Report: Critique of Centralized Decision-Making and its Implications

This report offers a critical analysis of centralized decision-making within organizational structures. It begins by defining centralized decision-making and its implications, such as delays in work processes and potential lack of employee motivation and feelings of self-worth. The report highlights the disadvantages associated with this approach, including reduced employee involvement and potential for decreased service quality. It contrasts centralized decision-making with theories like McGregor's Theory Y, Herzberg's dual-factor theory, and Expectancy theory to illustrate the importance of employee involvement and motivation. By referencing these theories, the report suggests that empowering employees and allowing them to participate in decision-making can lead to enhanced service delivery and improved organizational outcomes. The report concludes by emphasizing the need to consider employee motivation and engagement when implementing decision-making processes within an organization.

Critique of Centralized Decision-Making 1
CRITIQUE OF CENTRALIZED DECISION-MAKING
Student’s Name
Course
Professor
Institution
Date

Critique of Centralized Decision-Making 2
Critique of Centralized Decision-Making
A centralized organization is said to hold a hierarchy decision-making structure where
every process and decision is handled by those at the top (Lima, Moreira and Verdier 2017,
p.324). Employees and managers in a lower chain of command are not consulted and can rarely
make nor implement decisions needed to stir up the proceedings of an organization. In this type
of organization, decisions regarding everyday processes and operations are also made by higher
level executives! Policies are enacted to see to it that others in the company follow the
executives’ directions.
Centralization brings about delay in work in the event that records have to be transmitted
to and from the central control room for approval. Delay in performance renders delivery of
hospitality services amiss thus poor attendance to customers. Employees develop slackness in
their service delivery as executives lack time to supervise and monitor their progress due to
heavy work pressure. There exists a lack of loyalty to work by subordinates since they are treated
like machines; working on tasks as designated without question (Certo 2018). An atmosphere of
secrecy is null as decisions and orders flow from one point and are ushered to everyone. In
centralisation, special attention is not given to any special work since all tasks are attended to at
one place.
McGregor’s Y theory postulates that individuals can deliver more in their jobs if they
work out of commitment rather than coercion. On the other hand, Herzberg’s dual-factor theory
suggests that motivator factors are intrinsic thus administered by employees, e.g., responsibility
(Alshmemri, Shahwan-Akl and Maude 2017). Entrusting an employee on simple decisions
motivates them in delivery of hospitable services. Moreover, the Expectancy theory argues that

Critique of Centralized Decision-Making 3
an employee will only deliver only if he/she is well motivated in handling a certain task (Purvis,
Zagenczyk and McCray 2015, p.7). Involvement of employees and other subordinates in
decision-making motivates them to their obligations by enacting a feeling of self-worth within
them in the organization’s processes.

Critique of Centralized Decision-Making 4
References
Alshmemri, M., Shahwan-Akl, L. and Maude, P., 2017. Herzberg’s two-factor theory. Life
Science Journal, 14(5).
Certo, S.C., 2018. Supervision: Concepts and skill-building. McGraw-Hill Education.
Lima, R.C., Moreira, H. and Verdier, T., 2017. Centralized decision making and informed
lobbying. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 9(4), pp.324-55.
Purvis, R.L., Zagenczyk, T.J. and McCray, G.E., 2015. What's in it for me? Using expectancy
theory and climate to explain stakeholder participation, its direction and
intensity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), pp.3-14.