Decision-Making Models
Negotiations and decisions are a part of everyday business. In order to make a successful decision, it is necessary to understand how to make rational and sound decisions. Decisions that are rash, made on snap judgments, and past experiences can prove detrimental to a business. A deficit in basic thinking and decision making is felt at all levels of an organization (Gary, 1997). Decisions can have long term and short term impacts on organizations and their world in which they exist (Turner & Dean, 2008). In order to understand the process of making a sound and good decision, it is necessary to define and understand several decision-making models. These models help to make clear the issues to be addressed and the goals that need to be obtained before a final decision is made. This paper will discuss the zero sum game, win-win, satisfying solutions, and the fixed pie models.
Zero-sum game can play an important role wherein one entity wants or needs to dominate the other. Of the several decision-making models that can be implemented, the zero sum game is one decision model used in negotiations. In this instance, there is a winner and a loser. There is no give and take or compromise. The zero-sum can be seen in chess – only one player can win. However, in Monopoly, if it is not played with the intention of having one winner, but several players to place, is a non-zero-sum game, also known as a win-win (US department of state, n.d.).
The second model is the non-zero, also known as the win-win model. This is used in compromises so that each of the “players” feels like a winner. The total amount gained is variable; therefore, both players win and lose objectives (Heylighen, 1993). In this model, eac...
... middle of paper ...
...9712C, 15-18.
Heylighen, F. (2000). Principia Cybernetica Web, in: Heylighen, F., Joslyn, C. and Turchin, V. (eds): Principia Cybernetica Web. Retrieved November 15, 2010, from http://pcp.lanl.gov/ZESUGAM.html
Spangler, B. (2003). Distributive bargaining: Beyond Intractability. Guy Burgess & Heidi Burgess (eds.). Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Retrieved November 16, 2010, from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/distributive_bargaining.
Turner & Dean (2008). Testing the effects of prior performance on decision regret: Doubling-down, or all bets are off? Journal of Global Business Issues; 2, 1 13.
U.S. Department of State (n.d.). Consulate General of the
United States: Zero sum game between russia and the U.S. is gone with the cold war.
Retrieved November 15, 2010, from http://www.vladivostok.usconsulate.gov/zerosum.html
Skyrms’ writing goes beyond traditional game theory, and exposes some weaknesses in its application. He rejects the theory’s traditional interpretation of rational actors and actions by discovering some glaring inconsistencies. Skyrms conducted a number of experiments using one-shot prisoners’ dilemmas. The ultimatum the author introduces in the first chapter serves as a simple example of a one-shot prisoners’ dilemma. In the initial form of the example, Skyrms proposes there is a cake that must be divided between two individuals. Each individual is looking to maximize his or her utility, and therefore, wants as much of the cake as possible. However, there is a third party, or what Skryms labels a “referee.” The two individuals must determine the percentage or portion of the cake they want and summit these requests to the referee. The percentages must not exceed 100%, or the referee will consume all the cake. It is therefore not in either parties’ best interest to request a significantly large portion. Additionally, if the total of the two requests is below 100% of the cake, the referee will take the left-over portion. The two parties will then aim to maximize their portion, however the best claim that an individual submits is dependent upon the other party’s claim. There are two interacting optimization problems (Skyrms 3, 4).
This paper explores the legal, ethical and moral issues of three healthcare colleagues by applying the D-E-C-I-D-E model as a foundation of decision making as found in Thompson, Melia, and Boyd (2006). Issues explored will be those of the actions of registered nurse (RN) John, his fiancé and also registered nurse (RN) Jane and the Director of Nursing (DON) Ms Day. Specific areas for discussion include the five moral frameworks, autonomy, beneficence, Non – maleficence, justice and veracity in relation with each person involved as supported by Arnold and Boggs (2013) and McPherson (2011). An identification and review of the breached code of ethics and the breached code of conduct in reference with the Nursing, Council, and Federation (2008) will be addressed. Lastly a brief discussion on how the three schools of thought deontology, teleology and virtue had effects on each colleague (McPherson, 2011) .
Lewicki, R., Saunders, D.M., Barry B., (2010) Negotiation: Readings, Exercises, and Cases. 6th Ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin. New York, NY
Considering many factors, I decided that the Ethical Decision-Making Model was the best choice for me when it came to job-related decision-making. I feel that by using the Ethical Decision-Making Model I was able to maximize my opportunity for a successful outcome.
Schelling classified conflicts into two different types, a zero-sum and a nonzero-sum game. A zero-sum game is a mathematical representation of a situation in which a participant's gain or loss is exactly balanced by the losses or gains of the other participant or participants. A situation in which participants can all gain or suffer together is known as a nonzero-sum game. Through these two different types of games, the real defining characteristic of a zero-sum game, compared to a nonzero-sum game, is that the sum of all gains by a player or group of players is equal to the sum of all losses for every possible outcome of that game while in...
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2007). Essentials of Negotiation. New York: McGraw-Hill/ Irwin.
Principled negotiation allows disputants to obtain what they are entitled to, while enabling them to be fair, at the same time protecting against those who would take advantage of their fairness . Although the points made are logical and indeed a great approach to certain types of conflict, I found that in some cases the method did not completely come together. More than anything, I found the method altogether was simplistic and for an ideal situation. While going through the four elements, I shall illustrate these points.
Lewicki, R. J., Saunders, D. M., & Barry, B. (2010). Negotiation: Readings, exercises, and cases. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin
Before embarking upon this assignment, I never thought much about "Decision-Making Models." In fact, I was somewhat surprised at the sheer number of models I stumbled upon in my research. A quick look at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_making) shows that, for business applications alone, there are well over a dozen decision-making models to suit any need. Without being cognizant of the fact, the decision-making process at my current work site closely resembles the "Pros & Cons Model."
Distributive bargaining: The parties bargain over division of a particular pie, and one party’s gain is a direct loss for the opponent. It is a fixed-sum game, or distributive bargaining. Integrative bargaining: Both sides search for solutions that would increase the size of the pie. In game theory models, this approach is referred to as a variable-sum game.
...ch a decision. One of these models is the Rational Model. The benefit of utilizing the Rational Model to reach a decision is that it is easier to justify and defend a decision, due to the complexity and the thoroughness of the processes involved. The Rational Model is useful for developing a strong business case for why a specific course of action should be considered anytime a major business, or even personal decision must be made.
Von Neumann and Morgenstern established the principle of cooperative or non-cooperative game models contain in their book Theory Of Games And Economic Behavior. Cooperative game is a game with a set of players that able to communicate on the outcome of the game. Non-coope...
Life is full of decisions. Some decisions are trivial. Should I choose paper or plastic at the grocery store? Which of the 31 flavors of ice cream should I pick? Other decisions are vital. Should I get married to her or should I take this new job? Your decisions may affect many people or only yourself. In this paper I will present a decision-making model. I will describe a decision that I made at work using this model and how critical thinking impacted that decision.
Decision making can be described as a process of making a decision or decisions, based on choices made amongst two or more competing course of actions. The ‘Decision making’ also requires making a define choice between two or more alternatives course of actions that are available.
Decision making is essential when being involved with a job or company/business. As an employee or employer, there are going to be times where you are faced with having to make a decision. To make these decisions, you would have to use problem solving skills and techniques in order to help you understand the situation you are facing. Ultimately, decisions can either make or break a business. Depending on the situation, company leaders have to respond based on the culture of the company and the severity of the outcome. Decision making plays a role in positive and negative organizational behavior in a variety of ways, including size, training, employees, and conflict. Decisions can adversely affect a company both internally and externally,