Workshop Two, Case Study Analysis In review and analysis of the Case Study, Decision Making at the Top: The All Star Sports Catalog Division, (Hellings, 2007) the decision making process could use some improvement. Environment, precedent, personalities, subject matter and leadership styles have both an overall and a situational impact on the decision making process. Stephen Robbins in the 2005 edition of Essentials of Organizational Behavior lays out a six-step rational decision making model which he proclaims to be ideal. Robbins model is as follows: 1. Define the problem; 2. Identify decision criteria; 3. Weight the criteria; 4. Generate alternatives; 5. Rate each alternative on each criterion; and 6. Compute the optimal decision. (Robbins, 2005) In my opinion this model and theory that he proclaims ideal may be valid. My experience is that in real-life, in business, these steps are not always practical and possible. This model assumes each person is available and comfortable to speak freely and has the opportunity to do so, when it comes to the generation of alternatives. The decision making process at All Star Sports as described is heavily embedded in analytical analysis. This model is very good for decisions with financial impact. There are some decisions however, that are not number-based. Ironically, an example is a decision about ‘are we using a good decision making process’. The amount of people at the table is a weakness of their process. Extroverts often dominate the conversation and introverts may not be comfortable speaking out. Especially when Barrett immediately and consistently moves confrontational conversations off-line. In general I believe that staff feel the decision-making process to be fair. It is certainly consistent with previous practice and dependable. By dependable, I mean that being that staff know what the