Question 1: Was the decision facing Greyhound executives programmed or non-programmed? Provide examples to justify your answer
There is a clear distinction between the two types of managerial decisions. A programmed decision is made when you can apply solutions basing on past experience to matters of routine. There will be no error in the decisions because the managers would have the required information. A non-programmed decision applies specific solutions crafted for a unique problem. There is a great risk for a serious problem to occur for the fact that there are limited information and countless of uncertainty when a decision is being made. From the text, we can identify with certainty that Greyhound executives made non-programmed decisions
The decision to computerize the system which range from passenger reservations to fleet scheduling is one of the examples of non-programmed decisions. The introduction of Trips, computerised reservations system was a big change considering that Greyhound was still utilizing the traditional manual method. This decision was being made as the executives were very optimistic about the improvement that will be brought upon and it was being seen as a perfect solution to counter their deficiency in the area of customer service. The data collected were also promising. However the consequences of not heeding the words of advice of the managers proved detrimental as the outcomes were not like what was stated by the data.
The next non-programmed decision is the reorganization plan that includes substantial cuts in workforce, routes and services. This is a counter measure for the losses made by the company. Nevertheless, it is also not logical. A reduction in workforce and services is not going to help to improve the customer services provided in any way. Information deficiencies leaded the executives to make the wrong decision.
To conclude, non-programmed decisions are made when unexpected problems are faced and information on hands is limited. There is a risk of error to form which will affect the organization as a whole badly.
Question 2: Do you think Greyhound should have used the classical, administrative, or political model to make its decision? Which do you believe it used? Discuss. Provide examples to justify your answers.
The three models which consist of the classical, administrative and political model differs in terms of the clarity of the goals, condition of certainty, information available at any one time and the method used by the members of a group in making decisions. In my opinion, Greyhound should use the classical model to make a decision.
The reason is that the executives of Greyhound have already identified the problem. They understood that the company faces difficulty in providing buses which is of maximum capacity and they are not providing enough bus services when the demand for rides increased. They also took notice of the disciplinary issue of the terminal employee. The problems were clear cut. Besides, they were also provided with full information on the possible alternatives and consequences. For example, the manager in computer programming urged the executive to delay the introduction of the computerized system, Trips, so that they can fix the bugs in the highly complex software. This contributes to a coalition of certainty, risk is at its minimum. The consequences of not heeding the advice would be to face a risk of total system collapse. From there, we can make an optimizing decision. By making rational choices, we maximize the benefit of the outcome.
But, Greyhound used the administrative model in their decision making process. They approached the matter by treating the problems and goals as if it was indefinite and unclear. But in fact it was the opposite. Furthermore, they ignored the suggestion made by the managers and caused a self inflict damage on themselves. This action limits the information on the alternatives and their consequences. As a result it creates a condition of uncertainty, which makes the application of the administrative model reasonable. Thus, the executive’s makes satisficing choice which means they choose the first solution alternative that satisfies minimal decision criteria. This is understandable if the solutions and problems were unclear from the start, but this is not the case. Greyhound put themselves in a difficult situation when they can solve the problem in a more effective way through the classical model.
The reason why political model was not being considered is because although there were signs of conflicting goals between the managers and the executives of Greyhound. But a decision was still being made, regardless of the inconsistent viewpoints exchanged. The information provided by the manager in response to the proposal by the executive was clear. The managers fully recognize the danger and risk that will be brought upon. Hence condition of uncertainty is not present. Furthermore bargaining and discussion among the coalition members were non-existent.
In conclusion, I believe that the classical model is more appropriate to be used due to the clarity of the problem, condition of certainty and the availability of information.
Question 3: Analyse the Greyhound case in terms of the steps in the managerial decision making process. Do you think top executives paid adequate attention to all steps? If you were a Greyhound executive, what would you do now and why?
The five managerial steps are listed as identifying and defining the problem, generating and evaluating possible solutions, choosing a solution, implementing the solution and finally evaluating result. These are the common steps considering someone is making a decision rationally.
The first and most important step of the five managerial decisions is identifying and defining problem. It will determine the type of problem solving strategies that we want to implement. The problems facing Greyhound Lines Inc. comprises the inability to dispatch virtually empty buses, having employees who were not displaying professional behaviour and also not having drivers or buses on call to meet the demand by customers. The executives correctly defined the problems as it was neither too broad nor narrow. They also managed to focus directly on the causes instead of the symptoms of the problems. Finally, they chose the correct problems to deal with as these are the trouble which are causing the financial loss of Greyhound Line Inc.
Secondly, we have the generating and evaluating possible solutions step. This is where the Greyhound Executives went all wrong in their judgement. A mistake that the executives made was they were too hasty in committing themselves to a particular solution without considering the alternatives that may be potentially suitable for the problem that they are facing. If I was an executive of Greyhound, I would have conducted the cost-benefit analysis. This analysis allows the comparison of the cost and benefits of each potential course of action whereby the best case scenario would be having the benefit of solving the performance deficiency to outweigh the cost of implementing the alternatives. The few options suggested by the managers are to cut back on the huge workforce reduction, postponing the introduction of the computerised reservation system and to educate the employees on the way to operate the system. But the executives did not review it.
The following step would be choosing a solution. The Greyhound executives actually made a satisficing decision. Meaning, they chose the first satisfactory alternative that came to their attention. In this case, they were dead set on choosing to implement the reorganization plan and introducing computerization. This is a decision made under the behavioral model, through which decisions are made with limited information and bounded rationality. Errors are bound to happen this way. If I was an executive, I would consider the suggestions made by my managers before I choose a solution. This is an optimizing decision and an optimizing decision allows me to choose the alternative giving me the absolute best solution to a problem.
Subsequently, we have to implement the solution. Participation is crucial for a successful implementation. Participation is evident as the middle managers, managers in computer programming, the Human resource department and the terminal manager all contributed their ideas. Nevertheless, the managers had an equivocal thought with the executives. Surprisingly the plan was still given the green light by the executives. Given the solutions presented by them, I would have tried to reach a compromise. This will show my respect towards them as a fellow employee.
Finally, we must evaluate the result of the decisions made. A continuity of commitment to gather information on performance result allows us to make corrective actions. The outcomes were not positive for the case of Greyhound Lines Inc. The strategies and premature introduction of the new computerization reservations system resulted in inefficiency of customer service, dissatisfied customers and a decrease in ridership. The management ought to formulate corrective measures after identifying the dire state of the company. The executives did nothing on this aspect.