GROUP DECISION MAKING

INTRODUCTION

The word decision has been derived from the Latin word 'decider' which means a cutting
away or a cutting off, or in a practical sense. Thus, a decision involves a cut of alternatives
between those that are desirable and those that are not desirable. The decision is a kind of
a desirable alternative Lopez has defined a decision as:

"A decision represents a judgment; a final resolution of a conflict of needs, means and goals;
and a commitment to action made in face of uncertainty, complexity and even irrationality."

TYPES OF DECISIONS

Decision making is involved in every walk of life. It is relevant in organizational as well as

non - organizational context. In organizational context decisions may vary from the major
ones like determination of organizational objectives or deciding about major projects to
specific decisions about day–to–day operations. Therefore, there are different types of
decision which are made by managers in organizations and for each type of decision, decision
making variables and conditions differ.

1. Programmed and Non–Programmed Decisions

• Programmed Decisions: Programmed decisions are routine and repetitive and are
made within the framework of organizational policies and rules. These policies and
rules are established well in advance to solve, recurring problems in the organization
for example the problem relating to promotion of employees is solved by promoting
those employees who meet promotion criteria.

• Non - programmed Decisions: Non-programmed decisions are relevant for solving

unique/unusual problems in which various alternatives cannot be decided in advance.
(For such decisions, the situation is not well structured and the outcomes of various
alternatives cannot be arranged in advices). For example, if an organization wants to
take action for growth it may have several alternative routes like going for a grass -
route project or taking over an existing company. In each situation, the managers have
to evaluate the likely outcomes of each alternative to arrive at a decision.

2. Strategic and Tactical Decisions

• Strategic Decision: Strategic decision concept is based on strategy which is a

Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

1
 major action plan in an organization. Therefore, strategic decision can be
defined as: Strategic decision is a major choice of actions concerning
allocation of resources and contribution to the achievement of organizational
objectives.
• Tactical Decision: Tactical or operational decision is derived out of strategic
decision. It relates to day- to-day working of the organization and is made in the
context of well - set policies and procedures.

THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS

Decision making is a process to arrive at a decision.

Steps in Decision-making Process

No human being is perfect. Any decision taken by an organisation cannot please
everybody. The decision can also not be taken on the basis of emotion or bunch. In
fact, it is to be passed on logic. Further one cannot take decision just by studying the
literature on it, rather it requires practical experience. Moreover, the decision taken
today cannot remain in force forever. All this implies that the top-level and middle
Level executives can take decision only if they engage in the following five steps : see
figure 1.

Figure 1 : Steps In Group Decision Making

GROUP DECISION MAKING

Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

2
Managers like to believe that they are accomplished in such group activities like group
decision making, goal setting and problem solving. However-their ability to implement such
techniques is often hindered by their lack of understanding of the dynamics of group-decision
making processes. As a result, these managers often end up perpetuating problems that they
themselves create through their insensitivity to the needs of other group members. Hence,
instead of achieving consensus, such managers take decision/by the use of their authority.
Sometimes, they lead the group towards decision making by minority rule or by majority rule.
The better way to achieve consensus would be for them to track how decisions are made
and ensure that they are achieved by consultations with group members. The various
methods of group decision making are given below:
1. Decision by Lack of Responses: The most common group decision-making method is
the decision by lack of response. In this method, someone suggest an idea and before anyone
else has said anything about it, without any deliberations it is rejected. In other words, all
ideas that have been simply bypassed have in a sense been rejected by the group. The idea
thus been rejected because the 'rejections' is a simply a common decision not to support the
idea.
2. Decision by Authority Rule: Many groups have a power structure that makes it clear
that the leader (chairman or someone in authority) will make the ultimate decision. In this
case the group can generate ideas and hold free discussion, but the chairman or the leader
may say that he has heard the discussion and has decided upon a given plan. The authority
rule method produces a bare minimum of involvement by the group and unless the leader is
very proficient he will not be able to take good decisions.
3. Decision by Minority Rule: A single person can enforce a decision, particularly if he is
the chairman and does not give in to the opposition. A common form of minority rule is for
two or more members to come to a quick and powerful agreement on a course of action and
implement it through the chairman or other powerful members of the group. Usually in the
decision by minority rule, one, two or three people employ the tactics that produce action
and therefore must be considered decisions but which are taken without the consent of the
majority.
4. Decision by Majority Rule: Under this system, it is felt that if the majority of
participants feels the same way, it is often assumed that, that decision is the best. On the
surface, this method seems completely sound but often it turns out that decisions made by
this method are not well implemented, even by the group that made the decision. This is so
because of two kinds of psychological barriers:
• The minority feels that there was an insufficient discussion or that their point of view
were not properly understood and they may therefore feel misunderstood and
sometimes resentful.
• The minority members feel that voting (done to understand majority preference) has
resulted in two camps and that their camp has lost.
• As there are time constraints in coming to a group decision and because there is not
perfect system, a decision by consensus is one of the most effective methods. This
Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

3
 method is time consuming. Recognizing the several types of group decision-making is
only part of the process. Managers must be specific in their approach to the one that
is best in their own situation.

Strengths of group decision-making

• Groups generate more complete information and knowledge.

• They offer increased diversity of views.
• This opens up the opportunity for more approaches and alternatives to be
considered.
• The evidence indicates that a group will almost always outperform even the best
individual.
• Groups lead to increased acceptance of a solution.
Weaknesses of group decision-making

• They are time consuming.

• There is a conformity pressure in groups.
• Group discussion can be dominated by one or a few members.
• Group decisions suffer from ambiguous responsibility.

TECHNIQUES OF GROUP DECISION MAKING

In large and complex organizations most of the basic and strategic decisions are made by
group of managers rather than individuals. It seems safe to say that in many instances
group decision making is preferable than individual decision making.
Decisions relating to the determination of organization goals, formulation of plans,
strategies and policies fall under this category. Group decision making has become more
prevalent during the past few decades. Organizational problems have become so complex
which require a variety of specialized abilities that no individuals or one person can handle
effectively.
Over the decades, the social scientists have studied the ways in which group decision
making may be made really effective.
Following are some recent techniques for improving decision making.
1. BRAINSTORMING
2. NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE (NGT)
3. DELPHI TECHNIQUE
4. DEVIL’S ADVOCACY
5. DIALECTICAL INQUIRY

Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

4
 1. BRAINSTORMING

Brainstorming is a group decision making technique of generating as many ideas as

possible , suspending evaluation until the final decision has been taken.
Brainstorming is a group decision making process in which negative feedback on any
suggested alternative by any group member is forbidden until all members have
presented alternatives that they perceive as valuable. Brainstorming is carefully
designed to encourage all group members to contribute as many viable decision
alternatives as they can think of. Its premise is that if the evaluation of alternatives
starts before all possible alternatives have been offered, valuable alternatives may be
overlooked. 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 company which has immensely benefitted from brainstorming is Toyota, which
realized that it was not catering to the requirements of younger generation, they
assembled a team of young employees who brainstormed to come out with new
products like Toyota echo and scion ,an entirely new line of crossover vehicles aimed
to suit the taste buds of the younger generation.

2. NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE (NGT)

Nominal Group Technique is a structured approach to group decision making focusing on

generating ideas and choosing one. A manager who must take a decision about an important
issue sometimes needs to know what alternatives are available and how people would react
to them. It restricts verbal communication among the members during the decision making
process. In this a problem is presented to them, and they write their reactions, ideas,
suggestions, and send views on a sheet of paper without any discussion with other
members. It is meant to resolve differences in group opinion by having individuals
generate and the rank series of ideas. It follows the following discreet steps:

Step -1: Silent Generation of Ideas: The leads present questions to the group Individual
responses in written format Group work not allowed
Step – 2: Recorded round-listing of ideas: Each member presents an idea in turn All ideas are
listed on a flip chart. No discussion takes place until; all the ideas have been recorded.
Step -3: Brief discussions of ideas on the chart: Clarifies the ideas, common understanding
of the problem Evaluates the points
Step – 4: Preliminary vote on priorities: Each member ranks 5 to 7 most important ideas
from the flip chart and records them on separate cards. The leader counts the votes on the
cards and writes them on the chart.
Step -5: Discussion of the vote: Examination of inconsistent voting patterns.
Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

5
Step – 6: Listing of agreement on the priorities items. Final decision is determined by the idea
with the highest aggregate ranking.
NGT is widely used in health, service, education and government organization. It helps in
encouraging creativity, continued exploration of the issues.

3. DELPHI TECHNIQUE
This technique was first developed by N.C. Dalkey and his associates in 1950 at the
Rand Corporation’s Think Tank. In this technique members do not meet face to face for
group decision. All the decision are arrived through written communication. It is a
systematic means to obtain consensus from a group or panel of experts.
Steps :
• The problem is defined by the delphi leaders or experts.
• A sample of experts is selected.
• Questionnaires are developed and sent out to participants.
• Responses are compiled and summarized into a questionnaire.
• Each member receives a copy of results.
• Participants are asked to reevaluate the responses.
• The new responses are compiled and new questions may be prepared.
• Cycle stops only when consensus is reached.
• And ultimately a solution is developed.

This technique helps to evoke each participant’s unbiased opinion by preventing the
influences of group dynamics.

4. DEVIL’S ADVOCACY

It is a technique of group decision making in which group think is prevented , whereby an

individual is appointed as devil’s advocate to critically question the validity and feasibility of
every decision. He is entrusted with the task of bringing up the potential problems that might
arise after taking a particular decision. This saves the organizations from making costly
mistakes by identifying the potential pitfalls well in advance. This individual keeps all the
members on their toes and saves the organization from taking the wrong decisions.

5. DIALECTICAL INQUIRY

This is a group decision making technique where a solid debate is encouraged and
spearheaded between two opposing sets of recommendations. It is a very constructive
approach in the sense that on one hand it leads to conflicting situations, on the other hand
it brings forth the strengths and the weaknesses of both sets of ideas and thus helps in taking
a well informed rational decision.
Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

6
Brainstorming offers the advantage of encouraging the expression of as many useful ideas as
possible, but the disadvantage of wasting the group's time on ideas that are wildly impractical.
The nominal group technique, with its secret ballot, offers a structure in which individuals
can support or reject an idea without fear of recrimination. Its disadvantage is that there is
no way of knowing why individuals voted the way they did. The advantage of the Delphi
Technique is that ideas can be gathered from group members who are too geographically
separated or busy to meet face to face. Its disadvantage is that members are unable to ask
questions of one another. Managers must carefully weigh the advantages and disadvantages
of these group decision making tools and adopt the one or some combination of all these that
best suits their unique organizational requirements.

5.1 Factors to be kept in mind while selecting a particular technique

• Brainstorming can be adopted when the objective is to generate as many ideas as possible
• NGT can be adopted when the group members are unwilling to contribute ideas
• Delphi technique can be applied when there is a need for an expert opinion.
• When groupthink is to be avoided, devil’s advocate or dialectical enquiry can be adopted
• When decisions with regard to quality are to be taken, quality circles can be referred to.
• Research has shown that when the teams are made accountable for the decisions they
tend to take well informed decisions.
• When the organization contemplates giving complete empowerment to its employees,
the self managed teams can also be created.

5.2 LIMITATIONS OF GROUP DECISION MAKING

There are two probable limitations of group decision making which can be either in the
form of groupthink or group polarization/ shift.

Groupthink

We talked about group cohesiveness earlier as an outcome of effective teams, but at the
same time it becomes a disadvantage when it comes to group decision making as it
encourages group think which turns out to be dysfunctional rather than functional. This is
because Groupthink leads to confirming to group pressures and there is sort of less
tendency to apply one’s mind over the ensuing problems and the group is sometimes
attracted towards a more comfortable stance by going with the group opinion especially
when the group exhibits streaks of high cohesiveness. We can say that group think is
exhibited in the form of deterioration of mental efficiency and moral judgment on the part
of the group members, resulting from group pressures. It describes situations in which

Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS

7
group pressures for conformity deter the group from critically appraising unusual, minority,
or unpopular views.

Let us review the actual conditions which air the emergence of group think which are
• The presence of highly cohesive and high ranking teams that tend to take decisions
without outside support are prone to group think.
• Secondly the lack of diversity amongst the group members in terms of gender,
ethnicity, work experience and exposure etc also leads to group think where people
think alike.
• The other reasons could be the presence of limited resources and time constraints in
which quick decisions are required, and also sometimes the decisions are
consequential in nature and can be taken only when the whole group thinks alike.

Group polarization

Group polarization is exhibited by the tendency of the group members to produce shifts
towards more extreme attitudes among members following group discussions.

Let us review the actual conditions which air the emergence of group polarization,
which are ;

The first condition is the social comparison approach, here the individuals believe that their
views are better than the rest of the group members, especially before rigorous group
discussions have taken place. But after the discussion they realize that their views are not
so far from average which forces them to take extreme positions with regard to their
viewpoint.

The second condition is the presence of persuasive arguments approach, which says
that after the group discussion the members becomes more confident of their viewpoints
and thus they take extreme positions.

Thus polarization divides the group into two extreme positions and can be detrimental
to rational group decision making.

Both group think and group polarization are not good for group decision making. That is
why it is recommended to adopt a particular technique depending upon the situation as
discussed in detail above.

Dr. Simran Kaur, Assistant Professor, Department of Law, MAIMS