1. Chapter 10 Decision Making
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

2. Overview Optimizing Model Satisficing Model Muddling Model
Mixed Scanning Model
Contingency Model
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

3. I The Classical Model: Optimizing
Optimizing: Make the Best Decision
Define the Problems
Establish Goals and Objectives
Generate all Possible Alternatives
Consider the Consequences of all Alternatives
Evaluate all Alternatives
Select the Best Alternative
Implement and Evaluate the Decision
Questions: Can you make the Best Decision? Why?
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

4. Some Decision Making Assumptions
Assumption One: Administrative decision making is a dynamic process that solves some organizational problems and creates others.
Always more problems
No final solutions
Assumption Two: Complete rationality in decision making is impossible;
Thus, administrators seek to satisfice rather than optimize. Why?
Optimize--the Best Decision
Satisfice-- “Good Enough”
Bounded Rationality--Best of a narrow set of alternatives.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

5. Decision Making Assumptions
Assumption Three:
Values are an integral part of decision making.
Assumption Four: Decision making is a general pattern of action found in the rational administration of all tasks and functions.
Define the problem
Analyze the difficulties in the situation
Establish criteria for a satisfactory decision
Develop a strategy of action
Initiate a plan of action
Evaluate the outcomes
Tasks of Administration: C&I, supervision, finance & business, PR, etc.
Functions of Administration: policy, resources, executive action
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

6. II The Administrative Model: Satisficing
Satisficing: Make a Satisfactory Decision
Recognize and Define the Problem
Initiate Action Plan
Program
Communicate
Monitor
Appraise
Analyze the Difficulties
Get the Relevant Facts
Classify the Problem
Specify Problem
Situation
Develop a Plan of Action
Consider Alternatives
Weigh Consequences of Each Alternative
Deliberate
Select Course of Action
Establish Criteria for a
Satisfactory Solution
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

7. II Steps in Administrative Model:
Satisficing
Step 1: Recognize and Define the Problem or Issue
Be sensitive to difficulties.
Define the problem: conceptualize it.
Don’t define problem either too narrowly or broadly.
What is the short-term problem?
What is the long-term problem?
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

8. Satisficing Step 2: Analyze the Difficulties in Existing Situation
Classify the problem.
New problem or Old?
Generic or Unique?
Routine or Novel?
Two common mistakes:
Treat routine problem as new problem.
Treat new problem as an old one.
Get the Relevant Facts
What is involved?
Why?
Where? And When?
To what extent?
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

9. Satisficing Step 3: Establish Criteria for a Satisfactory Outcome
What are the minimum objectives to be achieved.
Compare your “musts” with your “wants.”
Compare the ideal with satisfactory.
What is good enough?
The minimums that you must get to have a satisfactory decision--the boundary conditions.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

10. Satisficing Step 4: Develop an Action Plan or Strategy Warnings:
Do not decide questions that are not pertinent.
Do not decide prematurely.
Do not make decisions that cannot be effective.
Do not make decisions that others should make.
Developing a strategy is the heart of the decision-making process.
Specify your Alternatives.
Predict the Consequences.
Deliberate and Develop a Plan
Let’s examine each aspect of developing a strategy of action.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

11. Develop Plan of Action 1. Specify Alternatives
Develop a good list of alternatives--your options.
Generally speaking the more options the better, but try for at least a dozen; time is a constraint.
Search for novel and creative options.
Pause and reflect; avoid simple dichotomies.
Always consider “doing nothing” as your first option.
In brief--
Make few dichotomous distinctions.
Use divergent thinking strategies.
Make and take time to develop a good set of alternatives.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

12. 2. Predict Consequences
For each alternative, predict the probable consequences.
Often the development of alternatives and consequences occur together.
Try to anticipate the unexpected.
Groups are often important at this stage because the help gauge the possible outcomes.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

13. 3. Deliberate and Select Course of Action
Reflectively analyze your options and their consequences.
Develop a plan with contingencies.
Start with first option and then go to second, third, etc. depending on the actual consequences.
Think as many steps ahead as you can.
Be ready to shift plan if unexpected happens.
If you cannot find an acceptable alternative, be prepared to lower your aspiration level--lower criteria of satisfaction.
Use some simple heuristics if possible.
Be prepared to rethink your entire strategy if necessary.
Develop and exit strategy
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

14. Final Step in Satisficing
Step 5: Initiate and evaluate your plan of action
Program.
Communicate.
Monitor.
Assess success using criteria of satisfaction.
The end is usually a new beginning.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

15. Summary of Administrative Model: Satisficing
Step 1: Recognize and Define the Problem or Issue
Step 2: Analyze the Difficulties in Existing Situation
Step 3: Establish Criteria for a Satisfactory Outcome
Step 4: Develop an Action Plan or Strategy
Step 5: Initiate and evaluate your plan of action
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

16. TRAPS IN DECISION MAKING TO AVOID
Anchoring Trap:
Giving disproportional weight to initial information
Comfort Trap:
A bias toward alternatives that support the status quo
Recognition Trap:
Tendency to place a higher value on that which is familiar
Representative Trap:
Tendency to see others as representative of the typical stereotype
Sunk-Cost Trap:
Tendency to make decisions that justify previous decisions that are not
working.
Framing Trap:
Framing of the problem impacts the eventual solution (Be careful.)
Prudence Trap:
Tendency to be overcautious when faced with high-stakes decisions
Memory Trap:
Tendency to base predictions on memory of past events, which are often over-influenced by both recent and dramatic events
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

17. III The Incremental Model: Muddling
Muddling: Successive Limited Comparison
Charles Lindblom describes the way most decisions are made as the process of muddling through.
A small and limited set of options are considered.
Options are only marginally different from existing situation.
Options are considered by comparing actual consequences.
Try the option and then observe consequences.
If consequences are fine, then a little more.
If consequences are negative, then back off and try something different.
Focus is on outcomes and trial and error.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

18. Muddling Through Summary of Distinctive Features
Means-ends analysis is inappropriate because objectives and generating alternatives occur simultaneously.
Good solutions are what decision makers agree to regardless of objectives.
Alternatives and outcomes are drastically reduced by considering only options similar to current state.
Analysis is restricted to differences between existing state and proposed alternatives.
Muddling eschews theory in favor of successive comparison of concrete, practical alternatives.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

19. IV The Mixed Scanning Model: An Adaptive Strategy
Mixed Scanning is guided by two questions:
What is the organization’s mission?
What decisions move the organization towards its mission and policy?
Mixed scanning is a combination of the administrative model and mixed scanning model; it is directed, incremental change.
Mixed scanning has its roots in medicine.
A broad goal, mission, or policy guides the decision process.
Decisions are made incrementally, but with the broad goal in mind.
Consequences are assessed in terms of the goal.
Decisions are made with partial information.
Then further small decisions are made if progress is good.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

20. Principles of Mixed Scanning
Use focused trial and error.
Be tentative--proceed with caution.
If uncertain, procrastinate.
Stagger your decisions in stages.
If uncertain, factionalize your decisions.
Hedge your bets.
Be prepared to reverse your decisions.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

21. Mixed Scanning Summary of Distinctive Features
Broad organization policy gives direction and provides guidance.
Good decisions have satisfactory outcomes and are consistent
with policy and mission.
The search for options is limited to those close to the problem.
Information is incomplete but action essential.
Theory, experience, and successive comparisons are used together.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

22. Comparison of the Classical, Administrative, Incremental,
and Mixed-Scanning Models of Decision Making
Classical
Objectives are set
prior to generating
alternatives
Decision making is
a means-ends
analysis: first, ends
are determined, and
then ALL the means to
obtain them are sought.
The test of a good
decision is that it is
shown to be the BEST
means to achieve the
end.
(Optimizing)
Engage in comprehensive
analysis; all alternatives
and all consequences
are considered.
Heavy reliance on theory.
Administrative
Objectives are usually
set prior to
generating alternatives.
Decision making is
typically means-ends
analysis; however,
occasionally ends change
as a result of analysis.
The test of a good decision
is that it can be shown to
result in a SATISFACTORY
means to achieve the end;
it falls within the
established boundary
conditions.
(Satisficing)
Engage in “problemistic
search” until a set of
reasonable alternatives
is identified.
Reliance on both theory and
experience.
Incremental
Setting objectives and
generating alternatives
are intertwined.
Because means and
ends are not
separable, means-
ends analysis is
inappropriate.
The test of a good decision
is that the decision
makers can agree an
alternative is the “right”
direction when the
existing course proves to
be wrong.
(Successive comparing)
Drastically limit the search
and analysis; focus on
alternatives similar to the
existing state. Many
alternatives and important
outcomes are ignored.
Successive comparisons reduce
or eliminate the need for theory.
Mixed Scanning
Broad policy guidelines
are set prior to
generating alternatives.
Decision making is
focused on broad ends
and tentative means.
The test of a good decision
is that it can be shown to
result in a satisfactory
decision that is consistent
with the organization’s
policy.
(Adaptive satisficing)
Limit the search and analysis to
alternatives close to the problem,
but evaluate alternatives in
terms of broad policy. More
comprehensive than
incrementalism.
Theory, experience, and successive
Comparisons used together.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

23. V A Contingency Model of Decision Making
Yes
Satisficing
Important?
Yes
Sufficient
Time? No
Truncated Satisficing
Yes
Yes
Adaptive Satisficing
Important?
Decision
Opportunity No
Sufficient
Information?
Truncated Adaptive
Satisficing No
Yes
Adaptive Satisficing
Important?
Yes
Truncated Adaptive
Satisficing No
Sufficient
Time? No
Muddling to
Adaptive Satisficing
Yes
Important? No No
Muddling
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

24. End Decision Making in Schools
Swift and Smart DM Rules
Satisficing Rule: Optimizing is impossible in school administration: learn to satisfice.
Framing Rule: Frame problems in positive terms for positive results.
Default Rule: Consider as a first option “doing nothing.”
Simplicity rule: Simplicity trumps complexity; start simple.
Uncertainty Rule: Uncertain environments often require ignoring information; trust your intuition in this regard.
Take-the-Best Rule: Choose the first satisfactory option.
Transparency Rule: Make transparency in decision making a habit of thought and action.
Contingency Rule: Reflect on your successes and failures; think conditionally.
Participation Rule: Involve others in decisions when you deem they have relevant knowledge, a personal stake, and are trustworthy.
End Decision Making in Schools
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

25. Practical Imperatives
Use satisficing models of decision making: Optimizing is impossible.
Frame problems in ways that enhance positive, productive solutions: Framing does affect solutions.
View decision making as a continuous process: There are no final solutions.
View problems in terms of both short- and long-term goals: Immediate actions should be consistent with long-term goals.
Employ decision-making heuristics carefully: Avoid their hidden traps.
Use adaptive satisficing when information is vague or overwhelming or when time is of the essence: Adapt decision making to these decision constraints.
Employ objectives, mission, or policy to guide your decisions making: Adaptive satisficing needs direction.
Decide on the appropriate decision-making strategy: Assess the sufficiency of information, available time, and the importance of the decision before deciding.
Use soft vigilance to solve problems under pressure: Hypervigilance produces panic.
Remember there are no final solutions, but only satisfactory solutions for the present.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011