Decision making is an important element in running organizations. Everything that takes place in organizations is influenced by decision making processes which are conducted by the top employees such as chief executive officers, directors, managers and head of departments. Some decisions are easier to make than others due to their uniqueness. For example, some are made by single individuals while others involve more than one individual (Koller, 2005).
Those which involve several individuals are characterized by consultations which must take place in order for the parties to reach agreements. This usually happens in order to ensure that the operations of organizations are not affected by the processes. Major decisions in organizations require the parties involved in the processes to conduct prior research to identify which are affected because decisions have both merits and demerits (Chapman, 2010).
In order to handle difficult decision making processes that touch on employee relations in organizations, certain criteria are followed. By doing this, all potential problems associated with the decisions made are analyzed. In the case being analyzed in this paper, a CEO for a shipping company is preparing to get into a new contract with a labor union.
However, he/she has to make a difficult decision regarding some of the employees in one of the departments who use drugs. There use of drugs is associated with accidents in plants which cost the company huge sums of money in compensation. Although he/she feels that all new and existing employees should undergo drug testing, the union is opposed to the move. As a result, certain recommendations are important in order for him to make the right decision.
The first recommendation that needs to be adopted is that all employees are supposed to undergo the drug testing. This is because there is no precedent in the company that influences the process. In its history, the company has never registered cases of drug abuse thus no employee has been exposed to such a process before.
The process is fair because it includes all of them without any discrimination. As a result, they are all entitled to the same treatment during the process. The situation would have been different if the company had experienced issues of drug abuse among employees earlier. In such a situation, it would have been compelled to take caution not to set a different precedent from the existing one. This strategy is based on the first recommendation that it is important for the company to consider any existing precedents.
The second recommendation that is important in dealing with the case is that the company needs to consider making a new policy that requires all employees to be tested for drug use. This is because it is important to find a lasting solution for the problem in order to avoid a repeat of the accidents associated with use of drugs among employees.
This is based on the recommendation that it is important to establish whether the issue being dealt with is a one-time issue or a new policy being introduced. In this case, establishing this as a new policy is appropriate for the company.
The third recommendation that the company needs to consider is the identification of the legal issues that might be involved in the process. Drug abuse is of concern to the government in its bid to control the problem hence certain legal issues must be observed.
For example, the treatment sessions that the company wishes to offer employees who turn positive are supposed to be conducted under certain legal guidelines issued by the bodies concerned with drug abuse (Gordon & Cumberlege, 2007).
This ensures that the CEO does not make any decision that has legal implications for the company. During the process, it is important to seek advice from drug and law experts in order to make the right decisions. This is based on the recommendation that legal issues that might determine the decision-making process are supposed to be considered.
The fourth recommendation that is important in dealing with the case is that certain benefits are supposed to be included for employees who willingly denounce use of drugs and assist those still in the habit to stop. By doing this, the company is able to counter the losses incurred as a result of drug use among employees.
When employees who use drugs abandon the habit openly, this motivates their colleagues in similar situations to do the same. The idea is supposed to be sustained through rewards to such employees. This strategy is based on the recommendation that the decision process should be dominated by mechanisms that bring long-term benefits to the company. When employees participate in elimination of drug abuse, the company benefits in the long-run.
The last recommendation that is important for the company is that there is need to initiate a campaign within and outside the company to educate people on the impacts of drug abuse. During such campaigns the health and financial implications of drug use are supposed to be analyzed.
This strategy helps to counter the negative perceptions that the outside community may have after the idea of testing employees for drugs is adopted. The strategy is based on the recommendation that the impacts of the decision on outside community should be analyzed.
Chapman, A. (2010). problem-solving and decision-making. Retrieved from http://www.businessballs.com/problemsolving.htm
Gordon, L., & Cumberlege, P. (2007). Introduction to Legal Issues for Entrepreneurs. Cape Town: Juta and Company Ltd.
Koller, G. (2005). Risk Assessment And Decision Making In Business And Industry: A Practical Guide. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC.