Decision Making in Public Agencies

Decision making refers to choosing between competing alternatives and implementing the preferred alternative (Al-Shra’ah, 2015). Therefore, it is a problem-solving process that ends when we achieve the most appropriate solution. Also, it is an ongoing process carried out by managers in public agencies to accomplish organizational goals. Therefore, a step-by-step decision-making process enables corporate leaders to take more deliberate, thoughtful decisions by organizing relevant information and defining alternatives (Umass, 2020). Nevertheless, decision making may be a risky undertaking that may influence the future survival of the agency. However, organizational managers mostly make routine decisions that arise from the policies outlined within their agencies. Also, public agencies may have strategies that guide them in making unique or unscheduled decisions in cases of emergencies. Therefore, this paper seeks to unravel the decision-making process in public agencies. Hence, it looks into the steps followed in decision-making; legal aspects influencing decision making in organizations; decision-making styles and approaches developed in decision-making, and limitations in decision making.

Decision-Making Styles

Public organizations are varied, as are the managers who make decisions the decisions. Therefore, the styles that organizational managers will employ in decision making are a result of the manager’s training and experiences, the policies guiding that agency, the complexity of the problem involved, and resources available for solving the problem (Al-Shra’ah, 2015). Hence, there are five decision-making styles. Firstly, it is a decisive style where managers use limited information to reach rapid solutions. Therefore, public managers who use this approach focus on efficiency and consistency. Such managers are visionary by nature.  Secondly, some managers use a flexible decision-making style. With this approach, the decision-maker focuses on adaptability, reviews a wide array of alternatives available, and considers the implications of each possible alternative before arriving at a solution.

Thirdly, some managers prefer the hierarchical approach. In this style, there is a thorough analysis of the options available with greater emphasis laid on the quality of the outcome. Also, there is a greater emphasis on hierarchical relationships, and decision-making relies on mutual trust in a bureaucratic environment. Fourthly, some decision-makers follow the integrative style. The style lays more focus on creativity and innovativeness. Such managers prefer using several and new ways to solve a problem in an environment that focuses on trust, team-work, and creativity. Lastly, some leaders are motivators with visionary ideas of addressing issues (Bashin, 2019). Besides, such decision-makers are good at convincing others in making a particular choice. Also, they are good at making people believe in their decision and guide them towards turning them into reality.  However, decision-makers must follow specific steps when they are looking for solutions.

Steps Followed in Decision Making

Decision-making starts with the identification of the decision to be made.  Therefore, the decision-maker must define the problem that requires a solution (Negulescu, 2014). The manager writes down possible choices made and all the possible actions that can help achieve it. Therefore, they are guided by such questions as to which? What? And how? However, some managers interrogate this step by using the query: what if? A manager who is deciding this level must ensure that it is time-bound and measurable (Lucidchart, 2020). Moreover, the decision that is defined should not be too narrow or too broad. Hence it should be realistic. However, in public agencies, this could be laborious proves plagued by bureaucracies and competing inputs from different stakeholders; therefore, it could take a long time to implement.

The second step requires the decision-maker to gather all relevant information. First, the decision-maker will evaluate the internal history of the organization to establish whether it has succeeded or failed in solving similar issues in the past. Also, the analysis will enable the decision-maker to understand if the agency has enough resources to implement the decision.  However, there is a need to garner information from the external environment (Marchisotti et al., 2018). Such data can come from research studies, websites, books, government records, or paying a consultant to evaluate the agency’s internal and external environment and coming up with relevant information. However, observe caution so as not to gather too much information that it becomes irrelevant or too little that it provides a narrow-minded view of the question at hand.

After collecting the information, the decagons maker needs to identify alternatives to solving the problem at hand information will provide possible options, or the decision-maker can use imagination and additional information to construct new possibilities (Umass, 2020). However, public agencies are complex. Hence they may require a combination of two or more alternatives in reaching their goal. Therefore, a public agency decision-maker will have to consult widely to arrive at the most plausible choice or group of other options. Besides, since public agencies, on average, take longer to review their policies, such a decision should be made in consideration of both the short term and long-term aspirations of the organization.

With the alternatives identified, the decision-maker has to weigh the evidence. Therefore, the decision-maker will review each option and ask if it can solve the identified problem (Umass, 2020). The process is an elimination stage for the identified alternatives. Therefore, those with the highest potential to solve the problems are selected. Also, the public agency decision-maker must weigh the organization’s potentials and pitfalls in accommodating each alternative (Negulescu, 2014). After that, place the other options in priority order, starting with the most plausible.

After assessing the evidence, the decision-maker is now ready to choose the most plausible alternative. In public agencies, it is prudent to select more than one option. Because of their complex nature and the considerable number of problems they solve. However, the choices made must follow the decision made in stage four (Umass, 2020). Therefore, alternatives at the top of the hierarchy should be priorities that will enable implementers to enact alternatives that will elicit more profound impacts.

The sixth stage will require the decision-maker to take action. Therefore, decision-makers will draw a plan to make the decision tangible and achievable (Shahsararani & Abadi, 2015). At this level, the decision-maker givers other team members more leeway in implementing the decision. However, in public organizations, the decision may first undergo a pilot test before it is entirely accepted. Moreover, it may require a supporting policy to enable its adoption into use.

The final step entails a review of the decision and its consequences (Umass, 2020). Therefore, the decision-maker will evaluate the results after implementing the decision to establish whether it has resolved the problem identified or not (Negulescu, 2014). If the resolution fails to meet the set objectives, then the decision-maker will have to repeat some steps or alter them to arrive at an informed solution. Further, it may require a review of existing policies in public agencies to enable the adoption of new changes or solve weaknesses identified in an earlier or existing decision.  Therefore, the right choice will allow a federal agency to deliver its set mandate while poor decagons making may render its services irrelevant. It is for these reasons that public agencies observe certain legal aspects when making decisions.

Legal Aspects Informing Decision Making in Public Agencies

Public agencies exist for the good of the general public. Therefore, a decision-maker makes the right decision on behalf of the people. Hence, several legal aspects should be observed to make an all binding decision. Failure to observe such aspects may land the decision-maker in legal disputes or face opposition from members of the public. Therefore, the public agency manager should observe the following before making a decision

consultation.

In most jurisdictions, it is a requirement by law that public consultation must take place before a decision is made, hence public participation (Spence, 2010). Most often, if improper consultation is done, disgruntled citizens can challenge the decision at a court of law, which may declare it unconstitutional. According to Isopi et al. (2014), people view the final decision more positively if there was participation in the decision-making process. Also, sufficient time should be allowed for the participants to interrogate the issue under consideration. Moreover, the public should be furnished with enough information about the decision to make useful contributions. Furthermore, they should be provided with feedback about the outcome.

independence.

Unlike private organizations, public agency decision-makers must not have a personal interest in the decision they are trying to make (Spence, 2010). Therefore, it is good practice for a public agency decision-maker to declare their interest in the decision under review. Hence, if they have an interest, then they have to recuse themselves from the entire process and allow independent decision-makers to lead the process. Koop and Hanretty (2017) aver that independence has a positive and significant influence on the quality of decisions made. Therefore, decision-makers in public agencies must enjoy autonomy when making decisions, free from political interference.

Procedure.

Decision making in public agencies follows some strict laydown procedures. Therefore, federal agency decision-makers must acquaint themselves with all existing guidelines and policies before making particular decisions (Negulescu, 2014). Moreover, failure to follow laid down procedures is ground enough for legal disputes or even suspension of the entire decision-making process.

Compatibility with existing statutes.

All public agency decisions must fall in line with existing legislation. Therefore, a decision-maker must understand the existing statutes and then frame decisions in line with them. Failure to observe this will open avenues for legal challenges and a waste of time when the choices are declared unlawful. Besides, the decision-maker should understand international best practices in making such decisions co as to align their choices with international law.

Proper purpose.

A public agency decision-maker must act in good faith when making a decision. Therefore, they should not make decisions with a hidden agenda or in bad faith (Spence, 2010). For instance, a public agency charged with the provision of water should not decide to increase water bills because it has a plan to increase its employees’ salaries. It will be benefiting from the suffering of others. Therefore, all decisions should be soberly made and in good faith to benefit the larger public.

Limitations in Decision Making

Although decision-making is a noble undertaking in public agencies, they face several barriers. For instance, it is difficult to identify all alternative decisions that can help achieve the anticipated goal. Besides, because of the lengthy consultations involved in public agency decision making, the process may be expensive and time-wasting than those in private organizations. Also, public agency decision making is subjected to many legal and public scrutiny making the process unpopular and tedious for decision-makers. Moreover, it is almost impossible to eliminate biasness in public decision making as the participants are members of the same society and a human tendency to prefer some decisions that they are popular with. Nevertheless, decision making in public agencies is a rigorous process which if thoroughly followed will bring more significant benefits for the society and generations to come

Decision making involves making the most plausible decision from a range of competing choices. However, decision-makers are varied with different education levels, aspirations, personalities, and expectations. Therefore, this gives rise to five styles of decision-makers: the decisive, hierarchical, flexible, integrative approaches and the motivators.  Additionally, decision making follows a seven-step approach: identifying the decision, collecting supporting information, identifying alternate strategies, evaluating the alternatives, selecting the best possible choice, actualizing the chosen option, and reviewing the impact of the decision taken. Furthermore, a particular legal aspect informs public decision making, such as consulting, independence, following procedures, following existing statutes, and ensuring it serves a proper purpose. Nevertheless, some challenges limit the process of decision making. For instance, the process could be lengthy and time consumers, decision-makers may harbor biasness, and also it is difficult to consider all alternatives. Nonetheless, decision making in public agencies must follow the laid down procedures to make informed decisions that will benefit the greater society.

References

Al-Sha’ah, A. E. M. (2015). The Impact of Decision Making Styles on Organizational Learning:   An Empirical Study on the Public Manufacturing Companies in Jordan. International  Journal of Business and Social Science, 6(4), pp.55-62.

Bashin, H. (2019). 5 Decision Making Styles that help Management. Marketing91.            www.marketing91.com/decision-making-styles/

Isopi, A., Nosenzo, D. & Starmer, C. (2014). Does Consultation Improve Decision-Making?         Theory and Decision, 77, pp.377-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-014-9449-9

Koop, C. & Hanretty, C. (2017). Political Independence, Accountability, and the Quality of         Regulatory Decision-Making. Comparative political studies, 51(1), 38-75.          https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0010414017695329

Lucidchart, (2020). 7 Steps of the Decision-Making Process. Lucidchart.            https://www.lucidchart.com/blog/decision-making-process-steps

Marchisotti, G. G., Almeida, R. L., & Domingos, M. L. C. (2018). Decision-Making at The First  Management Level: The Interference of the Organizational Culture. Revista de    Administração Mackenzie, 19(3), pp.1-26. www.doi.org.10.1590/1678    6971/eRAMR180106

Negulescu, O. H. (2014). Using A Decision-Making Process Model in Strategic Management.      Review of General Management, 19(1), pp.11-123.

Shahsavarani, A. M., & Abadi, E. A. M. (2015). The Bases, Principles, and Methods of     Decision-Making: A Review of Literature. International Journal of Medical Reviews,      2(1), pp.214-225.

Spence, J. (4 March 2010). UK: Public Sector – Decision Making. Mondaq.            https://www.mondaq.com/uk/Government-Public-Sector/95044/Public-Sector–Decision    Making

Umass (2020). 7 Steps to Effective Decision Making. Umass.            https://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/fycm/decision_making_process.pdf