Characterize decision making as it applies to practicing the art of leadership in schools. List the several approaches leaders might use to make decisions in schools.

1. SADI
2022-2023
Chapter 6:
Decision Making:
Quality and Acceptance
Course: Educational Administration and Leadership 1
Mr.VATH VARY

2. Learning
Outcomes
• Characterize decision making as it
applies to practicing the art of
leadership in schools.
• List the several approaches
leaders might use to make
decisions in schools.
• Give examples of situations when
leaders might utilize an autocratic or
participatory decision-making style and
explain when one style is more
appropriate than the other.
• Illustrate how group decision-making techniques
might be used in school situations.
• List barriers and traps that inhibit the
effectiveness of decisions.

3. Let me hear your voice!
1) Why is decision making such an
important activity for school
administrators?
2) What types of decisions do school
administrators make?
3) Why is it virtually impossible for school
administrators to make optimum
decisions?
4) How can decision-making models help
school administrators improve their
decisions?
5) What are the benefits/problems of
group decision making?.
6) What are some decision-making
techniques that can be used to improve
decision making?

4. Decision making
 Decision making pervades all
administrative functions:
• Planning, organizing, staffing,
directing, coordinating, and
controlling.
 School administrators at all levels
make decisions.These decisions may
ultimately influence the school's
clients-the students.
 All decisions, however, have some
influence, whether large or small, on
the performance of both faculty and
students.
 Therefore, school administrators must
develop decision-making skills
because they make many decisions
that will affect the organization.

5. • acting with
integrity, valuing
diversity, and
bringing ethical
principles to the
decision-making
process
• effectively
communicating
with all
stakeholders to
ensure quality
and acceptance
of decisions.
• establishing and
implementing
policies that
ensure
educational
success for all
students
Decision making from three
Different perspectives:
MR. VATH VARY

6. What is ‘Decision making?’
MR. VATH VARY
……. is the systematic process of choosing from
several alternatives to achieve a desired result
(Kamlesh and Solow, 1994).
Choice
• Choosing
from
among
options.
Process
• Independen
tly made by
leader or
involved
with others
Outcome
• Achieving
the
desired
outcome.
Three elements of decision
making

7. An Analytic Model of Decision Making
In order to have
a right Decision
Making, a leader
follows

8. Approaches to Decision Making
MR. VATH VARY
• The leader identifies the problem and
its cause(s) then follows the series of
steps or develop solutions.
• The theories of choice and they
describe how decisions are made
and what people will actually do in
the decision-making process.
The Normative
(rational) Theory
The Descriptive
(non-
rational)Theory
• The Classical Model,
• Administrative Model,
• Incremental model
• Mixed Scanning Model
• Garbage Can Model,
• Political Model

9. MR. VATH VARY
The
Normative
Theory
The
Classical
Model
Administrati
ve Model
The
Incremental
Model
Mixed
Scanning
Model

10. (1)The Classical Model:
MR. VATH VARY
• Is completely rational and has its prime objective
maximizing the achievement of the goals of the
organization by finding the best solution among all
possible alternatives (as in figure 6.1)
• The process …
 presupposes that all alternatives are identifiable,
 consists of a series of sequential steps that begin with
problem identification and end with the achievement of
the desired outcome.
Optimizing: Make the Best
Decision
• Most scholars, in fact, consider the classical model
an unrealistic ideal. Decision makers virtually never
have access to all the relevant information.
Moreover, generating all the possible alternatives
and their consequences is impossible.
Problem

11. (2) The Administrative Model
MR. VATH VARY
• A systematic process that can be used to enhance the
identification of the appropriate alternative when
competing alternatives exist.
 The basic approach is satisficing—that is, finding a
satisfactory decision/solution rather than the best one.
• The leader uses a rational,
sequential process to find the most
satisfactory solution possible.The
process consists of distinct phases:
a) recognition and definition of
the problem;
b) an analysis of the difficulties;
c) establishment of the criteria
for success;
d) development of an action
plan; and
e) an appraisal of the plan.
Because leaders do
not always have the data
necessary to find the one best
alternative for addressing
complex issues, they may settle
for bounded rationality (the
concept suggests that the ability of
decision makers to be rational is
limited by numerous constraints, such
as complexity, time, money, and other
resources, and their cognitive
capacity,values, skills, habits, and
unconscious reflexes.)

12. (2) The Administrative Model
MR. VATH VARY
• Decisions can be reached using a means–
end analysis; the leader selects a means
to reach a desired end.
 The principal of a high school is interested in
purchasing new football uniforms for the school’s
team and has identified five companies to contact
regarding the purchase.
 After completing the call to the third
company, he stopped calling and made a
purchase.
 Consequently, he made a decision with
limited information because he did not
make the fourth and fifth calls.
Example

13. 3. The Incremental Model:
A Strategy of Successive Limited Comparisons
MR. VATH VARY
Charles Lindblom describes the way most decisions
are made as the science of muddling through:
• A small and limited set of options are considered.
• Options are only marginally different from existing situation.
• Options are considered by comparing actual consequences.
• Try the option and then observe consequences.
• If consequences are fine, then a little more.
• If consequences are negative, then back off and try
something different.
• Focus is on outcomes and trial and error.
• allows the school leader to make changes in small
increments in order to avoid unanticipated negative
consequences.

14. 3. The Incremental Model
MR. VATH VARY
 Consider a superintendent who is interested in
implementing a new computer program for all
schools in the district at a cost of $2 million dollars.
 However, he is not quite sure how teachers,
parents, and other stakeholders will receive
this new program or whether it will enhance
student achievement.
 Therefore, he installs the computers in two
schools and evaluates their use; then, after
a period of time, installations are made in
five additional schools, and their use in
those schools is evaluated.
 The decision regarding installation in
the remaining schools is based on the
evaluative information from the first
two installations.
Example

15. 4. The Mixed Scanning Model: An Adaptive Strategy
MR. VATH VARY
… is guided by two questions:
 What is the organization’s mission?
 What incremental decisions will move the organization
toward its mission/direction?
is a synthesis of
the
administrative
and incremental
models
• Leaders can make decisions and
stay within the realm of the
organization’s mission and policies
by responding to these questions.
 Problems can be surveyed,
 difficulties analyzed,
 and a tentative action plan
initiated.
• If the plan fails, something new can
be attempted

16. 4. The Mixed Scanning Model
MR. VATH VARY
• Instead of taking a close look at all student
achievement test scores or only at the scores
of students who are not reaching the
established benchmark,
• the leader first conducts a general review of
student test scores (broad scanning) and
then makes a determination of the areas on
which to focus (narrow scanning).
 Broad scanning reveals that there is a
problem with student achievement.
 Narrow scanning allows the leader to focus
on the area of the problem.
• Using this process, time and resources can
be saved.
Example

17. MR. VATH VARY
Garbage Can
Model
Political Model
The
Descriptive
Theory

18. • If the decision, the problem, and
the participant just happen to
fit, the problem is solved.
• If the solution does not fit, then
the problem remains unsolved.
MR. VATH VARY
• March (1982)
reasons that the
Garbage Can
Model allows
individuals to act
without fully
thinking through
an issue.
• Garbage Can Model is used, rather than
beginning with a problem and ending
with a solution, decision outcomes are the
product of independent streams of events.
• Over time, as various problems occur and
possible solutions to these problems are
developed, they are deposited into what is
figuratively referred to as a garbage can.
• The garbage can contains a
number of possible solutions
that have been considered or
used previously.
• When school leaders
encounter a problem, they can
select an alternative from the
garbage can.
The Garbage Can Model

19. The Garbage Can Model
MR. VATH VARY
• Principal Green, having observed student decorum in the cafeteria,
was very displeased with his observation.
• To improve student decorum, he implemented an alternative that
had worked effectively in a similar situation in the past. However,
student decorum in the cafeteria did not improve, and the
alternative was not retained.
Example
Three days later, he tried a second alternative that had
worked in a similar situation in the past.When the
faculty expressed concern with this alternative, it was
not retained.
• Then, Principal Green implemented a third
alternative. His third alternative, one that had been
used previously, improved student decorum in the
cafeteria and also met with the approval of the
faculty. Because of its effectiveness and
acceptance, the third alternative was retained for
the remainder of the year.

20. The Political Model
MR. VATH VARY
• The Political Model becomes the decision-making tool when
organizational goals are replaced by personal influence and
power is the overriding force
• Most
organizations
have defined
goals that
they are
striving to
achieve.
• The power and influence of individuals and/or
groups suppress the organizational goals.
 personal perspectives and preferences
influence decision making in the
organization, resulting in manipulation.
• Individuals and/or groups maneuver to
influence organizational outcomes so that the
objectives that they favor might be achieved,
rather than the objectives of others in the
organization
• Conflict, bargaining, and game playing are
intensive and pervasive, and satisficing
organizational decision making gives way to
influence, power, and persistence.

21. Autocratic and Participatory Decision Making
MR. VATH VARY
• Consider for a moment that you
are the principal of an
elementary school, and a
decision has to be made
regarding the use of one of
three basal texts for teaching
first-grade reading.
 Would you select the series
to be used (autocratic),
 or would you involve other
individuals (participatory)
in the selection process?
 If you elected to involve
other individuals in the
selection process, who
would you involve and why?
The leader must also
determine whether to make
the decision independently
or to invite assistance.

22. Autocratic and Participatory Decision Making
MR. VATH VARY

23. • The model addresses how the
behavior of the leader affects
decision quality and acceptance.
• They also suggest when leaders
should involve followers in the
decision-making process and to
what extent.
MR. VATH VARY
The Vroom–Yetton Model
• Vroom and Yetton
(1973) proposed a
Normative Model that
distinguishes between
individual and group
decision making.
a) The more influence that followers
have, the more they will be
motivated to implement a
decision; and
b) When decision acceptance is not
already high, follower
participation will increase
decision acceptance
The Vroom and Yetton
Model addresses two
basic assumptions:

24. MR. VATH VARY
The Vroom–Yetton Model
Totally
Autocratic
Using the information available, leaders make decisions without
assistance from anyone. Leaders are totally autocratic in their behavior
Autocratic
with
Assistance
Leaders receive information from followers but make the decision
without follower involvement. Using this procedure, leaders are
somewhat autocratic in their behavior as they receive assistance from
followers.
Consultativ
e with
Individuals
Leaders interact with followers individually, share information about
the problem, solicit ideas and listen to the opinions of followers, and
then make the decision themselves. Leaders actively consult with
followers
Consultativ
e with
Group
Leaders interact with followers as a group, share information about the
problem, solicit ideas and listen to the opinions of the group, and then
make the decision themselves.
Group
Decision
Leaders interact with followers as a group, share information about the
problem, solicit ideas and listen to the opinions of the group, and then
seek to reach consensus on the decision.
 School leaders are offered five decision-making procedures.
 Two procedures are autocratic in nature;
 two are consultative,
 and in one of the procedures, leaders and followers make decisions jointly

25. MR. VATH VARY
TheVroom–Jago Model
• Vroom and Jago (1988) revised the Vroom–Yetton Model,
adding the dimensions of time and follower development.
a) If a decision needs to be made
quickly, then selecting a
participatory style may be
counterproductive.
b) If followers have the skills and
attributes necessary for
participating in the decision-
making process, then, under
certain conditions, they should be
invited, particularly if an
immediate decision is not
necessary. Followers’ participation
could enhance decision quality
and acceptance.
• The revised
model adds
these criteria as
critical factors
to be
considered in
determining the
optimal
decision-
making
procedures:

26. MR. VATH VARY
a)designing a system in which
followers can effectively function;
b)the fear by leaders that if followers
are allowed to participate too
frequently, they will abuse the
privilege
The two major concerns regarding the
use of a participatory approach are:
TheVroom–Jago Model

27. • Decision
quality
• Examples
 Individuals who are assigned to groups do not
have the expertise to make a contribution.
 Individuals who have the required
expertise are not invited to participate as a
member of the group
MR. VATH VARY
Decision Quality and Acceptance
• takes into account the objective aspects of decisions
that affect the performance of the group.
 These objective aspects are considered
apart from any effects mediated by decision
acceptance.
• also refers to the expertise of members of the
group—the extent to which group members are able
to contribute to the selection of a quality alternative
Group performance is jointly affected by the variables
of quality and acceptance.

28. Decision Quality

29. • Decision
quality
• Examples
 Decisions made by leaders are accepted
by followers simply because the decisions
are beneficial to them or because they
approve of the approach used by leaders
in reaching the decision.
 Followers refuse to accept a decision
because it was made in an autocratic
manner.
MR. VATH VARY
Decision Quality and Acceptance
• refers to the degree to which
followers are committed to
implementing a decision in an
effective manner

30. MR. VATH VARY
To further address these concerns, A two-dimensional approach
that is widely accepted for use by leaders in determining whether
followers are to be involved in the decision-making process.
• Leaders determine whether
followers have the expertise
needed to contribute toward
finding an appropriate solution to
a problem.
Expertise of
Participants
Participants’
Zone of
Concern
• Leaders determine whether the
problem lies within the zone of
concern of followers, which affect
the decision to implement the
decision.
Decision Quality and Acceptance

31. MR. VATH VARY
Participants’ Zone of Concern
Examples
• When decisions are outside of the zone of
concern or interest of followers, they are not
likely to be highly motivated to participate in
the decision-making process.Thus, including
them is not likely to enhance the quality or
acceptance of the decision.
• If a decision is within their zone of concern
and followers are excluded from participating
in the process, they are likely to feel
unappreciated and become dissatisfied with
school leaders.
• A decision is within the zone of concern
or interest of followers when they are
affected by the decision and/or are
expected to be involved in the
implementation process.

32. MR. VATH VARY
Group
Decision-
Making
Techniques
The Delphi
Technique
The Nominal
Group
Technique
The
Dialectical
Inquiry
Technique
The Pareto
chart
The
Fishbone
diagram
the
Brainstormi
ng
Technique

33. MR. VATH VARY
• is most appropriate for addressing complex
problems when two completely different and
contrary approaches are identified.
 The leader can employ the technique with the
direct involvement of the opposing groups or
elect to use the technique independently of the
opposing groups.
The Dialectical Inquiry Technique
• Accordingly, the dialectic method calls for
managers to foster a structured dialogue or
debate of opposing viewpoints prior to making a
decision.

34. MR. VATH VARY
Barge (1994) characterizes the technique in the following manner:
1) All available information regarding a specific problem or event is collected by
the leader and presented to the two subgroups.The makeup of each group is
as homogenous as possible, but the groups are as different from each other as
possible.
2) The groups meet separately, analyze the information, and develop a list of
assumptions in order of importance to the group.The assumptions are written
down and presented to the opposing group.The groups then meet to debate
the merits of their theses and/or proposals. After the debate, each group
presents a revised proposal to the leader.The proposal should be in writing
and include all relevant information, assumptions, and key facts.
3) The leader reviews the information provided by the groups in search of
arguments and positions that are counter to or that negate the theses.The
leader also looks for recommendations that are counter to those developed in
Step 2 and conditions under which the original analysis would be in error or
open to question.The antithesis of the original analysis is thus identified.
4) The leader compares the two lists constructed during Steps 2 and 3 and
engages in a systematic critique of the competing assumptions.The validity of
both sets of assumptions is examined. Ultimately, a list of assumptions that is
consistent with both analyses is identified. A synthesis of the two competing
positions is developed.
5) On the basis of the remaining assumptions, the leader can develop a set of
recommendations.

35. MR. VATH VARY
The Nominal Group Technique
• Silent generation of ideas;
• Round-robin recording
ideas;
• Discussion of ideas;
• Preliminary vote on item
importance;
• Additional discussion
• Final vote
• Individuals are brought together to develop a solution to a
problem.The leader generates ideas by asking group
members to write their ideas on slips of paper without
engaging in discussion.
 It is concerned with both the generation of and
evaluation of the ideas
Six steps are

36. MR. VATH VARY
The Delphi Technique
• It is a process that generates ideas and allows individuals to
react to program proposals or raise questions concerning a
project.
 participants do not engage in facet-to-face
discussions;
 the input is solicited from a large number of experts,
teachers, administrators or clients who are removed
from the organization by distance or scheduling
problems.
Individuals are able to think through
complex issues and submit high-quality
ideas without being influenced by
individuals in positions of status.

37. MR. VATH VARY
The Delphi Technique
The
technique
involves
the
following
five steps:
1. The leader defines the problem, decision,
or question to which individuals and/or
groups are to react.
2. The leader identifies those individuals
and/or groups whose opinions, judgment,
or expert knowledge would be valuable
to obtain in the process of making a
decision.
3. The leader asks for the responses of
identified individuals and/or groups using
a written format, often a questionnaire.
4. The results are summarized and
redistributed to the individuals and/or
groups, and they are asked to review the
results and indicate any changes to their
initial responses.
5. Step 4 is repeated until there is a
reasonable consensus on the problem or
the decision

38. MR. VATH VARY
• When ideas are suggested, they are written on a
whiteboard or flip chart.
• The rules of effective brainstorming do not permit any
positive or negative evaluative comments, scowls,
• groans, sighs, or gestures.
• All ideas are accepted, and value judgments are deferred.
• After all ideas have been listed, the members of the group
are encouraged to combine or improve on the ideas
suggested.
is a technique used to encourage group members to
contribute toward finding solutions to problems by
spontaneously suggesting any and all ideas that come
to mind
Brainstorming

39. MR. VATH VARY
The Fishbone Diagram (Cause and Effect)
The steps in the process are as
follows:
1. Secure a flip chart or whiteboard.
2. Use the previously noted brainstorming
technique to identify the possible causes
of the problem.
3. Write the major categories on the right
side of the paper or whiteboard (i.e.,
Teaching Strategies, Materials,Teaching
Skills, and Time on Task).
4. List the ideas that the team brainstormed
under the appropriate category.
5. Then, look for the causes that appear
most frequently.
6. Work with the team to reach consensus
on the basic causes of the problem.
7. Search the data to determining the
frequency of the different causes.

40. MR. VATH VARY
The Pareto Chart
1. The school leader calls a faculty meeting and
asks the faculty to brainstorm challenging
school program areas.
2. After giving the charge, he or she facilitates
the identification of a unit of measurement
3. A time frame is established for the period
during which the data are collected.
4. Data are collected for each of the
brainstormed areas.
5. The faculty compares the frequencies for
placement in categories.
6. The categories are listed from left to right in a
bar graph format.
7. The highest point is determined, which
indicates the preference of the faculty.
• … is a vertical bar graph that is used to determine
the rank order of issues, problems, and/or activities.
The
following
steps
outline the
developme
ntal
process:

41. MR. VATH VARY
Barriers and Traps That Inhibit the Effectiveness
of Decisions
Groupthink
• can become a barrier because sometimes groups
become so cohesive that members resist challenging
ideas in order to maintain the integrity of the group.
Overuse of Groups:
• The leader must also safeguard against involving too
many people in the decision-making process.
• Some leaders have so many committees in operation
that they spend a major portion of their time in
committee meetings.
Fair process
is another issue to which leaders should attend as
decisions are being made.

42. MR. VATH VARY
Barriers and Traps That Inhibit the Effectiveness
of Decisions
1. Engagement. Individuals are involved in making
decisions that affect them.The leader asks for their input
and allows them to refute or promote the merits of one
another’s ideas and assumptions.
2. Explanation. Everyone who is involved and affected
should understand why that particular decision was
made.
3. Expectation Clarity. Once a decision is made, leaders
clearly state the new operational procedures.
Kim and Mauborgne (1997, p. 69) propose
three principles of fair process that are
worthy of consideration by the school leader:

43. MR. VATH VARY
Avoiding Hidden Traps
a) Status Quo. We all carry biases, and those biases influence the choices that
we make.The source of the status quo trap lies deep within our psyches, in
our desire to protect our ego from damage.
b) Sunk Cost. We make choices that justify past choices, even when the past
choices no longer seem to be valid.
c) Confirming Evidence. We seek out information that supports our existing
instincts or points of view while avoiding information that contradicts it.
d) Framing. We can use different frames of reference to assess a problem.The
same problem can elicit very different responses when different frames of
reference are used. A poorly framed problem can undermine even the best-
considered decision.
e) Estimating and Forecasting. We often fail to get clear feedback regarding
the accuracy of our estimates and forecasts.
f) Prudence. When we are faced with high-stakes decisions, we tend to adjust
our estimates to be on the safe side.
g) Recallability. We frequently base our predictions about future events on
our memory of past events, and we can be overly influenced by dramatic
events that leave a strong impression on us.
h) Overconfidence. We tend to be overconfident about our accuracy with
regard to our estimates.This can lead to errors in judgment and, in turn, bad
decisions.

44. The demands on the educational system today are putting
pressure on educational leaders to be effective decision makers
and to communicate those decisions in a manner that will
improve teaching and learning and promote the success of all
students
Guarding against groupthink, using groups only when
appropriate,ensuring a system of fair practices, and
safeguarding against the hidden traps can assist greatly in
improving decision quality and acceptance in schools.
MR. VATH VARY
Leadership for Today’s Schools

45. MR. VATH VARY
Summary
(1) Identifying the problem;
(2) analyzing the problem;
(3) Identifying alternative solutions;
(4) assessing the alternatives;
(5) selecting an alternative;
(6) implementing the selected
alternative; and
(7) evaluating the process.
• All decisions made in schools have some effect on the
performance of both faculty and staff.
• Therefore, it is important for school leaders to recognize
the magnitude of the problem and to be as rational as
possible in selecting an alternative.
The basic
decision-
making model
includes the
following steps: