Advertisment

Decision making and the art of driving

author-image
DQW Bureau
New Update

Man is such a bundle of contradictions. What he doesn't do himself, (or at least doesn't like doing) he likes to see others do. One of the most common things said about him is that he is resistant to change. And yet what he craves around him is change. Constancy bores him. And so it is that the old order giveth away and the new order takes its place. 

Advertisment

The only thing is that he mostly has little control over change. For change is being brought about by all kinds of people. And all of them don't think alike. No wonder the biggest challenge lies in aligning groups of people to the same thought process so that they channel their efforts towards a common goal and do not end up dissipating their energies in different directions.

For large organizations, this poses a considerable challenge. And it is a even greater challenge where you have a significant number of senior knowledge workers capable of independent thinking. In fact, leadership may be all about getting these great thinkers together to pool their collective thoughts and come up with an agenda that each one is committed to.

Of course, there are two ways of achieving this. There is a simple way and there is a difficult way. The simple way is that the top man makes it extremely difficult for other senior guys with independent thinking (usually at variance with his own) to stay on in the organization. I will not get into the mechanics of it, but there are several ways in which you could make others uncomfortable to the extent that they leave.

Advertisment

Naturally, this method will raise the percentage of people who think like the boss. (God only knows why you need to pay for guys who can only think like you. Please note that the operative word here is 'only'.)

The more difficult way to achieve this is to get these senior guys together and evolve a common approach through a process of give and take (By give and take, I definitely do not mean bargaining). You create a healthy environment for free exchange of idea. It is a constructive approach where you think through each decision rather than adopt something which sounds attractive on the face of it.

The second method calls for high degree of maturity in handling people. Each member of the team must be given due respect for his ideas. The think-through process automatically brings up problem areas and possible inconsistencies. Depending on the nature of the problem, one could decide whether a radically different approach is required or one only needs to take slight detours on the way.

Advertisment

Unfortunately, it is not uncommon to find organizations where the former approach is taken. It leaves the organization with a highly depleted think tank.

Obviously, those adopting this approach do not think that there is anything amiss. On the contrary, they feel that it helps speed up the decision making process. In our nano seconds world, speed is of essence. So it is easy to sell this approach.

There is another factor, which helps adoption of the first approach. Everyone wants lean and mean organizations these days. When you create situations for senior guys to leave, you are able to project this positively as reduction of flab. After all, senior guys get fat salaries (mostly) and the 80-20 rule may well apply in their case on the wage bill.

Advertisment

The lean and mean approach had gone to such an extent that anyone crossing the age of 35 had to keep his fingers crossed. Thankfully better sense seems to have prevailed (in good time) and some pundit has talked of the future times as being the 'revenge of the gray haired' (as also the 'revenge of the nerds'). So experience will have its rewards after all. (If you really want to make your professional career doubly safe, you better strive to become a gray haired nerd!)

As for the 'speed of decision making' factor, I got some interesting insights from the call center practitioners at Chicago. A call center agent is supposed to help increase customer billing by keeping the call as short as possible. This way more number of calls can be attended to, thereby resulting in higher billings. Naturally, managers end up assigning stiffer and stiffer call duration' targets. The result is that the agent does manage to meet his/her targets.

Great! But there is a catch. The customer ends up making repeat calls till his issue is fully resolved. For the call center, it means more calls and hence more billings. For the customer it means dissatisfaction with the service provider. In the short term there is gain. In the long term the customer may never come back!

Advertisment

The criticality of the think-through process in decision making can hardly be over emphasized. If you've read Spencer Johnsons' 'Yes or No', you will appreciate this point much better.

The quality of decision making can never be subjected to speed alone. You can drive a car only as fast as it remains in control. Else you may end up driving a new car every now and then. Or who knows, god forbid, not be able to drive one at all. 

Sumit Sharma is Associate VP, Microland and the author of the book titled `The Corporate Circus.'

Advertisment