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
Problem
Achieve Make it OK
NOT to
What What
to do to do
How to do it How to do it
Duncker Diagram Worksheet
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
Uncertainty Coalition Formation SearchInformation limitations Joint discussions Simple, local searchMany constraints Interpret goals Established proceduresDifferent constraints Interpret problems (if appropriate)
Create solution (if needed)Share opinions
Conflict Satisficing behaviorDifferent goals Establish problem priorities First acceptable alternative
Different opinionsDifferent values Obtain support for problemDifferent experiences Obtain support for solution
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
Organization decision process / uncertainty
When uncertain: When uncertainCarnegie Model Incremental process model
Political and Social processes Incremental, trial & errorBuild coalition Big problems / little stepsAgreement to resolve conflicts
Resolve conflics about goals & Recycle & try again when blockedproblem priorities
Problem Identification Problem Solution
Contingency framework
• Goal ConsensusGoal Consensus– Agreement about goals and outcomes– Agreement
Disagreement• 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
Low
High
High 1 2Problem Ident. Problem Ident.Low Uncertainty High Uncertainty
Problem Solution Problem SolutionLow Uncertainty Low Uncertainty
3 4Problem Ident. Problem Ident.Low Uncertainty High Uncertainty
Problem Solution Problem SolutionHigh Uncertainty High Uncertainty
Low
Contingency Decision Situations
GoalConsensus
TechnicalKnowledge
Low
High
High 1 2Individual IndividualRational approach BargainingComputational Coalition formation
Organization OrganizationManagement Science Model Carnegie Model
3 4Individual IndividualJudgement Bargaining & JudgementTrial & Error Inspiration & Imitation
Organization OrganizationIncremental Process Carnegie & Incremental
Evolving to Garbage Can
Low
Contingency Decision Models
GoalConsensus
TechnicalKnowledge
Low
High
High 1 2Individual IndividualRational approach BargainingComputational Coalition formation
Organization OrganizationManagement Science Model Carnegie Model
3 4Individual IndividualJudgement Bargaining & JudgementTrial & Error Inspiration & Imitation
Organization OrganizationIncremental Process Carnegie & Incremental
Evolving to Garbage Can
Low
Contingency Decision Models
GoalConsensus
TechnicalKnowledge
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
Top Related