© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Problem-Solving & Decision Making I: Defining a Problem & Evaluating Options © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. C H A P T E R 1 0 Twelfth Edition Theory and Practice EFFECTIVE GROUP DISCUSSION

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter Content  Problem Solving & Decision Making  Group versus Individual Problem Solving & Decision Making  Factors Affecting Quality of Group Outputs  Need for Structure in Group Problem Solving  Problem-Solving Guidelines  Procedural Model of Problem Solving, Steps One through Three

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Problem Solving & Decision Making  Problem  Problem solving  Decision making

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Group versus Individual Problem Solving & Decision Making  Advantages of groups:  Assembly effect  Better decisions  Compensation for others’ weaknesses  Ability to process more information  Different perspectives on a problem  Greater acceptance of a decision  Satisfaction of belonging & affection needs Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Group versus Individual Problem Solving & Decision Making  Disadvantages of groups:  Longer time to make decisions  Pressure to conform from group members  Strained relationships among members

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. So, when is it worth the trouble?  Solution M ultiplicity  Population A cceptance  Sufficient T ime

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Factors Affecting Quality of Group Outputs  Input factors  Type of task  Conjunctive  Disjunctive  Abilities of members  Integrative complexity  Need for cognition Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Factors Affecting Quality of Group Outputs  Throughput factors  Communication among members  Full group member participation  Group’s climate

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Intuitive Problem-Solving  Steps …  Conception  Preparation  Incubation  Illumination  Verification  “Trust but Verify”  Graham Wallis’ approach

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Need for Structure in Group Problem Solving  Without structure, groups:  Move randomly between ideas  Produce lower quality output Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Need for Structure in Group Problem Solving  Organized problem-solving discussions allow groups to:  Balance participation  Improve reflectiveness  Coordinate group members’ thinking  Establish important ground rules for proceeding

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Functional Perspective  Communication influences the quality of solutions  Guidelines

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Functional Perspective  Task requirements for groups to succeed: 1.Understand the issue 2.Determine minimal characteristics of acceptable alternatives (Criteria) 3.Determine relevant and realistic alternatives 4.Examine the alternatives 5.Select the best alternative

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Problem-Solving Guidelines  Procedural Model of Problem Solving (P-MOPS)  Single Question Format  Ideal Solution Format Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Procedural Model of Problem Solving (P-MOPS)  General model  Major steps: 1.Problem description & analysis 2.Generating & elaborating on possible solutions 3.Evaluating possible solutions 4.Consensus decision making 5.Implementing the solution chosen

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Single Question Format  Less-structured  Major steps: 1.Identify the problem question 2.Create a collaborative setting 3.Identify and analyze the issues 4.Identify possible solutions 5.Resolve the single question

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Ideal Solution Format  Major steps: 1.Identify the nature of the problem 2.Identify the ideal solution 3.Identify the conditions that must change 4.Select the most ideal solution

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Comparison of Problem-Solving Guidelines Figure 10.1 Comparison of the Questions Addressed by Three Problem-Solving Guidelines

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 1 of P-MOPS: Problem Description & Analysis  1A: Understand the charge and area of freedom  1B: Understand the type of question to be addressed  Question of fact, value, conjecture, or policy  1C: Focus on the problem Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 1 of P-MOPS: Problem Description & Analysis  1D: State the problem appropriately  Solution questions versus problem questions  1E: Map the problem  Use the problem census to discover problems

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 2 of P-MOPS: Generating & Elaborating on Possible Solutions  2A: Identify as many good ideas as you can  Use brainstorming to discover alternatives  2B: Defer judgment during discussion to identify options  2C: Discuss criteria for evaluating solutions  Absolute and relative criteria

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 3 of P-MOPS: Evaluating Possible Solutions  3A: Establish a collaborative climate for evaluation  3B: Establish norms that promote critical thinking  Identify negatives about all possible solutions Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 3 of P-MOPS: Evaluating Possible Solutions  Evaluate information  Distinguish between facts and inferences  Evaluate survey and statistical data  Evaluate the sources and implications of opinions Continued

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Statements of Fact & Statements of Opinion & Inference Figure 10.4 Comparing Statements of Fact and Statements of Opinion and Inference

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 3 of P-MOPS: Evaluating Possible Solutions  Evaluate reasoning -- Fallacies  Overgeneralizing  Ad hominem attacks  Suggesting inappropriate causal relationships  False dilemmas  Faulty analogies  Precedent

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Step 3 of P-MOPS: Evaluating Possible Solutions Criteria for evaluating information and reasoning from the Internet:  Accuracy  Credible authority  Audience  Purpose  Recency  Coverage

© 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Notes on Chapter 10  Whatever outline you use, you first must achieve a thorough understanding of your problem.  The more good quality options you generate, and the more thoroughly and objectively you evaluate them, the better your group’s chance of achieving the best solution.