Please provide a summary of this specific conclusion

This study attempted to provide the decision support consultant with some insight into the decision-making style of individual decision-makers as well as that of organisations. Only when such decision-making is understood can one claim to truly support it. In the field of Operations Research, the scientific method [1] is used to provide decision support. Often, this means a focus on the rational components of decision-making. Although analytical decision support tools may be extremely useful in solving problems in a complex and 158 SM Turpin & MA Marais industrialised environment, the same tools or methods cannot necessarily be applied to human decision-making. Even the seasoned decision-makers surveyed, most of whom had a highly analytical background, do not rely on formal decision support tools to a large extent. Indeed, one of the surprises of this study was that although a number of the decision-makers had formal training in sophisticated decision support methods and technology, some selling it to clients or stakeholders, they found limited use for it in their own environments. In the conversations, issues such as the appropriate use of gut feel and sensitivity to the political context often took precedence over the rational aspects of decision-making. The results of this study seem to indicate that rather than following the normative approach that attempts to improve the rationality of human decision-making, there might be merit in the support of an approach that is descriptive, focuses on the human process and assumes that people are competent decision-makers. The study shows that attention to aspects such as the decision-making context, the nature of the decision-making processes, people’s personal styles, the agendas of decision-makers, as well as the presentation of results, may significantly improve the impact of a decision support project. It also raises the question of how decision support consultants can develop a sensitivity towards the various models of thinking about decision-making so that they do not fall into the trap of reducing problems to fit their preferred models. One of the models of decision-making that received relatively strong support, in principle, was that of the Recognition-Primed Decision (RPD) model describing naturalistic decisionmaking. This was mainly because the RPD model recognises the use of, among others, gut feel and intuition as part of the decision-making process. The RPD model was based on the behaviour of people in crisis situations with severe time constraints. One suggestion for further research would be to investigate how the RDP model could be adapted for organisational decision-makers who might have more time to reflect and consult, but where the impact of decisions is still severe.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The study found that the use of formal decision support tools is not as prevalent as one might expec... View the full answer