for sir toney

!

!

!"#$$%&'#$(#)*%+%,-.'/%012#3#.)%45"#)*% !

Introduction

Group decision making is a type of participatory process in which multiple individuals

acting collectively, analyze problems or situations, consider and evaluate alternative courses of

action, and select from among the alternatives a solution or solutions. The number of people

involved in group decision-making varies greatly. The individuals in a group may be

demographically similar or quite diverse. Decision-making groups may be relatively informal in

nature, or formally designated and charged with a specific goal. The process used to arrive at

decisions may be unstructured or structured. The nature and composition of groups, their size,

demographic makeup, structure, and purpose, all affect their functioning to some degree. The

external contingencies faced by groups (time pressure and conflicting goals) impact the

development and effectiveness of decision-making groups as well.

In organizations many decisions of consequence are made after some form of group

decision-making process is undertaken. However, groups are not the only form of collective work

arrangement. Group decision-making should be distinguished from the concepts of teams,

teamwork, and self managed teams.

,6789%0:;<!<7=%4>?<=,%4:@A70!%

There are many methods or procedures that can be used by groups. Each is designed to

improve the decision-making process in some way. Some of the more common group decision-

making methods are brainstorming, dialetical inquiry, nominal group technique, and the delphi

technique.

&6><=!@764<=,%

Brainstorming involves group members verbally suggesting ideas or alternative courses

of action. The "brainstorming session" is usually relatively unstructured. The situation at hand is

described in as much detail as necessary so that group members have a complete understanding

of the issue or problem. The group leader or facilitator then solicits ideas from all members of

the group. Usually, the group leader or facilitator will record the ideas presented on a flip chart

or marker board. The "generation of alternatives" stage is clearly differentiated from the

"alternative evaluation" stage, as group members are not allowed to evaluate suggestions until all

ideas have been presented. Once the ideas of the group members have been exhausted, the group

members then begin the process of evaluating the utility of the different suggestions presented.

Brainstorming is a useful means by which to generate alternatives, but does not offer much in the

way of process for the evaluation of alternatives or the selection of a proposed course of action.

One of the difficulties with brainstorming is that despite the prohibition against judging ideas

until all group members have had their say, some individuals are hesitant to propose ideas

because they fear the judgment or ridicule of other group members. In recent years, some

decision-making groups have utilized electronic brainstorming, which allows group members to

!

"#$%!&'(#%)(!*+*,+-.**!

propose alternatives by means of e-mail or another electronic means, such as an online posting

board or discussion room. Members could conceivably offer their ideas anonymously, which

should increase the likelihood that individuals will offer unique and creative ideas without fear of

the harsh judgment of others.

0<>B:@<;>B%<=C8<6DE%

Dialetical inquiry is a group decision-making technique that focuses on ensuring full

consideration of alternatives. Essentially, it involves dividing the group into opposing sides,

which debate the advantages and disadvantages of proposed solutions or decisions. A similar

group decision-making method, devil's advocacy, requires that one member of the group highlight

the potential problems with a proposed decision. Both of these techniques are designed to try and

make sure that the group considers all possible ramifications of its decision.

=74<=>B%,6789%@:;A=<C8:E%

The nominal group technique is a structured decision making process in which group

members are required to compose a comprehensive list of their ideas or proposed alternatives in

writing. The group members usually record their ideas privately. Once finished, each group

member is asked, in turn, to provide one item from their list until all ideas or alternatives have

been publicly recorded on a flip chart or marker board. Usually, at this stage of the process verbal

exchanges are limited to requests for clarification—no evaluation or criticism of listed ideas is

permitted. Once all proposals are listed publicly, the group engages in a discussion of the listed

alternatives, which ends in some form of ranking or rating in order of preference. As with

brainstorming, the prohibition against criticizing proposals as they are presented is designed to

overcome individuals' reluctance to share their ideas. Empirical research conducted on group

decision making offers some evidence that the nominal group technique succeeds in generating a

greater number of decision alternatives that are of relatively high quality.

0:B9A<%@:;A=<C8:%

The Delphi technique is a group decision-making process that can be used by decision-

making groups when the individual members are in different physical locations. The technique

was developed at the Rand Corporation. The individuals in the Delphi "group" are usually

selected because of the specific knowledge or expertise of the problem they possess. In the Delphi

technique, each group member is asked to independently provide ideas, input, and/or alternative

solutions to the decision problem in successive stages. These inputs may be provided in a variety

of ways, such as e-mail, fax, or online in a discussion room or electronic bulletin board. After

each stage in the process, other group members ask questions and alternatives are ranked or rated

in some fashion. After an indefinite number of rounds, the group eventually arrives at a consensus

decision on the best course of action.

>0F>=@>,:!%>=0%0<!>0F>=@>,:!%%7G%,6789%0:;<!<7=%4>?<=,%

The effectiveness of decision-making groups can be affected by a variety of factors.

Thus, it is not possible to suggest that "group decision making is always better" or "group

decision making is always worse" than individual decision-making. For example, due to the

increased demographic diversity in the workforce, a considerable amount of research has focused

on diversity's effect on the effectiveness of group functioning. In general, this research suggests

that demographic diversity can sometimes have positive or negative effects, depending on the

specific situation. Demographically diverse group may have to over-come social barriers and

difficulties in the early stages of group formation and this may slow down the group. However,

some research indicates that diverse groups, if effectively managed, tend to generate a wider

variety and higher quality of decision alternatives than demographically homogeneous groups.

!

"#$%!&'(#%)(!*+*,+-.**!

Despite the fact that there are many situational factors that affect the functioning of groups,

research through the years does offer some general guidance about the relative strengths and

weaknesses inherent in group decision making. The following section summarizes the major pros

and cons of decision making in groups.

>0F>=@>,:!

Group decision-making, ideally, takes advantage of the diverse strengths and expertise of

its members. By tapping the unique qualities of group members, it is possible that the group can

generate a greater number of alternatives that are of higher quality than the individual. If a greater

number of higher quality alternatives are generated, then it is likely that the group will eventually

reach a superior problem solution than the individual.

Group decision-making may also lead to a greater collective understanding of the

eventual course of action chosen, since it is possible that many affected by the decision

implementation actually had input into the decision. This may promote a sense of "ownership" of

the decision, which is likely to contribute to a greater acceptance of the course of action selected

and greater commitment on the part of the affected individuals to make the course of action

successful.

0<!>0F>=@>,:!%

There are many potential disadvantages to group decision-making. Groups are generally

slower to arrive at decisions than individuals, so sometimes it is difficult to utilize them in

situations where decisions must be made very quickly. One of the most often cited problems is

groupthink. Irving Janis, in his 1972 book Victims of Groupthink, defined the phenomenon as the

"deterioration of mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment resulting from in-group

pressure." Groupthink occurs when individuals in a group feel pressure to conform to what seems

to be the dominant view in the group. Dissenting views of the majority opinion are suppressed

and alternative courses of action are not fully explored.

Research suggests that certain characteristics of groups contribute to groupthink. In the

first place, if the group does not have an agreed upon process for developing and evaluating

alternatives, it is possible that an incomplete set of alternatives will be considered and that

different courses of action will not be fully explored. Many of the formal decision-making

processes (e.g., nominal group technique and brain-storming) are designed, in part, to reduce the

potential for groupthink by ensuring that group members offer and consider a large number of

decision alternatives. Secondly, if a powerful leader dominates the group, other group members

may quickly conform to the dominant view. Additionally, if the group is under stress and/or time

pressure, groupthink may occur. Finally, studies suggest that highly cohesive groups are more

susceptible to groupthink.

Group polarization is another potential disadvantage of group decision-making. This is

the tendency of the group to converge on more extreme solutions to a problem. The "risky shift"

phenomenon is an example of polarization; it occurs when the group decision is a riskier one than

any of the group members would have made individually. This may result because individuals in

a group sometimes do not feel as much responsibility and accountability for the actions of the

group as they would if they were making the decision alone.

Decision-making in groups is a fact of organizational life for many individuals. Because

so many individuals spend at least some of their work time in decision-making groups, groups are

the subjects of hundreds of research studies each year. Despite this, there is still much to learn

about the development and functioning of groups. Research is likely to continue to focus on

identifying processes that will make group decision-making more efficient and effective. It is also

likely to examine how the internal characteristics of groups (demographic and cognitive diversity)

!

"#$%!&'(#%)(!*+*,+-.**!

and the external contingencies faced by groups affect their functioning.

Adapted from: Tim Barnett’s “Group Decision Making” www.referenceforbusiness.com/management