Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota [email protected] ce.umn/~smith

1 / 12

# Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota [email protected] ce.umn/~smith - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota [email protected] www.ce.umn.edu/~smith January 2005 Engineers Leadership Institute Minnesota Society for Professional Engineers. Team Decision Making… The New They\'ll Never Take Us Alive!!.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Team Decision Making Karl A. Smith University of Minnesota [email protected] ce.umn/~smith' - tanuja

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

Team Decision Making

Karl A. Smith

University of Minnesota

[email protected]

www.ce.umn.edu/~smith

January 2005

Minnesota Society for

Professional Engineers

Team Decision Making…The New They\'ll Never Take Us Alive!!

The top fifteen causes of death in the United States in 1997 in alphabetical order. The data are based on an annual review of death certificates. Your task is to rank them in decreasing order of number of deaths caused each year. Place the number 1 next to the one that causes the most deaths, the number 2 by the next, and so forth.

1. Individually determine the ranking.

2. Determine one ranking for the group.

3. Every group member must be able to explain the rationale for the group\'s ranking.

4. When your group finishes (each member has signed), (a) record your estimated number of fatalities in the U.S. for each, and then (b) compare your ranking with that of another group.

The New They\'ll Never Take Us Alive!!

Product or Activity Ranking Number of Fatalities

Accidents

Alzheimer\'s disease

Blood poisoning

Cancer

Diabetes

Hardening of arteries

Heart disease

HIV and AIDS

Homicide

Kidney disease

Liver disease

Lung disease

Pneumonia and influenza

Stroke

Suicide

Postdecision Questionaire

• How understood and listened to did you feel in your group?
• Not at all 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 Completely
• 2. How much influence do you feel you had in your group’s decision making?
• None 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 A great deal
• How committed do you feel to the decision your group made?
• None 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 A great deal
• 4. How much responsibility do you feel for making the decision work?
• None 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 A great deal
• 5. How satisfied do you feel with the amount and quality of your participation in your group’s decision making
• Dissatisfied 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 Satisfied
• 6. Write one adjective that describes the atmosphere in your group during the decision making
How

Individual

Mathematical

Consensus

Iterative – H, M, L

Both ends toward the middle

Assumptions/Biases

Family/Friends

News

Youth

Geographic location

They’ll Never Take Us Alive Team Decision-Making Process

Methods of Decision Making

• (Johnson & Johnson, 1991)
• Decision by authority without discussion
• Expert member
• Average of member’s opinions
• Decision by authority after discussion
• Majority control
• Minority control
• Consensus

Choice of Decision-Making Method

• Depends On:
• 1. The type of decision to be made.
• 2. The amount of time and resources available.
• The history of the group.
• The nature of the task being worked on
• The kind of climate the groups wishes to establish
• The type of setting in which the group is working
• Johnson & Johnson, 1991

Characteristics of Effective Decisions:

• The resources of the group members are well used.
• Time is well used.
• The decision is correct, or of high quality.
• The decision is put into effect fully by all the necessary members\' commitment.
• The problem-solving ability of the group is enhanced.
• Johnson & Johnson, 1991
Two Approaches to Decision MakingGarvin & Roberto, 2001. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 108-116.

A Litmus Test (Gavin & Roberto)

• Multiple Alternatives
• Assumption Testing
• Well-defined Criteria
• Dissent and Debate
• Perceived Fairness

Gavin, David A. and Roberto, Michael A. 2001. What you don’t know about making decisions. Harvard Business Review, 79 (8), 108-116.