Friday, September 20, 2013

Rethinking : Discretion versus Decision-making

(refer previous blog: Difference between Discretion and Decision-making)

On a re-thinking about Discretion -Versus- Decision-making, Discretion is something which allows space for person taste of the leader to play bigger role in the proceeding. In dictionary, Discretion is described as "Good Judgments". However , in management/administrative theories the area of interest of 'Good Judgements' grows outward to enquire the "how?" , the methodology of making a 'Good Judgements'. Management/administrative theories therefore proceed to create distinctions between Decision-making and Discretion. Discretion, here, is differed by a factor of 'personal taste' from Decision-making. Decision-making is about picking the best choice from various options being explored; Discretion is about acting solely by 'Personal Taste'. Therefore the term 'Discretionary Power' stands separate from the ordinary power of decision-making which is an elementary ingredient of every executive machinery.
'Discretionary Powers' now stand to define an unchallenged, immunized from investigation, power to act purely by 'personal taste' , ofcourse presumably as 'good Judgement' in the interest of the organisation. However the exercise of Discretionary Power absolves the person from the gains or loss suffered in consequences of the exercise of this power. The clear purpose of this power is to expedite the action if it is required to be taken urgently and in limited, insufficient information climate. It is expected that the exercise of this power will be meant to prevent the following of a decision which is very deeply immersed in doubts. It is hoped that Discretionary Power will not be meant to adopt another course of action which has not yet been evaluated.
Therefore, Discretionary Power, in a balance understanding, should reserve itself to a decision of "to proceed , or to not to proceed" with the likely emerging choice. This will minimize the consequences of damage which could have been suffered in the following of that decision, Without aggravating the damage cost by putting the organisation on higher damages route which has not been evaluated.