Thursday, April 7, 2011

Vroom-Yetton-Jago Normative Decision Model

I believe that a huge part of being a leader is based upon the ability to effectively make decisions.  Leadership is based around being able to make decisions, set goal, conceive vision, all while keeping in mind the ideas of your followers in order to gain their buy in and support to achieve a goal. Vroom-Yetton-Jago Normative Decision Model is similar to the situational model in the sense that it explains the importance of making decisions that pertain to each situation.  A leader will be most accepted when making decisions and suggestions if the decision is appropriate to the situation.

This theory is based around two ideas: d
ecision quality & decision acceptance.

Decision quality is defined as “the selection of the best alternative, and is particularly important when there are many alternatives. It is also important when there are serious implications for selecting (or failing to select) the best alternative.”

I really enjoyed the steps that were laid out on the website:
http://decision-quality.com/intro.php
1. Realize when and why you need to make a decision.
2. Declare the decision: decide what the decision is, how you’ll work it, and who should be involved.
3. Work the decision: generate a complete set of alternatives, gather the information you need to understand the possibilities and probabilities, and ultimately make a choice that best fits your values.
4. Commit resources and act

The second idea is decision acceptance.  This is “the degree to which a follower accepts a decision made by a leader. Leaders focus more on decision acceptance when decision quality is more important.”

Vroom and Yetton defined five different decision procedures (ranging from autocratic to consultative to group-based decisions) on the situation & level of involvement.

These procedures include:
“Autocratic Type 1 (AI) – Leader makes own decision using information that is readily available to you at the time. This type is completely autocratic.

Autocratic Type 2 (AII)
 – Leader collects required information from followers, then makes decision alone. Problem or decision may or may not be informed to followers. Here, followers involvement is just providing information.
Consultative Type 1 (CI) – Leader shares problem to relevant followers individually and seeks their ideas & suggestions and makes decision alone. Here followers’ do not meet each other & leader’s decision may or may not has followers influence. So, here followers involvement is at the level of providing alternatives individually.
Consultative Type 2 (CII) – Leader shares problem to relevant followers as a group and seeks their ideas & suggestions and makes decision alone. Here followers’ meet each other and through discussions they understand other alternatives. But leader’s decision may or may not has followers influence. So, here followers involvement is at the level of helping as a group in decision-making.
Group-based Type 2(GII) – Leader discuss problem & situation with followers as a group and seeks their ideas & suggestions through brainstorming. Leader accepts any decision & do not try to force his idea. Decision accepted by the group is the final one.”

I found the following list to be very insightful.  It explains s
ituational factors that influence which method should be used.
  • When decision quality is important and followers possess useful information, then A1 and A2 are not the best method.
  • When the leader sees decision quality as important but followers do not, then G2 is inappropriate.
  • When decision quality is important, when the problem is unstructured and the leader lacks information / skill to make the decision alone, then G2 is best.
  • When decision acceptance is important and followers are unlikely to accept an autocratic decision, then A1 and A2 are inappropriate.
  • When decision acceptance is important but followers are likely to disagree with one another, then A1, A2 and C1 are not appropriate, because they do not give opportunity for differences to be resolved.
  • When decision quality is not important but decision acceptance is critical, then G2 is the best method.
  • When decision quality is important, all agree with this, and the decision is not likely to result from an autocratic decision then G2 is best.

1 comment: