This document discusses models of shared decision making and participative leadership. It addresses four critical questions about when and how to involve subordinates in the decision making process. It presents the Vroom model and Hoy-Tarter model which examine the conditions that influence how effective subordinate participation will be. These include whether the decision is within the subordinates' zone of acceptance and expertise and interest. The document also outlines different decision making groups, roles leaders can take, and a normative model for determining the appropriate level of participation based on the situation.

1. © Hoy, 2008
Chapter 9Chapter 9
Shared Decision Making:Shared Decision Making:
Empowering TeachersEmpowering Teachers

2. © Hoy, 2008
• Under what conditions should the leader involve
subordinates in decision making?
• To what extent should subordinates be involved?
• How should the decision making group be
structured and function?
• What is the role of the leader in participative leadership?
Four Critical QuestionsFour Critical Questions

3. Quality Rule. Use a unilateral approach to decision making only if;
The quality requirement is low and the matter unimportant to subordinates, or
The quality requirement is low, the decision is important, and will be readily
accepted by subordinates
Leader Information Rule. Don’t make a unilateral decision if
The quality of decision is important and you don’t possess sufficient
information and expertise to solve the problem alone
Trust Rule. Make a unilateral decision when
The quality of the decision is important and you can’t trust subordinates to
decide on the basis of the organizational goals
Problem Structure Rule. Involve knowledgeable subordinates to collect
relevant information when
- The quality of the decision is important, the problem is
unstructured, and you lack sufficient information or expertise
The Vroom Model of Shared Decision
Making
© Hoy, 2008

4. © Hoy, 2008
Assumptions of the Hoy-Tarter ModelAssumptions of the Hoy-Tarter Model
• As subordinates are involved in decision making located within their
ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be less effective.
• As subordinates are involved in decision making outside their ZONE
OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be more effective.
• As participants are involved in decision making for which they have
MARGINAL EXPERTISE, their participation will be marginally
effective.
• As subordinates are involved in decision making for which they have
MARGINAL INTEREST, their participation will be marginally
effective.

5. © Hoy, 2008
Decision-Making GroupsDecision-Making Groups
and Their Functionsand Their Functions
Group
Consensus
Group
Majority
Group
Advisory
Individual
Advisory
Unilateral
Who is Leader Leader Leader Leader and Leader
Involved? and Group and Group and Group Selected
Individuals
Nature of Group shares Group shares Group shares Individuals No subordinate
Involvement? information, information, information, provide data, involvement
analyzes and deliberates, analyzes and discuss, and
reaches and votes on recommends. recommend.
consensus. action.
Who makes Group by Group by Leader with Leader with Leader Alone
the decision? Consensus Majority Rule Advice Advice

6. © Hoy, 2008
Five Leadership RolesFive Leadership Roles
1. The integrator brings subordinates together for consensus decision-
making. Here the task is to reconcile divergent opinions and positions.
2. The parliamentarian facilitates open communication by protecting the
opinions of the minority and leads through a democratic process to a
group decision.
3. The educator reduces resistance to change by explaining and discussing
with group members the opportunities and constrains of the decisional
issues.
4. The solicitor seeks advice from subordinate-experts. The quality of
decisions is improved As the administrator guides the generation of
relevant information.
5. The director makes unilateral decisions in those instances where the
subordinates have no expertise or personal stake. Here the goal is
efficiency.

7. © Hoy, 2008
Administrative Roles forAdministrative Roles for
Decision MakingDecision Making
Role Function Aim
Integrator Brings together divergent positions To achieve consensus
Parliamentarian Facilitates open discussion To support reflective deliberation
Educator Explains and discusses issues To assure acceptance of decisions
Solicitor Solicits advice from teachers To improve quality of decisions
Director Makes unilateral decisions To attain efficiency

8. © Hoy, 2008
A Normative Model forA Normative Model for
Participative Decision MakingParticipative Decision Making
Relevance
Outside Zone
Marginal with
Expertise
Marginal with
Relevance
Inside Zone
YES NO
YES
NO
Expertise
1. Situation? Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert
Noncollaborative
2. Involvement? Yes and extensive Yes but limited Occasionally Occasionally None
and limited and limited
3. Decision- Group Group Group Group Individual Unilateral
Making Consensus Majority Advisory Advisory Advisory
Structures
4. Role of Integrator Parliamentarian Educator Educator Solicitor
Director
Superior?
Trust
YES NO