For Potential Executives
*Santa Misra
financing parameters, and determining the timing of both capital expansions in general and strategic acquisitions and divestitures in particular (Cundiff, 1975; Dhalla, 1980; Greer, 1984; Mascarenhas & Aaker, 1989; McCallum, 1991; Navarro, 2006).
In a study Welsh & Schmitt-Wilson (2013), while analysing on executive function, identity, and career decision-making in college students, found that elements of self- reported executive functions are related to identity statuses and differentially predict the domains of career decision-making , certainty and uncertainty. They have suggested further research utilizing direct measures of executive/prefrontal function to illuminate the manner in which neurological development may influence identity development, vocational development, as well as other important domains of future planning characteristic of emerging adulthood. The purpose of this study was to conduct a preliminary examination of the relationships among executive functions, identity, and career decision-making in traditional- aged students in their first two years of college.
Executive functions are mediated by the prefrontal cortex of the brain (Welsh, 2001) and incorporate processes involved in goal-directed behaviour (Welsh, Friedman, & Spieker, 2006). Recently, authors have speculated that a relationship exists between executive function and identity (Phillips, 2008, Shanahan & Pychyl, 2007). Besides researches are identifying the relationship between identity and career decision-making (Blustein, Devenis, & Kidney 1989; Vondracek, Schulenberg, Skorikov, Gillespie, & Wahlheim, 1995). Managerial discretion, or latitude of action, varies from industry to industry as the characteristics of a firm’s environment affect the level of managerial discretion and thus how much influence managers have on firm outcomes (Finkelstein and Hambrick, 1996).
Several brain structures have been identified as integral to the decision making process particularly the orbitofrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate. The orbitofrontal cortex (OFC; BA47 & 11) within the prefrontal cortex (see Figure 1) is responsible for processing, evaluating and filtering social and emotional information for appropriate decision making abilities (Elliott, Dolan, & Frith, 2000). It is seen to be involved because of on-line rapid evaluation of stimulus-reinforcement associations, that is, learning to link a stimulus and action with its reinforcing properties. In addition, the anterior cingulated cortex (see Figure 1) controls and selects appropriate behavior as well as monitors errors and incorrect responses of the organism (van Veen & Carter, 2002). In case of adults, these regions appear integral to successful decision making ( Bechara & Damasio, 2002; Bechara et al., 1997, and Lamar, Yousem, & Resnick, 2004) . However, other regions within the prefrontal cortex are also involved in the decision making process. The OFC and anterior cingulate cortex act in concert with other prefrontal regions, particularly the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the posterior medial frontal cortex to monitor errors and make
appropriate choices during decision making. Thus, the DLPFC is involved indirectly with decision making through its neural connections to the orbitofrontal and anterior cingulate cortices as well as directly with its own cognitive contributions to the decision making process. Cohen, Heller, & Ranganath, 2005, demonstrated that the DLPFC selects information for working memory, planning and flexibility as it relates to the decision making process. Thus, there is an analysis of cost-benefit acted out in working memory as mediated by the DLPFC. In addition, the DLPFC and the posterior medial frontal cortex are implicated in the goal directed behaviours of information integration and ongoing performance monitoring, respectively (Hogan,et.al., 2006). These regions are connected to each other as well as other regions of brain through a series of cortico-subcortical and cortico-cortical connections. Basal ganglia-thalamocortical circuits (BGTC) and frontoparietal networks are implicated in aspects of decision making through their neural associations suggesting that decision making is not solely relegated to the prefrontal cortex.
For example, the BGTC involving the OFC , connects this region with the thalamus and ventromedial caudate, each of which have connections throughout brain. Likewise, the BGTC involving the DLPFC connects this region with the thalamus as well as dorsolateral regions of the caudate. The frontoparietal network is cited as important in directing attention towards relevant information as opposed to irrelevant information during goal-related decision making processes (Chelazzi & Corbetta, 2000; Kastner & Ungerleider, 2000).
Thus, decision making evokes multiple brain regions and multiple networks for completion of the tasks.
In the analysis of neuro management, i.e., neurological basis of behaviour is most important to consider. Which part of the brain is responsible for which work and how all the behaviours are controlled, guided, modified and managed by brain is to be focused on.
Thus the study aims to understand
• The Neural processes underlying how we craft decisions
• To Understand mechanisms of decision-making using functional Neuro-imaging methodologies.
• And thus Integrating interdisciplinary research towards contributing to decision neuroscience of the study
OBJECTIVES
Thus the Objectives of the study are
• To put forward a model for neuro - managerial decision making capacities in potential executives,
• To observe the decision making style of potential executives in their work place
• To consider the interactions among various components of Human Resource Management(HRM) in promoting their decisions
• And based on these advocacies to prepare an exemplary model with inviting the suggestions from various fields of researches.
METHODOLOGY Sample
100 Ss from TCS Branch , joined as Assistant System Engineer (ASE), in their training period at - Nal Sarovar - ILP Center, 2nd, 3rd & 4th Floor, Info Tower - III, Infocity, Gandhinagar - 382 009, Gujarat, India, who are considered as potential executives with their average income range as 3.25 lakhs per annum
Instrument Used
The Decision making style questionnaire by “Co-operative Education and career Division” was used for data collection which consists of 24 questions in a five point scale strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree. The components of decision making analysed are Rational, dependent, avoidant, intuitive and spontaneous.
Procedure
All the subjects were individually administered the Decision making style questionnaire in their own set up. After the data collection the result was analysed based on the components of decision making process.
ANALYSIS OF RESULT
The result was interpreted on rational decision making, intuitive decision making, dependent decision making, avoidant decision making, and spontaneous decision making components of decision making style.
Rationale: This approach is characterised by using a logical and structured approach to decision making. One may find using ideas such as SWOT or force field analysis helpful here, which are explained later in this section. The average score of all the subjects in this component is 30 %.
Dependant: This approach is characterised by reliance upon the advice, direction and support of others. You will find that you are more comfortable making a decision when you have discussed the options with others, and are uncomfortable making decisions alone.
The average score of all the subjects in this component is 18 %.
Avoidant: This approach is where one attempt to postpone or avoid making a decision. This is not a healthy way to approach making decisions. Whilst taking time to reflect on the options is a good idea, avoiding or postponing making the decision can lead to negative consequences. The average score of all the subjects in this component is 14 %.
Intuitive: This approach is characterised by reliance upon hunches, feelings and impressions. One will go with ‘gut instinct’ or with what feels right, rather than taking a logical approach to the decision making/ The average score of all the subjects in this component is 18 %.
Spontaneous
This is where the decision maker is impulsive and prone to making ‘snap’ or ‘spur of the moment’ decisions. This can be a valuable trait in terms of not over planning the future, but it is not always a good idea to leave important decisions to be made this way. The average score of all the subjects in this component is 20 %.
Table 1: showing % of efficiency and deficiency in different components of Decision Making Style of 100 potential executives
Components of D S M Rational Dependent Avoidant Intuitive Spontaneous Percentage of efficiency 30% 18% 14% 18% 20 %
Percentage of deficiency 70% 82% 86% 82% 80%
The percentage of scores in Rational decision making , intuitive decision making dependent decision making , avoidant decision making , and spontaneous decision making were found to be 30%, 18%, 14%, 18%, and 20 % , respectively. Less dependent component (18%) can be considered as better quality of an administrative officer. But their deficiency level in these components , mainly on Rational, avoidant, intuitive, and spontaneous , which are important characteristics for administrative personnel, are found to be 70 %, 86%,82%
and 80%. Hence the causal effects of these points can be taken into consideration and can also be explained on the basis of neuro-physiological basis of their behaviour.
In order to improve the decision making capacity among the potential executives in organisational sectors the following figure can act as a model for human resource management in work place that can contribute to creative and better decision making style of an individual ( Figure 6 ).
CONCLUSIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS
On the basis of above discussions the following conclusions can be made:
• Decisions are inevitable part of human activities.
• Decisions are inevitable part of human activities.
• Behavior is not a product of single process
• Both nature and nurture are responsible for decision making capacities of a person
• Human behavior is not constant
• Deciphering requires neuro - biological processes
• There must be Call for management decision - making before the executives will take their decisions
• There must be training and orientation programme to all the employees about the conditions that might affect their decision making processes
• There must be development of awareness among the employees of an organization on different steps in decision making process.
• There must be preparation of models that constitute all the above points
• The proposed model of the paper invites suggestions and recommendations from all spheres to be used (Fig 6 )
• The following model and figures are the indicators of the issues described in the paper.
(Appendix: Conditions that affect decisions, Figure 1, Fig 2, Fig 3, Fig 4, Fig 5).
LIKELY CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE
• Provide conceptual framework for understanding and conducting Neuro-managerial research at intersection of Neuroscience, managerial and Psychology.
• Offer solution through additional set of data obtained via series of measurements of Brain activity at time of decisions.
• Attempt to build Brain-based models capable of predicting observed behavior
• Describe first standard model for decision making process with intention of linking and spanning neurobiological, psychological and managerial levels of analysis.
REFERENCES
Bechara, A.; Damasio, H.; Tranel, D. & Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275 (5304), 1293-1295.
Bechara, A. & Damasio, H. (2002). Decision-making and addiction (part I): impaired activation of somatic states in substance dependent individuals when pondering decisions with negative future consequences. Neuropsychologia, 40(10), 1675-1689.
Blustein, D. L.; Devenis, L. E. & Kidney, B. A. (1989). Relationship between the identity formation process and career development. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 196-202.
Chelazzi, L. & Corbetta, M. (2000). Cortical mechanisms of visuospatial attention in the primate brain.In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences (2nd ed., pp. 667-686). Cambridge, MA: MIT, in Press
Cohen, M. X.; Heller, A. S. & Ranganath, C. (2005). Functional connectivity with anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortices during decision-making. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res, 23(1), 61-70.
Cundiff, E. (1975). What is the role of marketing in a recession? Journal of Marketing, 39(2): 1.
Dhalla, N. (1980). Advertising as an antirecession tool. Harvard Business Review, 58(1): 158 –165.
Elliott, R.; Dolan, R. J. & Frith, C. D. (2000). Dissociable functions in the medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex: evidence from human neuroimaging studies. Cereb Cortex, 10(3), 308-317.
Finkelstein, S. & Hambrick, D. (1996). Strategic Leadership, Top Executives and their Effects on Organization, West, Minneapolis, MN.
Greer, C. (1984). Countercyclical hiring as a staffing strategy for managerial and professional personnel:
Some considerations and issues. Academy of Management Review 9: 324 – 331.
Hogan, A. M.; Vargha-Khadem, F.; Saunders, D. E.; Kirkham, F. J. & Baldeweg, T. (2006). Impact of frontal white matter lesions on performance monitoring: ERP evidence for cortical disconnection.
Brain, 129(Pt 8), 2177-2188.
Kastner, S. & Ungerleider, L. G. (2000). Mechanisms of visual attention in the human cortex. Annu Rev Neurosci, 23, 315-341.
Lamar, M.; Yousem, D. M. & Resnick, S. M. (2004). Age differences in orbitofrontal activation: an fMRI investigation of delayed match and nonmatch to sample. Neuroimage, 21(4), 1368-1376.
Larkin, J.; McDermott, J.; Simon, D. P. & Simon, H. A. (1980). Models of competence in solving physics problems. Cognitive Science, 4, 317-345.
Mascarenhas, B. & Aaker, D. (1989). Strategy over the business cycle. Strategic Management Journal, 10(3): 199 –210.
McCallum, J. (1991). Yes, managers, there is still a business cycle. Business Quarterly, 56(1): 36 – 40.
Navarro, P. (2005). What the best MBAs know: How to apply the greatest ideas taught in the best business schools. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Phillips, T. M. (2008). Age-related differences in identity style: A cross-sectional analysis. Current Psychology, 27, 205-215.
Shanahan, M. J. & Pychyl, T. A. (2007). An ego identity perspective on volitional action: Identity status, agency, and procrastination. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 901-911 Van Veen, V. & Carter, C. S. (2002). The anterior cingulate as a conflict monitor: fMRI and ERP studies.
Physiol Behav, 77(4-5), 477-482.
Vondracek, F. W.; Schulenberg, J.; Skorikov, V. & Gillespie, L. K. (1995). The relationship of identity status to career indecision during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 17-29.
Welsh, M. C. (2001). The prefrontal cortex and the development of executive functions. In A. Kalverboer
& A. Gramsbergen (Eds.), Handbook of brain and behaviour development (pp. 767-790). The Netherlands: Kluwer
Welsh, M. C.; Friedman, S. L. & Spieker, S. J. (2006). Executive functions in developing children:
Current conceptualizations and questions for the future. In K. McCartney & D. Phillips (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood development. London, England: Blackwell.
Welsh, M. & Schmitt-Wilson, S. ( 2013). Executive Function, Identity, and Career Decision-Making in College Students,Sage publications, DOI: 10.1177/2158244013505755 Published 30 October 2013.