1
Ewan Simpson, Ph.D.
Ewan Simpson, Ph.D.
MGT3205 Decision Making
COURSE GUIDE AND SYLLABUS
Ewan Simpson, PhD, Associate Professor of Management
B.Sc. in Business Administration and Accounting
Bang College of Business
KIMEP University
FALL 2013
__________________________________________________________________
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
2
Contents
Page Number
1. Overview
3
2. Instructor Availability
3
3. Instructional Resources
3
4. Relationship Between Course and Program
4
5. Learning Philosophy and Methodology
4
6. Course Description / Overview
5
7. Learning Objectives
5
8. Intended Learning Outcomes
6
9. Learning Activities
6
10. Assessment Scheme
7
11. Grading Scale
7
12. Detailed Course Structure
8
13. Key Dates
10
14. Other issues
10
15. Individual Assignment
12
16. Group Assignment
13
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
3
1.
Overview
Semester:
Fall 2013
Instructor:
Ewan Simpson, Ph.D.
Course Code and Title:
MGT3205 Decision Making
Class Time :
1130-1245, Tuesdays and Thursdays
Class Place:
Course Credit:
Three (3) credits
Office:
Room #328, Dostyk Building
Phone:
270 44 40, ext.2287
E-mail:
simpson@kimep.kz
2. Instructor Availability
Office/Advising Hours:
Tuesday/Thursday 1400-1600 (outside office hours by
appointment only – please send an email to arrange)
Note: It is much more effective to send an e-mail outlining the specific issue you wish to discuss either
during office hours or at another time. I will respond within 24 hours.
3.
Instructional Resources
3.1
Reference Textbook:
There is no set textbook. The main learning materials are the extensive PowerPoint materials
prepared by the instructor for each class, drawing on multiple sources. Other reading materials
will be provided as the course proceeds as and when relevant.
As background, students are recommended to purchase a copy of ‘: A Primer on Decision
Making by James March. This is available as an ebook from www.ebooks.com. Please note this is
not required, but is recommended since it is a classic compilation of writings by one of the
world’s leading decision making academics.
3.
Other Resources
To be provided as the course proceeds in the form of articles, webpages and video.
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
4
4. Relationship Between Course and Program
This course is an elective course for the Management major in the B.Sc. in Business Administration and
Accounting.
5.
Learning Philosophy and Methodology
Aim
To combine the development of:

practical knowledge of the subject

analytical and critical thinking skills
in a collegial environment.
Foundations
1.
A structured approach to course delivery is critical. Students have a right to know the subject
matter they will be exposed to in advance. At times, however, unforeseen changes may have to
be made. In this event, as much notice as possible will be given.
2.
It is also critical to get a firm grasp of the basic concepts from the start. Many business subjects
often obscure the often ‘common sense’ fundamentals which underpin the content. The goal is
to help the student to unearth these base concepts for themselves.
3.
Practicality is also crucial. A good course must help the student to develop a toolkit or
framework for understanding the subject, but is also applicable in other contexts.
4.
Relevance to Kazakhstan and Central Asia is also fundamental. This can take several forms,
including students sharing their experiences in applying the issues raised in class.
5.
Interaction in class based on respect for each participant and their contribution is not only a
more enjoyable way to learn than traditional ‘chalk and talk’ learning, it is a better way.
6.
Students should be assessed via a combination of individual efforts and team based projects.
7.
Support in providing supplementary learning materials outside the class and online enhances
the in-class learning experience.
6.
Course Description/Overview
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
5
This course explores the basic theory and practice of decision making, drawing on global best practice,
the insights of world class decision making researchers and practitioners and the experience and
expertise of people in leadership positions in Kazakhstan. The focus is on developing basic practical
insights into three issues:

Theories of decision making;

The practice of decision making

The key role of human factors in decision making.
This focus will be delivered by a combination of introduction of theories and concepts, self assessment,
case analysis and discussion, with an emphasis on discussion and conversation using practical examples
from everyday life as well as business to illustrate the core basic concepts of decision making processes.
The purpose of the course is to simplify the complexities of the decision process and give students a
grounding in how to better understand the multitude of factors involved in making effective decisions in
the real world.
7
Learning Objectives
Knowledge
Students will:
•
understand the base or core concepts of the key theories of decision making

learn the fundamentals of how to analyze decision making by using established specific tools

build a basic framework to allow differentiation of ‘good’ decision making approaches from
‘bad’ from a range of ethical viewpoints;
•
how to apply all of the above in the context of Kazakhstan.
Skills:
In addition to the knowledge base development indicated above, students will further develop the
following generic skills as they proceed through the course:
•
written communication;

Interpersonal/team skills;

Problem solving/creativity;

Critical thinking skills;

Oral communication;
The core intent, however, is to give a context to students to provide them with basic practical support to
develop their own decision making capacity.
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
6
Application Abilities:
Students will be able to

Develop a thought framework regarding the field of decision making which allows issues to be
addressed strategically and critically

Apply this framework to understand cases specific to the class, in their wider learning
experience and in their current and future personal and professional life
8.
Intended Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of the course, students will be able to;
•
Work in groups and understand what it means to be part of a team to deliver effective decisions
– however defined
•
Communicate business knowledge on decision making in both oral and written form;
•
Recognize and diagnose decision making problems,
•
Demonstrate a base knowledge of practical decision making issues.
•
Apply this knowledge to help understand approaches to decision making in the context of the
Kazakhstan business environment.
9.
Learning Activities
Students are expected to undertake various learning activities both in class and outside the class. For
every one hour in class, students are expected to spend two hours working independently, on their own
or in groups, outside the class. As a motivation and time management tool, they will be encouraged to
keep a record of study. Therefore on average, successful completion should involve an average
commitment of 9 hours per week over the course of the semester.
Classroom Contact (45 hours):
During the 15 week semester, students will spend:

3 hours per week, totaling 45 hours in the semester.
Preparation for Presentation (45 hours): Background reading and study (video etc) is essential in order
that excellent presentations can be made.
Reading Assignments and Preparation for examination assessments (45 hours): Background reading
and study (video etc) is essential in order to maximize the effectiveness of learning in class.
10
Assessment Scheme
The course is assessed by a combination of continuous assessment and final assessment as follows
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
7
Assessment Element
Continuous Assessment:
Of which:
Continuous Assessment Exam 1
Continuous Assessment Exam 2
Individual Assignment
Final Assessment
Of which:
Group Assignment
Final Examination
TOTAL (Continuous plus final assessment)
% of total
60%
15%
15%
30 %
40%
20%
20%
100%
*Attendance is essential in order to fully understand the key concepts and issues in the course, as well
as to effective participation in discussions in class.
11
Grading Scale
Letter grades for the course will follow the same standards as specified in the KIMEP Catalog. The table
below presents the grading scale.:
Letter Grade
A+
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CD+
D
DF
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
Numeric Scale
90-100
85-89
80-84
77-79
73-76
70-72
67-69
63-66
60-62
57-59
53-56
50-52
Below 50
8
12.
Detailed Course Structure
Week
1- 2-6 September
Session
1.
2
2.9-13 September
3
4
3. 16-20 September
4. 23-27 September
5.30 September-October
4
5
6
Why We Make Bad Decisions and
Decision Traps 2
7
Why We Make Bad Decisions and
Decision Traps 3
8
Ethics 1
9
Examination on material covered
in classes 2-8
Ethics II: How Our Unconscious
Undermines Our Attempts to Be
Ethical Decision Makers
10
6. October 7-11
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
Content
General Description of Approach
and Content of the Course
Starting Point: The Rational
Choice Model
Starting Point: The Rational
Choice Model 2
Starting Point: The Rational
Choice Model 3
Why We Make Bad Decisions and
Decision Traps 1
11
Ethics III: Strategies to Address
Unconscious Bias
12
Individual Level Issues - System 1
and 2 Thinking
Reading
PPT slides on L Drive
March, J. (1994) A Primer on Decision Making, ch 1
PPT slides on L Drive
March, J. (1994) A Primer on Decision Making, ch 1
PPT slides on L Drive
March, J. (1994) A Primer on Decision Making, ch 1
PPT slides on L Drive
Hammond, J.S., Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H. (2006) The
Hidden Traps in Decision Making, Harvard Business
Review, January 2006, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions.
Campbell, A., Whitehead, J., Finkelstein, S. (2009)
Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions, Harvard
Business Review, February 2009, reprinted in
Harvard Business Review (2011) Making Smart
Decisions
PPT slides on L Drive
Hammond, J.S., Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H. (2006) The
Hidden Traps in Decision Making, Harvard Business
Review, January 2006, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions.
Campbell, A., Whitehead, J., Finkelstein, S. (2009)
Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions, Harvard
Business Review, February 2009, reprinted in
Harvard Business Review (2011) Making Smart
Decisions
PPT slides on L Drive
Hammond, J.S., Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H. (2006) The
Hidden Traps in Decision Making, Harvard Business
Review, January 2006, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions.
Campbell, A., Whitehead, J., Finkelstein, S. (2009)
Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions, Harvard
Business Review, February 2009, reprinted in
Harvard Business Review (2011) Making Smart
Decisions
PPT slides on L Drive
Banaji, M.A., Bazerman, M.H., Chugh, D. (2003) How
(Un) Ethical Are You?, Harvard Business Review,
December 2003, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Banaji, M.A., Bazerman, M.H., Chugh, D. (2003) How
(Un) Ethical Are You?, Harvard Business Review,
December 2003, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Banaji, M.A., Bazerman, M.H., Chugh, D. (2003) How
(Un) Ethical Are You?, Harvard Business Review,
December 2003, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Kahneman, D (2011) Thinking Fast and Slow, Ch 1
PPT Slides on L drive
9
Week
7. October 14-18
8. October 21-25
9. October 28-November
1
10. November 4-8
Session
13
14
Frames and Over-Optimism
15
Countering Over-Optimism
16
The Wisdom of Crowds 1
17
The Wisdom of Crowds 2
18
Small Groups and Teams
19
Examination on material covered
in classes 10-18
Group Think and Other Challenges
1
20
11. November 11-15
12. November 18-22
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
Content
Moods and Emotions
21
Group Decision Making
Challenges
22
Developing Conflict In Decision
Processes
23
Tackling Indecision and Decision
Role Clarity
24
Evidence – based Management
and Advocacy
Reading
Lewicki, R.J., Barry, B., Saunders, D.M. (2007)
Essentials of Negotiation, McGraw-Hill Irwin, ch5
PPT Slides on L drive
Lovallo, D., Kahneman, D. Delusions of Success: How
Optimism Undermines Executives’ Decisions,
Harvard Business Review, July 2003, reprinted in
Harvard Business Review (2011) Making Smart
Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Lovallo, D., Kahneman, D. Delusions of Success: How
Optimism Undermines Executives’ Decisions,
Harvard Business Review, July 2003, reprinted in
Harvard Business Review (2011) Making Smart
Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Surowiecki, J. (2004) The Wisdom of Crowds, ch 1-3,
Anchor Books.
PPT Slides on L drive
Surowiecki, J. (2004) The Wisdom of Crowds, ch 1011, Anchor Books.
PPT Slides on L drive
March, J. (1994) A Primer on Decision Making, ch 3
and 4
PPT Slides on L drive
Coutu, D. (2009) Why teams Don’t Work: AN
interview with John L Hackman, , Harvard Business
Review, May 2009, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Managing Teams
PPT Slides on L drive
Coutu, D. (2009) Why teams Don’t Work: AN
interview with John L Hackman, , Harvard Business
Review, May 2009, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Managing Teams
PPT Slides on L drive
March, J. (1994) A Primer on Decision Making, ch 3
and 4
Eisenhardt, K.M., Kahwajy, J.L., Bourgeois, L.J.
(1997). How Management
Teams Can Have a
Good Fight, Harvard Business Review, July 1997,
reprinted in Harvard Business Review (2011)
Managing Teams
Charan R. (2001) Overcoming a Culture of
Indecision, Harvard Business Review, January 2001,
reprinted in Harvard Business Review (2011) Making
Smart Decisions
Rogers, P., Blenko, M. (2006) Who has the D? How
Clear Decision Roles Enhance Performance Harvard
Business Review, January 2006, reprinted in Harvard
Business Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Garvin, D.A., Roberto, M.A. (2001) What You Don’t
Know About Making Decisions, Harvard Business
Review, August 2001, reprinted in Harvard Business
Review (2011) Making Smart Decisions
Pfeffer, J., Sutton, R.I. (2006) Evidence-Based
Management, Harvard Business Review, January
2006, reprinted in Harvard Business Review (2011)
Making Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
10
Week
13. November 25-29
14. December 2-6
15. December 9-13
13.
Session
25
26
27
28
29
30
Content
Building a Strategic Decision
Making Process
Best Practice at the Three Levels 1
Best Practice at the Three Levels 2
Group Case Presentations
Group Case Presentations
Final Examination December 12
Reading
Mankins, M.C., Steele, R. (2006) Stop Making Plans;
Start Making Decisions, Harvard Business Review,
January 2006, reprinted in Harvard Business Review
(2011) Making Smart Decisions
Davenport, T. H.(2009) Make Better Decisions,
Harvard Business Review, November 2009,
reprinted in Harvard Business Review (2011) Making
Smart Decisions
PPT Slides on L drive
Prior readings and PPT Slides on L drive
Prior readings and PPT Slides on L drive
Key Dates
Assessment Element
Continuous Assessment:
Of which:
Continuous Assessment Exam 1
Continuous Assessment Exam 2
Individual Assignment
Final Assessment
Of which:
Group Presentation
Final Examination
TOTAL (Continuous plus final
assessment)
14.
% of total
60%
Date
15%
15%
30%
40%
October 1 2013
November 5 2013
November 28 2013
20 %
20%
100%
December 3 2013
December 12 2013
Other issues
Referencing of submitted documentation:

Please follow the Harvard referencing system referencing written submissions. A comprehensive
guide is available at: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/harvard.htm
Plagiarism

Please follow the guidance provided on the L-Drive:
Discipline

Please follow the guidance provided in the Catalog. Violations will be dealt with according to
KIMEP University Policies and Procedures.
Attendance

Attendance is expected. If you do not come to class, you only punish yourself. KIMEP University
policies on withdrawal will be applied to persistent non-attendees.
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
11
Coming to Class

It is courtesy to your fellow students, and good practice for your future career, to arrive at class
in good time for the start of the lecture. If you do arrive late, please respect others and enter
quietly.
THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING TO TAKE THIS COURSE
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
12
15. MGT 3205 Individual Assignment Fall 2013
Ten questions are presented below.
Select three questions and clearly indicate which question you have chosen to answer.
Each answer to each of the three questions should be a short essay of 500-600 words, giving a total of
1500-1800 words. The paper should be submitted on November 28 2013.
All of these issues will be discussed in detail in the class sessions.
1. Describe the ‘pure’ theory of rational choice. What are the key assumptions of the theory? What
are its strengths and limitations? What are the challenges in using such an approach in ‘real
world’ decision making?
2. As human decision makers we have limitations in processing information. There are four main
areas where constraints are evident. Take each of these factors and explain why they act as
constraints.
3. There are four basic coping strategies which we adopt to help us cope with the complexity of
the real world in decision making. Take each of these coping strategies in turn and explain how
they work. Are there common links between them?
4. In decision making, it is important to understand the idea of risk taking propensity. There are
four elements in understanding this – ‘personality traits’, a ‘reaction to targets’, a ‘reasoned
choice’ and an ‘indicator of reliability’. Discuss the key elements of each of these. Is it possible to
accurately predict risk after these elements are understood?
5. ‘Hidden traps’ are an important component in understanding the decision making process.
There are six main traps identified by Hammond et al. Describe and discuss these ‘traps’,
highlight what they are, how they occur and how they can distort our decision making
processes. Select three (3) of these ‘traps’ and highlight how we can work to avoid having our
decision making processes distorted by them.
6. Banaji, Bazerman and Chugh’s research into unconscious bias is very important in understanding
decision processes. What is ‘unconscious bias’? What are the four main kinds of unconscious
bias that can impact decision processes? Discuss the main aspects of each of the four kinds of
unconscious bias. There are three main ideas which might help to address unconscious bias.
What were they, and what are the key components of each of these three approaches?
7. ‘system 1’ and ‘system 2’ thinking and decision processes are an important concept in
understanding how we make decisions. What are the key characteristics of system 1 and 2
processes? Give examples of System 1 and System 2 processes, identify how they work together
to help us make decisions and identify some of the challenges both systems face.
8. Discuss the ‘planning fallacy’ identified by Lovallo and Kahnemann. What are the key ways that
optimism can skew decision processes? Discuss each of these. What is the appropriate place for
optimism in the decision process?
9. There are four key elements necessary to ensure that the wisdom of crowds can be successfully
leveraged. What are they, why are they important and what are the challenges businesses
might face in adopting ‘wisdom of crowds’ decision processes?
10. There are five main advantages and disadvantages of team and group decision making.
Introduce each of these and highlight why each of them is seen as an advantage. Do you agree
they are an advantage or a disadvantage? Justify your answer.
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
13
16. MGT3205 Group Assignment Fall 2013
Instructor: Ewan Simpson
Decision Making Consulting – Putting It Into Practice
You are a consultant team, based in Almaty, Kazakhstan, representing a company called Decision
Making Consulting (DMC) working with a human resources management team in an international
consulting company, XY Partners, which is American-owned, with its headquarters based in San
Francisco.
You have been asked to work with the XY Partners branch office based in Almaty, Kazakhstan. You have
been appointed by the HR VP of XY in Almaty because the company faces a series of challenges. You are
asked to deal with two as a priority.
Challenge 1
Repeatedly in recent years, XY Partners has made what turned out to be poor hiring decisions,
particularly at the senior management level. As a result, senior management turnover has been high and
the performance of the business has suffered. In the past five years, there have been 17 different
people employed in the four senior positions in the company.
As a consulting team, you have just completed a training course on how human behavior and thought
processes can impact decision processes. You are charged with designing a review to understand why
this management team has had such problems in building a sustainable senior team.
Design a review which might help understand the decision processes of the selection team, which was
comprised of whatever management team was in place at the time of each search and appointment. All
managers were white American males aged 50-60. All of them were recruited from positions in the USA
to come and work in the Almaty office. All advertising was done in the USA by a recruitment agency and
the CVs passed to the Almaty management team. This was seen as the most economic and rational way
to design the initial search process. Interviewing was done often by one or two of the four strong
Almaty-based management team, sometimes by video conference, but often by telephone.
This review should provide insights into how the composition, behavioral make up, decision making
styles, decision making processes and attitudes towards the hiring processes of the selection team may
have contributed to the resultant instability in senior management.
Make recommendations as part of the review, based on your experience of best practice, as to how
recruitment decision making processes may be improved throughout the process with the ultimate aim
of building a sustainable management team in the Almaty office.
Challenge 2
The new HR VP has also asked you to review decision making processes among the various teams in the
organization. A rotating, flexible team management system based on specific projects was set up three
years ago on instruction from the San Francisco headquarters, with each of the four senior executives
put in charge of oversight, strategic direction and final authorization of actions for each project, but with
implementation and day to day management delegated to the project team, all of who are citizens of
Kazakhstan, aged 25-35. Of the forty (40) current employees, 60% (24 people) of them are female and
40% (16 people) are male. By nationality, they are 60% Kazakh (24 people, 16 female and 8 male), 30%
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013
14
Russian (12 people, 8 male and 4 female) and 10% (4 people, all female) are from other nationalities.
They all have graduate level business education. Turnover in this group has also been high, with 70
different people occupying the 40 available positions in the last five years.
There appears to be widespread dissatisfaction among the employees. Decision making is slow and
there appears to be limited support for the decisions made among the employees actually involved as to
how to implement projects. Clients have registered their dissatisfaction with the pace of work,
commitment of the project teams and the recommendations made, most of which are standard issues
that the clients themselves had already thought of.
As an initial part of the review, which will last six months given the complexity of the problems, identify
which issues might be limiting the effectiveness of the team decision making process in a briefing note
to the HR VP. The recommendations should draw on your experience as a consulting team in
understanding the dynamics of team and organizational decision making. The briefing note is intended
to assist the HR VP to design a process to explore the realities of group decision making processes in the
company, highlighting the key areas that need to be initially investigated.
The HR VP has also asked for a review of best practice in team and organizational decision making to be
carried out with the findings presented in the report as a one page summary.
Assessment
Challenge 1 – written report up to 40% of your ‘fee’ – 1,500 words, +/- 10%
Challenge 2 – written report up to 40% of your ‘fee’ – 1,500 words, +/- 10%
10 minute presentation by all team members on findings of Challenge 1 and 2 - up to 20% of your ‘fee’
Key Dates
Full Report covering challenges 1 and 2 – to be submitted electronically to simpson@kimep.kz before
1130 December 3 2013
Presentations to be made in class December 3 and 5 2013.
Ewan Simpson PhD, 2013