Decision-Making Styles

There are several decision-making styles to choose from in order to reach the company’s/organization’s objectives. The best ones are extremes: the first is directive, wherein only key people get to decide; and the other one is participative, wherein rank and file employees are given the chance to voice out their opinions concepts and ideas. This paper intends to discuss both as Hewlett-Packard’s style for the first and mine for the second. It also aims to provide the strengths and weaknesses of both styles.Last but not least, its objective is also to mention the solution to both the problems/flaws that inevitably arises in both styles.

Decision-Making Style of Hewlett-Packard I have worked for Hewlett-Packard for quite some time now and I have observed that the decision-making style the organization utilizes is known as “Directive Decision-Making”, which a style of decision-making wherein the decision is made by the people in charge alone (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ).

Furthermore, in this kind of style, the authority/authorities do not open the issues for discussion; instead, the person/people in charge are the only one/s who will be engaged in all the thinking and analysis, before eventually deciding on an issue (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ). Strengths of the Decision-Making Style of Hewlett-Packard Directive Decision-Making is exceedingly effective if it is utilized for the creation of “policy/procedures” (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n.

p. ).Furthermore, if the issues are absolutely confidential, then this style is the perfect one to be utilized since only the top officials of an organization are informed about it (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ).

Moreover, if the decision to be made is with regards to “staffing” then this is the right style to be chosen because only the key persons should be notified about it (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ).In addition to the aforementioned, if an issue is politically-oriented or client-sensitive, this should really be the correct style to be carried out (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc.

, 1997, n. p. ). Also, if it is necessary that the issue is to be regulated then the decision-making style to be utilized should really be this one (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p.

).Through this style, the owner, head/manager of the organization/company is almost sure of the outcome of his decision as everything is instructed or directed by him/her/them; the rules are properly/strictly implemented, that is why the expected outcome may really be attained (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ). Last but not least, if the other people working for/involved in the organization do not have the intellectual capability of arriving at the correct decision then this style of decision-making should be picked (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc.

 , 1997, n. p. ).Weaknesses of the Decision-Making Style of Hewlett-Packard There are weaknesses as well to this decision-making style that Hewlett-Packard picked and some of these are the following: First of all, the employees’ only role is to accept the final decision made by the key person/individuals and adhere to the rules that the aforementioned people have implemented (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc.

, 1997, n. p. ).Furthermore, the output if this style is utilized may be a mistake or it may have flaws in it simply because the “decision was made with little or no input from external factors” (Swinton, n.

d. , n. p. ). My Own Decision-Making Style On the other hand, my own decision-making style is technically referred to as, “participative”, wherein I trust my co-team members to come up with a decision (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc.

, 1997, n. p. ).Strengths of My Personal Decision-Making StyleWhat’s good about this style is that: First of all, several input/concepts/thoughts/ideas are contributed which widens the horizon of the company and may contribute largely to the correct decision to be made (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n.

p. ). Second, since the rank and file employees are given a role in making a final decision, they are motivated to work better and love their company more (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p.

).This means that employees are also willing to assist in the facilitation of what is needed by the company/organization (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ).

Last but not least, since there is “delegation” in this style of decision-making, the goal of the organization may easily be attained (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ). Weaknesses of My Personal Decision-Making Style The problem with this style, however, is that it cannot be used in high-risk decision-making (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc., 1997, n.

p. ).Also, this style may be utilized for recommendations purposes only (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n.

p. ). Furthermore, since so many individuals are engaged in it, it is impossible to speed up the decision-making process, meaning it is generally a waste of one’s time (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p.

). Last but not least is that the issues may not at all be kept confidential because too many individuals, if not everyone, are informed about it (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc., 1997, n. p.

).Solution to the Problems Aforementioned in Both Styles of Decision-Making The only solution to the aforementioned is to become as flexible as possible. Since every style has flaws on it, one should always be prepared to shift from one style to the other as required by the situation, for instance, if it is a high-risk decision, then one should resort/shift to directive style, but if inputs are necessitated then it is best to change to participative style (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p.

).ConclusionBoth directive and participative decision-making style have their own sets of strengths and weaknesses depending on the situation that arises (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ).

The only solution to that is to be as flexible as possible to be able to alter the style to be used as the need arises (Leadership Management Development Center, Inc. , 1997, n. p. ). At this point, no one can conclude what the best style is; it is just relieving to know that there are styles available for every problem that may come about.