MSG Team's other articles

11075 Role of Communication in Negotiation

Communication plays an important role in negotiation. What is negotiation ? Negotiation is nothing but a discussion among individuals to reach to an alternative which would satisfy all. How is an effective discussion possible ? Only through communication. An effective communication is directly proportional to an effective negotiation. The better the communication is the better […]

12601 What is Business Communication

Communication is neither the transmission of a message nor the message itself. It is the mutual exchange of understanding, originating with the receiver. Communication needs to be effective in business. Communication is the essence of management. The basic functions of management (Planning, Organizing, Staffing, Directing and Controlling) cannot be performed well without effective communication. Business […]

8866 Decision Making in Self Directed Teams

In many organizations, it is often the practice to give autonomy to many teams and let them take the decisions that affect their day to day affairs as well as some strategic issues. These are the so-called self-directed teams that exist in all organizations where the managers of these teams take the decisions regarding the […]

9820 Importance of Character in Personality Development

Let us first understand what does character mean? Character refers to the sum of an individual’s qualities and characteristics which differentiate him/her from others. An individual’s character is actually an amalgamation of his/her qualities which makes him unique and helps him stand apart from the rest. Character plays an essential role in Personality Development Remember […]

9551 Hofstede’s Cultural Framework as Applied to China

Hofstede’s Cultural Framework The Hofstede’s framework is a measure for assessing the impact of cultural values on the workplace behavior and gauging how much the cultural mores and attitudes influence the people at their work. Dr. Geert Hofstede was a psychologist who developed his now famous framework while working at IBM and his research was […]

Search with tags

  • No tags available.

Corporate decision making happens at various levels in organizations and can be top down or bottom up. The difference between these two styles of decision making is that the top down decision making is done at the higher levels of the hierarchy and the decisions are passed down the corporate ladder to be implemented.

On the other hand, bottom up decision making is done by giving autonomy to the middle managers and the line managers to take decisions based on the conditions and circumstances existing in their teams.

In many organizations, what we see is a top down decision making in the realms of policy, strategic focus, direction in which the organization has to proceed and bottom up decision making about the day to day running of the teams.

It needs to be remembered that the middle management is often called the “sandwich” layer because they have to implement the decisions made above and at the same time have to decide about how to run the teams and have to communicate them to the lower levels as well.

The point here is that in any process of corporate decision making, the actual implementers play a critical role since the best laid plans of the top management can go awry in case there is no commitment from the middle management.

Hence, many organizations organize off site meetings at resorts and other places where the senior management briefs the middle management about the decisions that they have taken and how it would impact the organization.

Corporate decision making is also characterized by consensus or the lack of it. Like in the real world, corporations often have power centers and groups that have their own agendas and hence arriving at a consensus can be cumbersome for the CEO or the Chairman of the Board of Directors. It is because of this reason that many corporations witness periodic restructurings with regards to organizational structure and with regards to turnover among the top management.

In recent months, Infosys has seen rapid and often turbulent situations in the company because of the power struggles at the top as well as lack of consensus among the top management about the direction that the company ought to take.

The other aspect related to corporate decision making is that many organizations thrive on leaders who have a “halo” around them and hence decision making is smooth because the rival power centers often concede to the leader’s charisma or his or her ability and vision.

Again, Infosys has seen this happen when with the retirement of its legendary founder, N R Narayana Murthy; the company is going through a bad phase with competing factions jostling for control.

Apple is an example of a company that relied on the halo effect of its founder, Steve Jobs and once he passed away, there is some uncertainty about the way the company should take in the market.

In conclusion, corporate decision making is successful as long as there is a “glue” to bind the organization together in the form of charismatic leaders or an organizational culture that values coherence and imposes stability. Once any of these conditions are removed, then the organizations fall into a self-defeating trap wherein the process of corporate decision making is impaired leading to the loss of competitiveness of the company.

Article Written by

MSG Team

An insightful writer passionate about sharing expertise, trends, and tips, dedicated to inspiring and informing readers through engaging and thoughtful content.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Articles

Curious Observation – First Step in Decision Making Process

MSG Team

Conflict Resolution and Decision Making

MSG Team