Group Decision-Making Methods

 

Group decision-making is a participatory process that entails numerous individuals working together to analyze issues or scenarios, reckon and assess alternative courses of action, and then a solution or solutions is chosen from the alternatives (Hinsz, & Nickell, 2004). The purpose of groups, structure, demographic makeup, their size, the nature, and composition, all impact their functioning to certain points. Furthermore, conflicting goals and time pressure – considered external contingencies – also affect the effectiveness and development of decision-making groups. Nonetheless, there are four common group decision-making methods namely, Delphi technique, brainstorming, nominal group technique, and dialectical inquiry (Van, et al., 2004). However, I will elaborate, compare and contrast only brainstorming and Delphi technique.

Brainstorming is a technique that consist of group members attempting to formulate ideas or source solutions for a particular issue via accumulating ideas instinctively and without any form of judgment (Schwalbe, 2015).  It is a common method utilized by numerous institutions and businesses to generate new ideas; however, caution must be taken to not misuse or overuse brainstorming. Group effects such as the domination of a session by vocal individuals, effects of authority hierarchy, and the fear of social disapproval tend to hinder idea generation for numerous participants (Montuori, 1998). Moreover, according to experimental research, individuals that work alone tend to generate more ideas compared to when they brainstorm in small, face-to-face meetings (Sutton, & Hargadon, 1996).

Delphi technique attempts to derive consensus among a panel of specialist who make forecasts about developments in the future. In other words, it is an approach to accumulating information – although, contrary to brainstorming, the negative group effects are not present. Delphi technique utilizes recurrent rounds of interrogation and written responses, including responses to prior rounds, to take advantage of the input from the group while simultaneously evading oral panel deliberations’ bias effects (Schwalbe, 2015).

 

 

 

 

References

Hinsz, V. B., & Nickell, G. S. (2004). Positive Reactions to Working in Groups in a Study of Group and Individual Goal Decision Making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(4), 253.

Montuori, A. (1998). J. DANIEL COUGER Creative Problem Solving and Opportunity Finding. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(3), 223-226.

Schwalbe, K. (2015). Information technology project management. Cengage Learning.

Sutton, R., & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming Groups in Context: Effectiveness in a Product Design Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(4), 685-718. doi:10.2307/2393872

Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of applied psychology, 89(6), 1008.