Group decision making l.jpg
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 10

GROUP DECISION MAKING PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 95 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

GROUP DECISION MAKING. ADVANTAGES BROAD REPRESENTATION TAPS EXPERTISE MORE IDEAS GENERATED EVALUATION OF OPTIONS COORDINATION HIGH ACCEPTANCE DISADVANTAGES TIME CONSUMING POSSIBLE INDECISIVENESS COMPROMISE DECISIONS DOMINATION BY A MEMBER RISKY SHIFTS GROUPTHINK.

Download Presentation

GROUP DECISION MAKING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Group decision making l.jpg

GROUP DECISION MAKING

ADVANTAGES

  • BROAD REPRESENTATION

  • TAPS EXPERTISE

  • MORE IDEAS GENERATED

  • EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

  • COORDINATION

  • HIGH ACCEPTANCE

    DISADVANTAGES

  • TIME CONSUMING

  • POSSIBLE INDECISIVENESS

  • COMPROMISE DECISIONS

  • DOMINATION BY A MEMBER

  • RISKY SHIFTS

  • GROUPTHINK


Group decision making issues vroom yetton 73 l.jpg

GROUP DECISION MAKING ISSUESVROOM & YETTON (73)

  • TIME AVAILABILITY

  • TYPE OF PROBLEM OR TASK

  • AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION

  • NEED FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DECISION

  • LEVEL OF TRUST

  • CAPABILITIES OF SUBORDINATES

  • LIKELIHIID OF CONFLICT


Participation in decision making vroom yetton 73 l.jpg

PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKINGVROOM & YETTON (73)

LEADERS HAVE THREE DECISION MAKING STYLES

AUTOCRATIC

CONSULTIVE

PARTICIPATIVE

FACTORS AFFECTING CHOICE OF STYLE:

1. 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?

2. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MANAGER

DOES THE LEADER HAVE GOOD INFORMATION TO MAKE THE CHOICE?

3. 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?


Vroom s decision styles l.jpg

VROOM’S DECISION STYLES

  • A1 YOU SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOURSELF, WITH YOUR OWN INFORMATION

  • A2 YOU OBTAIN INFORMATION FROM YOUR SUBORDINATES, THEN SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOURSELF

  • C1 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

  • C2 YOU SHARE THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR SUBORDINATES AS A GROUP, COLLECTIVELY GETTING THEIR IDEAS, THEN YOU MAKE THE DECISION BY YOURSELF

  • G2 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 l.jpg

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


Symptoms of groupthink janis 72 l.jpg

SYMPTOMS OF GROUPTHINKJANIS (72)

A VERY COHESIVE GROUP THAT IS LIKELY TO MAKE POOR DECISIONS

  • OVERESTIMATION OF THE GROUP

    ILLUSION OF INVULNERABILITY (Superiority)

    ILLUSION OF MORALITY

  • CLOSEMINDEDNESS

    RATIONALIZATION (Discounting Warning Signs)

    STEREOTYPED VIEWS OF OUTSIDERS (Not Trusted & Not Very Smart)

  • PRESSURE TOWARD CONFORMITY

    SELF-CENSORSHIP OF MEMBERS

    DIRECT PRESSURE APPLIED TO DEVIANTS

    MINDGUARDS (Don’t Let Others/outsiders Influence Us)

    ILLUSION OF UNANIMITY (Silence Means Agreement?)


Remedies for groupthink l.jpg

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


Brainstorming l.jpg

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 l.jpg

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


Delphi technique l.jpg

DELPHI TECHNIQUE

  • CAN PROBE THE VIEWS OF INDUSTRY EXPERTS

  • MATRERIALS SENT TO PARTICIPANTS FOR REACTIONS

  • OPTIONS ARE INDIVIDUALLY WRITTEN AND SENT BACK

  • SUMMARIES ARE SENT OUT FOR FURTHER COMMENT

  • ROLE OF THE IN-HOUSE COORDINATOR IS CRUCIAL

  • THE “GROUP” NEVER MEETS TOGETHER

  • NO FINAL DECISIONS ARE “MADE” BY THIS GROUP

    THIS IS A “VIRTUAL GROUP” WHICH CAN BE INTERNET CONNECTED

    PROCESS GATHERS THE BEST THINKING & JUDGMENT OF EXPERTS

    SUCCESSIVE FEEDBACK REDEFINES AND FOCUSES IDEAS

    FINAL DECISIONS ARE MADE BY COMPANY OFFICIALS, NOT THE GROUP


  • Login