Too Many Majors

The enrolment focal point Committee and the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee were asked to investigate the over readjustment issue and to consider avenues for handling the preponderance of communication majors by the chairperson of the communication department, Chelsea McGuire. Each committee dedicated clipping, effort and null in their sm all(prenominal) groups to light up with firmnesss for this problem. I would characterize the decision-making carriage of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC) as a rational decision-making course when considering the enrollment management problem.They began their research with formulation (researched enrollment management systems round campus),then moved to concept development (set a goal to determine the optimum system for stemming the flow of majors into the communication department), and then detailing (conducted a systematic survey of all separate campus departments to determine if they had also experience problems with over en rollment in recent years), followed by evaluation(inquired about plans and effectiveness, comp bed characteristics of other campus departments with relevant attributes in considering any other options) and finally, implementation (coming up with iii optimal solutions for Communications department to consider).The Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC) utilize an a priori decision- making title when considering the enrollment management problem. They based their solution on past experiences in similar contexts- what has worked in the past. This oddball of decision-making style is very analogical. Before reading this scenario, I thought for sure that intuitive decision making style was something that would be more effective in a real-life situation. After further reading and thinking, I find that the Enrollment Management Committee has come up with some great solutions and I do non think they should be dismissed. Sometimes, its difficult to tonicity inward and realize the pro blem might be that your program is to a fault easy and thats why students are choosing it.I would choose any of the solutions precondition by the EMC. I think that if Chelsea McGuire retains her typical participative decision-making style during the upcoming capacity concourse, she will not walk out with a definitive solution. This type of problem, as we see from the response letters, can have many solutions that are subjective. Although I do not believe the UCC to be incorrect in their findings, I do think that some people and groups are not as comfortable with neuter. A well respected member of the UCC that has held her bearing for thirty years might not see an issue, but that does not mean there is not an issue. The faculty should not looking at overwhelmed.If the staff is overwhelmed, how can they perform their best and give each student the guidance and attention they deserve? If there are no budget constraints, some other option might be to hire additional faculty. T he advantage to victimisation participative decision-making is that every whizz odors included and motivated. There is a possibility that people will come together and agree on a solution for the greater good. The damage to this kind of style is that you may risk the lack of motivation when one group did not win the solution. It would be difficult to feel that the energy, time and effort going into finding the best solution did not suffer off. I think it would be helpful for Chelsea to use the Cognitive manakin of PDM.Using this model would allow the faculty to see the possible decisions provided by the EMC and UCC (allowing all faculty to feel the participation and also giving acknowledgement and reference work to each team for their efforts), and allowing an open discussion forum for faculty to let loose about what they think would be the best solution, and then voting. This allows for all voices to feel heard and will hopefully involve less disappointment when a solution h as been decided. The communication behaviors I would watch for in the upcoming meeting to assess whether an effective decision-making process is being used would be the train of participation and dialogue.If the majority of the faculty seems engaged in the decision making, I would consider the choice of decision-making style a success. Although I might feel that the most effective solution involves change, if the faculty and staff participating in the faculty meeting come together and support the no change solution, I would determine a solution based on the group. A bona fide group perspective on the way the group is embedded in organizational structures (e. g. , the department, the university, professional (institutions) might influence my assessment of the situation in a positive way. It is important for a group to feel maven because a unified group builds an internal strength and motivation.