It has been an open question on whether group decision making is better than individual decision making. Suppose it were true that groups did not perform tasks as well as individuals. There would have been little motivation to form groups at all. Many vital economic, legal, political, and military choices are been created by groups. There's a limit to how much information any one individual can process, and a limit on how many perspectives one person can see. Many decisions need full group participation to explore the situation, provide input, and make a final choice. As one has probably seen, groups can often make better decisions than any one person operating on his or her own. This is one of the main reasons that good companies have boards, …show more content…
During brainstorming, group members are encouraged to state their ideas, no matter how wild they may seem, while an appointed group member records all ideas for discussion. One major advantage of brainstorming is the enormous number of ideas that are generated from the technique. By having an open and free session, everyone can engage in the creation of ideas. This kind of atmosphere is not the usual “formal” situation, which often cramps people of their creativity. People feel good about themselves and the idea that they can contribute to the session. A major disadvantage of the technique is that it produces ideas without screening them. Although brainstorming may produce a wide variety of ideas, many of them may not be quality ideas. Effective solutions to problems usually have been screened, tested, and evaluated. For this reason brainstorming is often used only as the first step in an overall problem-solving …show more content…
It ultimately depends upon the situation. If there is an emergency and a decision needs to be made quickly, individual decision making might be preferred. However, if one person does not have all the information and skills needed to make a decision, if implementing the decision will be difficult without the involvement of those who will be affected by the decision, and if time urgency is more modest, then group decision making may be more effective. When time is of the essence, a good decision is one that's made quickly. That doesn't usually happen with full team decision making. And when one or two people have the necessary expertise to make the decision, it doesn't make sense to involve the whole team – the experts provide most of the input and make the final choice
One will think that when individuals are in groups they will mostly likely be able to help, and come to a person rescue, well that is the opposite of that. When people are in groups they tend to run away from the problem, instead of coming together to come to a conclusion. When one part of the group is doing something, the whole group is going to follow. Not one member of the group will have the guts to stand up and do the opposite of the group. It is like the whole group think alike.
While brainstorming “allows for spontaneous, creative, quick ideas/ suggestions” (Anderson, 1990, p.), the discussion is prone to drifting off tangent or being bullied by extroverts. Perhaps the initial ideas produced by the brainstorming could be given to the members where introverts and extroverts alike are provided an opportunity to provide in-depth feedback. Thus creating increased involvement, “eliminating interpersonal problems, and making solutions and predictions more accurate” (Bolland and Fletcher, 2011). Afterward, a meeting setup using the nominal group technique would help resolve any resolutions associated with the decision to be addressed by leadership or members involved with the suggestions and solutions.
Psychologist Irving Janis explained some alarmingly bad decisions made by governments and businesses coined the term "groupthink”, which he called "fiascoes.” He was particularly drawn to situations where group pressure seemed to result in a fundamental failure to think. Therefore, Janis further analyzed that it is a quick and easy way to refer to a mode of thinking people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members ' striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. According to Janis, groupthink is referred as the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevents the appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.
Decision-making is constant in the workplace, both individually and in a group setting. At some point during a professional career an employee will be involved in the decision-making process. Decision-making on the individual level often occurs daily, such as deciding the order by which work tasks will be completed. There are several issues associated with the decision-making process on both the individual and group level. Of these issues are biases and errors in decision-making.
The final result will not always fit everyone’s liking. There can be a lack of trust among the group members. Finally there can be situations in where only experts about the topic should be able to decide. Firstly, reaching a consensus
This is a key element that unifies the group members to basically share different point of views and expertise to solve a certain problem, brainstorming also helps in the creation of new ideas and strategic methods a company can aim for. No company should leave brainstorming the same group of people at all times, there should be access to all the necessary people from the management team to the hardworking employees for input, because information only increases, and ideas change based on what is put on the table, and additional forms of key concepts no matter who says them, will always be of added value and extra help. Groups who really team up and collaborate will see the value of cooperating, which will lead up eventually to benefiting both sides and for the organization as a whole. Having a collaborative work force will increase efficiency and effectiveness within the workplace. And there are many benefits that come along it.
Six Thinking Hats in Group Decision Making : When we take certain decision about important things in our life, it does not become easy to come to final and constructive conclusion. If we look into our usual (Indian) approach of communication and thinking, it is usually not lateral but opposing and does not involve co-operation. Especially when an individual or team decision needs to be taken- it should be collaborative, supportive, 360 degree thinking, understanding from all angles and then taking decision. In group, members assume different hats of thinking and put forward such kind of views which would be integrated into an effective
1) Compare and contrast three influential theoretical frameworks on team creativity/ innovation. Your review of each theory should a) provide a clear definition of team creativity, b) describe some similarities and key differences between these theories, and c) clearly explain major causal mechanisms. 1) Comparison and contrast of three frameworks According to the interactionist perspective of organizational creativity (Woodman, Sawyer, & Griffin, 1993), creativity results from interaction of the individual with the many levels of their organizational environment, namely the individual, team, and organizational levels.
When do groups make better decisions than individuals? The first question that comes to mind when we hear of groups and individual decision-making is what is decision-making? Individuals, groups, teams, and corporate entities are confronted with daily decision-making. For instance, if we have three things to choose from, and we pick one against the other two things, there is a decision-making process that led to that choice.
Hence, a decision is needed to put things back on track. In this scenario, a manager may be able to think of an easy solution, but he has to analyze the cause of the problems and what are the possible means of overcoming such. This is because an effective strategic decision is very easy to understand but difficult to achieve. Vasilescu (2011) asserts that one problem with decision making is the thinking that people can make decisions immediately. Most likely, people make decisions through identifying and comparing circumstances in order to determine which one produces the most favorable resolution.
Moreover, the managers should not reprimand the creativity of their employees by imposing them tremendous amount of paper work every time they want to present a new idea. In order, to help your employees to bring new ideas, you have to instore a creative environment where the employees will not be discouraged by the work they have to do just to present a new algorithm for example. The employees should also see the action of the top management as an example of good behaviour. [1] The only way that this change would
Managers has total authority over everything. Since the managers alone would be making decisions groups may feel demotivated and may have difficulty completing a task if it is not going the way it should be going stated by the manager, groups may feel pressured causing them to make
As projected by Forsyth (2009) that these models are the most successful parameters of group decision-making process. Usually, these models are called general models of this procedure. The effectiveness might be improved further by focussing on some specific techniques. These techniques are brainstorming, nominal group technique, Delphi method, and dialectical inquiry, which must be undertaken during the alternative selections (Forsyth,
Brainstorm possible solutions Brainstorming is defined as the rapid generation and listing of solution ideas without clarification and without evaluation of their merits. There are six rules for brainstorming: • Don’t evaluate ideas until later. • Don’t seek clarification of suggestions. • Go for creative (zany, silly) ideas as well as ‘sensible’ ones. • Expand on each other’s ideas.
Cultural Influence: The Creative Thinking Difference with Study in the Australia and the Netherlands Hendrik Wang Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Netherlands INTRODUCTION: Many scholars has been noted that the relationship between studying abroad and creative thinking. According to Brian J. Hurn and Barry Tomalin (2013), there are advantages and disadvantages of study abroad, in particular the advantages of cultural diversity, including increased skills, new ideas and creativity and the disadvantages of pressure on the existing welfare services, housing and education. Moreover, Christine s. Lee stated that creative thinking as a possible cognitive benefit gained from studying abroad (2012). But why creative thinking has so strong relationship