Group Decision Making Up to 40% of a manager’s time is spent in meetings –All meetings involve decision making

What Experienced “Problem Solvers” say... First four steps –Collect and analyze information and data –Talk with people familiar with the problem –If at all possible, view the problem firsthand –Confirm all findings The next four steps –Determine if the problem should be solved –Continue to gather information, search literature –Form simple hypotheses and quickly test them –Brainstorm potential causes and solution alternatives

Group Decision Making Advantages –More complete information (diversity of experience, perspectives) –Identify / generate more alternatives –Increases acceptance of solutions –Increases legitimacy (democratic ideals, regardless of legitimate power) –Tend to be more accurate / better –More effective

Group Decision Making Disadvantages –Time consuming –Potential for imbalanced influence / contribution –“Group-think” (pressure to conform) Undermines individual’s critical thought –Ambiguous responsibility –“Size” sensitive (5 - 7 is ideal) –Tend to be slower than individual decision making –Less efficient

Management Science model Analogous to Rational Model Clarity of problem –Problems are analyzable –Problems are well structured Clarity of decision criteria Identify relevant variables –Suited to large number of variables –Issues of complexity

Management Science model Advantages / Disadvantages –Difficulties in incorporating appropriate criteria –The nature of the data used to arrive at a decision High in “Quantity” Low in “Richness”

Carnegie Model Analogous to a “Behavioral Model” (applying bounded rationality) –Based upon uncertainty / ambiguity Goals & Objectives –Frequently ambiguous or inconsistent –Creates disagreements about priorities Managers intend to be rational –Constrained by cognitive capabilities –Seek to gather information - reduce ambiguity

Carnegie Model Coalition formation –Facilitates prioritization –“satisficing” rather than optimization –Managers more concerned with short-run Problemistic search –Immediate environment for solution that will quickly solve problem –Don’t expect “perfect solution –First satisfactory solution presented

Carnegie “process”

Incremental Process Model Another “behavioral model” –Less emphasis on social factors –More emphasis on structured sequence of activities –Most decisions = nonprogrammed Require “custom” solutions

Incremental Process Model Major organizational choices –Series of small choices –Combining to produce major decision –“Nibbles” vs. “Bites” Decision “Interrupts” –Barriers –Requires cycling back through previous decision Trying something “new”

Incremental Process Model Identification –Recognition –Diagnosis Development –Search / Screen alternative solutions –Design custom solutions Selection –Judgement / evaluation - choice –Analysis / evaluation –Bargaining / evaluation - choice –Authorization

Contingency framework Goal ConsensusGoal Consensus –Agreement about goals and outcomes –AgreementDisagreement If agree –Goals are clear –Standards of performance are clear Tends to be related to diversity of business

Contingency framework Technical knowledgeTechnical knowledge –Understanding / agreement about “how” to reach organization’s goals –Ability to achieve acceptable solution Goals = EffectivenessGoals = Effectiveness Technical knowledge = EfficiencyTechnical knowledge = Efficiency

Intuition Compromise

Conceptions of order Reality –Capability of objective assessment –“Real” truth Causality –Reality is a chain of causes and effects –Choices influence results Intentionality –The results were intended –Decisions are instruments of purpose & Self

Models of intentional decision Rational choice –Evaluating anticipated consequences –Used in non-programmed decisions Learning –Evaluating past experiences –Used in both programmed & nonprogrammed Matching identity to rule/proc./policy –“What kind of problem” is it? –Used in programmed decisions

Garbage Can model Problem preference –Ambiguous Unclear, poorly understood technology –Cause and effect relationships ambiguous Turnover of participants –Limitations / dynamics of participation

Concept of temporal sorting When events occur –Together Events occurring together are associated with each other –Distant in time Events distant in time are treated as distant in connections with each other

Importance of “Problems” Problems to not appear in particular order Problems are not inherently important or solvable Number of choices attached –Concepts of: Recency Primacy Urgency Pressure Relate to Heuristics

Problem Resolution Typically, NOT accomplished Generally, “flight” or “oversight” is utilized Resolution only occurs –When choice opportunity is attached –When system load (energy drains) are light

Possible Results What problems get “solved?” Oversight –Choice opportunity without problems attached Problem resolution –Choice opportunity with problems attached Flight –Problems and choice opportunities exceed available energy

Participants in “System Reformers –Systematic (rational) Optimistic, blind faith in consistency Pragmatists –Exploit the system (self-serving) Assumes everyone else is naïve Enthusiasts –Encourage organization attention/flexibility Overestimate tolerance for confusion

Assessing performance of decision “system” Activity –Problems attached to choice solutions Latency –Problems activated, but not linked to choices Decision time –Time that choices remain unmade Hard to improve all 3 simultaneously –Related to problem structure –Unstructured problems overload system