The Effectiveness of Group Decision Making - Term Paper Example

The Effectiveness of Group Decision Making The increasing expansion of globalization is causing multi-national organizations to develop and implement group decision making strategies and practices to maximize the effectiveness of group interaction. Along with the emergence of virtual groups and teams the need to internalize processes that harness the affects of successful group decision making practices increases the likelihood of organizations and companies remaining sustainable in the continuously changing global arena. Successful group decision making practices are not peculiar to one industry or profession, but are applicable to any group, company, or organization in which effective outcomes of activities are the goals and objectives. The effectiveness of decision making requires the implementation of internal systems in which people, technology, and operational procedures proficiently intermingle. The coordination of internal communication systems of interaction enable and ensure the alignment of the group’s activities and decision making process with the strategic objectives of the organization. The group decision making processes and practices within an organization potentially determine the success or failure of a group’s strategic goals and objectives. Formulating strategies to efficiently harness the influence of collective intelligence for the benefit of accomplishing a group’s goals is the purpose for understanding the value and importance of making logical, rational, thorough, and informed group decisions (Gregg, 2010). The purpose of this paper is to discuss group decision making practices and how the outcomes of the coordinated and synergetic efforts of an assembly of individuals can prove profitable and beneficial. To substantiate the value of effective group decision making reviewing several research studies in which using creative thinking techniques, communication, and cohesion as tools aid in generating and formulating effective decisions (Kunifuji & Kato, 2007; Geist & Chandler, 1984). Characteristics of Groups Groups perform multiple functions in organizations that increase internal operational efficiency, productivity, and consequently can determine a group’s position in the marketplace. Groups or specialty teams, and internet or virtual teams within an organizational culture create an environment in which individuals must work cohesively and cooperatively as a unit because of geographical logistics. Because groups are comprised of individuals with unique characteristics and traits the collective assembly becomes a unique entity within itself with a distinct personality as a result. The characteristics of a group reflect the individual traits, skill and talents of the individuals within the group. One task of leadership is to identify and effectively coordinate the human resources maximizing the individual skills for the benefit of the organization. By taking inventory of the talent and skills of each member enables the most efficient and effective use of the collective human effort. Morgan (2006) makes the metaphorical analogy of the structure of groups (organizations), resembling machines, living organisms, and brains (pp. 3-114). Even though his theories focus on the whole structure of organizations, his premise and philosophy is applicable to internal groups or departments within an organizational structure such as research and development (R&D), accounting, marketing and others (pp. 3-114). Each member in the group interacting and interconnecting to work systematically and harmoniously with the other members is the foundation for producing effective decisions. Tuckman’s and Jensen’s (2010) model identifies four stages of developing groups for effective collaboration, communication and performance: forming, norming, storming, and performing. The forming stage of group development is the stage of getting to know each other on the team. During this stage the group members are unfamiliar with how to interact effectively and are learning to understand each member’s unique traits. The storming stage is the time of blending and beginning to work cohesively and mechanically, however it is during the storming stage that conflict erupts requiring intervention from management and leadership. Whereas conflict is a disruptive force in an organizational setting working through the challenges of learning how to interrelate and interact within a group has its benefits. One of the most significant benefits of working through conflict is learning to identify the collective group’s strengths and weaknesses. Storming uncovers those areas that may otherwise go undetected and create or cause dissention later in the group’s interactions. Norming is the stage in which the personalities, attitudes, and dispositions of the individuals within the group begin complementing one another as opposed to being antagonistic toward members. This stage enables members to recognize how to work through issues and resolve disagreements more readily and easier remaining focused on the group’s goals and objectives. The task of harnessing, directing, and synchronizing individual energy in a group is not an easy undertaking, however once accomplished the outcome or results of producing effective decisions strengthens the positioning of the group in the organization. As a group, the cohesion of the members determines the consistency in the quality of the decisions. Gardner, Davidson, McAteer, and Michie (2009) in their qualitative research study on the social psychological influences of decision making highlighted the factors of conceptualization of recommendation; evaluation of evidence; beliefs and values; professional status; interests and opinions; and experience and knowledge of the group’s members as influential in determining the effectiveness of the group’s ability to work cohesively and produce quality decisions (p. 48). In addition to the list of influencing factors, Gardner, el al (2009) suggests that to improve a group’s decision making capabilities requires analyzing and evaluating the influences on the decision making process as a starting point (p. 48). During the formation of the group, identifying the dominant members and evaluating their influence on how decisions are made can have a positive or negative impact on the outcomes. The natural hierarchy within the group forms over time with the dominant personalities assuming the leadership positions, however contingent upon the type of decision and the human resources needed to make the decision(s) each member will assume a leading position over the life of the group. Decisions affect day-to-day operations as well as long range goals and objectives that determine the longevity and sustainability of organizations. The process of becoming an effective decision making group is accomplished through trial and error in the beginning of the cohesive process; learning from the decisions that did not produce the expected or desired outcomes provides a foundation to build on for understanding how to work together collectively and successfully (Kunifuji & Kato, 2007). Because individual members possess unique skills and talent(s) each member’s abilities should in some way complement other members in the group to create a complete entity as opposed to a fragmented, dysfunctional grouping of misaligned people. By establishing rules as to how a group functions as a single unit helps unify the members with the best use of their collective intelligence and collaboration methods to help develop effective decisions and eliminate friction, declension, and conflict. Decision Making: Success or Failure Royce Homes a privately owned 100 million dollar plus homebuilder is no longer in business because of ineffective business decisions. The collapse of the subprime mortgage industry was instrumental in the company filing for bankruptcy in 2007; and subsequently going out of business within one year of seeking protection from creditors (Your Name, Personal Communication, 1994-2008). As one of the most volatile times in the real estate and mortgage lending industries in the United States leadership at Royce Homes failed to acknowledge the obvious external threats and make the necessary internal adjustments to insulate the company against failure. Whether the actions taken by the company’s leaders were contrived or out of ignorance is unknown, however if effective group decisions been made and implemented the outcome for the organization could have possibly been different. In hindsight the organization could have avoided the affects of the erosion of the home building industry if the group decision making processes within the organizational structure and culture had been reasonable, rational, and logical considering the circumstances. As other homebuilders re-evaluated and revised their internal operating procedures in response to the external environment by reducing construction costs and reducing their employee base, Royce’s leaders stayed the course. As a new home sales counselor with the company at the time, it appeared leadership at Royce Homes was attempting to continue business as usual in the eroding marketplace. The decision to stay the course depleted reserves, increased expenses as the costs for building supplies increased due to the decrease in demand resulting in the demise of the company. The decisions to maintain operations as the company had in previous prosperous years was fatal for the survival and continuing life of the company. The problems occurring in the industries were not isolated events, but were historical events affecting property values and the financial and real estate industries worldwide. Royce Homes’ group decision making processes demonstrated the value and significance of making effective decisions and how faulty decisions can threaten the survival and continuation of a company. In reflection, if the collective internal group decision makers had made decisions in response to the external environmental conditions to fortify and enable the company to recover after the affects of the mortgage implosion could have increased the company’s survival options (Your Name, Personal Communication, 1994-2008). The recount of the demise of Royce Home is only one example of how critical group decision making is for the overall and general well-being of any type of entity. Group decision making is at the center of success or failure of a company or organization and confirms the validity of investing in developing workable, productive, effective, and efficient decision making policies and practices. Methods of Decision Making in Groups Geist and Chandler (1996) in their analysis of the group decision making process use various methods to evaluate the effectiveness of decisions. They make the assertion that the interaction between group members is a determinant of how effective the decisions of the group will be echoing Gardner, Davidson, McAteer, and Michie (2009) assertions of the importance of group members learning how to interact productively. Whereas Geist and Chandler’s (1996) perspective primarily focuses on the study of communication the fundamental principles of their theories and philosophy apply to the process of making decisions in groups as well. Without successful interaction between members the quality and consistency in the output of decisions could produce less than desirable outcomes. Gordon (1996) cites Brandenburger’s and Nalebuff’s (1996) philosophy of “Co-opetition,” the combination of cooperation and competition as a strategy for groups to use to position themselves with a competitive advantage (p. 67). The philosophy underscores the benefits of using and leveraging the forces of cooperation and competition internally as well to increase the effectiveness of the group decision making process. An integral component in their strategies of internal mindsets starts with leadership and management implementing internal methods to evaluate the effectiveness of decision making processes and practices. Creative Problem-Solving Techniques in Groups Kunifuji and Kato (2007) suggests the human creative thinking process has four primary ways for developing creative thinking skills: divergent thinking, convergent thinking, idea crystallization (evaluation and judgment), and idea verification (p. 459). Brainstorming, brain-writing, mind mapping, equivalent transformation method, and others are just a few of the techniques of creative problem solving in groups. In their research study the correlation between knowledge acquisition and learning are cores components of the group or team concept. Their theories emphasize the significance of understanding how group members acquire knowledge and the affects of collective learning increasing the likelihood of producing a higher quality of output (pp. 468-470). A salient point is the importance of cooperation and each member’s expression of his or her ideas, knowledge, and opinions is essential for a group to make decisions collectively (Kunifuji & Kato, 2007). Whereas Geist and Chandler (1996) emphasis the importance of communication in groups, their assertions reaffirm how the expression and exchange between members in a groups is influential on the quality of the collective decision making process and output. Conclusion The affects of globalization and the current worldwide economic conditions makes group decision making paramount and critical for companies and organizations to remain viable in the marketplace. From the evidence and synopsis of various qualitative research studies presented in this paper, group decision making is a core determinant of success and failure of any entity. The ability to openly express ideas, opinions, and knowledge by individual members in a group contexts helps foster a culture that enables the formation and production of effective decisions. In evaluating the mechanics of effective decision making groups one key element is the willingness of the individual members to participate in the group’s effort to maximize the benefits of their collective efforts to produce effective decisions. The group decision making process is foundational for an organization or company to create competitive advantages and sustainability in the external environment. By developing and implementing internal strategies that encourage and promote the collective group effort of producing quality decisions fortifies and strengthens an organization internally and in the external marketplace. References Gardner, B., Davidson, R., McAteer, J., & Michie, S. (2009). A method for studying decision making by guideline development groups. Implementation Science, 4(48), 1-9. DOI: 10.1186/1748-5908-4-48. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Geist P. & Chandler, T. (1984). Account analysis of influence in group decision making. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 67-78. Gordon, R. M. (1996). Playing to win. Marketing Management, 5(2), 67. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Gregg, D. G. (2010). Designing for collective intelligence. Communication of the ACM, 53(4), 134-138. DOI. 10.1145/1721654.1721691. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Kunifuji, S. & Kato, N. (2007). Consensus-making support systems dedicated to creative problem solving. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 6(3), 459-474. Morgan, G. (2006). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Tuckman, B. W. & Jensen, M. C. (2010). Stages of small group development revisited. Group facilitation: A Research Applications Journal, 10, 43-48. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. Read More