Trending Models of Managerial Decision-Making: From Ideal to Gender-Oriented
Abstract
This article presents a critical analysis of the evolution of managerial decision-making models in the public sector within the context of contemporary transformations: technological revolution, demographic changes in Ukraine’s civil service, and wartime challenges. The study traces the theoretical trajectory from Weber’s classical rational model to modern adaptive and hybrid models, including Simon’s bounded rationality model, Lindblom’s incremental model, Etzioni’s mixed-scanning model, Cohen-March-Olsen’s garbage can model, and the coalition model. A comparative analysis of models is conducted based on epistemological foundations, key assumptions about decision-makers, critical limitations, and optimal application domains. Particular attention is paid to analysing contemporary models utilizing artificial intelligence and adaptive approaches within Bauman’s concept of “liquid modernity.” The author proposes a gender-oriented decision-making model that accounts for the influence of socially constructed behavioural patterns on managerial practices. The model comprises eight cycles: emotional reaction, problem definition, goal formation, alternative generation, decision selection, implementation, monitoring, and reflection. The methodological limitations of the proposed model are critically analysed, including risks of essentializing gender differences and the problem of within-group variability. The study demonstrates that under conditions of martial law and personnel transformations in Ukraine’s civil service (reduction of 50,000 employees, 75% female dominance in positions), a hybrid approach integrating elements of various models depending on specific managerial situations is optimal. Prospects for empirical verification of hybrid model effectiveness and development of methodology for assessing the correspondence between decision-making models and specific managerial challenges are identified.
Downloads
References
Andriyash, V., & Hromadska, N. (2020). Effectiveness of public administration decision-making: Features of using political analysis. Public Administration and Regional Development, 8, 445–470. https://doi.org/10.34132/PARD2020.08.05 [in Ukrainian].
Bovsunivska, I.V., & Nesterenko, H.P. (2025). Artificial intelligence in public administration: Opportunities and challenges in managerial decision-making. Law and Public Administration, 1, 139–145. https://doi.org/10.32782/pdu.2025.1.19 [in Ukrainian].
Brodskyi, Yu.B., & Kovbasiuk, S.V. (2024). Cybernetic model of regional situational center. Technical Engineering, 2, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.26642/ten-2024-2(94)-81-89 [in Ukrainian].
Dashboard on the quantitative composition of civil servants in Ukraine. (n.d.). URL: https://nads.gov.ua/test?v=66de8f59549ff [in Ukrainian].
Zaporozhets, T.V. (2020). Application of intelligent technologies and artificial intelligence systems to support managerial decision-making. Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky TNU. Series: Public Management and Administration, 31(70)(2), 79–85. https://doi.org/10.32838/2663-6468/2020.2/13 [in Ukrainian].
Kravchenko, M., & Holiuk, V. (2022). Managerial decision-making: Essence and modern development trends. Economy and Society, 40. https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2022-40-37 [in Ukrainian].
Maier, Yu.V. (2023). Psychological features of the role position of modern women. Extended abstract of candidate’s thesis. Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University. URL: https://elibrary.kdpu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/8501 [in Ukrainian].
Markovych, I.B. (2022). Decision-making models in economic processes and public administration. Electronic Scientific Publication «Public Administration and National Security», 5.
https://doi.org/10.25313/2617-572X-2022-5-8134 [in Ukrainian].
OECD. (2024). SIGMA monitoring reports. Public administration in Ukraine. Assessment of compliance with the Principles of Public Administration (December 2023). URL: https://surli.cc/nwwfnk [in Ukrainian].
Mraka, N.M., Pitsykevych, V.V., Hnatyshyn, B.O., Kochin, I.S., Mykhailov, T.S., Lenko, N.V., & Bezzubyi, O.V. (2024). Psychological factors of managerial decision-making under stress. Academic Visions, 30. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12516821 [in Ukrainian].
Nesterenko, H.P., & Boiko, V.V. (2024). The use of AI in decision-making in public administration and responsibility for them. Scientific Notes of V.I. Vernadsky TNU. Series: Public Management and Administration, 35(74)(6), 54–59. https://doi.org/10.32782/TNU-2663-6468/2024.6/10 [in Ukrainian].
Ovdiiuk, O.M. (2019). The influence of schools of administrative management, human relations and behaviorism on the formation of management decision theory. Effective Economy, 4. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105-2019.4.51 [in Ukrainian].
Parii, L.V., & Kubrak, A.O. (2023). Making managerial decisions at the enterprise. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod National University: Series: International Economic Relations and World Economy, 47, 75–79. https://doi.org/10.32782/2413-9971/2023-47-13
[in Ukrainian].
Prykhodkina, N.O. (2010). Gender as a social status of women-leaders in education.
Theory and Methods of Education Management, 4, 1–11. URL: https://surl.li/yyflgy [in Ukrainian].
Salnyk, S.V., & Sydorkin, P.H. (2024). Application of decision support tools in mobile radio network management systems. Science and Technology of the Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, 3, 68–74. https://doi.org/10.30748/nitps.2024.56.02 [in Ukrainian].
Statistical data on the quantitative composition of civil servants. (n.d.). URL: https://surl.li/hjxmoo [in Ukrainian].
Shulha, O. (2022). Methodological principles of managerial decision-making. Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 22, 54–58. https://doi.org/10.37320/2415-3583/22.9 [in Ukrainian].
Audia, P.G., & Brion, S. (2023). A Carnegie plus Self-enhancement (CSE) model of organizational decision making under ambiguity. Research in Organizational Behavior, 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2023.100194
Bauman, Z. (2012). Liquid modernity. Polity Press. URL: https://surl.li/ctubrh
Buchanan, J. (1973). Public choice and public policy. AgEcon Search, 131–136. URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/17815?v=pdf
Buškevičiūtė, J., & Raipa, A. (2010). Modern decision-making in the public sector. Public Policy and Administration, 34(1), 21–31. URL: https://ojs.mruni.eu/ojs/public-policy-and-administration/article/view/1119
Cohen, M.D., March, J.G., & Olsen, J. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392088
Cyert, R.M., & March, J.G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. URL: https://surl.li/habyar
Dziundziuk, V., Dziundziuk, B., Karamyshev, D., Krutii, O., & Sobol, R. (2024). Artificial intelligence-based decision-making in public administration. Public Policy and Administration, 23(4), 421–440. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-24-23-4-01
Etzioni, A. (1967). Mixed-scanning: A «third» approach to decision-making. Public Administration Review, 27(5), 385–392. URL: https://www.uv.es/sasece/docum2015/mixed%20scanning.pdf
Fox, J., Cooper, R.P., & Glasspool, D.W. (2013). A canonical theory of dynamic decision-making. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00150
Gernreich, C., & Exner, C. (2015). A comparison of the influence of gender on managerial decision making. URL: https://surl.li/urrqes
Goniukova, L., & Surzhyk, M. (2022). Models and methods of public administrative decision-making. Public Administration and Regional Development, (18), 1266–1280. https://doi.org/10.34132/pard2022.18.14
Lenine, E. (2020). Modelling coalitions: From concept formation to tailoring empirical explanations. Games, 11(4), 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/g11040055
Lindblom, C. (1959). The science of «muddling through». Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88. URL: https://surl.li/hthwpi
Lomi, A., & Harrison, J. (2012). The garbage can model of organizational choice: Looking forward at forty. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 36. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X(2012)36
Profeta, P. (2017). Gender equality in decision-making positions: The efficiency gains.
The Economic Costs of Gender Inequality in Europe, 52(1), 34–37. URL: https://surl.lu/qwdllt
Simon, H. (1994). Administrative behavior: How organizations can be understood in terms of decision processes. Computer Science. URL: https://jespersimonsen.dk/Downloads/Simon-introduction.pdf
Teisman, G. (n.d.). (2000). Models for research into decision-making processes:
On phases, streams and decision-making rounds. Public Administration, 78 (4), 937–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00238
