BUSI1702

OrganisationalDecisionMaking
Assessment
BUSI1702 Assessment
Management report due 17th December 2021
 You are required to write a 3000-word (excluding reference list) management
report to review decisions & make recommendations for future decisions and
actions in ONE of the assigned live business case studies, either WeWork or Asda.

 You MUST read the case study (Moodle folder, module handbook, assessment
brief)

 A submission with word count – or + 10% of 3,000 is acceptable; submissions

without meeting the minimum or the maximum word count would be penalised)
How many decisions & problems?
 Your report should evaluate at least one of the assigned organisational
decisions (1a OR 1b)

 You can include one more decision in addition to the one(s) required by the
assessment

 You MUST make sure that these problems and decisions you identified are of
clear and logical relevance to the assigned ones

 The number of decisions that you choose to evaluate does not affect your
grade BUT keep the decisions to max. three to ensure sufficient space for in-
depth evaluation of the decisions and proper analysis
Assessment: Introduction
Approx. 300 words
 A brief introduction to the organisational context related to one of
the assigned case studies, describing specific organisational
problems and relevant decisions

 An outline of concepts covered by this module that are specifically

relevant to the organisational problems and decisions

 Hint: revise Week 2 content about how to describe the problems and
decisions specifically in terms of how, who, what/where, when
Introduction example
The example is from a past assignment with different requirements

“In 2010 Adam Neumann and Miguel McKelvey were opening the first WeWork – a shared
office space aiming to change the way people work (Bliss, 2018). The company soon boomed
and became one of the most valuable start-ups in the world valued at $47bn only to
experience a dramatic fall out of favour with both investors and the general public while its
valuation is now down to $2.9bn (Pietsch, 2020). This report will analyse three main decisions
that preceded the fall of WeWork while also drawing on some consequent decisions
prompted by these. The report will use the rational choice theory and institutional logics to
assess the rationality of these decisions and consequently draw onto judgemental heuristics
and prospect theory to analyse how these decisions were made from a behavioural decision-
making perspective. The three main decisions are: rapid business expansion, the
commitment to carbon neutrality by 2023, and filing for IPO.”
Introduction example
 What went well:
 Clear, concise, and logical writing overall
 Use of evidence to support the existence of the organisational problem
 Clearly outline the organisational decisions, the objectives of the report,
and theories applied

 What could be improved:

 Informal expressions: ‘ The company soon boomed… a dramatic fall
out of favour’…
Assessment: Evaluation section
Approx. 1500 words
 An evidence-based discussion about external & organisational factors that
influenced the organisational problems and decisions

 An evidence-based discussion about managerial & behavioural factors that

influenced the organisational problems and decisions
 Hint: revise Week 5-7 content about how to acquire & appraise four types of evidence;
revise week 8-10 content for managerial & behavioural factors

 An analysis of how the organisational problems and decisions affect the most
relevant stakeholders
 Hint: revise Week 3 content about three stakeholder attributes, including power,
legitimacy, and urgency
Evaluation example
 Factors that shape organisational decisions: the example is from a past assignment with different requirements

The decision to commit to achievement of carbon neutrality by 2023 was also a long-term strategic decision. The key
decision makers being the WeWork executives who happened to be close friends or family of Adam Neumann (Durkee,
2019). The goal which aligns with the company’s mission of ‘elevating the world’s consciousness’ is, like its growth
ambitions, slightly unrealistic (Feiner, 2019). To put this into context, more established companies, such as Amazon
and Unilever, have set their targets to achieving carbon neutrality by 2040 and 2039 respectively (Nguyen, 2020).
Consequent to the strategic decision of achieving carbon neutrality was the tactical decision of implementing a ‘no-
meat’ policy. This decision driven and announced by Miguel McKelvey who also happens to be vegan, was easily
approved by his friend and company CEO, Neumann (Feldman & Sharf, 2019). What was omitted however was not
only the cultural context in many of the countries in which WeWork operated, where meat plays an important part, but
also WeWork’s financial dependency on Softbank’s Vision Fund to which Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman
contributed $45 billion – oil money from Saudi Arabia (Hoffman, 2019). WeWork’s refusal to shy away from money
obtained from fossil fuel, responsible for 89% of global CO2 emissions according to ClientEarth (2020), paired with
Adam Neumann’s acquisition of a $60 million private jet (Brown, 2019), while forcing employees to become vegetarian
to reduce carbon emissions could only come across as hypocritical.
Evaluation example
 What went well:
 Clear identification & logical articulation of how different factors affected the decision
 External: general business pursuit of (an image of) sustainability
 Organisational: dependency on a large investor involved in business activities (oil) that negatively influence
organisational goal of carbon neutrality
 Managerial: founder McKelvey is vegan

 Use of practitioner evidence in support of the statements about what factors shape the organisational
decision

 What could be improved:

 Sweeping/inaccurate/ statement without evidence: ‘forcing employees to become vegetarian to
reduce carbon emissions’
 The employees were merely no longer offered meat options in the company’s catering service!

 Lacking other types of evidence

Evaluation example
 Stakeholder analysis: the example is from a past assignment with different requirements

“In order to assess whether the consequences produced by these decisions were positive or negative it is paramount
to identify who is affected by these decisions or who is ‘at stake’. According to Freeman (1984, p. 46) “any group or
individual that can affect or is affected by the achievement of an organization’s objectives” is a stakeholder. It is
therefore rational to infer that stakeholders are the ones that can be used to assess whether a consequence was
positive or not. In the case of WeWork, the main stakeholders are WeWork executives (in this report these will be
mainly Adam Newman and Miguel McKelvey), Softbank, Governments, employees and customers. As any big
company such as WeWork will have a multitude of stakeholders it is critical to assess which one of them is more
important. Mitchell, Agle & Wood (1997) classified stakeholders based on the attributes of power, legitimacy, and
urgency where the power of stakeholders increases based on how many of the attributes they possess. Based on
this framework WeWork’s definitive stakeholders are its executives in possession of all three attributes, followed by
Softbank as a dangerous stakeholder (possessing urgency and power), the employees and customers as dependent
stakeholders (possessing urgency and legitimacy) and the Governments as dormant stakeholders (possessing only
power).
Evaluation example
Stakeholder analysis
 What went well:
 Clear application of stakeholder attributes
 Power, legitimacy, and urgency
 Use of references in relating to theories

 What could be improved:

 A clearer focus on stakeholder attributes in related to the specific
organisational problem

 Lack an explanation about how exactly each stakeholder group affect/is

affected by the decision
Assessment: Evaluation section
If time permits…
 Form groups based on your chosen organisation

 Share your understanding about external & organisational factors that

influence the organisational problem & decisions

 Share the types of evidence that you used to identify these factors
 You can use the resources on Moodle Assessment Folders

 Report to the class for feedback

Examples
 External factors:
 Changing national regulations on workplace health and safety during the
pandemic
 Economic recessions

 Organisational factor:
 Business model
 Organisational ownership
 Organisational structure
 HR policies
 The nature of work
Assessment: Recommendation section
Approx. 1200 words
 A statement about whether the decisions are good/plausible, or poor based on your evaluation &
analysis

 An analysis of alternative decisions/solutions to the organisational problems in the assigned

operational environment

 An evidence-based discussion about whether your alternative decision could produce better
desirable outcomes for the most relevant stakeholder & whether your alternative is feasible
 Hint: Revise Week 4 for the content related to alternative solutions, costs and benefits, resources and constraints,
and the desirability and probability of decision outcomes

 For instance, good practices that improve business performance, decision making, publicity OR
talent management in relation to the assigned decisions and operating environment (see case
study requirements)
Recommendation example
 The example is from a past assignment with different requirements

“The main trend that can be identified from the evaluation of the decision-making process is the prevalence of Adam Neumann
as a key decision maker. As he had the status of definitive stakeholder, and all other definitive stakeholders were either his
friends or his relatives, it was very easy to make way for flawed decisions and rational errors. In order to implement positive
change in the decision-making process it is imperative that the definitive stakeholders are diversified. One way of achieving this
is effective corporate governance. To achieve this a non-executive board should be formed with members having the necessary
skills, independence, experience and knowledge to oversee the decision-making process (CIPD, 2020). Decentralising the
power and offering definitive stakeholder status to an overseeing board in addition to the executive team will help prevent
heuristics influencing decisions.
Furthermore, the team of executives should be independently elected rather than chosen by the founder and CEO. Ensuring
that the executive members are independent from each other will further reduce the risk of collective heuristics and improve the
decision-making process. The power of the CEO should also be subject to limitations to ensure that there is no abuse of power
and that resources are not misused. Additionally, an external auditing company could be entrusted with the yearly reviewing of
the company processes and financials to assess and certify whether the decisions are unbiased and most likely to be profitable
for the company on the long run. Although it is impossible to completely eliminate decision-making errors, having processes in
place will minimise the possibility of such errors occurring."
Cover at least three of the Use all four types of
following key concepts evidence in your
and theories: assessment
 rational choice theory
 institutional logic
 evidence-based management
 bounded rationality
 Intuition
 judgemental heuristics and bias
 behavioural decision making
 system 1 and system 2 thinking
 utility theory
 prospect theory
 framing effect
How to acquire practitioner evidence?
For your assessment:
 Professional body reports related to the organisational problems
presented in the assessment case studies

 Practitioners opinions and views expressed in interviews for

newspapers, podcasts, and television or journalistic analysis of the
organisational problems

 Ask anyone you know who fit with the definition of ‘expert' in the
subjects related to the organisational problem
How to acquire stakeholder evidence?
For your assessment:
 Professional body reports, empirical research conducted by stakeholder
groups (i.e. union; regulators) & academic studies elated to stakeholder
views of the organisational problem/decision presented in the assessment
case studies

 Stakeholder views expressed in interviews for newspapers, podcasts, and

television or journalistic analysis of the organisational problems

 Ask anyone you know who fit with the definition of ‘stakeholder' in the
subjects related to the organisational problem
Appraise practitioner & stakeholder
evidence in your assessment
 Consider questions in the previous slides

 To what extent are the analysis of the company’s problem & the
suggested solutions provided by practitioners such as
management consultants journalists in the press valid and
reliable?
How to acquire organisational evidence?
For your assessment:
 External bodies with relevant & high quality
information about an organisation and its
competitions & sector/market
 industry bodies & professional associations (i.e. CIPD)
 census bureaux (i.e. Office of National Statistics)
 private market data companies (i.e. Statista)
How to acquire organisational evidence?
For your assessment:
 Assessment case study specific
organisational data
 Asda’s company report
 WeWork’s IPO application SP-1 Form

 Social media
 Information shared by ASDA & WeWork
Appraising organisational evidence
For your assessment:
 Accuracy & relevance of data acquired
 Are the data relevant to the organisational problem/decision?
 How were the data collected?
 Was the sample representative?
 Are the units (i.e. teams, departments or divisions) comparable in size?

 Contextual information related to data

 Is the data presented and interpreted without contextual information (esp. on social
media)
 Sectoral comparison could be important in relation to absenteeism, staff turnover, job satisfaction,
failure frequency, customer complaints, metrics, & Key Performance Indicators
How to acquire scientific evidence?
For your assessment:
 Peer-reviewed academic journal articles related to the organisational
problems, for example:
 Remote work and its impact
 Maria Charalampous, Christine A. Grant, Carlo Tramontano & Evie Michailidis (2019) Systematically
reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: a multidimensional approach, European Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(1), 51-73.

 Staff redundancy & restructuring

 McLachlan, C.J., MacKenzie, R. and Greenwood, I. (2021), Victims, survivors and the emergence of
‘endurers’ as a reflection of shifting goals in the management of redeployment. Human Resource
Management Journal, 31, 438-453.
How to acquire scientific evidence?
For your assessment:
 Peer-reviewed academic journal articles related to the organisational
problems, for example:
 Customer strategy & competition in coworking spaces
 Gauger, F., Pfnür, A. and Strych, J.-O. 2021 ‘Coworking spaces and Start-ups: Empirical evidence
from a product market competition and life cycle perspective’, Journal of Business Research,
132: p.67–78.

 Use key words related to your arguments to search for the literature, such as NOT
limited to ‘merger and acquisition’ (applicable to Asda), ‘restructuring’ (application to
WeWork), and ‘organisational change’ (applicable to both companies)
Appraising scientific evidence
For your assessment:
 What does the academic literature suggest regarding the possible antecedents of the
organisational problem?

 What does the academic literature suggest regarding the possible outcomes of the
management practices involved in organisational decision?

 Does the literature suggest alternative practices that might work better than Asda or
WeWork’s current solutions?

 To what extent is the evidence generalisable/applicable to the organisational context of

Asda or WeWork?
How to use evidence?
 Use evidence to support the existence of the organisational
problems & the factors that shaped the problems & decisions
 Introduction & evaluation section

 Use evidence about the actual implications of the decision for the
stakeholders after the decision was made
 Evaluation section
 e.g., stakeholder evidence on how a stakeholder group felt about the
decision)
How to use evidence?
 Use evidence to provide insights into how a decision was made &
could be made in a more effective way in future
 Recommendation section

 Identify whether a decision show characteristics of rational, evidence-based,

behavioural decision making

 Consider whether evidence about the potential impact on stakeholders were

taken into consideration by the decision makers at the time when they made
the decision

 Consider whether there are a better approach to this decision

Where you can easily gain marks
 Get the references and in-text citations format right! Refer to the
Harvard reference guide

 Proofread and edit carefully before submission

 Adhere to the word count requirement (- or + 3,000 words

excluding the reference list)