A directive decision-maker typically works out the pros and cons of a situation based on what they already know. Directive decision-makers are very rational and have a low tolerance for ambiguity. Their decisions are rooted in their own knowledge, experience, and rationale, rather than going to others for more information. The upside to this style is that decision-making is quick, ownership is clear, and it doesn’t require extra communication. However, directive decisions can sometimes be made impulsively, without all the necessary information.
Analytic decision-makers examine much information before taking action. For example, analytic leaders rely on direct observation, data, and facts to support their decisions. However, unlike directive decision-makers, an analytic decision-maker will seek information and advice from others to confirm or deny their own knowledge. These decision-makers have a high tolerance for ambiguity and are very adaptable, but they like to control most aspects of the decision process. This style is a well-rounded approach to decision-making but can be time-consuming.
The conceptual decision-making style takes a more social approach compared to the directive or analytic methods. Conceptual decision-makers encourage creative thinking and collaboration and consider a broad array of perspectives. These decision-makers are achievement-oriented and like to think far into the future when making important decisions.
Behavioural decision-makers try to make sure everyone works well together. Like the conceptual style, behavioural decision-making is group-oriented; however, rather than brainstorming potential solutions, the group is given the options available to them. From there, the group discusses the pros and cons of each choice. This style of decision-making considers many different outlooks and opinions in the process.