Employees Perception And Participation in

Organizational Decision-Making

Abdulrahman Dhabaan

2022
Employees Perception And Participation in

Organizational Decision-Making

ABDULRAHMAN DHABAAN

Final Project of Organizational Behavior

The Business School Of

Lebanese International University

2022
 i

ABSTRACT

The ability of an organization to make the right decisions at the right time is

critical to the success of the organization (Wernz & Deshmukh, 2010; Roberto, 2013).

Given the importance of effective decision making to an organization, it is not surprising

that there is extensive research on this subject. However, most analysis and research

focuses on the role that leaders play in organizational decision making. I think the overall

approach to decision-making needs to take into account people's contributions to the

decision-making process and outcomes. The purpose of my research is to supplement the

organizational decision-making literature and provide both managers and employees with

information that supports effective decision-making processes and outcomes of employee

behavior. There is a strong correlation between the existence of specific employee

behavior and the effectiveness of decision making. In addition, there is an opportunity to

theorize which of these behaviors has the greatest impact on the effectiveness of decision

making. These findings have important implications for organizations, leaders, and

employees looking for ways to improve the decision-making process and results.
 ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express our special thanks of gratitude to our teacher, mentor &

research advisor Dr. Taha Al-Mahbashi as well as the Lebanese International University

president Dr. Rida Hazimi. We are really thankful to them. Secondly, I would also like to

thank my parents and friends who helped me a lot in gathering different information,

collecting data and the guidance from time to time. Also finalizing this project despite their

busy schedules within the limited time frame.

Finally, I acknowledge the encouragement and support of course mates who have

been of great assistance to us in diverse ways for the success of this research.
 iii

Contents
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................................... ii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. iv
1.1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Definitions of Terms ............................................................................................................. 3
1.3. Research Organizing ............................................................................................................ 4
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 5
2.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Employee perception........................................................................................................ 5
2.3. Decision-Making .............................................................................................................. 6
2.4. Organizational Decesion Making ..................................................................................... 7
2.5. Organizational Decision Making Models ........................................................................ 9
2.6. Best Practices in Organizational Decision-Making ....................................................... 10
2.7. Employees Participation in Decision-Making ............................................................... 12
3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 16
3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 16
3.2. Research Design ............................................................................................................. 16
3.3. Population and Sampling ............................................................................................... 16
3.4. Instrumentation .............................................................................................................. 17
3.5. Data Collection............................................................................................................... 17
3.6. Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 17
3.7. Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 28
3.8. Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 29
3.9. Summary ........................................................................................................................ 30
References ..................................................................................................................................... 32
APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................ 38
 iv

List of Figures

Figure 1. 18

Figure 2. 19

Figure 3. 19

Figure 4. 20

Figure 5. 21

Figure 6. 22

Figure 7. 23

Figure 8. 24

Figure 9. 25

Figure 10. 26

Figure 11. 27

Figure 12. 28
v
 1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

In today’s complex fast-paced business environment, organizations need the ability

to effectively respond to threats and take advantage of opportunities. This can be

accomplished by making high quality decisions quickly and efficiently, and then

implementing accordingly. Effective decision-making is well established as a key

competency of successful organizational leadership (Ewing, 1964; Norton, Gustafson, &

Foster, 1977; Tjosvold, Wedley and Field, 1986 as cited in Caruth, Caruth, &

Humphreys, 2009). Decisions must be made on every facet of a business, including

strategy definition, capital allocation, and organizational structure. As organizations

become larger, more complex and more challenging to control, effective decision-

making becomes even more important (Wernz & Deshmukh, 2010). An organization’s

ability to make the right decision at the right time is critical to its success (Wernz &

Deshmukh, 2010; Roberto, 2013).

Every organizations, leaders and employees should increase their recognition of the

important role employees play in effective decision-making, and for both leaders and

employees to have more tools and training available to support employees’ contributions

to effective decision-making. I believe this will improve organizations’ success and

effectiveness.
 2

Jumaan Trading and Investment Co.

The former name was Mohamed Ahmed Jumaan Corporation (MAJ) a leader family

trading Company in the Republic of Yemen. A 50-plus year history of leadership and

annual turnover rate of 7 billion YR in the last 6 years. JTI is a local provider of

Construction Machinery, Industrial Equipment, Marine & Agricultural Equipment,

Military & Civil Spare Parts and All purpose Military & Civil Vehicles and offers after

sales service.

• The Mission

To increase customers, employees, and shareholders value through

expanding our activities in all divi- sions we currently operate and deliver new

related products and high-quality service, at the same time entering new industries

and achieve the prospective growth.

• The Vision

“ Over 50 years of experience in providing the local marketplace with high

quality and innovative products , JTI will expand its activities across global businesses to

be a World-Class company able to provide a boost to national economy.

 3

1.2. Definitions of Terms

• Employee perception

Employee perception is the process by which an individual organizes

and interprets his or her sensory inputs and gives meaning to the environment.

Perception is not always based on reality, but only from the perspective of a

particular person's situation. When dealing with the concept of organizational

behavior, awareness is important because "people's" behavior is based on their

perception of what reality is, not reality itself. The perceived world is an

important world for action.

• Employee participation

Employee participation is the process of providing opportunity for the employees to

participate in the decision-making process and it is a part of the process of empowerment

in the workplace. Therefore, the individual employees are encouraged to take responsibility

in carrying out certain activities, in order to meet the requirements of their customers. It is

a kind of a motivational technique used by the management to encourage their employees

and to get the maximum contribution towards the organizational success.

Employee participation can also be referred as a kind of an opportunity given to the

employees to express their ideas. Meanwhile, the management is expecting and

 4

appreciating their views in making crucial decisions on behalf of the organization.

• Decision-Making

Decision making is the process of making choices by identifying a decision,

gathering information, and assessing alternative resolution.

1.3. Research Organizing

After the Introduction, the second part of the research is including current

knowledge substantive findings, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions

and presents previous studies that have been done about Perception and decisions making.

The last part analyses the findings from the questionnaire survey.
 5

CHAPTER 2

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

The literature review aims to explain, clarify, sum up, appraise and incorporate the

content of crucial reports which may be hypothetical, experimental, essential, analytical

or practical in nature (Cooper and Cooper, 1998). In an effort to achieve an understanding

of organizational decision making and how it may be improved, a literature review has

been conducted by going over relevant papers, journals, articles, books, conferences and

dissertations.

2.2. Employee perception

Perception is the process by which an employee organizes and interprets his/her

impressions in order to give meaning to his/her environment and thus, it influences

significantly his/her workplace behavior (Langton & Robbins, 2006). The evidence

suggests that what individuals perceive about their work situation influences their

attitudes and behavior during organizational change. Thus employee perceptions will lead

to either resistance or acceptance of change. (e.g. Coghlan, 1993, Galpin, 1996).

Perceptive organizational readiness to change: Organizational readiness to change is

reflected in the organizational members’ beliefs, attitudes, intentions and it is defined as

 6

the employees’ belief in the benefits from a proposed change (Jones, Jimmieson &

Griffiths, 2005). Similarly, Kotter (1996) suggests that failure to create sufficient

readiness accounts for one-half of all unsuccessful, large-scale change efforts.

Employees' perceptions of organizational readiness to change can either facilitate the

success of a change intervention or be a significant source of resistance to change (Eby,

et al., 2000). Employees' readiness perceptions indicate the extent to which an

organization is ready to make the necessary changes as well as its ability to be adaptive to

changing demands and new evolutions (Elgamal, 1998). Thus, most change readiness

models emphasize the significance of generating an awareness of the need for change and

supporting people’s perceived ability to change. In formulating their change efficacy

judgments, employees are influenced by the extent to which the work environment and

the organizational features seem to create a more receptive context for innovation and

change. Overall, it is critical to assess employees’ readiness perception prior to any

change attempt.

2.3. Decision-Making

Mintzberg (1973) defines decision making as a “commitment to action”. It can

also be considered as the process of making intentional, informed choices (Marakas,

2003) between alternative actions that are possible (Saaty, 1982). Paradice (1991)

defines decision making as “the product of intellectual processes resulting in the

selection of a course of action between numerous options, leading to a final selection”.

Decision making is an essential part of management and it occurs in every function at

all levels, often taken in the face of uncertainty, conflicting objectives, value

preference, and risk attitudes.

 7

The most important job of any manager is making decisions. It is also the

hardest and the most dangerous. With decisions valued in their millions (Forrester,

2003) a bad decision can damage a business and a career irreparable (Hammond et al.,

2006). Fragmented and inaccurate data causes executives and managers to make

delayed and flawed decisions costing millions (Forrester, 2003). Finding the right data

at the right time and analysing it fast enough remains a challenge for businesses as poor

decisions can be very costly (Teradata, 2004).

Nowadays, decision makers are expected to make more decisions than ever

before, often without much support and with a limited amount of time (Capgemini,

2004). As the complexity of decision making increases, the issue of developing

decision making capabilities remains a challenge (Papamichail and Rajarm, 2007).

2.4. Organizational Decesion Making

Organisational decision making is the process by which one or more organisational

units make a decision on behalf of the organisation (Huber, 1981). The decision making

unit may be as small as an individual, e.g., a manager, or as large as the entire organisational

membership. Even though organisational decisions are often influenced by personal goals,

the decisions themselves are legitimised to other units and agencies as fulfilling

organisational needs. As Chester Barnard put the matter, “organisational decisions do not

relate to personal purposes, but to organisation purposes”.

The distinction between individual decision making and organisational decision

making is that individuals make decisions based on their own values and beliefs and
 8

whether something is appropriate or not, whereas organisations have different stakeholders

and different sets of values that are incorporated in their process of decision making.

In organisational decision making it is fundamental to involve stakeholders and

uncover and reconcile their considerations or concerns (Nutt, 2001). Devising search

tactics and considering a range of alternatives is also important (Nutt, 2001) as is

brainstorming (Chudakov, 1994). Such practices can help produce better organisational

decisions.

Decision making is an important aspect of any organisation’s operations and

business strategy. Organisations are faced with thousands of decisions on a daily basis, and

how they handle and process these decisions could have a substantial impact on their

financial status. For that reason, it is imperative that organisations have efficient, well

organised procedures in place to handle such decisions. They should also make a genuine

effort to enhance the overall efficiency and quality of their decision making processes.

Organisations might also strive to incorporate and adopt a number of best decision making

practices in their operations and business strategy.

The process of decision making is a delicate and complicated procedure that

requires organisations to put a lot of thought and consideration into how it should be

designed. Businesses with good, efficient and well organised processes for producing

decisions are more likely to generate better decisions, and as a result improve their

productivity and financial results. Organisations have to closely monitor their decision

making processes, as the quality of these procedures can have a substantial effect on their

overall performance and efficiency.

 9

2.5. Organizational Decision Making Models

Huber (1981) pointed out four organisational decision making models, they are:

1. Rational Model

2. Political Model

3. Garbage Can Model

4. Process Model

The Rational Model describes an environment where organisational entities use

information in a designed and rational approach to make selections on the part of the

organisation resulting in organisational decisions being made (Howard et al., 1976). Even

though the Rational Model is an extremely important model, since it is publicly ascribed

to and because it is often the target of those who support alternative models, it is simple to

overlook that it is merely a model, an incomplete representation of what actually occurs

(Huber, 1981). The Political or Competitive Model describes a setting where decisions are

the results of the implementation of tactics and strategies by entities seeking to manipulate

and persuade decision procedures in directions that will lead to selections favourable to

themselves (Pettigrew, 1973). The Political Model highlights the fact that different

participants in the decision process often have different goals and targets in mind (Huber,

1981).

The essence of the Garbage Can Model is that organisational decisions are

consequences of interactions of problems searching for solutions, solutions searching for

problems and opportunities for making decisions (Cohen et al, 1972). In other words,

decisions in this model are made at random. The Garbage Can Model highlights the roles

of chance and timing in determining organisational choices (Huber, 1981). The Process or
 10

Program Model depicts a setting where organisational decisions are the results of the

processes and procedures of the entities involved (Barnard, 1938). Seeing as organisation

programs and processes are slow to change, and since the effects of programming are hard

to erase, decisions in this model can be predicted at any point in time (Huber, 1981)

2.6. Best Practices in Organizational Decision-Making

The majority of organizations work hard to make their strategic decision making

processes as thorough as possible. And when senior managers are pleased with the result

of their decisions, they often rate their organization’s processes highly when it comes to

practices that avoid much favoritism, despite the fact that some do sneak in (The

McKinsey Quarterly, 2008).

The McKinsey Quarterly (2008) survey highlighted some of the best practices for

organizational decision making, which include:

• Balancing a mix of financial, strategic targets.

• Long and short term considerations.

• Realistic assessment of company’s execution capabilities.

• Allowing truly innovative ideas to reach senior management.

• Based on robust fact base.

• Stakeholders shared all critical information.

• Accurately forecasting market demand.

• Aligning individuals’ incentives with strategic objectives defined by the

decision.
 11

• Actively seeking evidence contrary to the initial plan and factoring it in.

These best practices for organizational decision making highlight some of the finest

processes and procedures for decision making, which organizations can incorporate and

integrate in their operations and business strategy. These practices are the result of years

of careful planning, design and trials that cultivated into a number of highly efficient and

highly effective decision making processes. Organizations must try to implement as many

of these practices as they possible can in their decision making processes, in an attempt to

help enhance the quality of their overall decision making, and as a result produce better

and more informed decisions. These practices for organizational decision making can

help reduce if not eliminate some of the bad decision making that takes places within

organizations.

Decision making is an important aspect of any organizations operations and business

strategy. Organizations are faced with thousands of decisions on a daily basis, and how

they handle and process these decisions could have a substantial impact on their financial

status. For that reason, it is imperative that organizations have efficient, well organized

procedures in place to handle such decisions. They should also make a genuine effort to

enhance the overall efficiency and quality of their decision making processes.

Organizations might also strive to incorporate and adopt a number of best decision

making practices in their operations and business strategy.

During a survey conducted by (Forrester, 2003), only 23% of participants agreed on any

one measure when asked about what future actions they would take to enhance and

improve decision making. This highlights the uncertainty of direction for many decision
 12

makers and organizations. Many researchers have highlighted elements of good decision

qualities (Spetzler, 2007) and smart organizations (Matheson, 2001) but there appears to

be a gap in the literature in terms of guidelines, rules or framework for improving

organizational decision making. There is currently no roadmap or methodology that

enables organizations to make better decisions giving measures for future actions that

would enhance and improve decision making.

2.7. Employees Participation in Decision-Making

Employee participation in decision-making, also known as participative decision-

making, has to do with shared decision-making in the workplace (Mitchell, 1973). PDM is

the degree to which employers encourage or allow their employees to be involved in

organizational decision-making (Talib & Rahman, 2010). Since the 1940s, the impact of

PDM on performance has been studied. However, as American businesses encountered

competitive challenges requiring higher performance levels, techniques such as PDM

gained renewed interest in the 1980s (Paul, Niehoff, Turnley, 2000). Studies argued that

PDM is a crucial element in improving job satisfaction in organizations (Black &

Gregersen, 1997; Kim, 2002; Han, Chiang, & Chang, 2011), and previous research proved

that worker participation is a way for management to increase worker satisfaction (Cotton,

Vollrath, Froggatt, Lengnick-Hall, Jennings, 1988). A definition of participation is

involvement (Vroom, 1974), implying that managers must treat their employees fairly to

accomplish organizational goals. Employee involvement in organizational decision-

making has a place within the hierarchy of needs (Mitchell, 1973; Vroom, 1974). Being

involved in decision-making may be a challenge for many employees but may also increase

their motivation (Scott & Marshall, 2004). Employee participation plays a key role in
 13

effective implementation of management strategies and employee job satisfaction (Harber,

Marriott, Idrus, 1991; Ardichvili, Page, Wentling, 2003).

Black and Gregersen (1997) stated that PDM ranges from formal to informal. A

formal system entails explicit guidelines as to who is allowed to participate, what decisions

employees can participate in, and how involvement occurs. An informal system has much

less explicit rules regarding who can participate and what can be discussed. Formal systems

are more common (Black & Gregersen, 1997).

Many scholars and managers contend that if employees are adequately informed

about matters concerning them and given the chance to make decisions related to their

work, there will be benefits for both the organization and the individual (Shadur, Kienzle,

Rodwell, 1999). PDM enhances production efficiency, employee morale, and job

satisfaction; it also builds a better sense of control and trust in the employees (Chang &

Lorenzi, 1983). When employees are afforded opportunities to contribute ideas and

suggestions in decision-making, firm performance may increase because deep employee

involvement in decision-making maximizes the diversity of perspectives (Kemelgor,

2002). Sashkin (1976) in his research defines the outcomes of PDM as quality

improvement. Better information flow and use clarify task goals, thus producing

qualitatively better decisions. Support for the participative approach and how its effects

continue can be time-consuming due to learning through behavioral practice, which

represents the behavioral process effect. However, potential benefits gleaned from greater

employee involvement in decision-making depend on whether employee interests align

with firm interests (Ogden, 1992; Spreitzer & Mishra, 1999).

 14

According to Noah (2008), there is also a significant relationship between

frequency of employee consultations and organizational commitment. Workers with

greater choice regarding how to do their work have high job satisfaction and, consequently,

have high performance (Spreitzer et al., 1997). Research further revealed that firm

performance increasingly hinges on employee involvement in decision-making (Arthur,

1994; Daft & Lewin, 1993; Deninson & Mishra, 1995; Spreitzer & Mishra, 1999).

Moreover, several studies suggested that a slight positive relationship exists

between the degree of participation and employee satisfaction (Black & Gregersen, 1997).

However, the findings of PDM were vague. Some findings indicated almost no impact for

PDM, while some scholars argued that participation is a joint responsibility of employees

and managers that convenes members to tackle issues and make decisions through team

work (Davis & Newstrom, 1997; Budhiono et al., 1999; Kim, 2002). Employee

participation requires employees to understand a problem and later decide on a solution.

Three concepts develop from this approach: (1) mental and emotional involvement, (2)

motivation to contribute to organizational performance, and (3) acceptance of

responsibility. Budhiono et al. (1999) stated that participation is an important aspect of the

decision-making process, during which all levels of an organization supply necessary

information. Employees who actively participate in decision-making with set individual

goals thus internalize the organization’s goals. Employee involvement contributes to

organizational efficiency because it can improve the quality of decision-making by

increasing inputs and promoting commitment to the outcomes (Miller & Monge, 1986).

However, Latham, Winters, Locke. (1994) argued that there is much less evidence for the
 15

value of employee involvement on quality decision-making. In fact, PDM may make

employees feel positively about their jobs and organizations but actually does little to

enhance firm performance (Wagner, 1994). Hence, the study’s hypothesis: Employee

participation in decision-making has significant influence on firm performance.

 16

CHAPTER 3

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

Regarding chapter 3, it mainly focuses on the way the research is obtained or in

other words the methodology of the research. The methodology approach that is used in

this research is a quantitative study. Here are the points that will be discussed in details

through this report; research design, population and sampling, instrumentation, data

collection tools and data analysis techniques.

3.2. Research Design

I have done quantitative questionnaire design which will help me to know The

employees perception and participation in organizational decision-making . I will figure

out that by giving a clear and an unbiased questionnaire.

3.3. Population and Sampling

The main source of data in this study comes from a survey distributed to Jumaan

Trading and Investment Co. The targeted population of my study are thirty of the

employees and the surveys are distributed randomly . The distribution of the questionnaire

will be in hard copy for exponentially more accurate information.

 17

3.4. Instrumentation

The study used a questionnaire survey method which has standardized answers that make

it simple for people to gather data and provide quantifiable answers for our research topic,

therefore these answers are easy to analyze. The questioner of the study consists of three

parts: the first part provides which is Gender, could be considered as an important

independent variable and man and woman could be affected differently in terms of

perception and participation in decision making . Moreover Educational level of the

employees such as having master degree is another important parameter for job satisfaction

and job satisfaction can differ according to the educational level. Finally Number of years

within the organization is also an important independent variable that can change the

perception of employees about job satisfaction. Thus the questions on the questionnaire

were able to answer the research questions and achieve the research objectives

3.5. Data Collection

The distribution and collection the questioners will be in hard copy distributed to

the First-Line managers and the company’s employees.

3.6. Data Analysis

Charts are one of the most common way of data visualization especially pie charts.

With them, you can quickly and easily highlight differences between categories, clearly

show trends and outliers. Pie charts are useful for displaying data that are classified into

nominal or ordinal categories. Nominal data are categorized according to descriptive or

 18

qualitative information such as county of birth or type of pet owned. Ordinal data are

similar but the different categories can also be ranked, for example in a survey people may

be asked to say whether they classed something as very poor, poor, fair, good, very good.

The percentage of the Yeses and the Noes. Furthermore, they are generally used for

displaying proportional data and usually for the percentage represented by each category

(Rodgers,2011).

I took my chances in asking employees about what they feel when they’re

participating in decision making and how did they make their decision under different

conditions. Their responses were as shown below in figures .

Figure 1. Gender

Gender

Male Female

The statistics shows that 83% of the employees is Male and 17% is Female.
 19

Figure 2. Age

Age

Under 25 25 - 35 35 - 45 45 +

The statistics shows the most of the employees' age is between 25-35 years.

Figure 3. Education

Education

Diploma Bachelor Master

The statistics shows that most of the employees have Bachelor Degree.
 20

Figure 4. Years of Working

Years of Working

Less than 3 Years 3 Years 5 Years More than 5 Years

The figure above shows that most of the employees work in the corporation for 3

years.
 21

Figure 5. Perception of Participative Management Policy

Perception of Participation

Confusion Allowing Emploees to Take Decesion Employee Initation Will be Welcome

The Figure 5 shows the employees' perception of participative management policy

in their organization.50% of the employees said that the perception of participative

management allows them to take decision concerning the running of particular task, and

30% said it ensures that their initiation in particular task will be welcome. In the other hand,

20% said it causes confusion.

 22

Figure 6. Employees Participation Matching with Firm Policy

Participation Matching With Policy

Yes No Not Sure

The figure above shows that 53% of the employees said that their participation is

matching with the organization's policy, however, 30% said 'No' and the rest choose 'Not

Sure'.
 23

Figure7. Managers Consideration to Employees' Decisions

Managers Consideration to Employees' Decsions

Yes No Not Sure

Figure 7 statistics of the employees who agree that their manager seek their opinions and

consider them in decision making is 40%, while 37% didn't agree and the rest said not sure

because they don’t participate in decision making in direct way.

 24

Figure8. Opposite Views Are Signs of Disloyalty to Supervisor

Opposite Views Are Signs of Disloyalty to Supervisor

Yes No Not Sure

Figure 8 shows that 30% of the employees feel trapped that the oppostion to views of

their suprevisors might be seen as a sign of disloyality,however, 43% said "No" they

didn’t feel that and the rest said not sure.

 25

Figure9. Involvement in Decision Making Reason to Improve Productivity

Involvement in Decision Making Reason to Improve

Productivity

Yes No Not Sure

Figure 9 the statistics of the employees that they consider their involvement in decision

making as a major reason to improve their productivity is 60%. On the other hand, 23% of

the employees didn’t consider that and the rest that didn’t participate in decision making

said not sure.

 26

Figure10. Direct Consequences of Participation in Decision Making.

Direct Consequences of Participation in Decision Making

Increse Productivity Waste of Time and Money Add Responsibility to Emplyees

The figure above shows that 63% of the employees said that their participation in

decision making caused to increased their productivity ,20% said it is wastage of time and

money and 17% said it added more responsibility to them.

 27

Figure11. Consolation in Decision with the Members of the Department

Consolation in Decision with the Members of the

Department

Yes No Not Sure

Figure 11 the statistics of the employees who said that there is consultation in decision with

members of the department is 68%, while 26% said the opposite.

 28

Figure 12. Employees Solve Problems Connected with their Work.

Employees Solve Problems Connected with their Work

Yes No Not Sure

Figure 12 shows that 57% of the employees said that they have the opportunity to solve

their problems connected with their work , while 27% said the opposite.

3.7. Recommendations

The research would provide even more insights; the study can help organizations

increase their decision-making effectiveness. As a first step, I recommend organizations

provide training to employees to address those gaps and paying particular attention to

those behaviors that have the greatest impact on effective organizational decision-

making. Alternatively, organizations can focus on those behaviors found in the study to

have the greatest impact on decision-making effectiveness. In particular, those behaviors

that support decision-making processes may have the greatest overall impact.
 29

Organizations may also want to consider ways to select and reward employees who

demonstrate these behaviors.

I recommend leaders use the results of the study to gain a deeper understanding of how

employees can contribute to effective decision-making, and make sure they are creating

an environment in their organization to support employees’ participation in decision-

making. Examples can include listening to providing guidance to employees to better

understand overall strategies, taking time to listen to employees’ feedback on decisions,

and creating an environment of trust so that employees feel safe providing feedback and

input to decisions.

Finally, I recommend employees make sure they recognize their contributions to effective

decision-making, and look for ways to increase the frequency of those behaviors that

support effective decisions in their organizations. This includes supporting decision-

making and leaders in an active, engaged way such as taking initiative, putting in extra

effort, being accountable, and providing recommendations. In addition, employees must

do their part to build trusting and collaborative relationships with leaders.

3.8. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to address the existing gap in current research and

gain a better understanding of employees’ role in organizations decision making.

. The supportive nature of the employee behaviors identified by leaders was also

consistent with the literature on strategic decision-making in organizations. Leaders are

responsible for driving strategic decision-making in their organization (Roberto, 2013);

although employees may participate in decision-making (Aboyassin, 2008; Scott-Ladd &

 30

Chan, 2004), by implication employees are playing a more supportive role. However, it is

important to make a distinction between playing a supportive role and being passive. Many

of the employee behaviors identified by leaders in the study were not passive behaviors;

they included taking initiative, putting in extra effort, being accountable, and providing

recommendations. In addition, many of these behaviors involved communication and

collaboration with others, including leaders. Finally, most of the behaviors noted by the

leaders could be seen as either a collective (involving groups or large numbers of people)

or an individual behavior. In other words, the impact of the behavior could be seen if it was

performed by just one individual employee or by a group of employees.

3.9. Summary

The study identified employee behaviors that support effective organizational

decision-making process and outcomes, showed that there is a positive relationship

between the behaviors and effective decision-making and provided insight into which of

those behaviors have a more significant impact on effective decision-making. For

companies looking to improve their decision-making capabilities, these are important

findings. As a first step, I recommend organizations to provide training to employees to

address those gaps, paying particular attention to those behaviors that have the greatest

impact on effective organizational decision-making. Organizations may also want to

consider ways to select and reward employees who demonstrate these behaviors. Finally,

the study demonstrates the role employees play in decision-making. It is important for

leaders and organizations to acknowledge this role, and for leaders to focus on providing
 31

the right support and environment for employees to behave in ways that support effective

decision-making. Employees also need to understand their role in contributing to effective

decision-making, and make sure they are looking for ways to increase the frequency of

their behaviors that support decision-making. It is in this way that employees and leaders

will work together to accomplish organizational goals, and help both themselves and their

organizations be more successful.

 32

References

Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and

turnover. Academy of Management journal, 37(3), 670-687.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256705

Barnard, C. I. (1938) The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge,

Massachusetts

Black, J. S., & Gregersen, H. B. (1997). Participative decision-making: An integration of

multiple dimensions. Human Relations, 50(7), 859-878.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872679705000705

Budhiono, A., Rosidi, B., Taher, H., & Iguchi, M. (1999). Kinetic aspects of bacterial cellulose

formation in nata-de-coco culture system. Carbohydrate Polymers, 40(2), 137-143.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0144-8617(99)00050-8

Capgemini. (2004) ‘Business Decisiveness Report’ Consultancy Report.

Caruth, D. L., Caruth, G. D., & Humphreys, J. H. (2009). Towards an experiential model of

problem initiated decision making. Journal of Management Research , 9(3), 123-132.

Retrieved from http://www.macrothink.org/journal/index.php/jmr

 33

Chang, G. S. Y., & Lorenzi, P. (1983). The effects of participative versus assigned goal setting

on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Management, 9(1), 55-64.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920638300900106

Chudakov, B. K. (1994) Better Decisions. Executive Excellence, 11(8): 14.

Coghlan, D. (1993). A person-centered approach to dealing with resistance to change.

Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 14(4), 10-14.

Cohen, M. D., March J. G., and Olsen, J. P. (1972) A Garbage Can Model of Organisational

Cooper, H. & Cooper, D. H. M. (1998). Synthesizing Research: a guide for literature reviews,

Sage Publications Inc.

Cotton, J. L., Vollrath, D. A., Froggatt, K. L., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Jennings, K. R. (1988).

Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy of Management

review, 13(1), 8-22.

Davis, K., & Newstrom, J. W. (1997). Human Behavior. Work (New York: McGraw-Hill Book

Company, 1977), 261.

Eby, L. T., Adams, D. M., Russell, J. E. A, & Gaby, S. H. (2000). Perception of Organizational

Readiness for Change: Factors Related to Employees' Reaction to the Implementation of

Team-based Selling. Human Relations, 53(3), 419-428.

Elgamal, M.A. (1998). An Examination of Organization and Suborganization Readiness for

Total Quality Management. International Journal of Technology Management, 16, 556-

569.
 34

Forrester. (2003) Enterprise visibility makes decisions profitable. Consultancy Report.

Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R., and Raiffa, H. (2006) The Hidden Traps in Decision Making.

Harvard Business Review, 84(1): 118.

Harber, D., Marriott, F., & Idrus, N. (1991). Employee participation in TQC: An integrative

review. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 8(5).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656719110144346

Howard, R. A., Matheson, J. E., and Miller K. L. (1976) Readings in Decision Analysis,

StanfordResearch Institute, Decision Analysis Group, Melno Park, California.

Huber, P. G. (1981) The Nature of Organisational Decision Making and the Design of Decision

Support Systems, MIS Quarterly.

Jones, R., Jimmieson, N., & Griffiths, A. (2005). The Impact of organizational culture and

reshaping capabilities on change implementation success: the mediating role of readiness

for change, Journal of Management Studies, 42, 361-386.

Kemelgor, B. H. (2002). A comparative analysis of corporate entrepreneurial orientation

between selected firms in the Netherlands and the USA. Entrepreneurship & Regional

Development, 14(1), 67-8

Kim. S. (2002).perceptive management and Job Satisfaction: Lessons for Management

Leadership. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 231-241.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.48037118

Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA
 35

Langton, N., & Robbins, S. (2006). Organizational Behaviour. Toronto: Pearson Prentice

Canada.

Latham, G. P., Winters, D. C., & Locke, E. A. (1994). Cognitive and motivational effects of

participation: A mediator study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(1), 49-63.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030150106

Marakas, G. (2003). Decision Support Systems in the 21st century, 2nd edition, Prentice

Hall,New Jersey.

Matheson, D. & Matheson, J. (2001) Smart Organisation Perform Better. Research Technology

Management, 49-54

Miller, K. I., & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-

analytic review. Academy of management Journal, 29(4), 727-753.

Mintzberg, H. (1973) The Nature of Managerial Work, New York, Harper & Row.

Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Motivation: New Directions for Theory, Research, and Practice,

Academy Of Management Review, 7( 1), 80-88, 1982.

Noah, Y. (2008). A study of worker participation in management decision making within

selected establishments in Lagos, Nigeria. Journal of Social Science, 17(1), 31-39.

Nutt, P. (2001) Decision Debacles and How to Avoid Them. Business Strategy Review, 12(2): 1.

Ogden, T. H. (1992). The primitive edge of experience. Jason Aronson.

Papamichail, K.N. , and Rajarm, V. (2007), ‘Framework for Assessing Best Practice in Decision

Making’, International DSI Conference 2007 & APDSI Conference.

 36

Paradice, D. B. (1991) The ethical decision making processes of information systems workers.

Journal of business ethics, 10, 1.

Paul, R. J., Niehoff, B. P., & Turnley, W. H. (2000). Empowerment, expectations, and the

psychological contract—managing the dilemmas and gaining the advantages. The Journal

of Socio-Economics, 29(5), 471-485.

Pettigrew, A. M. (1973) The Politics of Organisational Decision Making, Tavistock, London.

Rodgers,T. (2011). Which Chart or Graph is Right for You?.

Saaty, T. L. (1982) Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytical Hierarchy Process for

Decisions in a Complex World.

Sashkin, M. (1976). Dimensions of leadership. Leadership and social change, 10-15.

Scott-Ladd, B., & Marshall, V. (2004). Participation in decision making: a matter of context?.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25(8), 646-662.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059601199244005

Shadur, M. A., Kienzle, R., & Rodwell, J. J. (1999). The relationship between organizational

climate and employee perceptions of involvement the importance of support. Group &

Organization Management, 24(4), 479-503.

Spetzler, C. S. (2007) Building decision competency in the organisation. Advances: building

decision competency, 1-31.

 37

Spreitzer, G. M., & Mishra, A. K. (1999). Giving up control without losing control trust and its

substitutes’ effects on managers’ involving employees in decision making. Group &

Organization Management, 24(2), 155-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059601199242003

Talib, F., & Rahman, Z. (2010). Critical success factors of TQM in service organizations: a

proposed model. Services Marketing Quarterly, 31(3), 363-380.

Teradata. (2004) The 2003-2004 Teradata Report on Enterprise Decision Making.

The McKinsey Quarterly. (2008) How companies make good decisions.

Vroom, V. H. (1974). Decision making and the leadership process. Journal of Contemporary

Business, 3(4), 47-64.

Wagner, G. (1995). Basic approaches and methods for quality assurance and quality control in

sample collection and storage for environmental monitoring. Science of the total

environment, 176(1), 63-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-9697(95)04830-8

Wernz, C., & Deshmukh, A. (2010). Multiscale decision-making: Bridging organizational scales

in systems with distributed decision-makers. European Journal of Operational Research,

202(3), 828-840. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.06.022

 38

APPENDIX A: The Questionnaire

Questionnaire

2022

Employees Perception And Participation In Organizational

Decision Making
 39

Introduction

Dear Respondent,

I am Studying Master in Lebanese International University majored in International

Business Management . I am conducting an academic research on the employees

Perception and participation in organizational decision making . I am very humbly

request you to spend your precious five minutes in filling the questionnaire as per your

perception about the research . Your contribution in this regard will be highly appreciated

and will be acknowledged at the time of submission of thesis.

Section 1 Demographic Information

The following questions are about your personal information.

1- Gender: 2- Age: 3- Education: 4- Years of Experience

❑ Male ❑ Under 25 ❑ Diploma ❑ Less than 3 years

❑ Female ❑ 25 - 35 ❑ Bachelor ❑ 3 years

❑ 35 - 45 ❑ Master ❑ 5 years

❑ 45 + ❑ PhD ❑ More than 5 years

 40

Section 2 Questions About The Perception and Participation in

Decision Making

1. What is your perception of participative management policy in your organization?

• It causes confusion [ ]

• It allows an employee to take decision concerning the running of a particular

task [ ]

• It ensures that an employee initiation in a particular task will be welcome

[ ]

2. Is your perception of participative management in line with the firms policy?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [ ]

3. Do managers seek your opinions and consider them in decision making?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [ ]
 41

4. If Yes how do you feel about it?

• I feel satisfied which increases my tempo of work [ ]

• I feel indifferent [ ]

• I feel a sense of belonging which boosts my morale [ ]

5. If No how do you feel?

• I feel dejected [ ]

• I feel demoralized which decreases my tempo of work [ ]

• All of the above [ ]

6. Do you feel trapped by a feeling that opposition to views of your supervisor might

be seen as a sign of disloyalty?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [ ]

7. Do you consider your involvement in decision making as a major reason to improve

productivity?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [
 42

8. What are the direct consequences of employee participating in decision making?

• Increased productivity [ ]

• Increased wastage of time and money [ ]

• Added Responsibility to the employee [ ]

9. Is there any consultation in decision with the members of the department?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [ ]

10. Does opportunity be given to employees to solve problems connected with their

work ?

• Yes [ ]

• No [ ]

• Not sure [ ]