Case Study - Alvis Corporation

Alvis Corporation
1. Were the TWO decisions appropriate for a group decision procedure

according to the Vroom-Yetton model?
The underlying assumption of the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision Models
is that no one leadership style or decision making process fits all
situations.
By analyzing the situation and evaluating the problem based on time,
team buy-in, and decision quality, a conclusion about which style best fits
the situation can be made. The model defines a very logical approach to
which style to adopt and is useful for managers and leaders who are
trying to balance the benefits of participative management with the need
to make decisions effectively.
Thereon, I think the two decisions by Kathy McCarthy are appropriate
for a group decision procedure according to the Vroom-Yetton model.
The first decision which involved holiday schedules was important to
plan a holiday schedule that would ensure adequate staffing for all of the
essential operations performed by the department. The second decision
which involved production standards was important because sales had
been increasing steadily and the company recently installed some new
equipment to increase productivity, therefore, the new equipment would
make it possible to produce more with the same number of workers.
2. What mistakes were made in using participation, and what could

have been done to avoid the difficulties the manager encountered?
Making good decisions is one of the main leadership tasks. Part of doing
this is determining the most efficient and effective means of reaching the
decision.
The primary mistake of participative management is that important
decisions can be turned to long discussions. When these long discussions
happen, competitors can show up and take advantage. These competitors
can destroy the decision once it is made.
Another mistake is the unclear and confusing communication generated
by the manager who wants to be participative, or at a minimum, nonautocratic. Such communication can be a danger if the manager did not
evaluate his communication methods well.
What could have been done to avoid the difficulties the manager
encountered is to follow standards and use templates. There are good
reasons why experienced professionals took the time to create and
publish industry and company standards. Standards detail best practices
and procedures learned over years of trial and error
3. Were these TWO decisions appropriate ones for introducing

participation into the department?
I do not think so because they did not allow enough time for the workers
to adapt to the situation.
Failure to allow enough time for each stage of the project can lead to
missed requirements, inadequate analysis, poor design, rushed
programming, insufficient testing, and incomplete documentation. The
result can be a system that doesnt meet expectations and fails in one or
more key areas.
Estimating the time needed to accomplish each phase of a project is
difficult. If I am an employee I will achieve the best results when I sat
down with my supervisor and determined the time allotted for each major
task in the project plan.
One should be overly optimistic in his estimates; the other should be
much more realistic in his estimates, and this turned out to be right.
As a good rule, doubling initial estimates came close to the actual time
required. That information was useful for developing project plan
timelines.
You may need to develop a similar rule until you can more accurately
estimate completion dates. Ideally, you want to complete each stage of
the project on time, and the best way to do that is estimate them correctly
from the beginning.
4. How does the revised model as designed by Vroom and Jago differ
from the Vroom-Yetton model?
In three samples of manager-reported decisions the VroomJago model's
predictions were supported. Decisions that more closely fit the
recommended decision method were rated as higher in effectiveness.
The model was also found to account for more variance in decision
effectiveness than the prior VroomYetton model.
It was also found that the VroomJago model's greater precision in
situational assessment and derived prescriptions allow for greater
discrimination in choice of decision method across all situations.
The Vroom-Yetton: When do not know about the model, 96 managers
from a variety of organizations described 181 actual problem-solving or
decision-making situations and their behavior in these situations. The
model was then employed to predict ratings of the technical quality,
subordinate acceptance, and the overall effectiveness of the final
solutions chosen or decisions made. Substantial support for the model
and its various components was obtained. Its concurrent validity was
greater than that of a noncontingent model proposed by other theorists.
The validity of the Vroom-Yetton model is due, in large measure, to
relationships between agreement with the model and subordinate
acceptance of or commitment to decisions. Relationships with decision
quality were smaller.

Case Study - Alvis Corporation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study - Alvis Corporation

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study - Alvis Corporation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alvis Corporation

1. Were the TWO decisions appropriate for a group decision procedure

2. What mistakes were made in using participation, and what could

3. Were these TWO decisions appropriate ones for introducing

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.