Vol 1 No 2 (2018)
Articles

Models of Decision Making - Advantages and Drawbacks in Crisis Management

Marko Jajčinović
University of Applied Sciencies Velika Gorica
Marko Toth
Published December 14, 2018
Keywords
  • theory of decision-making,
  • crisis management,
  • prevention,
  • stress,
  • models of decision-making
How to Cite
Jajčinović, M., & Toth, M. (2018). Models of Decision Making - Advantages and Drawbacks in Crisis Management. Annals of Disaster Risk Sciences, 1(2), 129-138. Retrieved from https://ojs.vvg.hr/index.php/adrs/article/view/18

Abstract

It has been shown that professional stress is underexamined when it comes to personnel management in crisis situations. High degree of responsibility associated with this profession implies high stress potential that largely depends on quality of leadership and decisions taken. Decision element is of crucial importance for successful crisis managing. In order to understand and improve decision-making in crisis situations, a necessity for rationalization of decision theory emerges. Researches focusing on the matter of decision-making have been conducted by scientists of many profiles, having establishment of basic approaches of modern decision theory for the result: normative approach is based on probability functions whereas the prescriptive approach provides guidelines for decision-making in practice. Finally, there is descriptive approach that harnesses heuristics to describe ways in which people actually decide. In real-life situations decision-making is laid by contextual and psychological boundaries inherent to all people. In that respect, observed patterns of different behaviours in people when it comes to decision-making under ambiguity, different from those in deciding under stress, play a major role. There are significant differences in practical values of particular models of decision-making. Therefore, this paper investigates various models of decision-making and their applicability in crisis situations in purpose of prevention and reducing stress levels in responsible persons. In the conclusion, the approach of bounded rationality based on heuristic strategies imposes itself as the most appropriate, although fallible, but often only possible choice. By adopting skills of situational awareness and critical thinking, supported by adequate stress trainings, simulations and preventive measures such as risk analysis, operation strategies and calculations of probability based on postulates of normative domain of decision-making theory, it is possible to mitigate negative influence of stress and enhance decision-making in crisis management.

References

  1. Albert, M. (2003). Bayesian Rationality and Decision Making: A Critical Review. Analyse & Kritik, 25: 101-117.
  2. Boin, R.A. (2008). Crisis Management Vol. 2. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
  3. Bruine de Bruin, W. & Parker, A.M. & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5): 938-956.
  4. Camerer, C. & Weber, M. (1992). Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4): 1-52.
  5. Campitelli, G. & Gobet, F. (2010). Herbert Simon's Decision-Making Approach: Investigation of Cognitive Processes in Experts. Review of General Psychology, 4(14): 354-364.
  6. Edwards, W., Miles Jr, R.F. & Von Winterfeldt, D. (Eds.), (2007). Advances in decision analysis: from foundations to applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Hancock, P.A., Vincenzi, D.A., Wise, J.A. & Mouloua, M. (2008). Human Factors in Simulation and Training. Boca Raton-Florida: CRC Press.
  8. Hansson, S.O. (1994). Decision Theory – A Brief Introduction. Stockholm: Royal Institute of Thechnology.
  9. Horgan, J. (2016). ''Bayes's Theorem: What's the Big Deal?''. acessed April 2018. Retrieved from https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/bayes-s-theorem-what-s-the-big-deal/
  10. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking: Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  11. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1973). Judgements under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157): 1124-1131.
  12. Kešetović, Ž., Korajlić, N. & Toth, I. (2013). Krizni menadžment. Velika Gorica: Veleučilište Velika Gorica.
  13. Koehler, J.D. & Harvey, N. (2004). Blackwell Handbook of Judgement & Decision making. New Jersey: Blackwell Publishing.
  14. Madara, O.M. (2011). ''Game Theory in Strategic Management''. accessed April 2018. Retrieved from
  15. http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/9848/aibuma2011submission_25%20%20Game%20Theory%20in%20Strategic%20Management.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  16. Myerson, B.R. (1991). Game theory, Analysis of Conflict. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  17. Pavić, D. (2009). Gerd Gigerenzer: Snaga intuicije-intuicija nesvjesnoga. Zagreb: Algoritam.
  18. Simon, HA. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Psychology Review, 41: 1-19.
  19. Surowik, D. (2002). Leonard Savage's Mathematical Theory of Decision. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 5 (18):65-75.
  20. Tversky, A, Wakker, P. (1995). Risk Attitudes and Decision Weights. Econometrica, 63 (6): 1255-1280.