Question Description
First Post:
An effective leader is one who facilitates the forward movement of a team and organization, steers the accomplishment of a certain vision rather than providing it, he further defines the reality of achievement and success for the organization (Goetsch & Davis, 2014). Overall, an effective leader is the passionate holder of organizational values which steer an organization forward through the incorporation of various skills including creativity, intellectual drive, AND knowledge (Covey, 1992). He is the pioneer or organizer who helps a team come up with solutions including decisions that define the future of the company, brainstorming by use of the many interpersonal skills among the team as well as equipment of the overall organizational team with business skills that help an organization in times of disaster as well as in the management and mitigation of such crisis.
Great leaders are known to be great decision makers at all times whether in prosperity or during times of crisis. The great decision-making power evident in effective leaders is achieved from a combination of intelligence types as well as values including Emotional awareness and self-control, management of uncertainties as well as choices, going to great lengths to avoid uncertainties, limiting oneself to the choices one has, as well as trusting one’s intuition and consultancy (Zsambok & Klein, 2014). Crisis leadership incorporates various concepts of leadership and leadership practices to find the core causes of a disaster, mitigate it as well as minimizing or curbing its occurrence in the future. In order to do this, leaders need to put much thought into the subject of crisis or disaster (Goetsch & Davis, 2014). Discussions, as well as the writing of viable solutions, is also important if effective crisis management is to be accomplished.
A leader should be a decisive one when it comes to disaster management in an organization. The role of making the most challenging decisions falls in the leader. Examples of crisis a leader might have to address in the course of their service include, falling of profits, withdrawal of various shareholders as well as investors, massive walkout of employees, unsustainable funds as well as vicious competitions (Booth, 2015). In order to make a decision a leader needs to take many factors into consideration including the many ways to solve a crisis, what ways exist to prevent the disaster from occurring again and also what are the requirements to power the maintenance of a particular system in an organization.
Most importantly, deciding whether to make quick decisions or whether to gather additional information is needed. Rapid decisions may be characterized by future failures as well as misfortunes, while at the same time, they might they might lead to great success if applied carefully in times of disaster (Covey, 1992). Gathering of additional information helps create or set parameters that can be used to determine which info is of essential purpose and when the information gathering process should be terminated (Goetsch & Davis, 2014). Information gathering also helps leaders to find solutions to problems they never thought would come up in the near or further future.
Awareness of the aftermaths that come along with the making of any decision is very helpful in deciding what action to take regarding a crisis. It also helps the leaders to further continue with a decision knowing what to expect (Covey, 1992). Allowing the emotions and results of a particular decision to guide you as a leader is essential in the making of tough decisions during a crisis or during prosperity.
Every decision made by a leader is characterized by its share of uncertainties and risky elements. Recognition and acknowledgment of such factors is a necessary step that must be fulfilled (Covey, 1992). Although some of these risk factors cannot be calculated, anticipation is always there. Uncomfortable outcomes are likely if the existence of uncertainties is not acknowledged by any leader facing a crisis in an organization. Discussion with other executives as well as employees is paramount to test the viability of a certain decision (Goetsch & Davis, 2014). Discussion with stakeholders and employees also sheds some light on other uncertainties that may come up in the process. Positive findings may also come up in the process of discussion.
There exist many models of decision-making. These include, the rational model, the non-rational model, Satisficing Model, the incremental and garbage can model (Covey, 1992). The satisficing model is the model that makes sense to me in any decision-making environment especially in the case of crisis. The model suggests that leaders may not always have the ability to make perfectly rational decisions (Booth, 2015). This is backed up by the general knowledge that man is prone to making mistakes. The satisficing model of decision making was further suggested in order to facilitate a better understanding of what the decision-making process entails.
According to the bounded rationality concept, there exist many factors that limit the degree to which leaders can effectively make perfectly rational decisions. I agree that lack of information may render a leader unable to make certain decisions (Zsambok & Klein, 2014). Such info may include possible alternatives to solve the crisis, strength, and weaknesses of the alternatives as well as resources.
The satisficing model is also acceptable in the sense that the amount of information required to be gathered in order to make certain decisions may be limited by time or cost constraints. The relative importance of critical information differs from person to the other (Covey, 1992). Thus a leader may consider some information unimportant leaving them out in the decisions they make. Individuals capacity and lack of intelligence may also cause imperfect decisions.
As seen above, decision-making is a key component of leadership. In the case of a crisis, an adequate decision that serves the purpose is applied instead of a perfectly ideal solution that would take time to implement. Also, a leader should allow oneself to hear their intuition. Results such as talking yourself into things that dont go according to your principles, instincts, and experiences are expected when one overthinks of the important decisions they are about to make. A leader should be daring in the sense that they should occasionally seek opportunities that enable them to thoughtfully and provocatively make important decisions on the future of an organization or in the case of a crisis or unseen disaster.
References
Booth, S. A. (2015). Crisis management strategy: Competition and change in modern
enterprises. Routledge.
Covey, S. R. (1992). Principle centered leadership. Simon and Schuster.
Zsambok, C. E., & Klein, G. (Eds.). (2014). Naturalistic decision making.
Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2014). Quality management for organizational excellence.
Second Post:
Arriving at the best solution in case of an emergency requires a quick and well-planned process that is straight forward. Unlike in business, emergency management requires swift response as most incidences are life and death scenario and hence timely decisions are recommended. In this regard, a simple and comprehensive decision-making model is prudent in ensuring that a correct decision is reached. According to the Department of Homeland Security (2018), there is a well laid down communication structure that was laid down by FEMA after 9/11 incidence and Hurricane Katrina to avoid communication breakdown which was highly criticized during these two incidences. To align with this structure as well as other protocols depicted in the readings, the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision Model is the most suitable decision tool as it considers the quality of decision, subordinate commitment, time factor and it is well structured (Boundless, 2018). From the reading, it is evident that being good leader is the ability to consult and make swift decision tragedy times and able communicate the decision right away.
In this regard, there are different types of emergencies ranging from fire, bomb attack to floods. Every emergency requires a different approach and hence the leader needs to be diverse in decision making. More so, emergencies are time bound as delays leads to more death and destruction of properties. Thus, the Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision Model is efficient as it considers the leadership style of the leader, involvement of the group in decision making and time constraint. Involvement of subordinate is essential as highlighted in the reading as it gives more information about the event before making the decision. This also allows the junior members to feel as part of the solution and hence improved performance. more so, depending the leadership style, the leader of the emergency team is able to make a quick decision since he or she has the power to make decision that deem right. Hence, there are no lengthy procedures in making decision. Also, the clear structure of the model makes it simple and easy to implement.
Reference:
Boundless (2018). Leadership and Decision Making: The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Model. Retrieved from http://oer2go.org/mods/en-boundless/www.boundless….
Department of Homeland Security (2018). Crisis communication plan. Retrieved from https://www.ready.gov/business/implementation/cris…
Add and comment to the posts and also you can ask question to expand the discussion with references
About 250 words each reply
