Groups for Organizational Decision Making - Essay Example

Groups for organizational decision making April 11, Introduction Group decision making entails the contribution of each group member to the decision making process. As expected, different group members may contribute diverse choices. The diverse choices may conflict with the other alternative choices. Group decision making ends with the implementation of one or more alternative courses of actions. The diversity of the group members’ contributions influences the group’s decision making activities (Cuthbertson 65). Common Decision Making Techniques There are several decision making techniques popularly implemented by groups (Levi 160). One technique is the group’s implementation of decision handed down by authority. This technique does not allow any group discussion. This is prevalent in the military set up where the highest ranking officer of the group makes a decision to either attack the enemy or wait for the enemy to attack the soldier group. Another popular example is when a group of Grade 4 pupils are led by the class teacher on Disneyland field trip. The pupils eagerly obey the group teacher’s every instruction, without question. Second, the group implements the decision of the expert (Chelst 144). When a group of tourist visits a new tourist destination, the group eagerly accepts the recommendations of the group’s expert, the tourist guide. The group easily accepts the tourist guide’s recommended hotel, restaurant, sites, and other recommended tourism activities. Third, the group will implement the most popular (majority) recommendation or alternative (Levi 160). For example, the group decided to vote on whether to visit the White House, Disneyland, or Hollywood. If Hollywood gets the highest number of group member votes, everyone in the group will visit Hollywood. The members of the group who voted to visit Disneyland must disregard their preferred choices and abide by the group decision. Fourth, the group will implement the decision of the group leader after gathering the group members’ comments, suggestions, complaints, and other inputs (Chelst 144). The leader makes the decision by incorporating the group members’ comments, suggestions, complaints, and other inputs. The method normally pleases the group members. The members are happy that their diverse inputs are being included in the group leader’s decision making process. Fifth, group may decide to implement the average votes of the group (Stair 425). This completely differs from the prior third group decision technique. The average vote may not be the most popular vote. The average vote may not be the minority vote. Sixth, the group may implement the consensus decision (Forsyth 322). Under this technique, the decision make gets the agreement of all the group members. The group decision is continually revised to include the suggestions, recommendations, complaints and other inputs of all members. Each group member cooperates and coordinates with other group members in order to come up with a watered down or revised policy, statute, procedure, method, or other acts that that incorporates all the members’ inputs. Seventh, the Delphi group decision making technique is used (Griffin 110). One version of the technique includes anonymous or secret voting. Secret or anonymous voting indicates the other members do not know the votes of the other group members. In fact, the each group member may know who the other group members who voted during the Delphi decision making process. Potential Problems Group decisions may incur some possible problems or issues (Kugler 165). One of the problems is the failure to establish a vivid set of group goals. Some of the members may contribute suggestions to increase revenues. Other group members may contribute comments to ensure compliance with environmental protection laws. A different set of group members will espouse setting up a new branch in California in order to increase the company’s product and service presence in the area. Second, the group may encounter the problem of unnecessarily long meetings (Kugler 165). Everyone in the group is eager to participate in the discussion. Some members may insist that be allocated more time to discuss the benefits or disadvantages of certain recommended alternative choices. Consequently, the affected departments or individuals are affected. For example, the group members used 7 days to discuss their options to either allow sales discounts or not to high volume customers. Consequently, the sales department must unnecessarily wait for seven long days to implement the sales discount. Third, some of the members may unfavorably dominate the group meetings (Huber 133). When this happens, the other members are not given the time to contribute their recommendations, comments, and other inputs. When this happens, animosity and disgruntlement may crop up within the group. Consequently, the disgruntled members who feel their voices are not being heard may withdraw from the group’s decision making activities. Fourth, some members may not cooperate with the group’s decision making activities (Okasha 199). Some members are literally lazy. They just stay on the sidelines and let the other group members do the hard work. Some of the lazy members lack the interest to contribute their knowledge or expertise on the group topic to the group’s decision making processes. Fifth, conflicts may arise during the argumentation or presentation of group members’ alternative choices. The conflicts may include culture conflicts among the group members. Culture conflicts may include religious belief issues, gender issues, age issues, and other possible issues. For example, some of the African American group members may contest the use of White female model for the company’s television advertisement in a predominantly Chinese community. Another religious member of the group may contest the use of sexy young female models in the television advertisement. Sixth, the status or power of some members may create conflict in the group’s decision making activity (Eden 203). The employee member of the group cannot speak at the same power and influence level as the member who is the employer or owner of the business. The group leader may use his position to manipulate the decision making process to remove contradictory inputs of the lower ranking group members. For example, the higher ranking army captain can force the lower rank private to implement the captain’s group recommendations. Strategies for Efficient and Productive Group Management There are strategies that contribute to both productive and efficient group management (Essien 28). One strategy is assign accountability to each member of the group. For example, a classroom report is assigned to discuss five shapes. Consequently, each of the five members of the group is assigned to discuss one shape. The five shapes are triangle, square, rectangle, and pentagon. The strategy ensures everyone in the group contributes to group’s efforts. Second, each member is assigned leadership roles (Morrill 93). For the above classroom report group, each member is assigned to leader in the discussion of one’s assigned shape. This way, each member will actively steer the group members to accomplishing the group task of discussing the shapes in front of the class. Third, each member is assigned decision making tasks (Morrill 93). In the same classroom group, each member is required to make a decision on which resources will be used. Consequently, each member determines how many resources are needed to complete the assigned shape report. The members assigned to the square shape discussion may decide to use only two reference books to complete one’s report task. Fourth, voting will reduce conflicts among the members (Levi 160). Each member can request voting to resolve conflicts among the group members. The voting diffuses animosity or disgruntlement among the members. Voting allows the more popular alternative to prevail. If the majority vote is to submit the group project within three days, all members of the group must comply with the majority vote’s proposal. Conclusion Group decision includes the member’s influence on the decision making process. Each group members contributes different alternatives. Group decision making climaxes with the implementation of the chosen alternative(s). Normally, only one alterative is implemented. Evidently, the diversity of the group members’ contributions significantly affects the group’s decision making process. Works Cited Chelst, Kenneth. Value Added Decision Making for Managers. Baton Rouge: CRC Press, 2011. Print. Cuthbertson, Brent. Group Dynamics in Recreation and Leisure. New York: Human Kinetics Press, 2009. Print. Eden, Colin. Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. New York: Springer Press, 2010. Print. Essien, Wilson. Strategic Management. New York: AuthorHouse, 2012. Print. Forsyth, Donelson. Group Dynamics. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print. Griffin, Ricky. Fundamentals of Management. New York: Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. Huber, Diane. Leadership and Nursing Care Management. New York: Elsevier Press, 2013. Print. Kugler, Tamar. Decision Modeling and Behavior in Complex and Uncertain Environments. New York: Springer Press, 2008. Print. Levi, Daniel. Group Dynamics for Teams. New York: Sage Press, 2010. Print. Morrill, Richard. Strategic Leadership. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Press, 2010. Print. Okasha, Samir. Evolution and Rationality: Decisons, Cooperation and Strategic Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Print. Stair, Ralph. Principles of Information Systems. New York: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print. Read More