Ways of decision making

The basic task of managers is to manage the organization so that it operates efficiently and successfully achieves the set goals. measurement and judgment. Planning and designing is choosing between possible goals and strategies for achieving these goals - that is, deciding, arranging and connecting is deciding who should do what work and with whom and what powers they have in doing so. Management and governance is deciding when and how to interfere in the operation of the organization or employees, measuring and judging is deciding on the appropriateness of the achievements of the organization and employees. To the manager, they control the organization primarily through decisions, not through their implementation work.

Decision making can be:

• Routine: Simple decisions are defined in advance for a limited number of simple circumstances - decision-making according to rules;

• Analytical: Decision-making is carried out rationally, according to a more or less complex model, method, algorithm, which also takes into account many, complex, variable, risky, etc. Circumstances ;

• Intuitive: the decision is made in the subconscious of the decision-maker in the process, it is powered by the knowledge, experience, and personal characteristics of the decision-maker, it is creative.

At the implementation level, routine decision-making predominates, and the orderliness of this decision-making is an important criterion for the orderliness of the organization. Regulations, rules of procedure, instructions, standards, etc. They show the extent to which management manages the basic processes in the organization - and the extent to which it delegates simple decisions as close as possible to the implementation level. At the implementation level, there is also an abundance of simpler analytical decision-making, which also requires clearly defined methods, models, and algorithms. There is almost no intuitive decision-making at the implementation level - if we subtract responses to unpredictable, exceptional circumstances. The level of implementation and management, which he/she directly manages, is characterized by discipline and conscientiousness. At this level, management makes the largest share of all decisions in the organization.

At the savings levels, routine decision-making is all small. Middle management pushes routine decision-making down to the executive level to relax for analytical decision-making. This is significantly more demanding than at the implementation level and requires managers to have in-depth and broad knowledge and skills to use more complex models and methods. At the implementation level, there is also a pre-session of intuitive decision-making, which prevails especially in the final phase of case management, when analytical methods and models are exhausted. In the conditions of partial information 8n risk, which is characteristic of all organizational systems, intuitive decision-making is inevitable. At the intermediate level, the share of all decisions is already lower than at the implementation level, although the workload of decision-makers is increasing, both in terms of number and complexity. At the summit level - if properly regulated - routine decision-making is almost non-existent. At first glance, it is surprising that there is less and less analytical decision-making. Especially more demanding methods for analytical excellence require a lot of time, and this is less and less at the top of the organization. The top manager has to make a few decisions in a few minutes, so he may use at most very sexual methods, thought models. Most of the awards at the top of the organization are intuitive. By ability to quickly accept predominantly correct intuitive. By being able to quickly accept predominantly correct intuitive distinctions, talented and successful top managers are different from average ones who remain at the middle levels. Management excellence comes from information (that is, data with content) - about the matter, about possible decisions (alternatives), and the likely outcomes of these possible distinctions. The information should be of sufficient and high quality, sufficiently detailed and fresh and comprehensive, and should cover an appropriate time horizon. The more sufficient and high-quality the information, the lower the risk. If the information of the decision-maker is complete, the decision-making takes place in conditions of complete certainty and there is no risk. However, if the information is close to zero, the decision-maker decides in conditions of complete uncertainty and the risk is very high. In complete certainty, completely rational decision-making is possible, and incomplete uncertainty, only guesswork. Information should be obtained from cheaper to more expensive sources. The cheapest are existing sources (accounting, plans, and reports of development, production, marketing, finance, etc.). External sources may be slightly more expensive: business partners and competitors, newspapers and professional magazines, other public publications. General research or the use of research information for more clients or the market is more expensive. The most expensive are special researches that are conducted or commissioned specifically to decide on the matter under consideration. Hard information seems to be supplemented with "soft" (subjective, subconscious) - with experience, feelings, intuition - without which there is no creative