Analysis of the secondary data

The secondary data gave a different perspective to the strategic decision-making and the sub-unit participation than the primary data collection. As the consulting companies created the secondary data, all the article sources, 1, 2 and 3, offered similar results with similar aspirations. All the sources aimed to improve the strategic decision-making and emphasise its importance for its financial results. The article sources mainly discussed the topic on a general level using some practical examples from some MNEs. However, the case company was not mentioned in any of the articles.

46

All three sources emphasised understanding the nature of strategic decision-making and categorizing different types of strategic decisions. Article 1 presented four categories for the strategic decisions. First is “big-bet decisions”, which are infrequent and high-risk, usually shaping the company's future, such as mergers and acquisitions. The second category is cross-cutting decisions that are more frequent and high-risk decision which require more collaboration. The third category is delegated decisions which are frequent and low risk. The last one is ad hoc decisions which are infrequent and with low risks. Ad hoc decisions are not usually considered strategic decisions. Article 2 pointed out that the need for different types of decisions varies: there are “must make” decisions and the decisions that the organisation does not necessarily need.

Article 3 followed a similar pattern and categorised the decisions as either “big, one-off decisions that individuals have a significant impact” and as “small routine decisions that cumulatively have a significant impact. To conclude, all three sources recommended first categorise the decisions by nature and relevancy and then moved forward the decision-making process.

Big Bet Decisions

• Infrequent

• High-risk

Cross-cutting decisions

• Somewhat frequent

• High-risk Ad-hoc decisions

• Infrequent

• Low-risk

Delegated decisions

• Frequent

• Low-risk Table 3: The different types of decisions (paraphrasing De Smet et al. 2017).

The other important aspect that all the secondary data sources emphasised was to define who are the decision-makers. These sources agreed with the primary data participants in that that the corporation should make significant corporate-wide decisions, more precisely c-suite: executive team and the board. The secondary data also indicates similarly that some decisions. Should be delegated for other levels of the organisation – just as the case company is already doing. Article two presented the idea of the RACI framework, which comes from the words responsible, accountable, consulted, and informed, to reflect different parties of the decision-making process.

In the primary data collection, the participants often emphasised that the decisions are made by the stakeholders responsible for the profit and loss, which reflect the principles of being responsible and accountable. As was mentioned in the primary data collection, many strategic decisions require

47

discussions with other stakeholders to support the decision-making. Also, the primary data collection participants mentioned widely that relevant stakeholders know well the decision results before the decision is published, which also follows the informed aspect of the framework. Article 3 also emphasised that the persons or groups responsible for certain aspects of the business should have the right to make the decisions. Article 3 added that the responsibilities should also be well-defined to clarify the decision-making responsibility. Article 1 followed the same pattern in the decision-makers. The authors pointed out that even if the decisions should be delegated, sometimes in the organisations, the former decision-makers such as directors can be reluctant to give the right to decide for others. Another perspective about the delegated decisions presented was using data and algorithms in the decision-making, at least as support but even using artificial intelligence to make the decisions.

The last common aspect that the secondary data sources had was to clear, test and define the organisational dimension of the decision-making. They discussed that the companies should ensure that the decision-making organisation is clear, there are not overlapping rights and that all the individuals know their responsibilities regarding the decision-making. In addition, all three sources mentioned that many decisions can be made, should be made and are made in the groups when the responsibility is divided. When defining the decision-making process, another important aspect is to clarify where or to whom to escalate the decision-making responsibility if there are disagreement or something unexpected.

Few things can be pointed out when reflecting the results of the secondary data analysis. It seems that the case company is already handling the decision-making on the commonly recommended way of the secondary data. Corporate management makes the most crucial decisions. Nevertheless, the other ones are delegated to others. The participants of the primary data collection also mentioned widely different decision types. The responsibilities were emphasised in both. In the case company, the organisation as a whole seems to understand who the actual decision-makers are and how the decisions are made. The secondary data sources are mainly created in the American environment, which may influence the results. As discussed before, the traditional organisational culture of the Nordic countries is relatively autonomous and based on trust, and the hierarchy is relatively low. The participants in the primary data collection described the organisation to be very independent and trusting, which may explain the state of the

decision-48

making compared to the secondary data. Another critical perspective to raise from the secondary data is the source of the data. As the articles are published by consulting companies, it is important to notice their motive for the data, such as promoting their services. It can explain the form of the articles that focused on categorising the decisions and different steps to fix the organisation in a relatively general level, instead of evaluating the reasons of the current state or acknowledging its benefits. Each of the three sources had the mindset that the decision-making process should be changed, even if, for example, in the case company, participants were somewhat satisfied with the decisions. However, as discussed above, primary and secondary data agreed on the nature of the strategic decision, the delegation of decision-making and the connection between responsibility and decision-making rights.