GROUP DECISION

MAKING
Definition of
Decision-Making
■ The thought process of selecting
a logical choice from the available options.
■ When trying to make a good decision,
a person must weight the positives and
negatives of each option, and consider all the
alternatives.
■ For effective decision-making, a person must
be able to forecast the outcome of each
option as well, and based on all these items,
determine which option is the best for that
particular situation.
Philosophy of Groups
Decision Making

None of us alone is as smart as all of us.

more people = more information
more people to do more work
more people can do what they are best at
COMMON CAUSE

groups can discuss, process information

(check for errors, etc.)
groups have standards for deciding (e.g.,
majority rules)
people are more likely to follow through
and It is caused by several processes
 Why make decisions in Groups?

The effectiveness of groups as decision makers

depend on their knowledge in their assigned function.
▪ Examples: investment groups, advisory boards,
planners
▪ Individuals solved fewer problems than groups
 Types of Decisions
Group effectiveness also depends in a
demonstrated correct solution
Intellective Tasks (right or wrong answer –
e.g., math problems ) vs. Judgmental Tasks
(no correct answer – jury’s verdict)
Group members are superior in intellective
tasks than judgment tasks.
 Anatomy of Group Decision
Functional Theory of Group Decision Making
- Skilled decision making groups are more likely
use procedures that enhance the way they
gather, analyze, and weight information

Phases of Decision Making

- Orientation
- Discussion
- Decision
- Implementation
 Defining the
Problem
Orientation
Orientation Planning the
Process

Discussion

Functional Model of
Decision Making
Decision Orientation
No Decision ▪ Development of shared
Reached
mental model
Decision ▪ Group defines the problem
Reached
▪ Sets strategy & goals
▪ More time spent in this
Implementation stage the greater the
performance
 Remembering
Information

Exchanging
Discussion Information

Processing
Information

Remembering Information – 30 % of all comments

made by group members are expressions of
opinions and analysis of issues
 Remembering
Information

Exchanging
Discussion Information

Processing
Information

Weakness in group memory - importance of

keeping records (meeting minutes)

Exchanging information: Acquiring & sharing data

Processing information: Collective review of info.
Deciding
Social Decision Schemes – strategy used
to select a single alternative from various
alternatives proposed by the group

▪ Delegation - an individual or subgroup within

the group makes the decision for the group

▪ Statistical Aggregation – group members’

individual decision are averaged
Deciding
Social Decision Schemes
▪ Voting – publicly or secret ballot – 50% rule
is used primarily, however, sometimes more
substantial percentages are needed for a
decision to become final
▪ Consensus (discussion to unanimity)
▪ Random Choice – final decision is left to
chance
 Implementation

Implementation
▪ Evaluating the decision
▪ Adhering to the decision
▪ Participation is key in decision making – if
limited, hostility, turnover, & satisfaction
decreases
 Post-Mortem Discussions

Bringing closure and learning lessons to bring to

future decisions
▪ Gather group together
▪ Review decisions made and decision making
process
▪ Look for lessons learned
▪ Record them
 Individual vs. Group Decision
Making
Normative Model of Decision Making:
▪ Group – the leader discusses the problem with
the members of the group. Together the leader
and members devise options for a solution.
▪ The leader acts as a chairperson of a committee
& does not try to influence the group to adopt a
certain a certain solution.
▪ Procedure must fit the problem to be solved and
the decision to be made
Group Discussion Pitfalls
(An unexpected danger or difficulty)

Group shortcomings
▪ Information processing limitations
▪ Poor communication skills
▪ Decisional avoidance (procrastination,
avoiding responsibility, ignoring alternatives)
Shared Information Bias

Is the tendency for groups to spend more time

discussing information that all members know and less
time examining information that only a few members
now
Judgment errors and heuristic biases (to prevent or
hinder someone from learning by themselves)
 Groupthink
What is groupthink?
Janis’s theory of groupthink – a distorted style of
thinking that renders group members incapable of
making rational decisions.
Members try very hard to agree with one another
that they make mistakes in doing so.
■ Groupthink is a psychological
phenomenon that occurs within a
group of people, in which the desire for
harmony or conformity in the group
results in an irrational or dysfunctional
decision making outcome.
■ Group members try to minimize
conflict and reach a consensus
decision without critical evaluation of
alternative viewpoints, by actively
suppressing dissenting viewpoints,
and by isolating themselves from
outside influences.
■ There is loss of individual creativity,
uniqueness and independent thinking.
Symptoms of Groupthink
Overestimation of the group

Close-mindedness

Pressures toward uniformity

Defective decision-making processes

 Causes of Groupthink
Cohesiveness
▪ Cordial relationships
▪ Lack of conflict
Structural Faults
▪ Insulation
▪ Control of the leader

Provocative Situational Context

▪ How members deal with stress
▪ Exaggerate the positive and minimize the
negative
Can Groupthink Be Prevented?
If yes,HOW?

Limiting premature seeking of concurrence

▪ Open style of leadership
▪ Devil’s advocate, subgroup discussions
Correcting misperceptions and biases
Using effective decision-making techniques I
REMEDIES FOR
GROUPTHINK
ASSIGN EVERYONE THE ROLE OF CRITICAL EVALUATOR
SENSITIZATION
LEADER MUST BE IMPARTIAL
DO NOT INITIALLY STATE YOUR PREFERENCES
APPOINT AN INTERNAL “DEVIL’S ADVOCATE”
USE OUTSIDE EXPERTS TO CHALLENGE THE GROUP
THEY MAY STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO
DIVIDE INTO TWO OR MORE SUBGROUPS TO WORK
INDEPENDENTLY ON THE SAME PROBLEM
HAVE EACH GROUP REPORT BACK
HOLD “SECOND CHANCE” MEETINGS TO REAFFIRM
EARLIER THINKING AND DECISIONS
HAVE A “CONFIRMATION” VOTE LATER
ADVANTAGES OF GROUP
DECISION MAKING

■ BROAD REPRESENTATION
■ TAPS EXPERTISE
■ MORE IDEAS GENERATED
■ EVALUATION OF OPTIONS
■ COORDINATION
■ HIGH ACCEPTANCE
DISADVANTAGES OF
GROUP DECISION MAKING

■ TIME CONSUMING
■ POSSIBLE INDECISIVENESS
■ COMPROMISE DECISIONS
■ DOMINATION BY A MEMBER
■ RISKY SHIFTS
■ GROUPTHINK
GROUP DECISION MAKING
ISSUES

■ TIME AVAILABILITY
■ TYPE OF PROBLEM OR TASK
■ AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION
■ NEED FOR ACCEPTANCE OF
DECISION
■ LEVEL OF TRUST
■ CAPABILITIES OF SUBORDINATES
■ LIKELIHOOD OF CONFLICT
PARTICIPATION IN
DECISION MAKING

LEADERS HAVE THREE DECISION

MAKING STYLES
AUTOCRATIC
CONSULTIVE
PARTICIPATIVE
FACTORS AFFECTING
CHOICE OF STYLE:
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROBLEM
HOW IMPORTANT IS THE QUALITY OF THE
DECISION?
IS THE PROBLEM WELL-STRUCTUERED?
IS TIME CRITICAL?
HOW IMPORTANT IS SUBORDINATE COMMITMENT
TO THE CHOICE?
FACTORS AFFECTING
CHOICE OF STYLE:
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MANAGER

DOES THE LEADER HAVE GOOD INFORMATION

TO MAKE THE CHOICE?
FACTORS AFFECTING
CHOICE OF STYLE:
CHARACTERISTICS OF SUBORDINATES
WILL SUBORDINATES ACCEPT THE LEADER’S
DECISION?
DO SUBORDINATES SHARE THE ORGANIZATION’S
GOALS?
IS CONFLICT LIKELY AMONG SUBORDINATES
(OVER THE CHOICES)?
CAN THEY CONTRIBUTE GOOD INFORMATION TO
MAKE THE CHOICE?
 DECISION MAKING STYLES
■ YOU SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOURSELF, WITH YOUR OWN
INFORMATION
■ YOU OBTAIN INFORMATION FROM YOUR SUBORDINATES,
THEN SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOURSELF
■ YOU SHARE THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR SUBORDINATES
INDIVIDUALLY, WITHOUT BRINGING THEM TOGETHER AS A
GROUP. YOU CONSIDER THEIR IDEAS, THEN MAKE THE
DECISION BY YOURSELF
■ YOU SHARE THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR SUBORDINATES AS A
GROUP, COLLECTIVELY GETTING THEIR IDEAS, THEN YOU
MAKE THE DECISION BY YOURSELF
■ YOU SHARE THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR SUBORDINATES AS A
GROUP. TOGETHER YOU ATTEMPT TO REACH A CONSENSUS
ON A SOLUTION. YOUR ROLE IS CHAIR, AND THE GROUP’S
SOLUTION SHOULD BE THE ONE IMPLEMENTED
DEFECTS IN GROUP
DECISION MAKING
■ DISCUSSION LIMITED TO A FEW ALTERNATIVES (ONE OR TWO)
■ FAILURE TO REEXAMINE THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE FOR
WEAKNESSES AND POTENTIAL RISKS
■ NO SEARCH TO FIND ADVANTAGES FOR OTHER ALTERNATIVES, AND
NO SEARCH FOR WAYS TO MAKE OTHER OPTIONS FEASIBLE
■ LITTLE OR NO ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN EXPERT OR OUTSIDE ADVICE
■ A TENDENCY TO IGNORE FACTS AND OPINIONS THAT DO NOT AGREE
WITH THE PREFERRED PLAN OF ACTION
■ NO CONTINGENCY PLANS ESTABLISHED IN CASE SOMETHING GOES
WRONG
■ NO ATTEMPT TO LOOK AT THE SITUATION FROM A CONTRARY OR
ANTAGONISTIC VIEWPOINT
■ LAUGHING AT DANGER SIGNALS; MAKING LIGHT OF INDICATIONS
THAT ALL IS NOT PROCEEDING SMOOTHLY
■ LEADERS WHO DOMINATE DISCUSSIONS AND MAKE THEIR
SUGGESTIONS EARLY, BEFORE OTHERS HAVE HAD THEIR SAY
BRAINSTORMING
USED TO GENERATE NEW IDEAS OR ALTERNATIVES
RULES:
■FREEWHEELING IS WELCOME --- OFFER ANY IDEAS THAT COME
TO YOU
■QUANTITY IS DESIRED --- DON’T WORRY ABOUT QUALITY OR RISK
RIGHT NOW
■NO CRITICISM OR PRAISE OF IDEAS IS ALLOWED

■NO QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION OF IDEAS --- THAT WILL COME AT

A LATER MEETING
■COMBINATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF IDEAS IS ENCOURAGED ---
BUILD ON OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS AND SUGGESTIONS
NOMINAL GROUP
TECHNIQUE
■ EACH MEMBER GENERATES A LIST OF THEIR IDEAS AHEAD
OF TIME
■ IDEAS ARE SHARED WITH MEMBERS EITHER AS AN
EXHAUSTIVE LIST, OR ARE PRESENTED ONE AT A TIME
WITHOUT COMMENT
■ MEMBERS VOTE BY SECRET BALLOT TO SELECT THE “BEST”
IDEAS WHICH THEY WANT TO PURSUE FURTHER
■ EACH ITEM IS DISCUSSED AND EVALUATED PUBLICLY (Pros
and Cons)
■ FINAL VOTES ARE TAKEN BY SECRET BALLOT
REDUCES THE EFFECTS OF POWER AND STATUS DIFFERENCES
ALL MEMBERS CAN PARTICIPATE AND GET THEIR IDEAS BEFORE
THE GROUP
MEMBERS ARE NOT INTIMIDATED BY A DOMINANT MEMBER