When GM decided to build its Saturn model, the company made the decision (we do not know how) to use a different process than it used in the past. This meant that a large number of robots would be used at the new plant, and that the workers at the plant would be highly skilled in their fields. Instead of making the decision of where to place the plant in private, as companies of this size often do, GM opted instead to use a public decision making process. It was interested not only in rational factors such as tax breaks and logistical issues, but also in behavioral factors, such as quality of life and the community. This led to a public competition for the Saturn factory (which would, after all, provide jobs to the community in which it was eventually located), and an interesting decision making process.
The challenge that GM faces is whether it can take the lessons and processes from the first Saturn factory experience and duplicate them when making other choices for facilities in the future. In fact, the company must be able to determine whether the site location process led to an appropriate choice, and whether the company should try to duplicate the process or use a different decision making tool in the future.
GM had the luxury of combining decision making processes, using both a rational and a behavioral model in its selection of a location for the Saturn plant. Rational decision making processes are based on objective information which can be quantified and evaluated using decision rules; GM used this from the standpoint that it considered tax issues, education of workers in the community and similar items when it was making its decision and setting up its selection criteria.
Behavioral decision making is characterized by nonquantifiable issues, such as community quality of life, in this case, and by exhaustive searches for imperfect information. GM conducted a nationwide search for its location, and its decision...