Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Presented by: Selcuk NAS,
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
The Aim of Study
The aim of this study is determine the factors
affecting the individual decision making processes
of the ship masters in the shipboard operations.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Ship Masters’
Individual Decision
Making Process
Making
Process
Research Process
1. Literature Review (Decision Making and DM Styles)
2. Methodology
a. Qualitative Data Collection
i. Focus Group
ii. Content Analysis
iii. Developing Variables
b. Quantitative Data Collection
3. Findings
4. Results
5. Conclusions
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
The Role of Ship Master
Ship masters have a significant role in the internationally
dynamic structure of the shipping industry.
Ship masters are in such a powerful position that any
decisions they make with respect to their profession are
able to directly affect not only the shipping companies
they work for but also the whole shipping industry to a
considerable extent.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
Decision Making
Decision making is defined as choosing behavior (Connor and
Becker 2003).
Decision making is generally defined as making a choice
among a number of alternatives (Rollinson, 2002).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
Decision Making Style
During any decision making processes; decision makers
develop certain habits likely to be affected by various
internal and external factors. Such habits form the decision
maker’s decision-making style.
Decision making style could be defined as the “learning habits
of decision making” (Driver, et al, 1990;3).
Decision making style can help understand the processes
managers use while making decisions (Nutt, 1990; 174).
Individual's decision making style is his/her natural, habitual
approach affecting a choice and then acting on that choice
(Conner and Becker, 2003).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
Individual Decision Making Process
Noone (2002) states that, decision making occurs within a
complex, multidimensional, situation-specific context. This
context has both personal and environmental components
to affect decision making processes.
Environmental components are:
“temporal nature of situation”
“stress of decision”
“resources (economic and social supports)”
“culture”
“social norms”
“experiences and influences of others”
Personal components are:
“past experience with treatment”
“personal preferences”
“values”
“self-esteem”
“framing of event”
“pattern of decision making”
“use heuristic”
“physical abilities”
“locus of control”
“role preference”
“personality traits”
“age”
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Activites
Literature Review
Throughout the research model,
individual decision making is
displayed in eight different
stages. The model also exhibits
the activities included in each
stage as well as their
interrelationship.
Individual Decision Making Style
Individual Decision Making
Process
1
Defining a problem
or a challenge
requiring a decision
making
2
Evaluating task and
its requirements
3
Researching for
proper alternatives
4
Determining
strategy
5
Acquiring
information and
evaluating
alternatives
6
Putting strategy into
practice and
choosing
7
Practicing chosen
alternatives
8
Outcomes of the
decision
INDIVIDUAL DECISION MAKING PROCESS
Stages
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
The Factors Effecting Individual Decision Making Process
As for the other factors affecting individual decision making
processes, Rollinson (2002) points out;
organizational factors such as culture,climate and policies.
the individual-related factors are highlighted under such
topics as personality, perception, risk taking behavior,
ethics and values.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
The Factors Effecting Individual Decision Making Process
Besides, it is pointed out that the decision structure is also
important and that the time pressure of the decision as well as
any uncertainty is likely to affect the decision making process.
Cecil and Lundgren (1978) think that the probability pressure also
affect decision making processes.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
Decision Making Models
The literature review on decision making models reveals that a variety of
disciplines are involved in developing such models. Some of the
models appearing in the literature are;
• “Expanded Four-Force Model” developed by Rowe and Boulgarides
(2004)
• “Decision Making Model” developed by Driver at al (1990),
• “Organizational Decision Making Models” developed by Nutt (1976)
and
• “Inter-disciplinary Decision Making Model” developed by Harrison
(1993).
It is believed that an “integrated decision making model” covering and
representing all these models and approaches is to be formed. To do
this, a serious of integrated decision making models covering the
variables of all the models mentioned has been prepared, and the
series has been tested both qualitatively and quantitatively.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
The Studies on Decision Making Process
Consumers’ decision making behaviors were studied by Sprogles
and Kendall (1986), Harfrom-Chae (1992) etc.
Arroba (1978) made research on managers and employees at
industrial plants.
Janis and Mann (1977) practice research the field of education.
The decision making styles developed by Driver and friends (1990;
279) have successfully been practiced with such industries as
education, airways, real estates, international trade, computers,
energy and defense.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Literature Review
The Studies on Decision Making Process
The style developed by Rowe and Boulgarides (1992; 45) has
been applied with such sectors as education and banking.
Besides, this approach has also been practiced by Bowman
(1992) with medical center management, and by Connor and
Becker (2003) with state managers.
Scott and Bruce’s approach (1993) has been practiced with male
officers.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Decision Making Environment of Ship Masters
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Qualitative data collection (Focus Group)
The first stage of the research, qualitative data collection method
was implemented to determine the factors affecting the ship
masters’ individual decision making processes practiced in
shipboard operation.
Within the focus group study, a group was formed from the staff
of the factors with whom ship masters are interrelated and
which form the ship masters’ organizational environment.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Qualitative data collection (Focus Group)
In this study, the numbers of the members of the focus group
was decided to be 11, considering those who would affect the
ship masters’ decisions most. As a consequence, the group
was formed with such members as;
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ship masters,
flag state officer,
P&I surveyor,
ship manager (bulk),
ship manager (passenger),
operation director (container),
general director (tanker),
class surveyor,
maritime lawyer.
Numbers of focus group
member, should be 10-12
according to Kinnear and Taylor
(1996; 310) and Malhotra
(2004; 140), 8-10 according to
Sekeran (2003; 220) and 10
according to Nakip (2003; 71).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Qualitative data collection (Content Analysis and Variables)
As an overall result of the analysis made on the data gained from
the focus group study, 60 variables that would be affective on
ship masters’ individual decision making processes were reached.
The model studies available in the literature, those of
Rowe and Boulgarides (1994)
Driver et al (1990)
Simon (1976)
Nutt (1979)
Schermerhorn (1989)
helped a lot, while forming the questions to be used with the
focus group study. And their models were of great help in
determining the variables.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection
During the second stage, the variables determined at the
previous stage, were used to form a questionnaire which
served as a data collecting instrument.
The questionnaire was conducted through the ship masters who
were operating ships at the time of the research
implementation.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection
Concerning the analysis of the shipmasters’ individual making
processes two different parts were prepared,
the first part aimed to evaluate the factors objectively.
the second part of variables aimed to evaluate subjectively
their own decision making processes.
and also were prepared profiles variables of the ship masters
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection (Questionnaire)
Finally, developed (included 3 pilot studies) the questionnaire
aiming to find out how often such variables are likely to affect
the ship masters’ individual decision making processes.
The first part of questionnaire has 28 variables and the second
part have 40 variables. For evaluation 5-point Likert scale was
used (1: Never, 2: Rarely, 3: Sometimes, 4, Very Often, 5:
Always).
Moreover, 18 profile questions of ship masters were developed.
24 variables of “Evaluation of ISM Code Practices by The Ship
Masters” were developed considering the ship management
literature.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection (Data Collection Fields)
Following determining the 25 fields where the questionnaire
would be conducted, a coordinator was assigned for each field.
During field study a total of 1325 questionnaires were sent to the
fields, 577 of which were issued in Turkish language and 748
in English language.
Along with the field coordinators, 120 volunteers contributed to
the task of the questionnaire conduction. These volunteers
were consisted of harbor pilots and port managers.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection (Data Collection Fields)
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Methodology
Quantitative data collection (Sampling)
The basic participants of this research comprise “the ship
masters who were at the time of the questionnaire study,
actively conducting the ship operation”
“non-probability sampling” method (Kinnear and Taylor, 1996;
411, Sekeran, 2003; 276) was chosen. The reason for this
choice is that the mass is not constant, spread all over the
world, and the masters could be reached only when they were
at ports.
Research conducted on July 22, 2005 through September 15
2005, the number was limited with 386 in order to reach the
sample size for statistical analysis. 358 of questionnaire were
accepted for statistical analysis.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
Data processing is maintained by the SPSS (Statistical Package
for the Social Sciences) Program.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
H1 :
The mean of ages of shipmasters differs meaningfully difference in
terms of the nationality groups
[F(3-322)=4,921, p<0,002]
Hypothesis is excepted
The mean of ages of “Turkish” shipmasters = 43,98
The mean of ages of “West European Countries” shipmaster = 48,48
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
H3 :
The mean of company experience of shipmasters differs meaningfully
within the nationality group
[F(3-309)=1,756, p<0,000]
Hypothesis is excepted
Company experience of “Turkish” shipmasters = 4,10 years
Company experience of“West European Countries” shipmaster = 9,00 years
Company experience of “Far East Countries” shipmasters = 9,59 years
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
H4 :
The mean of annual sea service periods of shipmasters differs
meaningfully within the nationality groups.
[(3-284)=19,654, p<0,000]
Hypothesis is excepted
Annual sea service periods of “Turkish” shipmasters
8,63 month
Annual sea service periods of “West European Countries” shipmaster
7,41 month
Annual sea service periods of “East Europe and the former East Block Countries”
shipmasters
6,85 years
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
H5 :
The scales of the company with whom the shipmasters work
differs meaningfully within the nationality groups
[F(3-304)=19,654, p<0,000 ]
Hypothesis is excepted
The scales of the company with whom the “Turkish” shipmasters work
Medium scale (# 8,76 ships)
The scales of the company with whom the “West European Countries” shipmasters work
Big scale (# 62,65 ships)
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings
H19:
The mean of company experience of shipmasters differs
meaningfully within the type of the ships group
[F(3-289)=8,932, p<0,000]
Hypothesis is excepted
The company experience of shipmasters who work on the board of “general cargo ships”
4,12 years
The company experience of shipmasters who work on the board of “container ships”
5,14 years
The company experience of shipmasters who work on the board of “tankers”
8,46 years
The company experience of shipmasters who work on the board of “bulk carriers”
9,36 years
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Findings on DM Variables
Reliability analysis test on the variables of the “Ship Masters
Individual Decision Making Process on Management of Ship
Operations” were found as fully satisfied.
As a result of the reliability analysis, 28 variables were scaled
to be 0,9410 (Cronbach Alfa).
The result of the 40 variables of the second part were scaled to
be 0,8396 (Cronbach Alfa).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables
According to the Likert Scale means, the variables affecting the
shipmasters’ individual decision making processes most often
were found to be as fallows:
“considering the risk of life safety” (4,829),
“international rules” (4,717),
“legal responsibility on the conduct of the ship” (4,693)
“protecting the interest of the shipowner” (4,689)
“company’s aims and policies” (4,583)
“ISM Code and procedures (4,558)
“technological facilities” (4,536)
“instructions from local and official authorities” (4,532)
“ship security risk” (4,509).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables
According to the Likert Scale means, the variables affecting the
ship masters’ individual decision making processes least were
found to be as follows:
“ignoring the problems” (1,843)
“nationalistic opinions” (2,231)
“family problems encountered” (2,314)
“initiatives being restricted by technology” (2,398)
“conflict with company’s objectives and policies” (2,430)
“tendency to postpone actions” (2,555)
“requesting of the local state authorities against his will”
(2,573).
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables (Factor Analysis I)
Due to the difference in the methods used to determine the
perceptions, each of these two parts was exposed to a factor
analysis the results of which can be seen in Tables. First,
principal components analysis, with varimax rotation, was used
to assess how the 28 variables are grouped in Ship Masters
Individual Decision Making Process on Management of Ship
Operations ( I ).
The five factor groupings in the order of their reliability are
respectively;
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
“individual factors”,
“personal factors”,
“organizational factors”,
“environmental factors”,
“physical condition of the ship”.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables (Factor Analysis I )
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables (Factor Analysis II)
Variables of “Ship Masters Individual Decision Making Process
on Management of Ship Operations ( II )” are grouped in 10
factors through the factor analysis. Tables analyzed the ten
sets of factors. Proportion of variance explained by factors was
59,167 %. The ten factor groupings in the order of their
reliability are respectively;
(1) “maritime institutions and organizations”
(2) “protecting the interests and following the instructions”
(3) “safety, security and ethics”
(4) “using knowledge”
(5) “self-confidence”
(6) “requirements of profession”
(7) “prepotent needs”
(8) “legal responsibilities”
(9) “decision making style”
SHIPPING
AND LOGISTICS
RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
(10)
“prudent
seamanship”.
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables (Factor Analysis II)
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Results of DM Variables (Factor Analysis II)
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Conclusion
• Great efforts were made in planning, implementing and
evaluating the qualitative and quantitative methods used in
the study, and the results gained were quite fruitful.
• The data were collected through a great variety of methods,
some of which were as follows: observation, the author’s
professional experience, interviews with shipmasters and
academicians, focus group and literature review.
• The observation and interview involved various persons from
diverse fields. Analyzing the data also involved different
analysis methods. “triangulation” method was put into practice
collecting and analyzing data with the aim of enhancing and
validity.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Conclusion
The general factors affecting the shipmasters’ individual
decision making processes were found to be as fallows;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
individual factors
personal factors
organizational factors
environmental factors
physical condition of the ships
maritime institutions and
organizations
7. protecting the interests and
following the instructions
8. safety, security and ethics
9. using knowledge
10. self-confidence
11. requirements of profession
12. prepotent needs
13. legal responsibilities
14. decision making style
15. prudent seamanship
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Conclusion
These factors are similar to the factors stated before in the
decision making literature.
Especially factors of the “expanded four-force model” developed
by Rowe and Boulgarides (1994), fully matched with this study.
Besides, these factors affecting the decision making processes are
explored for ship master individual decision making processes on
the ship operation.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Conclusion
In this study, interaction between shipboard management - ship
management organizations – maritime business environments
and external environment are studied but this interaction theory
needs to be further developed.
The relations between factors affecting the decision making
processes of ship masters and their profiles have been analyzed
as a separate study.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Conclusion
As a further research “decision making style” of the ship masters
can be determined. Besides relation between decision making
styles of the ship masters and his/her profiles are to be explored.
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA
Ship Masters’ Individual Decision
Making Process
Thank You
SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS RESEARCH NETWORK WORKSHOP JANUARY, 14-16, 2008 AGENDA