scholarly journals GROUP DECISION MAKING: DRAWING OUT AND RECONCILING DIFFERENCES

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirti Peniwati
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Complex Environment ◽  
Supporting System ◽  
Scientific Approach ◽  
Book Group ◽  
Collective Thinking

Why is group decision making so important today?  In our increasingly complex environment, decision making becomes more and more challenging for leaders and practitioners.  Working in groups appears to be the norm because the alignment of visions and actions are critical for an organization. A leader or a group facilitator needs a supporting system to make collective thinking effective. The book, Group Decision Making: Drawing out and Reconciling Differences, written by Thomas Saaty and myself shows that the AHP is the scientific approach for supporting group processes in the current and future complex environment (Saaty & Peniwati, 2008). https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v9i3.533

GROUPTHINK: EFFECTS OF COHESIVENESS AND PROBLEM-SOLVING PROCEDURES ON GROUP DECISION MAKING

1984 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Callaway ◽  
James K Esser
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Decision Procedures ◽  
Decision Quality ◽  
Group Cohesiveness ◽  
Mixed Support ◽  
High Level

Janis' (1972) groupthink formulation was tested in the laboratory by manipulating group cohesiveness and adequacy of decision procedures in a factorial design. Internal analysis, involving redefined cohesiveness categories, provided mixed support for the groupthink hypothesis on measures of decision quality and group processes presumed to underlie the groupthink decisions. Specifically, it was found that: (1) highest quality decisions were produced by groups of intermediate cohesiveness; (2) high cohesive groups without adequate decision procedures (the groupthink condition) tended to make the poorest decisions; and (3) the presence of groupthink was characterized by a lack of disagreement and a high level of confidence in the group's decisions.

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF AGE AND GENDER IN GROUP DECISION-MAKING PROPENSITY

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliana Osmani ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Young People ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Complex Environment ◽  
Age And Gender ◽  
Participatory Processes ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
And Gender

Increasingly, organizations are oriented towards groups to make decisions. This is because some contextual factors have undergone significant changes. Companies are operating in a competitive, dynamic and complex environment, having to face with unstructured and non-programmed decisions. Organizations are also oriented towards participatory processes in order to benefit from the important advantages that these processes offer. The main goal of the current research is to understand if there is a correlation between group decision-making propensity, age and gender. The motivation for the current research starts from the consideration that the degree of preference for group decision-making processes determines the contribution and commitment of the members, with important consequences on the decisions’ effectiveness. The processing and analysis of the collected data indicate that adults prefer group decision-making processes more than young people and women prefer group decision-making processes less than men.

scholarly journals Ensuring Resident Competence: A Narrative Review of the Literature on Group Decision Making to Inform the Work of Clinical Competency Committees

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. Hauer ◽  
Olle ten Cate ◽  
Christy K. Boscardin ◽  
William Iobst ◽  
Eric S. Holmboe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Organizational Behavior ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Clinical Competency ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Education Psychology

ABSTRACT  The expectation for graduate medical education programs to ensure that trainees are progressing toward competence for unsupervised practice prompted requirements for a committee to make decisions regarding residents' progress, termed a clinical competency committee (CCC). The literature on the composition of these committees and how they share information and render decisions can inform the work of CCCs by highlighting vulnerabilities and best practices.Background  We conducted a narrative review of the literature on group decision making that can help characterize the work of CCCs, including how they are populated and how they use information.Objective  English language studies of group decision making in medical education, psychology, and organizational behavior were used.Methods  The results highlighted 2 major themes. Group member composition showcased the value placed on the complementarity of members' experience and lessons they had learned about performance review through their teaching and committee work. Group processes revealed strengths and limitations in groups' understanding of their work, leader role, and information-sharing procedures. Time pressure was a threat to the quality of group work.Results  Implications of the findings include the risks for committees that arise with homogeneous membership, limitations to available resident performance information, and processes that arise through experience rather than deriving from a well-articulated purpose of their work. Recommendations are presented to maximize the effectiveness of CCC processes, including their membership and access to, and interpretation of, information to yield evidence-based, well-reasoned judgments.Conclusions

Personality Influences on Group Processes

2018 ◽  
pp. 592-620
Author(s):  
Craig D. Parks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
History Of ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Modern Work

This chapter addresses the role of personality traits in group decision-making and performance processes. It begins with a review of the history of interaction between group and personality researchers to show that, at one time, the domains went hand in hand. Methodological concerns in the 1950s, however, led group researchers to move away from personality, resulting in a piecemeal approach to personality influences in groups. Following this historical analysis, modern work in conflict, group performance, group decision-making, and group maintenance is reviewed, with a key theme being that although there are few systematic studies of traits in groups, there is quite a bit of isolated work being done. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the barriers to increased collaboration between the two camps, why such collaboration is important for both, and some ideas about what a Person × Situation interaction within a group might reflect.

Group Problem Solving and Decision Making: An Investigation of the Process and the Supporting Technology

1996 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pat Finnegan ◽  
Lynda O'Mahony
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Group Technology ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Technological Support ◽  
Group Problem Solving ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Widespread Phenomenon ◽  
Available Technology

A major problem facing the development of technological support for groups is that many studies investigate group technology in isolation from an analysis of group activity, or focus only on discrete aspects of the process. This paper presents the findings of a study that investigated the nature and extent of group decision making and the use of group supporting technology in Irish organizations. The paper presents a model of group decision making and examines group processes and activities as well as the use of technology at each stage. The findings indicate that group decision making is a widespread phenomenon, which was found to be far more complicated than individual decision making. However, groups were found to need a great deal of control and coordination to enable members to collaborate effectively. Nevertheless, group decision making was found to receive little technological support. The available technology provided only low level support which mainly focused on supporting the asynchronous work of groups.

scholarly journals Group decision-making from an evolutionary/adaptationist perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 669-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Scott Tindale ◽  
Tatsuya Kameda
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Behavior ◽  
Group Decision Making ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Group Decision ◽  
Group Processes ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Human Social Behavior ◽  
Research Domains

Over the 20 years that Group Processes & Intergroup Relations has been in existence, evolutionary theory has begun to play a larger role in our understanding of human social behavior. Theory and research on group decision-making is no exception and the present paper attempts to briefly highlight how an evolutionary/adaptationist perspective has informed our understanding of how groups reach consensus and make collective choices. In addition, we attempt to show that humans are not the only species that use group processes to make important choices. Looking for similarities and continuities among research domains with different species should lead to a more unified and informed understanding of group decision-making processes and outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document