You bring your initial proposal work (topic, purpose statement, research questions, and hypothesis) to a stakeholder committee, which is comprised of your manager and other senior-level people. They react and you take notes.
Juicy Red Tomato Company
Steering Committee Meeting notes
? Discussed research proposal
? HR manager comments - agreed with everything, seemed a little upset
that her suggestions were not followed previously
? Agri director disagrees that wages are not adequate - "after all we're
using migrant workers" Also argued that JRT provides housing for
workers, so that should count as compensation.
? IT manager commented he's been fighting for budget to improve
communications but has been denied funding
? President believes that field personnel will not use "hi tech toys" like
cellphones and pdas
? CFO commented that if JRT starts paying production people more, profit
margin will be destroyed
What, if any, biases do you detect in the steering committee members' remarks?
At this point, are they using reflective or expedient decision-making methods? What do you need to do to address their concerns?
Think about your recent business decision you discussed. Your supervisor had asked that you expand on your self-evaluation by identifying at least two judgment issues that you had to address. Write a memo to your supervisor describing these issues. Explain how you addressed them and the degree to which your decision was based on expedience and/or reflection. Potential issues include: bias, or ethical issues related to the availability heuristic, bias related to the representative heuristic, bias related to anchoring and adjustment, avoiding uncertainty, framing effects, positive illusions, egocentrism, and regret avoidance.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com April 3, 2020, 2:51 pm ad1c9bdddf
Please see response attached. I hope this helps and take care.
FROM ATTACHED RESPONSE:
Employing Reflective Problem-Solving Methods: (see article at end of response for more detail)
1. Define the problem
Should I merge the acquired company into my company or operate the acquired company as a separate business entity (the results of this strategy will be two separate companies under one senior management "umbrella" (the senior management team that is responsible for running both companies)? The purpose was to make a judgment of the most profitable business decision. The structure of the transaction is of critical importance because it affects the form and liabilities of the ongoing business, the protections available to its owners, and the taxation of each entity and its owners. I had to make judgments on these major issues. (http://www.vta.spcomm.uiuc.edu/PSG/psgl2-ov.html).
2. Identify the criteria for anlayzing the problem (specifying the goals or objectives that you want to be able to accomplish).
a. Increase profit margin
b. Downsize in a way that will respect and motivate the most number of employees
c. Maintain as many employees as possible
3. Generate alternatives,
a. Merge the acquired company into my company
b. Or operate the acquired company as a separate business entity. The results of this strategy will be two separate companies under one senior management "umbrella" the senior management team that is responsible for running both companies?
4 identifying possible courses of action that might accomplish your various goals.
a. Merge the acquired company into my company
- Potential to increase shareholder value - that of achieving cost and/or revenue benefits.
- Improve channels of delivery
- While improving sales and revenue, it can also provided a competitive advantage over the competition. For example, the proposed merger of mobile phone carriers VoiceStream and Cingular Wireless could improve service and add features, experts said, but the deal could also hurt competition in the telecommunications industry (Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/08/21/BU76999.DTL&type=business)
- Lack of experience about the risks and activities of mergers and acquisitions - choose to go the monetary role which ignores the importance of others experience and expertise.
- Lack of agreement about the best strategic implementation strategy - Other executives has learned the hard way that when the merging of two businesses doesn't go smoothly, talent soon quits and projects drag out.
- Possibility of destroying shareholder value - Several solid studies report that as many as 75% of all mergers actually destroy shareholder value instead of achieving cost and/or revenue benefits.
- Partner decides to micromanage - Like most entrepreneurs, the American Dental Partners founder would not have welcomed pressure to acquire just for the sake of growth. "You want to make sure you bring in a partner who's not going to micromanage," he says. Company builders who sense that a potential equity partner may push too hard for acquisitions just to spur growth will be smart to delete that firm from the shortlist. The critical point is this: the entrepreneur runs the acquisition show, and must be comfortable with all likely deals ((Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/08/21/BU76999.DTL&type=business)
b. Or ...
In reference to the case scenario, this solution identifies at least two judgment issues (e.g. biases associated with availability heuristic, representative heuristic, anchoring and adjustment, avoiding uncertainty, framing effects, positive illusions, egocentrism, or regret avoidance) that a person needed to address and how each was addressed and the degree to which the decision was based on expedience and/or reflection.