RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT

HRPD710/003 – Alternative Dispute Resolution

Decision-Making Assignment

Participants:

Collins Temisa Elizabeth 301251089

Man Nga Chau 301221377

Oruare Ojimadu 301258058

Shamimbanu Pathan 301270658

HRPD 710 – Alternative Dispute Resolution

Sheldon Shiewitz

November 22, 2022

RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
2

In making an informed decision, it is paramount that the gap or issue that needs a

solution must be properly identified to avoid an error that may occur. Decision-making is

a process ending in the selection of the perceived best alternative from an array of

alternatives. In this scenario, we are tasked with buying a car from different alternatives

taking into cognizance the basic requirements to be met. Purchasing a car requires

adequate evaluation of different factors. It is important to note that despite the different

attributes of a car, different attributes are important to the purchaser. In this scenario,

three attributes weigh significantly in purchasing a car.

In carrying out the decision-making, a 9-step process is used. This is done to

ensure full consideration and reduce errors in making an informed decision.

Step 1: understanding the issue to be resolved

The purchase of a vehicle is to ensure:

- mobility for various clients to enable staff of the organization to conduct the

assigned duties to meet the goals and objectives of the organization.

- Movement of parcels when required

- Mobility of staff when errands need to be done.

Limitations: Properly ascertaining what the company required and establishing the

exact issue from the given information.

Step 2: Defining the criteria

In choosing a vehicle, three selection criteria will be used based on the company’s

requirements for the car purchase.

1. Fuel efficiency: this is a function of the distance in relation to the fuel. The higher

the fuel efficiency of the vehicle, the more preferably it is as it is cost efficient
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
3

which is an advantage for the company as cost savings are high on their list. In

gauging the fuel efficiency of a vehicle, the transmission system plays a

determining factor. Identifying the different alternatives, this factor ranks high in

the decision-making process.

2. Load capacity: the maximum weight a car can carry. One specific point noted by

the company in making a choice was making deliveries of different parcels. This

draws attention to the fact that the car chosen must have a reasonable capacity to

fulfill that specification.

3. Maintenance cost and repairs: once a car is purchased, maintenance costs and

repairs must be factored into the budget to avoid breakdown. Therefore, it is

chosen as a criterion in selecting a vehicle. The higher the maintenance cost, the

less desirable that option is for the company.

Limitations: Many criteria exist and it took a while in streamlining to three important

determining factors from the wide array of vehicle characteristics.

Step 3: Weighting the criteria

Identifying these criteria, we place them in levels of importance to assist in

making the right decision. In the first stage of weighting the criteria, the criteria are put in

an ordinal scale. The most important criterion is given the largest number which in this

case is 3.

Criterion Ordinal Scale value

Fuel efficiency 3

Maintenance cost and repairs 2

Load Capacity 1
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
4

With the criteria arranged in an ordinal scale, it becomes easier to identify the interval

scale required where a numerical value is assigned to each representing how much more

each criterion is compared to the other. Assigning values:

a. Fuel efficiency is 15x more important than Load capacity.

b. Maintenance cost and repairs is 8x more important than Load capacity.

Criterion Weighting

Fuel efficiency 15

Maintenance cost and repairs 8

Load Capacity 1

Limitations: In assigning weighting to each criterion, correctly assessing the level of

importance posed a challenge but a closer look at the company’s requirements brought

clarity.

Step 4: Generating alternatives

To address the issue, general vehicle information must be known to ascertain

alternatives that will fit into the requirements. In this stage, the criteria for choice need to

be determined. In choosing a vehicle, automotive experts are consulted to give a clearer

picture. Automobile magazine, consumer guide, and Autoweek are considered good car

review avenues. Before looking at the reviews, we review different criteria using our

basic requirements.

Based on our research, we chose the three alternatives.

1. Toyota Camry 2022 Model (LE) with a cost estimate of $28,000

2. Nissan Altima SE 2022 Model with a cost estimate of $31,000

RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
5

3. Honda Insight 2022 Model with a cost estimate of $26,000

Source: https://automobiles.honda.com/insight;
https://www.toyota.com/camry/2022/features/mpg_other_price/2532/2559/25
46; https://www.nissan.ca/vehicles/cars/altima.html

Limitations: From the wide array of vehicles in the market, despite the laid down criteria,

it took a while in narrowing down favorable alternatives.

Step 5: Evaluating the alternatives

Vehicle name Fuel efficiency Maintenance cost Load Capacity

and repairs/year (cargo in cu ft)

(estimated)

Toyota Camry 4.8 – 10.8 L/100km Maintenance 15.1

2022 Model (LE) City/Hwy/Combined $3,051
28 / 39 / 32 MPG Repairs
$601
Nissan Altima SE 6.5 – 9.3 L/100km Maintenance 15.4
2022 Model City/Hwy/Combined $4,899
28 / 39 / 32 MPG Repairs
$601
Honda Insight 4.6 – 5.3 L/100km Maintenance 15.1
2022 Model City/Hwy/Combined $3,489
55 / 49 / 52 MPG Repairs $646

Source: https://www.edmunds.com/car-comparisons/?
veh1=401884167&veh2=401883950&veh3=401896393
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
6

In calculating the rank of each criterion, we make the lowest value 1 and adjust the other

values accordingly. In the case of fuel efficiency, we use the average of both the high and

low values.

Vehicle name Fuel efficiency Maintenance cost Load Capacity

and repairs/year (cargo in cu ft)
(estimated)
Toyota Camry 7.8/4.95 = 1.56 3652/3652 = 1 15.1/15.1 =1
2022 Model (LE)

Nissan Altima SE 7.9/4.95 =1.58 5500/3652 =1.51 15.4/1.51 = 1.02

2022 Model

Honda Insight 4.95/4.95 = 1 4135/3652 = 1.13 15.1/1.51 = 1

2022 Model
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
7

Fuel efficiency [weight = 15] Maintenance cost and repairs Load Capacity [weight = 1]

[weight = 8]

TOTAL
Rank Weigh Score Rank Weight Score Rank Weigh Score SCORE
t t

Toyota Camry 2022 Model 1.56 15 23.4 1 8 8 1 1 1 32.4

(LE

Nissan Altima SE 2022 1.58 15 23.7 1.51 8 12.08 1.02 1 1.02 36.8
Model

Honda Insight 2022 Model 1 15 15 1.13 8 9.04 1 1 1 25.04

RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
8

Step 6: Selecting the alternatives

In selecting the alternatives, we identify the highest total weighted score. This is the best

alternative. From the above computation, Nissan Altima SE 2022 Model is the best

alternative.

Step 7: Intuition

Here we consider- does this make sense? Looking at the options, does the final chosen

alternative feel right?

Step 8: Implementing

In this stage, confirmation is made that all stakeholders buy into this choice and

everyone’s input was considered.

Step 9: Evaluation

In evaluating the choice of the final alternative, the Nissan Altima SE 2022 Model, this

will be for an extended period of use.

B. DECISION-MAKING ERRORS

In making the decision on choosing the best alternative, we were faced with some errors.

i. Anchoring Bias

According to Cho (2017) this bias is when the emphasis is made on one

aspect/information in the course of decision-making. This could occur as a

result of the way and manner the information is presented. This could create a

bias in the mind of the individual making the decision. Langton et al (2019)

described this bias as being focused on the initial information and being

unwilling to change or make necessary adjustments in considering other

RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
9

information in the future. In the course of making the decision on which car to

purchase, there was a high tendency to place a lot of emphasis on particular

websites and ignore other sources. Unfortunately, the possibility of not having

a full reflection of the characteristics of the different cars selected. To avoid

this, we had to consciously take steps to confirm different characteristics

before making our final selection.

ii. Confirmation Bias

This bias occurs when we selectively choose options that confirm our

preconceived ideas. An example is consciously selecting a Toyota vehicle and

looking for information confirming what we know and intentionally ignoring

information that is contrary. We choose the information that confirms our

opinions; actively seek out information that supports our decision instead of

being open-minded.

iii. Availability Bias

This bias is the potential for making selections based on available information.

This bias occurs mostly when operating on a deadline and wanting to make a

decision within a time frame. As a team, we had to consciously go further in

research to make an informed decision instead of making a decision hurriedly

because of the amount of other academic obligations.

iv. Immediate gratification bias

This bias is also called immediate gratification. Decisions are taken

immediately after options seem ideal without examining fully, all aspects of

that alternative. The urge to find a solution as soon as possible to meet the
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
10

existing need tends to cause immediate gratification without doing in-depth

research

C. DECISION-MAKING STYLE OF TEAM MEMBERS

Table 2: DM styles of group members

Team Member Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Name score score score score

Elizabeth Collins- 97 65 8 55
Temisa

Man Nga Chau 70 49 73 108

Oruare Ojimadu 57 82 74 78

Shamimbanu 61 82 90 67
Pathan

A look at the table indicated four different DM styles were present within the team.

This had an impact on our decision-making process. As a team, we had to ensure that

despite our different styles, we contributed to the process. A guiding factor was the initial

requirements given by the company. This helped us not to derail and streamline our

selections.

The directive decision-making style kept us focused on the task structure while

the analytical style helped in gathering and identifying information as well as analyzing

the options. The conceptual style helped in gathering options, highlighting possibilities of

the different alternatives, and relating them to the requirement of the company. The

behavioral style considered feedback from the entire team as well as keeping the

dynamics of the team intact.

REFERENCES
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
11

2022 Camry full specs

https://www.toyota.com/camry/2022/features/mpg_other_price/2532/2559/2546

Accessed 27/10/22

2022 Honda insight. https://automobiles.honda.com/insight. Accessed 27/10/22

All new 2022 Nissan Altima AWD Sedan

https://www.nissan.ca/vehicles/cars/altima.html Accessed 27/10/22

Cho I., Wesslen .R., Karduni .A.,Santhanam .S.,Shaikh .S. and Dou .W. (2017). "The

Anchoring Effect in Decision-Making with Visual Analytics," 2017 IEEE Conference

on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST), 2017, pp. 116-126, doi:

10.1109/VAST.2017.8585665.

Langton, N., Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behaviour: Concepts,

controversies, applications. Toronto: Pearson Canada Inc.

Malhotra, S. (2018, July 27). 4 styles of decision-making: A leader’s guide.

Enterprisersproject.com. https://enterprisersproject.com/article/2018/7/4-styles-decision-

making-leaders-guide

APPENDIX
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
12

Elizabeth Collins-Temisa
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
13

Man Nga Chau

Oruare Ojimadu
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
14

Shamimbanu Pathan
RUNNING HEAD: DECISION-MAKING ASSIGNMENT
15