Supervisory Problems in Decision Making

Summary This study reports the results of the interaction of 154 pairs of first and second line supervisors who were used as subjects in a Multiple Role Playing episode that involved the foreman's handling of a possible violation of a safety regulation by a repairman. The decision making proces...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Personnel psychology 1957-06, Vol.10 (2), p.169-180
Hauptverfasser: DANIELSON, LEE E., MAIER, NORMAN R. F.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Summary This study reports the results of the interaction of 154 pairs of first and second line supervisors who were used as subjects in a Multiple Role Playing episode that involved the foreman's handling of a possible violation of a safety regulation by a repairman. The decision making process and the problems encountered by the foremen in the situation were investigated. The reactions of the repairmen to the decisions and to the way he was dealt with by the foremen were related to the foreman's actions. When confronted with a situation involving a possible viola‐ tion of a safety regulation, the majority of the foremen (75%,) used the “judicial” approach of discussing the possible viola‐ tion. The objective of these foremen seemed to be the establish‐ ment of guilt or innocence, without regard for the possible consequences of such action. On the surface it appears, the initial decision to discuss or not to discuss the possible violation was not the determining factor for success in gaining the more basic objective (i.e. a safer worker). Either decision resulted in approximately 70 per cent success, but further analysis of the consequences of discussing the possible violation indicated that the foremen pursuing the judicial path created additional problems for himself and the repairman. In someinstances, he motivated the repairman to lie, deny the Violation, and in other situations where the repairmen did admit the violation the foremen were put in a position of having to lay off the worker, which they did very infrequently, or to let the person off and expose themselves to being accused of discriminating. In a majority of cases (69.5 per cent), the repairmen ex‐ pressed the opinion that they would be safer workers and that their respect for their foremen had increased as a result of the interaction and decision during the role playing. Respect and safety were significantly related but respect and dominance of conversation by foreman or repairman were not. The experi‐ mental findings form an outline of aids to supervision in dealing with the possible violation situations.
ISSN:0031-5826
1744-6570
DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1957.tb00775.x