In addition to affecting different stages of the decision-making process, value systems influence the overall approach of decision makers from various cultures. The relative level of utilitarianism versus moral idealism in any society affects its overall approach to problems. Generally speaking, utilitarianism strongly guides behavior in the Western world. In fact, research has shown that Canadian executives are more influenced by a short-term, cost-benefit approach to decision making than their Hong Kong counterparts. Canadian managers are considerably more utilitarian than leaders from the People's Republic of China, who approach problems from a standpoint of moral idealism; they consider the problems, alternatives, and solutions from a long-term, societal perspective rather than an individual perspective.
Another important variable in companies' overall approach to decision making is that of autocratic versus participative leadership. In other words, who has the authority to make what kinds of decisions? A country's orientation-whether it is individualistic or collectivist (as discussed in Chapter 3.- influences the level at which decisions are made. In many countries with hierarchical cultures-Germany, Turkey, and India, among others-the authorization for action has to be passed upward through echelons of management before final decisions can be made. Most employees in these countries simply expect the autocrat, the boss, to do most of the decision making and would not be comfortable otherwise. Even in China, which is a highly collectivist society, employees expect autocratic leadership because their value system presupposes the superior to be automatically the most wise. In comparison, in Sweden, decision-making authority is very decentralized. Americans talk a lot about the advisability of such participative leadership, but in practice they are probably around the middle between autocratic and participative management styles.
Arab managers have long traditions of consultative decision making, supported by the Koran and the sayings of Mohamed. However, such consultation occurs more on a person-to-person basis than in group meetings, and thus diffuses potential opposition.67 While business in the Middle East tends to be transacted in a highly personalized manner, the final decisions are made by the top leaders, who feel that they must impose their will for the company to be successful. In comparison, in cultures like Japan's that emphasize collective harmony, participatory or group decision making predominates, and consensus is important. The best-known example is the bottom-up (rather than top-down) decision-making process used in most Japanese companies, described in more detail in the Comparative Management in Focus.
One final area of frequent incongruence concerns the relative speed of decision making. A country's culture affects how fast or slow decisions tend to be made. The relative speed may be closely associated with the level of delegation, as just discussed, but not always. The pace at which decisions are made can be very disconcerting for outsiders. North Americans and Europeans pride themselves on being decisive; managers in the Middle East, with a different sense of temporal urgency, associate the importance of the matter at hand with the length of time needed to make a decision. Without knowing this cultural attitude, a hasty American would insult an Egyptian; a quick decision, to the Egyptian, would reflect a low regard for the relationship and the deal.
As a summary, Exhibit 5-10 illustrates how all the variables just discussed can affect the steps in the decision-making process.
Approaches to Decision Making : Economic article from Global Management Catagory Approaches to Decision Making
Approaches to Decision Making Economic article from Economic Global Management.Free learning from data about Approaches to Decision Making Economic Global Management Business Management,online business management,business management classes,online business management degrees