목차
1. Introduction.................1
2. External decision-making constraints....1~3
▪ General external environmental factors....1~2
┝ Economic conditions.......1
┝ Political conditions......1
┝ Legal requirements........1
┝ Social influences.........1
┝ Globalisation.............2
┕ Technology................2
▪ Specific external environmental factors......................2
┝ Suppliers............2
┝ Customers............2
┝ Competitors..........2
┝ Labour resources.....2
┕ Pressure group.......2
▪ Example 1. The Walt Disney Company`s case.....3
3. Steps in the Decision-Making Process.........3~10
▪ Figure 1.1 Seven steps of process.........3
▪ Step 1) Identifying opportunity & Diagnosing problems.............4
▪ Step 2) Identifying Objectives......4~5
▪ Step 3) Generating Alternatives.....5~6
▪ Step 4) Evaluating Alternatives.....6~7
▪ Step 5) Reaching Decisions............7
▪ Step 6) Choosing Implementation Strategies.......7~9
▪ Step 7) Monitoring and Evaluating.....9~10
4. Conclusion....11
5. References....12
2. External decision-making constraints....1~3
▪ General external environmental factors....1~2
┝ Economic conditions.......1
┝ Political conditions......1
┝ Legal requirements........1
┝ Social influences.........1
┝ Globalisation.............2
┕ Technology................2
▪ Specific external environmental factors......................2
┝ Suppliers............2
┝ Customers............2
┝ Competitors..........2
┝ Labour resources.....2
┕ Pressure group.......2
▪ Example 1. The Walt Disney Company`s case.....3
3. Steps in the Decision-Making Process.........3~10
▪ Figure 1.1 Seven steps of process.........3
▪ Step 1) Identifying opportunity & Diagnosing problems.............4
▪ Step 2) Identifying Objectives......4~5
▪ Step 3) Generating Alternatives.....5~6
▪ Step 4) Evaluating Alternatives.....6~7
▪ Step 5) Reaching Decisions............7
▪ Step 6) Choosing Implementation Strategies.......7~9
▪ Step 7) Monitoring and Evaluating.....9~10
4. Conclusion....11
5. References....12
본문내용
ill not receive any royalties or management fees until 1999 and may be required to contribute more equity capital if the holders of its $603 million in convertible bonds opt to become common stock owners.
On balance, it is far from certain that Eurodisney will emerge from the 1990s as a financial robust theme park. Further, it seems even less likely that Eurodisney will ever achieve the 20 percent return on shareholder's equity that the Walt Disney Company has come to regard as its norm.
4. Conclusion
Disney's primary objective in the Eurodisney case was to continue its substantial rate of financial growth through an international expansion of its theme parks. Given Disney's considerable internal strengths, this objective was eminently attainable. Disney's objective was compromised to some degree in that the decision-making process used by Disney was not completely open. Disney's decision makers accepted only part of the constraints of bounded rationality. time and cost constraints were observed, imperfect information was disregarded, cognitive limitations were acknowledged, and only the economic aspects of the external environment were considered. This reduction of the decision-making process from completely open to partially open tended to diminish the attainability of an otherwise easily attainable objective.
Given that the decision making process in this case was only partially open, Disney proceed to make the right choice in the right way up to the point of implementation. In the implementation phase, the decision-making process comes to a halt. This diminution in the overall decision-making process is serious because converting the choice into action is a major element in the process. In fact, a brilliantly conceived decision can prove worthless without effective implementation. To put it another way, a satisfying outcome is unlikely in the absence of effective action in the implementation and the follow-up and control phases of the decision-making process.
REFERENCE
1. Slocum, Hellriegel. (1996) Management. 7th edition. South-Western College
Publishing.
2. Griffin, Barney. (1992) The management of Organizations(Strategy, Structure,
Behavior). Houghton Mifflin Company.
3. Plunkett, W. Richard; Attner, Raymond F. (1994) Introduction to management. 5th
edition. Belmont, Calif. : Wadsworth.
4. Bateman, Thomas S. Snell, Scot. (2003) Management :new competitive
landscape. 6th edition. Boston, Mass. : McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
5. Lewis, Pamela S. Goodman, Stephen H. Fandt, Patricia M. (2003) Management
:for tomorrow's leaders. 4th edition. Mason, Ohio :Thomson/South-Western.
6. Lee David. Newman Philip. Price Robert. (1999) Decision Making: In
Organizations. Fiancial Times Pitman Publishing.
7. Harrison E. Frank. (1999) The Managerial Decision-Making Process. 5th edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company.
8. Robbins Stephen P, Coulter Marry. (2003) Management. 7th edition. Prentice Hall.
9. Chan Silvester. (2002) Management Practice. 3rd edition. Thames.
On balance, it is far from certain that Eurodisney will emerge from the 1990s as a financial robust theme park. Further, it seems even less likely that Eurodisney will ever achieve the 20 percent return on shareholder's equity that the Walt Disney Company has come to regard as its norm.
4. Conclusion
Disney's primary objective in the Eurodisney case was to continue its substantial rate of financial growth through an international expansion of its theme parks. Given Disney's considerable internal strengths, this objective was eminently attainable. Disney's objective was compromised to some degree in that the decision-making process used by Disney was not completely open. Disney's decision makers accepted only part of the constraints of bounded rationality. time and cost constraints were observed, imperfect information was disregarded, cognitive limitations were acknowledged, and only the economic aspects of the external environment were considered. This reduction of the decision-making process from completely open to partially open tended to diminish the attainability of an otherwise easily attainable objective.
Given that the decision making process in this case was only partially open, Disney proceed to make the right choice in the right way up to the point of implementation. In the implementation phase, the decision-making process comes to a halt. This diminution in the overall decision-making process is serious because converting the choice into action is a major element in the process. In fact, a brilliantly conceived decision can prove worthless without effective implementation. To put it another way, a satisfying outcome is unlikely in the absence of effective action in the implementation and the follow-up and control phases of the decision-making process.
REFERENCE
1. Slocum, Hellriegel. (1996) Management. 7th edition. South-Western College
Publishing.
2. Griffin, Barney. (1992) The management of Organizations(Strategy, Structure,
Behavior). Houghton Mifflin Company.
3. Plunkett, W. Richard; Attner, Raymond F. (1994) Introduction to management. 5th
edition. Belmont, Calif. : Wadsworth.
4. Bateman, Thomas S. Snell, Scot. (2003) Management :new competitive
landscape. 6th edition. Boston, Mass. : McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
5. Lewis, Pamela S. Goodman, Stephen H. Fandt, Patricia M. (2003) Management
:for tomorrow's leaders. 4th edition. Mason, Ohio :Thomson/South-Western.
6. Lee David. Newman Philip. Price Robert. (1999) Decision Making: In
Organizations. Fiancial Times Pitman Publishing.
7. Harrison E. Frank. (1999) The Managerial Decision-Making Process. 5th edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company.
8. Robbins Stephen P, Coulter Marry. (2003) Management. 7th edition. Prentice Hall.
9. Chan Silvester. (2002) Management Practice. 3rd edition. Thames.
소개글