You are facing a global pandemic. You must decide the best approach to keeping your business afloat.
How do you protect your bottom line? Do you lay off workers? Can you do mental gymnastics and reassess your business model, making the current economy’s limitations work for you?
The way you cope with the stress of complex business decisions reflects both your personality and your culture.
Four different managerial styles have been identified through research.
We’ll call these styles:
- The architect
- The free spirit
- The expert-seeker
- The panic attack
You may recognize one – or all – of these strategies in yourself and your management methodology.
Let’s take a look at each.
This form, which is most taught in schools of management, considers alternative solutions to complex business decisions through the attentive collection of facts.
This methodology and its application is one in which Western managers pride themselves.
An architect is a planner, accounting for the whole picture and all potential outcomes.
The Free Spirit
Complacency and spontaneity are the main tools in the free-spirit’s managerial toolbox.
No complicated decision-making process is employed; the free-spirit takes the first available practical course of action that presents itself.
In doing so, she may be blind to alternatives with better outcomes.
Instead of relying on his own managerial expertise, the expert-seeker passes the buck to those more knowledgeable or qualified on the subject.
The expert-seeker might consult a specialist or supervisor in all aspects of an issue in order to direct his decision-making.
The Panic Attack
The last managerial decision-making style is one you should avoid.
This tactic involves succumbing to panic mode and making reckless, ill-advised decisions largely based on hysteria.
Obviously, this decision-making methodology is not recommended.
Personality and Culture Impacts Decision-Making Methodology
Your decision-making process is largely impacted by both your personality and culture.
Although you’ll find all four strategies in every culture, some styles may be more predominant than others.
For instance, you’ll find The Architect methodology is applied more often in Western cultures (e.g. the U.S. and Australia) than in, say, Japan or other East-Asian countries.
That does not mean the chosen strategy is any less rational or effective (unless we’re talking The Panic Attack).
The difference in methodology is based on a different set of cultural norms and values so, rather, a style that is ineffective in one culture may be more effective in another.
As we discussed in past posts, people act rationally within their own culture.
Intuition and emotion often direct Japanese managerial decision-making.
Due to the collectivist values of the culture, a primary concern will be how the decision might be received by the group and how it might affect the social fabric.
Collectivist societies take stock in the collective view; the welfare of the entire group, rather than simply the individual, is most important.
We’ll talk more next week about other biases in the managerial decision-making process.