Decision making has long been seen as a central managerial activity. At the centre of this activity is the problem of choosing a course of action under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. A number of different strategies for making a choice are outlined. Underlying these strategies is a dualism between programmed, routine decisions which, given intendedly rational decision makers, would use a computational strategy, and unprogrammed, non-routine decisions which would use an iterative process involving interaction and mutual adjustment between decision makers.

Decision making takes place within an organizational context, setting a timeframe for the definition of problems, solutions and participants. Within this timeframe preceding decisions have already set constraints for choices made in the present which will, in turn, affect succeeding decisions. Concurrent decisions also compete for the attention of decision makers.

Coping with uncertainty forms the nub of decision making. Without uncertainty as to which course of action to take there would be no decision to be made. The dominant paradigm of organizational decision making assumes that decision makers are intendedly rational but that rationality is 'bounded' by lack of knowledge about preferences and any associated instrumentalitites.

Uncertainty involves the interpretation of problems and possible solutions through an interplay between a number of psychological and sociological processes. Psychological approaches to decision making tend to emphasize the inherent biases resulting from information assymetry and framing effects. Sociological approaches tend to be more descriptive and to emphasize the use of power and the interplay between different interests.

Much of the empirical research into organizational decision making has been concerned with finding patterns between variables that attempt to describe the processes found in real-life situations. This research, more by implication than by empirical measurement, has been concerned with discovering appropriate decision patterns for particular situations and types of decision. The general conclusion is that what has been called a 'sporadic' or 'muddling through' process is effective under conditions of high uncertainty while the more orderly 'constricted' process is appropriate for routine, relatively clear-cut decisions. In this respect, the general well- established thesis of the distinction between routine and non-routine decision making is supported.

There is increasing interest in finding linkages between decision- making processes and aspects of the general organizational culture and institutional framework within which an organization exists. According to this approach managerial decision making is seen as being severely constrained both by the cultural limitations upon the way in which problems and solutions are defined and by the external institutional forces acting on an organization, requiring it to demonstrate its worthiness for support through adopting certain structures and procedures.

Richard Butler