RATIONAL MODEL OF THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS

Deviations from the Rational Model of the Decision Making Process are Mostly Due to Behavioral Factors, Organizational Learning & a Bias to Previous Experience and Background



Deviations from the Rational Model of the Decision Making Process are Mostly Due to Behavioral Factors, Organizational Learning & a Bias to Previous Experience and Background

Introduction

The rational model of decision making claims that individuals engage in strict cerebral rationality when making decisions. Decision making is viewed as a sequential process that consists of (1) problem definition, (2) alternative generation and evaluation, and (3) decision selection and implementation. During the first two stages of rational decision making, individuals engage in an exhaustive and systematic search for information. To arrive at a selection among alternatives, individuals typically engage in a detailed cost-benefit analysis. However, cognitive constraints limit individuals' ability to explore alternatives comprehensively; they commonly readjust objectives and usually settle for a “satisfactory” instead of an “optimal” decision (Bazerman, 1998).

Discussion

Kahneman and Amos (2000) mention there are a variety of competing models of how individuals and organizations make decisions. While the dominant model continues to be the rational perspective, there is a broad array of alternative approaches including bounded rationality, behavioral decision making (Kahneman and Amos, 2000), and political, escalation, and garbage models. These reflect the broader intellectual turmoil over the nature of reality and both mirror and can inform current disputes over competing models of disability.

While specific formulations of rational decision making vary, a representative example might consist of the follow steps. A problem or opportunity is identified. All the possible alternatives to address the problem are generated. Agreed-on criteria exist to evaluate the alternatives. Complete information is gathered. Each potential course of action is evaluated. The course of action that maximizes utility is selected (Kahneman and Amos, 2000).

To illustrate this model, let us take the example of an individual who is involved in a serious car accident. Several months after being discharged from the hospital, the woman is experiencing numbness in the legs, a symptom not clearly associated with the accident. Soon she is experiencing complete paralysis from the waist down. Under the rational decision making formulation, all potential tests are undertaken to evaluate the disabled person's status. All potential treatment interventions are considered. The best intervention is then undertaken to “cure” the patient of her disability (Kahneman and Amos, 2000).

The rational model continues to be the dominant model in the social sciences and the applied fields based on them. Acceptance of this maximization framework enables a variety of elegant and rigorous analytic techniques to be brought to bear on complex decisions. Yet each step of the rational decision making model has been subject to aggressive criticism for a lack of descriptive accuracy (Kahneman and Amos, 2000).

The bounded rationality perspective provides a long-standing alternative to the rational model. Proponents of this perspective argue that because of limitations in individuals' and organizations' information processing capabilities, pure rationality is impossible to achieve. The bounded rationality model suggests that decision makers have ...