Curious Observation – First Step in Decision Making Process
February 12, 2025
Abraham Maslow is well renowned for proposing the Hierarchy of Needs Theory in 1943. This theory is a classical depiction of human motivation. This theory is based on the assumption that there is a hierarchy of five needs within each individual. The urgency of these needs varies. These five needs are as follows- Physiological needs- […]
The authority exercised is a kind of legitimate power and people follow figures exercising it, because their positions demand so irrespective of the person holding the position. Leaders in organizations and elsewhere may have formal authorities but they mostly rely on the informal authority that they exercise on people to influence them. Leaders are trusted […]
Oral communication implies communication through mouth. It includes individuals conversing with each other, be it direct conversation or telephonic conversation. Speeches, presentations, discussions are all forms of oral communication. Oral communication is generally recommended when the communication matter is of temporary kind or where a direct interaction is required. Face to face communication (meetings, lectures, […]
The previous articles touched upon the role of hierarchy in decision making. In this article, we consider whether top down decision or bottom up decision making is effective. To consider this comparison it would be useful to think of top down decision making as being akin to someone sitting on top of a tree telling […]
An individual alone can’t create wonders. He needs the support of others as well to discuss things and evaluate the pros and cons of his thoughts and concepts. Individuals should work together without fighting with each other for the timely accomplishment of a task. The team members must be focused and concentrate on their work […]
Corporate decision making happens at various levels in organizations and can be top down or bottom up. The difference between these two styles of decision making is that the top down decision making is done at the higher levels of the hierarchy and the decisions are passed down the corporate ladder to be implemented.
On the other hand, bottom up decision making is done by giving autonomy to the middle managers and the line managers to take decisions based on the conditions and circumstances existing in their teams.
In many organizations, what we see is a top down decision making in the realms of policy, strategic focus, direction in which the organization has to proceed and bottom up decision making about the day to day running of the teams.
It needs to be remembered that the middle management is often called the “sandwich” layer because they have to implement the decisions made above and at the same time have to decide about how to run the teams and have to communicate them to the lower levels as well.
The point here is that in any process of corporate decision making, the actual implementers play a critical role since the best laid plans of the top management can go awry in case there is no commitment from the middle management.
Hence, many organizations organize off site meetings at resorts and other places where the senior management briefs the middle management about the decisions that they have taken and how it would impact the organization.
Corporate decision making is also characterized by consensus or the lack of it. Like in the real world, corporations often have power centers and groups that have their own agendas and hence arriving at a consensus can be cumbersome for the CEO or the Chairman of the Board of Directors. It is because of this reason that many corporations witness periodic restructurings with regards to organizational structure and with regards to turnover among the top management.
In recent months, Infosys has seen rapid and often turbulent situations in the company because of the power struggles at the top as well as lack of consensus among the top management about the direction that the company ought to take.
The other aspect related to corporate decision making is that many organizations thrive on leaders who have a “halo” around them and hence decision making is smooth because the rival power centers often concede to the leader’s charisma or his or her ability and vision.
Again, Infosys has seen this happen when with the retirement of its legendary founder, N R Narayana Murthy; the company is going through a bad phase with competing factions jostling for control.
Apple is an example of a company that relied on the halo effect of its founder, Steve Jobs and once he passed away, there is some uncertainty about the way the company should take in the market.
In conclusion, corporate decision making is successful as long as there is a “glue” to bind the organization together in the form of charismatic leaders or an organizational culture that values coherence and imposes stability. Once any of these conditions are removed, then the organizations fall into a self-defeating trap wherein the process of corporate decision making is impaired leading to the loss of competitiveness of the company.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *