Maut Theory

Jennifer,

I understand your concern about the decision I made in which the result turned out poorly. The decision to promote Juliet to position of quality assurance manager did not produce the results that I had planned. My decision adversely resulted in Juliet having to be demoted back to data manager. It also resulted in loss of time and money for our company. I am very aware and extremely regretful that my decision was subjective rather than objective. I assure you that my future decision making processes will result in greater success for this company.

I have researched successful decision making theories that I plan on utilizing. There are three theories that I plan to utilize when making business decisions for this company. They are as follows: Multiattribution Utility Theory (MAUT), prospect theory, and the satisficing theory.

The MAUT theory will be beneficial in weighing out the strengths and weaknesses of employees prior to promoting them. Some of the strengths that are important to review are: performance appraisals, team player, organizational skills, time management, leadership, attention to detail, and professional development. If I had used this model I would have been able to objective see who was a better candidate for the position.

The prospect theory will predict a “certainty effect” in which “a reduction of the probability of an outcome by a constant factor has more impact when the outcome was initially certain than when it was merely probably” (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981, p. 455). In the future, when choosing an employee for promotion, the “most certain” choice will be decided. The risk will be eliminated rather than reduced. Looking back retrospectively, I see that there were other employees who were “most certainly” better candidates for promotion.

The satisficing theory will prove to be beneficial. The path that satisfies the company’s most