Identifying Decision-Making Styles & Components of Succession Planning Capabilities and Examine Their Relationship Case Study: Managers of Pars Special Economic Energy Zone (PSEEZ) Organization

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Phd Candidate, Department of Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Instructor, Deputy of Research and Technology, Lamerd Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lamard, Iran

10.22050/pbr.2019.118620

Abstract

This research identifies decision-making styles and components of succession planning and examines their relationship.The statistical population (190 people) in the present survey research consists of Pars Special Economic Energy Zone (PSEEZ) Organization managers who were assessed using the Census Method. Scott and Bruce’s general decision-making questionnaire and Kim’s succession planning questionnaire were used with a response rate of 90%.
Data was analyzed with the SPSS and Smart Planning softwares. In analyzing the obtained results, the dominant decision-making style is rational, followed respectively by the intuitive, dependent, avoidant, and spontaneous decision-making styles. By investigating succession planning capabilities, the results of the research showed that among items in the succession planning system, candidate evaluation ranked first, followed by policy setting, system evaluation, and candidate development respectively as the priorities of the statistical population. The research hypothesis based on a significant relationship between the decision-making styles and organizational succession planning capabilities was confirmed. In order to improve its human resources and bridge the gap with global standards, it is therefore proposed that the senior management of the organization take serious steps to implement the succession planning program. It is also recommended that other esteemed researchers carry out the present research again after the implementation of the succession planning program in the studied organization and compare the results before and after the implementation of the program.

Keywords