Decision-Making Strategies

Decision-making is one of the most important responsibilities of a leader. According to Peter Drucker’s The Effective Executive, it is the quality of decisions that sets one leader apart from another. If his/her decisions bring benefits for employees, customers, and shareholders, the leader is considered effective and promising, and he/she is very valuable to the organization.

But effective decision-making is not only the responsibility of the leader. All employees now have the opportunity to shape their worklife, and the decisions they make about their use of time, priority projects, and mental focus affect the rest of the organization. In this post, I will describe a few decision-making strategies you can use in your work.

Who Makes Decisions

First, it is important to identify your role in the decision-making process. In higher education, as in many other large organizations, employees from cross-functional departments can participate in the decision-making process, but only a few people are specified as “the decision-maker” by policy. In higher education, the decision-maker is often the Vice President for Academics, the President, or the Board of Trustees.

You may have served on a faculty governance committee, a university administrative committee, a college committee within your specific college, or an ad-hoc workgroup (such as a hiring committee, a dissertation committee, or a technology pilot study). Many of these committees do vote on policies, but their official function is to make a recommendation to the next level of decision-makers, such as to Academic Assembly or the Faculty Senate or academic administrators such as deans and VPs, and ultimately to the Board.

In many organizations, policies describe “powers and responsibilities” for top administrators – if not in policy, then administrative positions and responsibilities are described in the legal paperwork that established the organization as a non-profit or corporate entity. Each committee also includes a list of its “charges” (responsibilities) and who are voting and non-voting members. On many faculty committees, administrators serve as ex-officio members who can contribute to the discussion but not vote.

How Are Decisions Made

Technically speaking, there are many ways to make a decision. Some of these processes are spelled out in the committee’s policy, while others reflect the values of the organization or the leadership style of the chairperson.

• Majority Rules – The most common decision-making method is to have a Yes or No vote, and to see which side gets the most votes. This method can be simple and efficient, but it can also cause problems later on because there could be a large group of committee members who voted against the item and must now support it. Often, these members may feel alienated, they may never come around to supporting the project, and they may look for opportunities to speak against the policy or project at the next decision-making level.
• Consensus – An alternative to rule-by-majority is to continue with discussions until all committee members vote Yes or No. This approach is useful for building long-term support and buy-in, but it can take a long time for all committee members to agree. Even then, the last two or three committee members may feel obligated to join the vote because of peer pressure rather than because they were finally convinced.
• Chairperson Decision – On some committees, members provide only an advising role, and the chairperson is ultimately responsible for the decision. In these situations, the Yes or No vote is informal and more of a recommendation than an official vote. It’s a good idea for the chairperson to follow the committee’s recommendation, but there are examples (particularly on hiring committees, faculty tenure decisions, academic programs and policies) where a chairperson or administrator acts against the committee’s recommendation.

Decision-Making Strategies

No matter WHO makes the decision in your organization, you and your committee still have to go through a methodical decision-making process. Here are a few strategies.

Values-Based, Hierarchical Decision-Making. All organizations have values, goals, and priorities, and it’s a good idea to align your decision-making process to the organization’s values and goals. For example, if your organization focuses closely on spending, then your decision may lean towards the least expensive option. On the other hand, if innovation is a top value, then you may select the most innovative project, even if it takes more time and money. But decisions often have competing values: should you prioritize innovation, expand a strength, explore a new opportunity, seek to increase enrollment or revenue, examine the amount of time for development, or focus on cost?

How do you select the best project or academic program when there are so many competing values or goals? In this situation, it may be useful to list all of the values/goals, and to rank them by highest priority or importance. By doing this, you would be creating a hierarchy of goals/values. Then, you can select the project that corresponds with the highest goal. I wrote about a similar values-based decision-making hierarchy in a previous post.

Looking beyond the values/goals of the organization, you could also make decisions based on your personal values (such as promoting projects that could earn you personal recognition or a raise), societal values (such as honesty, pursuit of truth, environmentalism), the values of your profession (scholarship and professional ethics), religious values (such as charity, sanctity, alignment with scripture), and so on. A few well-known models for values-based (or needs-based) decision making include: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, McClelland’s Achievement and Acquired Needs Theory, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory, and others. (More on these at another time!)

Pros-Cons or Benefits-Costs. Another strategy is to make a two-column list: on one side, make a list of Benefits (anything positive); on the other, make a list of Consequences or Costs (anything negative). Then compare the two. (This is also called a “Pro-Con” list or a “For-Against” list.) This approach works best with a single topic, where you can compare only one set of positives and negatives; it’s more difficult to use when you are trying to decide among three or four options, and you have to compare multiple sets of positives and negatives.

I like to combine the Benefits-Costs approach with the value-based hierarchy; otherwise, there may be several reasons on one side, but they may not be important. For example, if an employer offered free parking, free WiFi, free coffee, and everyday-jeans-days, but no vacation days, the lack of vacation days would be more significant than all of the other benefits.

SWOT Analysis.  Many organizations use a SWOT Analysis, which stands for Strengths (things they do well), Weaknesses (problems they have), Opportunities (what they could be doing), and Threats (risks from the outside and competitors). Strengths and Weaknesses are usually internal to the organization, while Opportunities and Threats are usually external to the organization.

Organizations use this analysis to think about how they can improve weaknesses, take advantage of strengths and opportunities, and avoid threats. To complete the analysis, add items in each box, or many people simply make a bulleted list down the page with a heading for each list. Formal SWOT Analyses for organizations are also written as formal reports, with extensive commentary and evidence for each section. You could do a SWOT Analysis for your own life as well. For example, if something is a weakness now (such as your finances or your technology skills), you could make decisions to improve. Similarly, if you fear that the job market or legal requirements are going to change, you could take action now to prepare for it.

Effort vs. Impact.  Another decision-making strategy is to analyze how much effort (time, resources, hard work, brain-power, money) is required of that project vs. how much impact (benefits, profits, rewards, recognition, good things to the world) it will have. This analysis places effort on a range from left to right, and impact on a range from bottom to top.

High impact projects are going to the most beneficial, but they could also be difficult to accomplish. In higher education, difficult projects I have experienced include revising the General Education program, establishing faculty tenure policies, completely revising an academic program, building a culture of assessment, transitioning to a culture of community-engaged learning, and completing a successful accreditation. However, there can be some meaningful projects are easy to accomplish – the image calls these “quick wins” and “low hanging fruit.”

The two bottom boxes show little impact, but they may be a necessary part of the job or your work style – they may include deleting emails and cleaning your voicemail inbox. If these tasks are not important, consider if they are worth doing, or try to find ways to automate them (delete all unread emails after six months, for example) or to batch them (clean voicemail at the end of every month). It’s a good idea to clarify with administrators and other faculty if you and your committee are expected to achieve “quick wins” or if you should be tackling the organization’s major issues.

Evidence-Based or Data-Driven.  Any decision in higher education requires supporting justification – decisions need to be explained (to faculty, students, parents, colleagues, administrators, the Board, and the community). Often, this justification includes evidence or data from a pilot study (a sample group of students or courses), financial information, and other available data. These decisions are called “evidence-based” or “data-informed” or “data-driven.” In these situations, you should be prepared to take either route, and then make a decision based on what the information shows. For example, if you’re trying to decide between two technology platforms, you may want to have two small groups of students and faculty use each platform and compare the results … before going all in with a university-wide contract.

Policy and Procedure. Many organizations have very prescriptive policies and procedures that identify specific outcomes for many common situations. For example, the Student Handbook describes common problems related to cheating and plagiarism on assignments, and it lists possible outcomes, such as an assignment revision, a zero on the assignment, failure in the course, and even suspension and expulsion from the college. The Student Handbook also describes the process for appealing a grade, filing a Title IX complaint, requesting a course withdrawal, and so on, and these policies also include possible decisions for faculty and administrators. Similarly, policies for faculty promotions and tenure also list criteria and expectations for teaching, scholarship, service, and advising. In these situations, administrators and committees should make sure the requirements have been met and follow the policy’s recommendations.

Precedent. In many organizations, decisions may not be written out in policy, previous decisions may have established an expectation (an unwritten policy or procedure) or “a culture,” and faculty and administrators may be bound to follow it, unless there is a good reason to deviating from this common practice.

Feedback – What are decision-making strategies you use? If you have used any of these strategies, what has been your experience? Post a comment below.

Lirim Neziroski, Ph.D., MBA is an academic administrator and faculty member with expertise in instructional technology, curriculum development, assessment, and strategic planning.  Contact Lirim for resources and for speaking, consulting, and writing opportunities.