Wharton describes three decision-making approaches for dealing with multiple stakeholders within complex environments. These approaches used when navigating data-rich environments, navigating systemic complexity, and navigating multistakeholder and environmental complexity. For example, in data-rich environments “managers are using tools such as data mining and data warehousing to harness this avalanche of data in their business decisions” (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001, p. 121). While data is an element driving complexity, “interactions across multiple system boundaries surrounding a particular decision context” (Hoch et al., 2001, p. 122) is another factor increasing complexity. Computer models are being created to navigate systemic complexity and simulate these interactions. These models have proven to be invaluable to decision-making within complex environments but are only as good as the information input into them by the decision maker. The final challenge lies within navigating multistakeholder and environmental complexity. The interactions of multiple stakeholders increase complexity and therefore cooperation amongst competition is a necessary tool required to help operate such a complex environment. There are also three basic ingredient to new approaches to decision-making strategies” (Hoch et al., 2001). They are:
Building the information base. Data mining and warehousing combined with evaluation tools provide more precise informational base for decisions. Identifying constraints. Assuring that today’s decisions are directed at assuring a rich menu of possibilities for tomorrow’s decisions.
Strengthening organizational capabilities. Organizations as a whole require new skills and capabilities to design and implement new tools.
While reading this chapter I couldn't help but think of the Air Force's multiple programs and processes for assignments and duty positions. One must go to several websites to retrieve their personal records and different websites to apply for possible positions. In a military force of over 300,000 members, the Air Force (in my opinion) is lacking in their informational organizational capabilities. I believe the Air Force should have a "one-stop shop" informational base with Airmen's records, available assignments/positions and other useful information (skills, experience, aptitude, personality, interests, etc). For example, if the Air Force combined the current websites of ARMS, PRDA, AMS, VPC this would provide a more convenient process for obtaining records and information. I also think the Air Force should have each Airmen take a personality, intelligence, aptitude and decision-making analysis that could help leadership match their styles with assignment r
equirements. "The ability to effectively match an employee’s skills and personality to a specific job function is a vital component of successful management and leadership. By contrast, trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole can prove costly in terms of employee performance, team dynamics and corporate return on investment" (O'Rourke, 2019). If the Air Force used available tests and subsequently tested members at regular intervals to compare any changes, they could manage and measure the success of our Airmen. First the Air Force would have build the infomration base by combining available data and resources along with new personnel analysis data. Data mining systems could analyze all the information compared with manning positions to provide leaders the best possible "fit" for each job and vice versa for each Airman. Essentially, this could "put more powerful tools into decision maker's hands for addressing decisions" (Hoch et al, 2001, p. 129). This proposed solution could benefit several stakeholders; the Airman, leadership and the Air Force by matching capabilities, personalities and interests. However there are consequences as well. For instance, it is not realistic to assume each member will be matched with their "best fit" position. Nor is it accurate to believe that each test will be 100% correct in their assessments. Nevertheless, I feel a model of this extent could optimize navigating the systematic, multistakeholder and environmental complexity of the Air Force. References:
Hoch, S. J., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R. E. (2001). Wharton on making decisions (1st ed.). New York: Wiley.
O'Rourke, James. (2019, September 17). Putting Your Personality to Work. Retrieved from https://www.notredameonline.com/resources/business-administration/matching-employee-skills-and-personality/
No comments:
Post a Comment