattractiveness, incomprehensibility, etc.) or the quality of a legal act, a managerial decision that did not take into account the interests and capabilities of the performers, or the quality of those used social technologies(their routineness, inefficiency), or the costs of attracting resources, etc. This will help to understand the essence and causes of the problem. Any attempt to eliminate a phenomenon without knowing its essence will be ineffective: the undestroyed mechanism of the problem will cause new cause-and-effect dependencies, and, perhaps, of an even more negative nature;
As a result of the initial information processing, identify the gap between the desired and actual state of the controlled object and, on this basis, identify the problem as a decisive area of action.
The main task of structuring a problem is not only to avoid wrong decisions, but to learn to ask the right questions in order to solve exactly the problem that should be solved;
For a more in-depth study of the problem situation, make a list of the necessary additional material. At the same time, study information that reflects the needs and expectations of citizens, their appeals to government authorities in a given region (department);
Designate controlled variables - i.e., situations covered by a given problem that can be managed by the CPR: both quantitative and qualitative.
Highlight uncontrollable(quantitative and qualitative) variables - i.e. situations covered by a given problem, which cannot be controlled by the CPR, but which, together with the controlled ones, can influence the result of the choice (decision). On this basis, prepare proposals for involving those in management decisions
organizations (departments) that regulate (control) uncontrollable situations as co-executors;
As a result of secondary processing of information (taking into account additional facts), create a description of the situation and desired goal.
When determining the goals of future activities and ways to solve complex social problems, advanced methods of analysis are required. In particular, building a tree of goals: identify all problems as obvious and implied, arrange them in order according to the complexity of the solution. Establish starting points for resolving urgent problems. Analyze the main problem (information, conditions for solving it). Offer to solve the main problems first;
For final identification of the problem, transfer the description of the situation and conclusions to a specialist (for internal examination) who is not directly related to the situation under consideration,
in order to establish what is missing for analysis;
Research additional facts and information requested by the expert. Make appropriate amendments to the description of the problem situation, goals and objectives;
Submit the prepared Conclusion of the information unit to the analytical support center. /
So, information should be an organic support system for Acceptance decisions. It can be successfully created by employees of the information department (management), subject to competence and overcoming production costs, when the necessary information is inaccessible, and the information received is unnecessary.
When a rational model is used, the decision maker (DM) must outline a possible way to solve the problem. Here he needs the support of analysts. Their inclusion in the decision-making process constitutes the second stage.
2. The analytical center (department, management) performs the function of developing alternatives and analyzing preliminary decisions. Its employees can formulate the following task-signals:
In the process of generating alternatives, at least three, but no more than seven, are developed;
Use group discussion, techniques such as brainstorming, assessment indirect signs"etc., in order to get the maximum number of ideas about the advantages and disadvantages
all alternatives from different points of view;
A management decision is characterized by a close relationship between goals, objectives and means of their implementation. As a rule, there is not enough information on the basis of which goals are understood. Explore the data
about the resources and capabilities of the control system;
Preliminarily identify (specify) the lead contractor and co-executors, analyze their experience and effectiveness in solving similar problems in the past;
Analyze upcoming social and organizational changes in the management system. Study public opinion about the effectiveness of certain means of control - used earlier in making decisions similar problems;
Construct possible alternative solutions. Complex management tasks require simultaneous consideration of a wide variety of factors: economic, political, legal, psychological, etc. In this case, one should ignore the study of minor ones and analyze the impact of only the most significant of them.
In the process of developing options for complex management decisions, it is advisable to use the modeling method. It makes it possible to obtain a certain ideal version of a future solution without taking into account existing limitations, i.e., one that would allow the most effective completion of the assigned tasks. An ideal model helps to see all the social, technological, and resource aspects of solving a problem. Subjected to subsequent processing, taking into account counteracting factors, it creates the basis for determining appropriate actions aimed at achieving the intended goal. As a rule, if some part of the problem can be solved in the near future, then other issues, due to limited capabilities, require step-by-step work designed for the future. However, they must always be in the field of view of the relevant authorities;
Discuss the constructed models in groups (teams) in order to identify (take into account) the opposing factors for solving the problem, to predict possible results for each alternative - justify the selection criteria;
Eliminate unimportant advantages and disadvantages from the discussion of alternatives. Stick to the minimum number of options.
Here it is appropriate to ask the question: is it always possible to identify all options for solving a problem? If so, is the decision maker able to compare all the proposed alternatives and choose the optimal one? In practice, the “space” of solutions is still limited by the resources of time, people, and funds;
Since social problems must be resolved in the interests of society as a whole, then the development of solutions to generally significant problems requires, on the one hand, careful consideration of the entire range of opinions and proposals existing in society, on the other hand, professional expert assessment possible solutions, based on
relevant theoretical knowledge and practical experience, taking into account social relations, the state of public consciousness, cultural and historical traditions.
Public examination of decisions is an important component in public administration. During the years of cult ideology and crude authoritarian-bureaucratic methods, management expertise was not carried out at all. If anything was subject to examination, it was technical designs and products. In some cases, when expertise was used as an element of management activity in order to provide greater validity to management, it was confined only within the framework of subjects of state administration, or rather, in its subsystems, sectoral or functional, and had a departmental character, which means it lost objectivity. Today, the situation in this matter has not changed radically everywhere; social and legal status examination of management decisions, transfer it to society, its scientific institutions, unions and associations of specialists. Expertise is conceived as a phenomenon that is formed outside the boundaries of the subject of management.
Internal examination of alternatives is carried out (and thereby limits their number) by legal and social services(departments, departments), correlating various options draft solutions with existing legal acts, value orientations of their organization, experience of past years (past decisions).
3. The next (third) stage in the process of developing management decisions is management’s assessment of selected, justified alternatives and selection of the best option. Let us emphasize that it is not better in general, but only in relation to this specific situation.
The choice has, first of all, an objective basis: the presence of various states of external and internal environment, which the system encounters, i.e. a set of properties, relationships and connections with which the system interacts.
The situation characterizing the state of the environment of the controlled object and the control system can be calm or threatening; familiar or unfamiliar; hostile or favorable; expected or unexpected; controlled or uncontrolled; complex structured or unstructured, uncertain.
Perhaps the main thing that characterizes the problems that have to be solved in the 21st century. be it politics, economics, science, or any other field - it is complexity and uncertainty.
Situation of uncertainty may arise in relation to either a goal (the desire of the subject), or a means, or both; when the conditions for solving a problem are not fully defined; there is insufficient information about the limitations to which the solution is subject; finally, internal state subject of management (state of mind of the manager). Uncertainty can be objective in nature, such as constant variability of an object, its connections, behavior, and flexibility of reorientation. In general, the uncertainty of a situation can be interpreted as ambiguity subjective assessment about the control object or as complexity expressed through a function of the number of variables, factors, connections that must be taken into account when making decisions. It can be very difficult to make a choice risk situations - possible danger or failure,
A risky problem situation is a type of uncertain situation, when the occurrence of expected events (actions) is associated with the possibility of losses caused by the implementation of an alternative chosen under conditions of uncertainty.
The choice of management decision in conditions of uncertainty and risk should be based on a quantitative and qualitative assessment of the probability of achieving the expected result, failure or deviation from the goal.
The choice of the preferred option is often driven by political considerations and must therefore be consistent with the values that politicians bring to the process. However, once the preferred option is chosen, it forms the basis of “policy” on the issue.
What criteria determine the best option, the rationalism of the decision?
Depending on the nature and characteristics of the problem being solved, a wide variety of evaluation criteria can be used. The most common of them are: the degree and probability of achieving the desired result, the likely duration of the implementation of the decision, its various possible negative consequences. basis To evaluate the developed options and select the best, the scale of the work to be performed, as well as the costs and expenses associated with it, is used. A government agency's budget should present a complete picture of what the organization hopes to ultimately accomplish with its own efforts and resources. At the same time, the budget must provide for: actual unit costs for the volume of proposed activities, control costs, and verification of the efficiency of spending funds (including - how honestly they spend!), on checking reports on the amount of work performed, on convincing the public that managers are working honestly and efficiently. The main criterion should always be real achievement socially significant results, best match decision taken the task of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of citizens. “The infringement of individual interests, which is inevitable when resolving certain issues, should each time be considered as a forced and undesirable measure. Therefore, the criterion of minimal infringement of interests citizens and their associations should be one of the main ones when making management decisions.”
The choice of the most reasonable option for a future decision is facilitated by the use of four rules of a systematic approach, according to which in a given situation it is necessary to: know exactly real opportunities systems; examine the likely negative and positive consequences of the decision; understand the costs associated with the expected result; determine the feasibility of making this decision. Despite the apparent simplicity of these rules, they contain an extremely productive approach to developing solutions. If such rules are observed, the activity of the subject of management is determined not by the number of decisions he makes, but by the ability to systematically evaluate the entire set of factors operating here. Necessary procedures in the process of developing a decision are the discussion and coordination of its projects with interested public institutions and government departments.
When planning and drafting public decisions, it is very important to find out whether everyone feels that their interests are taken into account: this will help create a better project and gain public support when making controversial decisions. That is why it is advisable for the decision-making center (person) to involve a “block of influence” - groups that have an interest in making a particular decision, but are not formally included in the mechanism. They can influence the procedure for collecting and processing information, and the act of choosing alternatives, and at the stage of agreement (discussion) of the prepared draft decision, thus adjusting the outcome of the decision. Experimental verification or preliminary publication of the contents of the draft decision is also possible.
Preliminary study serves as a guarantee of increasing the validity of management acts. It should, however, be borne in mind that unnecessary “floors” of approval and willful amendments can delay the adoption of a decision (act) and distort its intent. A much stronger guarantee of the validity of a decision is its discussion with those performers to whom it is addressed.
The main task of the approval procedure is to realize sufficient potential for control actions. A positive experience of this kind is represented, for example, by the system for preparing decisions in Japan (rangi-sei), which provides for repeated coordination of prepared decisions at several levels of management, starting with ordinary employees and ending with senior managers who approve the decision. If many people are involved in preparing a decision, then it will be executed with greater interest and responsibility.
The rational element in the system of coordination of political decisions is actually high level public administration is the institution of countersignature (late Latin sotgazshchpasge - ministerial bond, signature), providing for the signing by the Prime Minister or authorized ministers of normative acts of the head of state or parliament as prerequisite, giving these acts legal force. This procedure is enshrined in state law a number of states with an established parliamentary and semi-presidential (mixed) form of government (for example, in Italy, France, etc.). In France, the countersignature became mandatory after its introduction in 1962. direct election of the president and meant that presidential decrees and decrees could not be applied without the countersignature of the prime minister. At the same time, the most important decrees of the Prime Minister, in turn, must have the countersignature of the relevant ministers as an expression of their consent with this decree. In Russia, this practice existed before the revolution; it makes sense to restore it in full.
4. Making (approving) decisions - this act (stage) makes them binding.
As already noted, the powers of the subject of management to make certain decisions are usually enshrined in current laws, by-laws, charters, etc. At the same time, it must be taken into account that complex decisions are prepared, as a rule, by teams, and the manager has to use a fairly wide an arsenal of means to influence the progress and results of this work. Methods of persuasion, moral and material incentives, and administrative means of forming labor discipline and responsibility among employees are used here. The main thing is that the chosen methods and means mobilize the creative and business potential of workers and ensure diversity starting points view, free discussion of all provisions, articles (points) of the decision, an atmosphere of openness and professional competence.
A managerial decision as a result of activity is at the same time a source of further social and organizational-administrative actions. The central decision-maker (decision maker), having approved the decision, transfers it to the executors.
The science and practice of administrative management says that the implementation of “policy” on a particular issue, the implementation of decisions taken rarely goes flawlessly, and therefore it is necessary to consider the practical consequences of the “policy” every time. To do this, you need to obtain information using " feedback"and give an analytical assessment.
Due to the fact that state (municipal) authorities and management operate in a complex and changing environment, the implementation of policies that solve certain problems can contribute to the emergence of new problems that, in turn, require solutions: this determines the cyclical nature of the policy development process.
Criticism of the “rational model”. According to those who have studied it, the analytical center is not looking for an optimal solution, guided by doubts that what seems optimal today will remain so tomorrow, because reality is extremely complex and the possibilities of foresight are limited.
Another reason for the lack of interest in finding an optimal solution is that the collected information about the control object quickly ceases to be relevant, because controlled social systems are self-regulating and undergo changes that are not at all the result of control action.
The reason is that only a small group of identified (and unidentified) factors are under the control of the subject of the decision. Unaccounted for and uncontrollable factors (uncontrollable variables) really affect the capabilities, and therefore the quality of decisions.
It was already noted above that although the rational model assumes that decision-makers act rationally, politicians bring their values, policies and priorities into the process, and this, “of course, does not pass without a trace. Analysts may present, say, 10 arguments for doing one way and 15 for another, but in four cases out of five there may be only one issue that will be decisive for the outcome of the entire case.
Exactly the same officials may not be broad-minded, imaginative, or have the time to map out everything possible options and evaluate their consequences.
A professional employee may be reluctant to offer an option to his manager, knowing that it is ideologically unacceptable to him.
The course planned for implementation must be based on a correctly understood cause-and-effect relationship. However, in the process of executing a decision, new intermediate links arise between cause and effect. For example, suppose that if we take an action, which we call A, then what will happen is that we
denoted by the letter B; but if B happens, something will happen that we will denote by the letter C. The longer the “cause-and-effect chain”, the more likely it is that a weak link or a new, unexpected link will be discovered in it and new connections instead of result B will give a new one, say, E For example, unexpectedly for local authorities authorities (not
only for them) the political leadership of the country decided on a single tax rate on individuals. This brought public attention to local government spending. Active organizations of residents of a number of municipalities demanded a report from the head of the district government. As a result, the profligate council members and the head of the administration lost their seats based on the results of the popular vote. In such a situation, the conclusion suggests itself about the advisability of shortening the cause-and-effect chain and minimizing the number of intermediate links.
So, management bodies, fearing that they will have to deal with an unknown situation, may not be willing to use a rational decision-making model, develop forecasts, simulate events, look for the best option, or choose an innovative radical way to solve problems.
This is why governing bodies are more likely to use the Concept bounded rationality, alternative decision-making model - incrementalism.
Incrementalism is a step up, a step forward compared to the current situation.
Decision makers in the context of this model strive to ensure that their decisions are as practical as possible. Above, we generally said what interferes with a rational decision and action: there is not enough organizational, intellectual abilities, time, which means that an employee acting with the best intentions will be content with a “satisfactory level” of his work, trying, most importantly, not to incur yourself the wrath of your superiors. This means that the essence of the incremental strategy is “somehow, with little effort, but to get the job done.” Until now, we have talked about the fact that incrementalism is used as a method of decision-making due to the fact that it is not possible to apply a rational model. But there are researchers who positively evaluate this approach to the decision-making process. The arguments are as follows:
1) it is possible that it is better not to set goals too clearly and definitely;
2) “leaps into the unknown” are dangerous, and therefore it would be more prudent to advise limited changes to the current situation;
3) in practice, it is unlikely that problems will be resolved immediately. It is better to choose a phased, step-by-step approach;
4) due to the fact that with each political problem a number of bodies and interests are connected, their clash makes the success of a rational approach unlikely;
5) although using a rational approach it is possible to develop the best policy, widespread agreement with it may not be achieved.
It may be that compromise is the best alternative.
So, incrementalism is adopted as a “tactic of small steps.” For a greater comparison of the two models, we will show in the diagram how both approaches to the decision-making process are used in order to move from the current state of affairs to the situation that is desirable for us.
Rational model
Incremental model
Success Failure
Situation that is desirable Decision point
Supporters of the rational model try to move towards the desired position in one strategic move (plan, project). However, given the problems we have discussed, it is quite possible to “miss the mark” and actually end up in an unpredictable situation.
The incremental model shows how a series of small, sequential steps can enable decision makers to move incrementally toward a desired state of affairs, skillfully turning the situation around (or adapting to a new situation) at each step.
It is advisable to note that in life, many factors influence the choice of a decision-making model (methodology, concept), determine the effectiveness of one or another or a combination, bringing together both models.
In conclusion, it is necessary to emphasize: it seems more significant that governing bodies and officials, when making decisions, are guided by such principles as:
Harmonization of man with nature;
Satisfying the basic material and spiritual needs of people;
Reliance on your own available resources;
The selection of alternative solutions to socio-economic and other types of social problems inherent in historical,
cultural and environmental context of the country.
Actually, every government agency has been developing and using decision-making models for years, some of them become typical, others represent a simplified version of it. For example, a typical model for developing solutions directly in ministries and departments looks like this.
1. Receive a task.
2. Determination of the main contractor and applicants.
3. Analysis of the problem situation, setting goals and objectives.
4. Preparation of proposals for the draft decision by co-executors.
5. Development of a draft solution by the parent organization.
6. Report of the draft decision to the manager.
7. Finalization of the draft decision by the lead executor.
8. Coordination of the draft decision with co-executors and interest groups.
9. Consideration of the draft decision at a board or meeting.
10. Preparation of an administrative document for the implementation of the decision.
In the work of government bodies there are often situations when a decision needs to be made quickly. In this case, a simplified model is used.
1. Receive a task.
2. Assess the situation, discuss the problem with the heads of interested organizations and experts.
3. Decision making.
4: Publication of the corresponding regulatory document.
So, at all stages of decision-making, three types of management activities are distinguished: analytical, during which, on the basis of multifactor analysis, a situation that requires resolution is examined, alternatives are formulated, draft decisions are prepared with the involvement of specialists in a particular field of social relations, and a forecast of the development of the situation is made. Moreover, at the level of “input” of analytical support there is a strategic goal, and it is no longer subject to discussion; political, during which information on the problem and prepared draft decisions are considered by the subject of decision-making, a choice is made based on socio-political priorities, values, historical and political traditions in leadership and management, and the decision is made in the established procedural order as a law, regulation, just expressions of will; organizational and administrative, in the process of which management potential is involved, groups and teams are formed, and their work is organized to develop and make decisions.
Management decision as result activities there at the same time source further social and organizational and administrative actions. The central decision-maker (decision maker), having approved the decision, transfers it to the executors.
Introduction
Stages of development of management decisions
Selection and evaluation of management decision alternatives
1The essence of the decision-making process
Methods for selecting alternatives to management decisions
Assessing the feasibility of management decision alternatives
Conclusion
Introduction
The most important element management are management decisions. One of the main components of decision making is the selection of management decision alternatives and their assessment in terms of effectiveness and feasibility. Key property An effective solution is the mandatory presence of alternatives that ensure the expediency and awareness of their free choice. The effectiveness of a solution is largely determined by the number of alternative options a given solution option is selected from.
The purpose of this work is to consider the main methods for selecting alternatives, assessing their feasibility and effectiveness.
Research objectives:
determination of the main methods for selecting alternatives to management decisions;
assessing the feasibility of management decision alternatives;
consideration of the psychological characteristics of the process of analyzing alternatives and choosing strategies;
conducting an analysis of alternatives and choosing strategies in the management decision process from the point of view of efficiency and realism;
management management alternative solution
1.Stages of development of management decisions
“Before you look for a solution, define the problem precisely.” John Williams. There are two ways to look at the problem. According to one, a problem is a situation when the set goals are not achieved. In other words, we become aware of a problem because something that should have happened did not happen. By doing this, we smooth out deviations from the norm. A problem can also be considered a potential opportunity. In this case, we recognize the problem when we realize that something can be done to improve the progress of the matter, or to take advantage of the opportunity. This stage includes the following sequence of management actions:
Awareness and identification of symptoms (indicators, markers) of difficulties or problems.
Defining the problem in general view- reducing the number of factors influencing the problem and at the same time avoiding immediate (impulsive) action to eliminate symptoms and their causes.
Identifying the causes of the problem.
. “Filtering” information - distinguishing between irrelevant and relevant information about a specific problem, people, goals, time frame.
Elimination of information distortions of a psychological nature, which include hidden motives and errors in perception of both employees and the manager himself.
The second stage is the formulation of restrictions and decision criteria.
Before decision alternatives are put forward, it is necessary to ensure that they are realistic. This is done by identifying factors (constraints) that do not depend on the organization. For example, these could be regulations that the manager is unable to change, intense competition, important relational characteristics, etc. Important psychological feature is that the choice is usually not made on the basis of an initial set of alternatives. First, a kind of “screening out” of the least attractive and significant, in the subject’s opinion, alternative options occurs. This process is called elimination of alternatives
The third stage is identifying alternatives
Revealing everyone possible actions that can eliminate the causes of the problem and enable the organization to achieve its goals. These actions act as alternative ways to solve the problem. It is important to avoid confusion between alternatives and to consider the widest possible range of solutions. Alternatives that can be considered include not only various activities, but also refusal of them, i.e. opportunity to remain idle
“Setting priorities is not very difficult. It's harder to decide what not to do." Peter Drucker.
The ability to classify organizational, managerial and business problems, set priorities in solving them, identify tasks that do not have a significant impact on the efficiency of the enterprise ( structural unit) and refuse their decision characterizes the leader as a truly competent manager.
Stage four - assessment of identified alternatives
At this stage, an analysis of each of the proposed ideas is carried out, their comparison, determination of the “pros” and “cons”, strengths and weaknesses. For this purpose, the expert assessment method can be used. The purpose of the examination of the developed alternative options is to determine the prospects of each of them, the opportunities that open up during their implementation, as well as the risks associated with the implementation of each of the proposed management decision options, and ultimately to present to the manager (decision maker) a verified, justified and a calculated option.
Fifth stage - choosing an alternative
This stage, also called “selection of a maximized alternative,” is essentially making a management decision. This is the main management act that is performed by the leader. It is this stage that I want to focus on special attention in your work.
If we discuss the possibility of implementing this stage in practice, behind decision-making, that is, the choice of an alternative, there are both technological techniques and the art of a manager. While the former can be mastered by studying a well-structured course in management science, the latter is developed over the years and is the result of a manager’s professional experience.
The final stages are execution and feedback.
At the next stages - execution and feedback - the manager’s task is to assess the changes that occur in the problem situation in connection with the solution being implemented, that is, to determine how much they “fit into the plan” and change the situation in the desired, desired direction.
Assessing the results of implementing a management decision is associated with determining whether the goal of the decision has been achieved, whether the problem situation has been eliminated (changed) based on the chosen alternative or not. If the result is positive and satisfactory to the manager, the management decision cycle ends. If it is negative, the manager resumes the management decision cycle, returning to its previous stages.
2. Selection and evaluation of alternative management decisions
1 The essence of the decision-making process
The development of management decisions is an important process that connects the main functions of management: planning, organization, motivation, control. It is the decisions made by the leaders of any organization that determine not only the effectiveness of its activities, but also the possibility of sustainable development and survival in a rapidly changing world. Making effective decisions is one of the most important conditions for the effective existence and development of an organization. In making any decision there are varying degrees three points: intuition, judgment, rationality.
An intuitive decision is a choice made solely on the basis of a feeling that it is the right one. Decisions based on judgment. Such decisions sometimes seem intuitive because their logic is not obvious. A judgment-based decision is a choice based on knowledge or experience. For strategic and tactical management of any subsystem of the management system, rational decisions are made based on methods of economic analysis, justification and optimization. Options for action are usually called alternatives.
Alternatives are an integral part of the decision-making problem: if there is nothing to choose from, then there is no choice. Therefore, to set up a decision-making problem, it is necessary to have at least two alternatives.
Alternatives are independent and dependent. Independent are those alternatives, any actions with which (removal from consideration, selection as the only best) do not affect the quality of other alternatives. With dependent alternatives, the evaluations of some of them influence the quality of others. Available various types dependencies of alternatives. The simplest and most obvious is direct group dependence: if it is decided to consider at least one alternative from a group, then the entire group must be considered.
Decision-making tasks also vary significantly depending on the availability of alternatives at the time of policy development and decision-making. There are problems when all the alternatives have already been given, have already been determined, and it is only necessary to select the best from this set. A feature of these problems is a closed, non-expanding set of alternatives. But there are many problems of another type, where all the alternatives or a significant part of them appear after the main decisions have been made.
At the first stage, all information available at the time of decision-making is collected: factual data, expert opinion. Where possible, they are built mathematical models; sociological surveys are conducted; views on the problem on the part of active groups influencing its solution are determined. The second stage is associated with determining what can and cannot be done in the current situation. And the third stage includes comparing alternatives and choosing the best solution.
The decision-making process is a cyclic sequence of actions of a management subject aimed at resolving the problems of the organization and consisting in analyzing the situation, generating alternatives, making a decision and organizing its implementation. Let us consider the content of each of the main procedures of the decision-making process.
Analysis of the situation. For the need to make a management decision to arise, a signal is needed about an external or internal influence that has caused or is capable of causing a deviation from the given mode of operation of the system, i.e. presence of a management situation. Therefore one of the most important conditions Making the right decision is an analysis of the situation. Analysis of a management situation requires the collection and processing of information.
Problem identification. The first step towards solving a problem is its definition or diagnosis, complete and correct. There are two views on the essence of the problem. According to one, a problem is considered to be a situation when the set goals are not achieved or there is a deviation from a given level. According to the second, the problem can also be considered as a potential opportunity to improve the efficiency of the organization.
Definition of selection criteria. Before considering possible options for solving a problem, the manager needs to determine the indicators by which alternatives will be compared and the best one will be selected.
Development of alternatives. Ideally, it is desirable to identify all possible alternative ways to solve a problem; only in this case the solution can be optimal. However, in practice, the manager does not and cannot have such reserves of knowledge and time to formulate and evaluate every possible alternative.
Selecting an alternative. Having developed possible solutions to the problem, they need to be evaluated, i.e. determine the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative and objectively analyze the likely results of implementation. To compare solution options, it is necessary to have standards or criteria by which they can be compared. These selection criteria were established in the third stage. With their help, the choice is made best alternative. Since the choice is made, as a rule, on the basis of several criteria, and not just one, it always has the nature of a compromise.
Agreement on the solution. Management decision-making in an organization is often mistakenly viewed as an individual rather than a group process. Therefore, the manager must convince of the correctness of his point of view, prove to employees that his decision brings benefits to both the organization and its individual members. That's why best way approval of the decision - involving employees in the process of its adoption.
Implementation management. The process of solving a problem does not end with the choice of an alternative: to obtain an effect, the decision made must be implemented. This is precisely the main task of this stage. To successfully implement a solution, first of all, it is necessary to determine a set of works and resources and distribute them among performers and deadlines, i.e. provide for who, where, when and what actions should be taken and what resources are needed for this.
.Methods for selecting alternatives to management decisions
The quality of the decision made largely depends on the ability of the decision maker (DM) to identify all possible alternatives. A particular alternative cannot be selected unless it has been identified and considered. Improving the ability of decision makers to expand the possible range of alternatives for solving a problem accessible ways increases the likelihood of making an effective decision. Methods for selecting alternatives include criterion-based methods and expert assessment methods. In turn, criterion methods differ in the number of specified criteria ( objective function or utility functions): single-criteria and multi-criteria methods and according to environmental conditions: they distinguish methods of choice under conditions of certainty, risk and uncertainty. Currently, many have been developed operational methods, allowing individuals and groups to make the most of their creativity in various aspects of problem solving and decision making. The basic rules for applying methods using creativity, are the following.
Separating judgment and evaluation from idea generation. The reason for stopping the flow of ideas is the critical evaluation of certain ideas in the process of putting them forward. The result of this will be a reduction in the number of proposed ideas due to negative feedback in the form critical analysis ideas put forward.
Consideration of all ideas put forward. Another reason for the decline in the flow of ideas is the failure to consider and evaluate some of the ideas that are put forward. All ideas put forward, even those that are obviously unfeasible, should be considered equally and assessed according to the same criteria.
Generating alternative solutions, control actions, etc. can be carried out either directly or through special expert procedures. Procedures for generating alternative options may include a special organization and conduct of examinations using methods such as " brainstorming", as well as the creation of automated systems for generating alternative options in complex but fairly structured cases.
The most accessible are group methods. Group methods include following methods.
Method brainstorming . It allows you to identify and compare individual judgments, a range of ideas for solving a problem, and then make a decision. There are several varieties of this method: direct brainstorming , inverse brainstorming , competition of ideas etc. Direct brainstorming - a form of collective generation of ideas to solve a creative problem. Its purpose is to select ideas. Reverse brainstorming involves criticism of existing ideas.
Key question method. It is advisable to use the technology for its implementation to collect additional information in a problematic situation or to streamline what is already available when solving a problem.
Free association method. It is noted that at the stage of generating ideas when using new associations, productivity increases creative activity due to the emergence of new ideas. In the process of the emergence of associations, extraordinary connections are established between the elements of the problem being solved and the previous experience of individuals involved in collective work.
Inversion method. When searching for an idea, a solution to a problem can often be found by changing the direction of the search to the opposite, contrary to the prevailing traditional views dictated by logic and common sense. The method and technology of its implementation are based on the principle of dualism (duality), dialectical unity and the optimal use of opposite (direct and reverse) procedures of creative thinking, a dialectical approach to the analysis of the object of study.
Nominal group method. Used for searching the best options problem solving.
Synectics method. Provides an opportunity to get the most original ideas due to training participants in the process brainstorming methods of analogy, intuition, abstraction, free thought, the use of unexpected metaphors, game elements, which allows a familiar problem in an unusual situation to be solved in an unexpected and original way.
Method 635: A group of six participants analyzes and formulates a given situation. Each participant enters three proposals for solving the problem into the form and passes the form to his neighbor. The person filling out the form takes into account the proposals of his predecessor, and below them, in three fields, he makes three more proposals. These suggestions can be used to further develop the written solutions. The process ends when participants have processed all forms. The technology allows you to get up to 108 (6 3 6) sentences.
Methods, techniques individual work
Reception Waiting for inspiration . When solving difficult problems, when it is not possible to concentrate efforts, it is advisable to alternate intense intellectual work with relaxation, disconnecting consciousness from the task. However, before going to bed, you should remember the task again and think about it until you fall asleep. In the morning or even at night, sometimes unconsciously, when you wake up, you can get up and solve a difficult problem
Thinking technology: Mettchet method . It is recommended to use the following modes of thinking to create, control and apply a way of thinking when solving a problem: strategic schemes; images (represent the problem in the form of diagrams, drawings); in parallel planes (observe your thoughts as they intersect); from different points of view; in basic elements (options of decisions, judgments, concepts).
Analytical technique: Elimination method hopeless situations. Using this method, it is possible to simulate the adoption of various management decisions, consistently excluding factors leading to undesirable predicted consequences. This is achieved by varying solutions: adapt, modify, strengthen, weaken, replace, remake, combine, use something differently.
Once the factors limiting a decision are identified, the manager can begin to work on finding alternatives or possible courses of action to solve the problem. Alternative options for management decisions should be presented in a comparable form according to the following factors: time factor (time of implementation of projects or investments); object quality factor; factor of the scale (volume) of production of the object; level of development of the facility in production; method of obtaining information for making management decisions; conditions of use (operation) of the object; inflation factor; factor of risk and uncertainty.
After alternative options for management influences have been developed, presented in the form of ideas, concepts, possible technological sequence of actions, possible ways implementation of the proposed solution options, their preliminary analysis must be carried out in order to eliminate obviously unviable options or options that are obviously inferior to others. Should also be taken into account specific features situations identified during its diagnosis.
All proposed alternatives must be compared with each other or evaluated in order to subsequently select the best one. The choice of alternative is a kind of pinnacle in the decision-making process. Good analysis alternatives allows you to sharply narrow the scope of choice. When choosing an alternative, three approaches can be used: taking into account past experience; conducting an experiment; research and analysis.
Most Interest modern management refers to the process of making an innovative decision, which involves some innovation, that is, the formation and implementation of a previously unknown alternative.
In cases where none of the known alternatives seems suitable, the criterion optimization method can be used. Main idea this method consists of the assumption that combining the best features of known alternatives can lead to a more effective solution.
When determining the choice of alternative solutions to a problem, a manager, seeking to increase the likelihood of obtaining higher returns, may desire as many alternative solutions as possible. Better decision-making results are achieved with more skillfully developed, bold, creative options.
.Assessing the feasibility of management decision alternatives
Increasing management efficiency is almost identical to increasing the effectiveness of management decisions at all levels of the hierarchy, because Management decisions are the main element of management influence.
The effectiveness of management decisions is the resource efficiency obtained as a result of the development and implementation of management decisions in the organization. The resources can be finance, materials, personnel health, labor organization, etc. We can say that the effectiveness of management decisions is determined by both the quality of the decisions themselves and the quality of their implementation. Meanwhile, as practice shows, not all decisions made are implemented within the given time frame, according to some data from them specific gravity in the total number of those adopted is 30. Similar to the classification of the overall effectiveness of the organization, the effectiveness of management decisions is divided into the following types: organizational; economic; social; technological; psychological; legal; environmental; ethical; political.
Even after the decision is finally put into effect, the decision-making process cannot be considered completely completed, since it is still necessary to verify whether it is justified. This goal is served by the control stage, which performs a feedback function in this process. At this stage, the consequences of a decision are measured and assessed, or the actual results are compared with those that the manager hoped to obtain. Evaluating management decision alternatives involves understanding, describing, and analyzing the consequences of choosing a particular alternative to determine its value or cost.
Before assessment there must be:
goals are determined and real decision criteria established based on them;
the problems and context of solutions are well understood;
alternatives from which a choice will be made are identified.
When evaluating decisions, the manager determines the advantages and disadvantages of each of them, and possible consequences.
We can talk about a system of characteristics when assessing alternatives to a management decision, including two subsystems of general and specific characteristics. Specific signs determined by the specific features of the problem being solved. Common signs when evaluating an alternative are its feasibility, acceptability and vulnerability. The feasibility of an alternative is the degree of difficulty of its implementation, assessed by the necessary expenditure of time, effort and resources. Acceptability determines the measure of progress towards goals when choosing a given alternative. The vulnerability of an alternative indicates the measure of risk we take in choosing that alternative.
Assessing alternatives and consequences involves the following steps.
Specification of individual criteria - their possible quantitative definition, qualitative characteristics, taking into account subjective aspects.
Comparison of the characteristics of various options for solving a problem, their consequences with standards and benchmarks.
Integration of comparison results in generalizing characteristics. Such integration is possible, for example, in cost form (in particular, the reduction of current and one-time costs, labor reduction) or in the form of point estimates.
The acceptability of an option refers to the degree to which the option satisfies all the objectives of the decision. One pole in the spectrum of alternatives is represented by options that fully satisfy all goals. At the other extreme are alternatives that do not satisfy either goal. Between the two extremes are options that may serve different purposes to varying degrees. It is in this intermediate area that the decision maker faces all the problems of selecting an option based on multiple criteria. At some point in a given sequence of alternatives, the concept of a “minimum level of acceptability” for a given decision can be defined. This concept can be represented by one or more points in a sequence that will separate what is acceptable from what is unacceptable. Rather, it will be a series within which lie various options for minimal acceptability.
The feasibility of an option determines the likelihood that the organization has or can obtain the necessary resources to implement the option. Here, as in assessing acceptability, it is difficult to clearly distinguish between the feasibility and non-feasibility of a particular option. But unlike the acceptability scale, multi-criteria selection will cause difficulties, since all the required resources must be available for the option to be feasible. The problem here is uncertainty, which stems from two points. First, the decision may not specify exactly what type of resources will be needed and in what quantities. Secondly, you cannot be sure that all the required resources will be available on time.
Options that are acceptable but not feasible, or feasible but not acceptable, should be discarded, although this is not as easy as it seems.
When evaluating options, it is assumed that the available information accurately describes the consequences of certain alternatives. However, there is often no complete control over the development of each option. You can choose an option, but only assume the consequences of its implementation. Often the most significant factors are beyond our influence and control. Therefore, it becomes quite understandable that various decision-making participants have different views on the same option and its likely consequences.
The analysis of feasible solution options involves the formation of many effective solutions. Regardless of the method (option) of forming and selecting admissible decision alternatives, determining effective solutions requires analyzing the generated set of admissible alternatives in order to narrow it down to the 2 or 3 most effective solutions (out of the set of admissible ones) by determining their preferences for the efficiency of resource use , minimal time and greater likelihood of resolving the problem. In this case, the following procedures for analyzing options are usually used: determining the degree of achievement of set goals, assessment (quantitative) necessary resources for its implementation, determination (assessment) of the probability of implementation, forecast of consequences (direct and indirect).
The following criteria are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the chosen solution: types and volumes of resources, the degree of achievement of the set goals (the likelihood of resolving the problem) and the time of implementation of the solution. Definition of a set effective options decision involves the use of an apparatus for determining absolute and relative assessment of the effectiveness of the solution. At the same time, a comparative assessment of options is carried out in terms of time and resource costs, as well as the likelihood of resolving the problem. Based on the results of this assessment, alternatives are selected that are the most effective in terms of implementation time, the resources required for implementation and the likelihood of resolving (removing) the problem, which constitute a set of effective solutions. The presence of their multitude is due to an ambiguous preference for one or another option according to the three preference (evaluation) criteria under consideration.
The performance criteria adopted for calculations are indicators based on numerical value of which, when implementing the decision made, conclusions can be drawn about the degree to which the set goals are achieved and tasks are solved. These criteria serve as units of measurement of the degree of achievement of management goals and the results of the organization's activities. Performance criteria include indicators that reflect the objective side of management results and the subjective attitude of people (who have full specific goals) to management, contributing to making the right decisions.
Thus, decision making is a conscious choice from available options or alternatives for a course of action that reduces the gap between the present and future desired state of the organization. The process of selecting potentially effective solutions is carried out on the basis that among the many alternative solutions there are always several similar ones. The evaluation of an alternative solution is carried out according to many criteria.
Conclusion
Making management decisions is an integral part of the activities of any enterprise. The efficiency of enterprises depends on the quality of management decisions. The problem of decision making is fundamental in nature, which is determined by the role that decisions play in any sphere of human activity. In the process of making management decisions, a large number of various methods.
This paper examined the main methods for selecting alternatives to management decisions. As discussed, methods are divided into individual and collective. The choice of method depends on the complexity of the situation and other conditions.
The importance and necessity of assessing alternative management decisions according to the criteria of realism and effectiveness was also considered. The purpose of this phase is to test what impact the implementation of the proposed alternatives will have on the existing system.
List of sources used
1. Bashkatova Yu.I. Management decisions: Tutorial. M.: Moscow International Institute of Econometrics, Informatics, Finance and Law, 2010. 89 p.
Blyumin S.L., Shuikova I.A. Models and methods of decision making under conditions of uncertainty: Textbook. Lipetsk: LEGI, 2010. 138 p.
Zlobina N.V. Management decisions: Textbook. Tambov: Tambov State Technical University, 2011. 80 p.
Kolpakov V.M. Theory and practice of managerial decision making: Textbook. K.: MAUP, 2011. 504 p.
Kulbakova I.G. Development of alternative options for management decisions // Bulletin of SevKavSTU, Series “Economics”. 2010. No. 2. 76s.
Larichev O.I. Theory and methods of decision-making, as well as a chronicle of events in the Magic Lands: Textbook. M.: Logos, 2011. 296 p.
Litvak B.G. Development of a management decision: Textbook. M.: Delo, 2011. 392 p.
Milner B.N., Lis F.S. Managing a modern company: A textbook. M.: INFRA-M, 2010. 34 p.
Smirnov E.A. Development of management decisions: Textbook. M.: UNITY, 2011. 48 p.
Chuikin A.M. Development of management decisions: Textbook. Kaliningrad: Kaliningrad University, 2010. 152 p.
Order work
Our specialists will help you write a paper with a mandatory check for uniqueness in the Anti-Plagiarism system.
Submit your application with the requirements right now to find out the cost and possibility of writing.
