Shared Decision Making: The Hoy-Tarter Simplified Model © Hoy, 2003

Question Should you involve subordinates in the decision-making process? Natural systems --human relations Answer-- “Of Course!” Rational systems-scientific management Answer-- Only if they have expertise. Open systems-social science Answer-- “It Depends!” © Hoy, 2003

Four Critical Questions • Under what conditions should the leader involve subordinates in decision making? • To what extent should subordinates be involved? • How should the decision making group be structured and function? • What is the role of the leader in participative leadership? © Hoy, 2003

Assumptions of the Hoy-Tarter Model As subordinates are involved in decision making located within their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be less effective. As subordinates are involved in decision making outside their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be more effective. As participants are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL EXPERTISE, their participation will be marginally effective. As subordinates are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL INTEREST, their participation will be marginally effective. © Hoy, 2003

Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcome? Zone of Acceptance Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcome? YES NO Outside Zone of Acceptance (Definitely include) Marginal with Expertise (Occasionally include) YES Do subordinates have expertise? Marginal with Relevance (Occasionally include) Inside Zone of Acceptance (Definitely exclude) NO © Hoy, 2003

Another Important Question Can you trust subordinates to make a decision in the best interest of the organization? Thus there are three critical questions: Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcomes of the decision? [The Relevance Question] 2. Do subordinates have the expertise to make a knowledgeable contribution? [The Expertise Question] 3. Can you trust subordinates to make a decision in the best interest of the organization? [The Trust Question] © Hoy, 2003

Situations for Participative Decision Making Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative Relevance? Yes Yes Yes No No Expertise? Yes Yes No Yes No Trust? Yes No Yes/No Yes/No N/A © Hoy, 2003

Decision Situations: Review Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative © Hoy, 2003

Decision Situations and Degree of Involvement Democratic--Maximum Involvement. Conflictual--Limit Involvement (until trust is developed). Stakeholder--Occasional Involvement (to educate). Expert--Occasional Involvement (for better decisions). Noncollaborative--No Involvement. © Hoy, 2003

Decision-Making Groups and Their Functions Group Consensus Group Majority Group Advisory Individual Advisory Unilateral Who is Leader Leader Leader Leader and Leader Involved? and Group and Group and Group Selected Individuals Nature of Group shares Group shares Group shares Individuals No subordinate Involvement? information, information, information, provide data, involvement analyzes and deliberates, analyzes and discuss, and reaches and votes on recommends. recommend. consensus. action. Who makes Group by Group by Leader with Leader with Leader Alone the decision? Consensus Majority Rule Advice Advice © Hoy, 2003

Five Leadership Roles The integrator brings subordinates together for consensus decision-making. Here the task is to reconcile divergent opinions and positions. The parliamentarian facilitates open communication by protecting the opinions of the minority and leads through a democratic process to a group decision. The educator reduces resistance to change by explaining and discussing with group members the opportunities and constrains of the decisional issues. The solicitor seeks advice from subordinate-experts. The quality of decisions is improved As the administrator guides the generation of relevant information. The director makes unilateral decisions in those instances where the subordinates have no expertise or personal stake. Here the goal is efficiency. © Hoy, 2003

Administrative Roles for Decision Making Role Function Aim Integrator Brings together divergent positions To achieve consensus Parliamentarian Facilitates open discussion To support reflective deliberation Educator Explains and discusses issues To assure acceptance of decisions Solicitor Solicits advice from teachers To improve quality of decisions Director Makes unilateral decisions To attain efficiency © Hoy, 2003

Participative Decision Making A Normative Model for Participative Decision Making Relevance YES NO Marginal with Expertise YES Outside Zone Expertise Marginal with Relevance NO Inside Zone Trust YES NO 1. Situation? Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative 2. Involvement? Yes and extensive Yes but limited Occasionally Occasionally None and limited and limited 3. Decision- Group Group Group Group Individual Unilateral Making Consensus Majority Advisory Advisory Advisory Structures 4. Role of Integrator Parliamentarian Educator Educator Solicitor Director Superior? © Hoy, 2003