個案總覽

Examines the competitive challenges facing Robert Mondavi as the wine industry begins to consolidate globally. Mondavi faces challenges from foreign competitors entering the U.S. market as well as diversified global alcoholic beverage companies entering the wine business.

In turbulent times, some leaders make tough choices with courage and conviction. Others, however, remain indecisive. But most executives find ways to cope with uncertainty, ways that enable them to make sense of a confusing situation. In this article, the author describes seven strategies that leaders can use to cope with ambiguity and complexity when making decisions. He also points out their drawbacks, underlining the need to take great care when deploying these strategies.

Describes the major phases of an initiative designed to transform the organization and enhance patient safety. Raises interesting questions about how to encourage candid discussion about failures while continuing to hold people accountable for their performance.

Most executives think of decision making as a singular event that occurs at a particular point in time. In reality, though, decision making is a process fraught with power plays, politics, personal nuances, and institutional history. Leaders who recognize this make far better decisions than those who persevere in the fantasy that decisions are events they alone control. That said, some decision-making processes are far more effective than others. Most often, participants use an advocacy process, possibly the least productive way to get things done. They view decision making as a contest, arguing passionately for their preferred solutions, presenting information selectively, withholding relevant conflicting data so they can make a convincing case, and standing firm against opposition. Much more powerful is an inquiry process, in which people consider a variety of options and work together to discover the best solution. Moving from advocacy to inquiry requires careful attention to three critical factors: fostering constructive, rather than personal, conflict; making sure everyone knows that their viewpoints are given serious consideration even if they are not ultimately accepted; and knowing when to bring deliberations to a close. The authors discuss in detail strategies for moving from an advocacy to an inquiry process, as well as for fostering productive conflict, true consideration, and timely closure. And they offer a framework for assessing the effectiveness of your process while you're still in the middle of it. Decision making is a job that lies at the very heart of leadership and one that requires a genius for balance: the ability to embrace the divergence that may characterize early discussions and to forge the unity needed for effective implementation.

Describes the firm's strategic planning activities and focuses on the challenge of developing processes that enable the firm to improve the core business as well as processes that foster the creation of promising new business opportunities.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

This series provides the instructions for a group decision-making simulation in which students experience four different methods for leading a group decision process. In the simulation, all students work in groups, with one person designated as the team leader. All groups experience two decision-making processes during the simulation. For the first decision process, all leaders follow the instructions in the (A) case, and all other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (E) case. The groups make a decision, and each individual completes a survey to assess the process. In the second decision process, some team leaders follow the instructions in the (B) case, while others employ the methods described in the (C) or (D) cases. All other group members adhere to the guidelines in the (F) case. Again, groups make a decision, and complete a survey to assess the process. The survey responses can be analyzed to compare the students' experiences with the four different methods for leading a decision making process.

Describes a senior management team's strategic decision-making process. The division president faces three options for redesigning the process to address several key concerns. The president has extensive quantitative and qualitative data about the process to guide him as he and the senior team attempt to make improvements.

Provides questionnaires so students can compare their experiences with different decison-making processes. Students read "Growing Pains," a Harvard Business Review (HBR) case study, and then work in teams to come up with recommendations using a consensus approach to decison making. The next day they use Decision-Making Exercise (B) and (C) and "Case of the Unhealthy Hospital," another HBR case study and, working in the same teams, use either a dialectical inquiry or devil's advocacy approach to decision making.

Provides questionnaires so students can compare their experiences with different decison-making processes. Students read "Growing Pains," a Harvard Business Review (HBR) case study, and then work in teams to come up with recommendations using a consensus approach to decison making. The next day they use Decision-Making Exercise (B) and (C) and "Case of the Unhealthy Hospital," another HBR case study and, working in the same teams, use either a dialectical inquiry or devil's advocacy approach to decision making.

Provides questionnaires so students can compare their experiences with different decison-making processes. Students read "Growing Pains," a Harvard Business Review (HBR) case study, and then work in teams to come up with recommendations using a consensus approach to decison making. The next day using Decision-Making Exercise (B) and (C) and "Case of the Unhealthy Hospital," another HBR case study, and working in the same teams, use either a dialectical inquiry or devil's advocacy approach to decision making.