PLEASE RESPOND TO PEERS POST

Weekly question was:

ecision making is the process of identifying and choosing alternative courses of action. While we want to make rational decisions, sometimes we don'tsometimes we make non-rational decisions.

There are four steps in rational decision-making:

1. Recognize and define the problem or opportunity. In business, the problem can come in the form of customer complaints, supplier breakdowns, staff turnover, sales decline, and so on. Organizations proactively seek opportunities to exceed goals, surpass the industry expectations, and to expand and grow the business.
2. Identify and analyze alternative courses of action. Leaders should seek input from multiple sources to interpret and analyze the problem/opportunity to come up with as many options as possible to solve the issue.
3. Choose a preferred course of action. The group want to answer the following:
   • Is the action ethical?
   • Is it feasible? (Costs, technology availability.)
   • Is it effective? If your answer to this question is the resolution is "good enough," you want to rethink this solutionit will cause more harm than good.
4. Implement the preferred course of action. You need to the participation from all teams to successfully implement the action.

On the other hand, non-rational decisions are generally the result of either satisficing (going with the first available option without much research) or intuition (using your "gut" or just your own feelings to make decisions).

For this week's discussion, think about a time when you made a non-rational decision on the job or in your personal life.

PEERS RESPONSE WAS

The time I made a non-rational decision comes from the time when I was the Line President of my academic fraternity. We had several members who did not help with planning or executing events. There was this one person in particular that I just had an incredibly off feeling about. Then one day, she said something in our group chat, and my first reaction was calling her out if front of everyone while projecting my negative emotions towards her in that message as well (satisficing). However, a few days later, we actually had the opportunity to chat about why she was so "checked out" from our group activities. Turns out she had many things happening in her life (academically and personally) that were affecting her ability to be present physically and emotionally. Needless to say, I felt horrible about unjustly calling her out without understanding her full situation.

As a result of that situation, I did have to have a conversation with the fraternity president, and the whole fraternity had to have a heart-to-heart meeting to address the animosity that was growing amongst the members. Although it was constructive, to this day I am embarrassed of my behavior/how I handled that situation all because her vibe was "off" to me.

My decision would have been different by:

1) Understanding that there was a conflict of personalities and lack of communication.

2) Understanding that calling someone out is never okay. Courses of action could have included talking with her privately or addressing the issue of participation with the fraternity president.

3) Both of those options are feasible, effective, and action ethical. They would both offer the opportunity for the parties involved to be more open regarding why they couldn't be available. It would include a private conversation, so negative behaviors and perceptions can be avoided.

4) To implement those actions, scheduling a time to have had that conversation would be the next step. After doing that, I did like how the official board members gathered us all to allow an opportunity to clear the air. I would definitely implement that as well.

Those steps would have helped me make a better decision about how to address the issue because it would have allowed for those involved to share their sides of the story. When it comes to working with people who have different personalities/ways of doing things, open communication is going to save a lot of headaches from misunderstandings. By implementing those four steps, I would have had a better understanding of the situation and a clearer sense of judgment in order to accurately address the-not just her issue-the fraternity's issue with the lack of participation and communication.