Running Meetings Effectively

Garvin, D. A., & Roberto, M. A. 2013. What you don’t know about making decisions. In HBR (ed.) HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Making Smart Decisions: 75-93. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. 

1. Contrasting 1) decision making as an event vs. as a process;

The difference between leaders who make good and those who make bad ones is on their way of perceiving the decision making concept. Some see decision making as an independent event which means a separated choice that takes place in a certain time and place. They think about the decision by themselves, alone, do researches take advices and neglect the organizational and social contexts in which this decision has evaluated. In this case, most of decisions are wrong.

Some others consider decision as a process that is closely related to power plays, policies, personal nuances and institutional history. Moreover, the decision is the fruit of discussions and debates and its execution depends on different levels of the organization.

2) the inquiry approach vs. the advocacy approach of decision making;

Seeing decision making as a process allow leaders to work with their teams in order to get more ideas and make the best decision. Process can be characterized by two similar approaches that give two different results: Inquiry focused groups and Advocacy ones.

Inquiry: The group considers different options and work together to reach the best solution. The goal is not to impose a point of view but it’s more about critical thinking and getting to an agreement from all the information shared. All possibilities are questionable and debatable and the decision is made on personal conclusions. This approach is described as being “open” and is the most recommended one because it produces decision of high quality that advances the company’s objectives and can be implemented effectively.

Advocacy: Is an approach that encourages competition and gives priority to the dominant view in order to avoid conflicts. Participants are passionate and subjective about their arguments. The goal is to make a compelling (irrefutable) case, downplay weaknesses, and defend your position aggressively. Innovation and differences are not welcomed it ends with a looser and a winner.

3) the cognitive vs. affective conflicts.

Cognitive and affective conflicts are hard to separate in real life. People take criticism personally and react defensively.