dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat Institute of Administrative Studies University of Wrocław Group decision making

dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat In the theory of group decision making there are at least three ways to view a group:  a group is a collective entity independent of the proper- ties of its members  a group is a set of individuals, and group properties are functions of the properties of individual members  A group is a collective entity composed of a set of individuals, and group behavior should be understood in terms of group properties and member properties

Group decision making E. Frank Harrison: The third view is by far the most comprehensive:  by adopting this view we are saying that it is necessary but not sufficient to define a group’s properties in terms of its members’ properties.  we must also realize that groups do have minds of their own in the obvious sense that we can study the group’s purposeful behavior independently of the characteristics of its members The notion of a group mind has been extended by Daniel M. Wegner through the concept of transactive memory system. dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Group decision making Daniel M. Wegner: The transactive memory system in a group involves the operation of the memory systems of the individuals and the processes of communication that occur within the group. Transactive memory is therefore not traceable to any of the individuals alone, nor can it be found somewhere „between” individuals. Rather, it is a property of a group. This unique quality of transactive memory brings with it the realization that we are speaking of a constructed system, a mode of group operation that is built up over time by its individual constituents. Once in place, then, the transactive memory system can have an impact on what the group as a whole can remember, and as a result, on what individuals in the group remember and regard as correct even outside the group. In short, transactive memory derives from individuals to form a group information-processing system that eventually may return to have a profound influence upon its individual participants. dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Group decision making More on the transactive memory system: dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Daniel M. Wegner

Grupowe podejmowanie decyzji Knowledge is of two kinds: we know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find in- formation upon it. Samuel Johnson ( )

Group decision making The assets of group decision making  greater sum total of knowledge or information  greater number of approaches to a problem  participation in decision making increases general acceptance of the final choice  better comprehension of the decision dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Group decision making The liabilities of group decision making  social pressure (groupthink)  acceptance of the first solution  individual domination  winning the decision*  time  group polarization * The appearance of several alternatives often causes the members to support a particular position. These preferences often take precedence over finding the best solution and the result is a compromise decision of lower quality.

Group decision making dr hab. Jerzy Supernat Strategies for group decision making  routine decision making  creative decision making  negotiated decision making

Source: E.F. Harrison ROUTINE DECISION MAKING CREATIVE DECISION MAKING NEGOTIATED DECISION MAKING Group structure Specialists with a coordinator (leader). Heterogeneous, competent personnel; leader who facilitates creative processes. Proportional representation of constituencies. Group roles Independent effort ; specialist expertise. All ideas are brought before the group for discussion. Individual sees self as a representative of a faction. Group process Specified objectives; interactions among coordinators and specialists. Problem-solving process with full participation, spontaneous communication, and considered judgment. Orderly communication; formalized procedures; voting procedures. Group style High stress occasioned by quality and quantity commitments and time constraints. Relaxed, nonstressful environment; ego-supportive; absence of sanctions. Frankness and candor; acceptance of due process; avoiding of emotional hostility. Group norms Professionalism. Openness in communication; consensus; supportive of originality; nonauthoritarian. Desire to reach agreement; constructive view of conflict freedom to disagree; acceptance of compromise.

Group decision making dr hab. Jerzy Supernat Types of decision-making groups:  interacting group  nominal group  Delphi group

Group decision making Interacting group  Typically interacting group meeting begins with a sta- tement of the problem by the group leader.  This is followed by an unstructured group discussion to generate information and pool judgments among the participants.  The meeting usually concludes with a majority vote on priorities, or a consensual decision. dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Group decision making Nominal group Nominal group technique was developed by Andre L. Delbecg and Andrew H. Van de Ven in The structured format of this technique proceeds this way:  individual members first silently and independently write down their ideas on a problem or task  this is followed by a recorded round-robin in which every group mem- ber presents an idea to the group without discussion, and the ideas are summarized in short phrases and written on a blackboard or sheet of paper on the wall  after all individuals have presented their ideas, there is a discussion to clarify and evaluate the recorded ideas  the meeting concludes with a silent, independent vote on priorities by individuals through rank ordering or rating; the group decision is a pooled outcome of individual votes dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Andrew H. Van de Ven

Group decision making Delphi group Unlike either the interacting group or the nominal group decision-making processes, participants in the delphi process are physically dispersed and don’t meet face to face for group decision making. dr. hab. Jerzy Supernat

Source: E.F. Harrison INTERACTING GROUP NOMINAL GROUP DELPHI GROUP Group decision criteria: - Quality - Acceptance - Originality Moderate to high Low to moderate Moderate Low or moderate Low to moderate Moderate to high Group situational characteristics: - Availability of expertise - Span of the decision - Conflict within the group Low to moderate Intermediate to brad Moderate to high Moderate Intermediate Low to moderate Moderate to high Narrow to intermediate Low Group membership - Experts - Representatives - Coworkers Occasionally Frequently Usually Frequently Occasionally Frequently Usually Seldom Occasionally

Concluding remark dr hab. Jerzy Supernat "Sir, What is the secret of your success?" a reporter asked a bank president. "Two words". "And, sir, what are they?" " Good decisions." "And how do you make good decisions?" "One word." "And sir, what is that?" "Experience." "And how do you get Experience?" "Two words." "And, sir, what are they?" "Bad decisions.” Anonymous