Michigan State University Extension
Boardsmanship - 12270001
06/05/00
Studies in Group Leadership How Should We Decide Elements of Sound Decision Making
List of files and visuals associated with this text.
Extension Bulletin E-1227 February 1988
(Fil. 2) Text in PDF version
Prepared by Maxine Ferris, Specialist in Staff Development
and Training
Making decisions and solving problems takes much time and
energy. But most groups allow little time and energy to
selecting a decision-making model or to evaluating the
process once the decision has been reached or a solution
attempted.
Ideally, decisions arise as a result of judgments and
reasoning to a final conclusion, unfortunately, that is not
always the case. Problem solving involves the organization
and arrangement of several decisions so that they will have
some usefulness solving a problem.
It's Real Work
Decision making and problem solving are rarely easy. They
become increasingly complicated when they involve several
people or a large group. Decisions are strongly affected by
personal and group needs and the environmental climate
-trust, budget constraints, history. Decisions are often
influenced by other persons, authority figures or groups
that exert pressure on us.
At times, groups have difficulty not only in making
decisions, but also in living with decisions. Deciders
must be concerned with both the quality of their decision
and the acceptance of it by those affected.
Decision quality is based on a number of factors: sound
reasoning, adequate information, appropriate conclusion and
fairness. Acceptance, on the other hand, is based on
agreement and satisfaction with the decision, and
willingness to support and/or work for its implementation.
The quality of a decision is based upon facts: acceptance
is subjective and based on feelings.
Achieving both quality and acceptance in the same decision
is difficult because, in many respects, they require
different processes and emphases.
High-quality decisions require acceptance and ownership.
Satisfaction is usually a product of participation and
involvement in the decision-making process. Satisfaction
may have very little to do with information or reasoning.
Acceptance May Be The Goal
Group leaders must determine the primary goal of a
particular decision and then initiate the appropriate
process. In some situations, quality is of little
consequence and satisfaction is all important. The leader
need not be concerned with which possible solution is the
best because group satisfaction is the key consideration.
In other situations, quality must be the top priority. On
other occasions, quality and acceptance are equally
important.
One reason for dissatisfaction with the way a group makes
decisions or solves problems is failure of members to
understand clearly the nature of the group: they do not
understand the purpose of the group. A policy-making body
and an action group are not the same, though one group may
have both functions. Often we think of making policy as the
end of deliberations, when it is instead the beginning
-implementation is inevitable, whether by the same group or
by another. How often have you heard the complaint, "This
group never does anything!" Quite possibly this group isn't
supposed to do anything.
Bodies such as school boards may go beyond their area of
responsibility and become action groups. Hence, they become
involved in problem-solving quandaries in addition to their
policy determinations. They overextend themselves by
confronting details not rightly in their domain. They must,
however, be responsible for the management of the total
system. This means that they may need to intervene if
checks and balances are not working properly.
Strategies Vary
Individuals solve problems in a variety of ways:
1. Let someone else tell them how to act to solve the
problem.
2. Study and analyze the problem and draw their own
conclusions.
3. Wait for a flash of insight to reveal the solution.
4. Mull the problem over in the mind, allowing it to
"incubate" until a solution occurs to them.
5. Seek advice from others and arrive at a joint decision.
Groups or group leaders may function in similar ways. Some
strategies produce better results than others and may be
more appropriate in certain cases. No hard and fast rules
can be set forth. Groups must consider their needs and
situations and then choose the decision-making model that
is most valid for them.
Groups generally make decisions on the basis of majority
support. Bylaws often specify that business will be
conducted according to Roberts' Rules of Order or some
other parliamentary guide, and may specify the majority
required for passage. This implies that motions will be
offered and heads counted-and the majority rules.
Sometimes in large groups or in groups where conflicts
are severe, voting appears to be the best and fairest
option. It is efficient and makes it possible to schedule
time. It provides an opportunity for all to participate in
an orderly manner.
However, voting is a win/lose strategy. It limits the
alternatives and frequently hardens positions early in the
deliberations. Once people have voiced their views, it may
be difficult for them to shift ground without losing face.
Decision Making Takes Time
Solving a problem takes time. The big question for groups
is whether to spend time deciding or gaining acceptance:
do we focus on satisfaction before voting -spending time
then -or, after the fact, "mending bridges" and working
to gain support?
Time saved reaching a decision by vote may be expended
threefold later trying to win support for the decision.
Time spent in reaching maximum agreement on a solution is
time well spent.
Consensus Works For Some
In its purist form, consensus implies 100 percent
agreement. This is rarely possible in group decisions,
though many groups come close. It is surprising how much
groups can agree on if their focus is on "where we are
together" rather than on "where we are apart." Reaching
absolute consensus requires very much time. Groups that try
to short-circuit the true consensus process and reach
agreement too quickly are avoiding differences of opinion
and not reaching agreement.
Consensus seeks to bring all parties to a mutually
satisfying resolution of the problem. It requires a
willingness to stop arguing for personal interests and a
belief that out of discussion of differences can come
better decisions.
Some group decisions are based on modified consensus
(maximum agreement possible) with the built-in provision
that if members don't want to spend time and effort working
toward this kind of decision, they have the option of not
participating in the deliberations. But if they choose to
side-step the deliberative responsibility, they also give
up the right to find fault and negate the decision worked
out by others. This appears to be a fair exchange: if one
isn't willing to spend the time and effort necessary to
arrive at a quality decision with a high degree of
acceptance, then one relinquishes the right to criticize
and reject. Normally, most members want to participate in
deliberations. But some occasions and issues may not
concern all members, and certain members would prefer
nonparticipation.
The higher the level of agreement, the more supportive
participants in the deliberations are likely to be in
carrying out and promoting the solution. The greater the
involvement in the deliberation, the greater the commitment
to the resulting solution.
Where decisions are reached by motion and majority vote,
some time lag may be desirable before finalizing the
decision or making it operative. Bylaws may or may not
provide for decayed voting or pre-announcing the motion
to be offered. The general intent in both cases is similar-
to prevent hurried, non-reflective decision making.
Deliberations need not drag on for several meetings, but
thought and reflection are necessary in reasoning through
to a sound conclusion.
Common Elements
Problem-solving processes are numerous but have common
elements. They tend to proceed in somewhat similar stages
regardless of what we call them. In all cases there is a
need to:
1. Identify and define the goal or goals.
2. Identify and examine the nature and causes of obstacles
to reaching the goal.
3. Establish criteria or standards for reaching a solution.
(Some do this by restating the problem in terms of what
they would like it to be-their concept of the problem
resolved or the ideal solution.)
4. Determine the present location, point of encounter-where
is the group in relation to its objective?
5. Seek and describe as many solutions as appear useful in
the situation.
6. Evaluate each solution for its potential in meeting the
criteria.
7. Evaluate each solution for its potential detriments.
8. Determine which solutions are most likely to meet the
criteria the least detrimentally. One approach to problem
solving involves developing a chart that focuses on the
important elements of problem solving. Such a chart
contains the following information:
Column 1: statements describing the problem.
Column 2: statements describing and ranking essentials of
a satisfactory solution. (What does a "satisfactory"
solution look like?)
Column 3: possible solutions.
Column 4: costs associated with each suggested solution.
Column 5: expected benefits from each solution.
Column 6: "so what" judgmental statements or conclusions
about the possible solutions.
Some people think of "hindrances" or "obstacles" rather
than "costs." There is no magic in words so long as
everyone clearly understands. Obstacles or costs might
include such considerations as lack of expertise, too few
resources- human or financial -solution would require too
much time, solution would violate the constitution or be
contrary to some other priority, solution would not be
popular.
It is important that groups seriously consider the costs
of their solutions. There may be high costs in choosing
the best high-quality solution, but the group may need to
"stretch" to solve the problem. For this reason, thinking
of costs and benefits may be helpful. What are the costs
of increasing participation or recruiting several prize
members? A group that takes on the challenge posed by
added costs may not only solve a problem, but may emerge
stronger and healthier.
Good Solutions
Good solutions have some characteristics in common:
1. They can be easily communicated, are clear-cut and
precise.
2. They offer realistic expectations.
3. They are consistent with the on-going program and
purpose of the organization.
4. They allow for some flexibility or modification.
5. They fulfill specified criteria.
6. They have more benefits than costs and do not produce
even greater problems.
7. They relate directly to the designated problem.
8. They are based on valid reasoning and adequate
information.
Perhaps more important than the specific staging of the
decision-making system is the thoroughness of the
reasoning. There is no doubt about it- solving even small
problems takes time and willingness to listen and reflect.
A plan or procedure ensures that all aspects will be
considered and adequate time allotted to all components.
Otherwise groups are inclined to spend too little time
analyzing the problem and establishing criteria and focus
too soon on solutions.
Brainstorming or ideation can be useful in problem solving.
It is valuable if the group tends to "nit pick" or belabor
evaluation of any suggestion. Because brainstorming
withholds evaluation until a specified time, members have
more opportunity to offer suggested solutions. A group may
refer brainstorm ideas to a committee for screening:
possible solutions can then be offered within a
problem-solving frame of reference.
Another problem-solving procedure concerns itself with
ordering problems and the manner of approaching them.
Members generally can discern the more serious problems.
Grouping problems or concerns as more and less serious
gives members control over the situation.
The first phase of this procedure is to separate the more
and the less serious items. Phase 2 is consideration and
resolution of the less serious items. Once the group has
proved to itself that it can solve minor problems, it is
easier to move into Phase 3, the resolution of the tough
or more serious considerations.
Nominal Group Process
The nominal group process is a method of reaching group
decision on a specific problem or question. It permits and
ensures idea input by each participant and allows a group
to decide which ideas are most important. The nominal group
process involves three phases and five steps.
Phase I: A "nominal phase" includes (1) the silent listing
of ideas in writing by each individual; (2)sharing and
recording in round -robin fashion all ideas until there are
no further ideas to share. The ideas are listed quickly,
without discussion.
Phase II: The "discussion phase" (3) is not free-wheeling.
Instead, each idea is given attention. The person
suggesting an idea has opportunity to clarify or explain
the idea. Others can add support or nonsupport. Round
-robin discussion of ideas ensures input by all group
members without domination by anyone.
Phase III: A "voting phase" (4) allows each individual to
privately rank or rate items numerically. (5) The
collective group decision is based on the pooled outcome
of individual votes. This form of voting ensures each
member equal input.
A group larger than 12 can split into two or more
subgroups. Each subgroup goes through the three phases.
When a subgroup has voted its outcome, it shares its top
five ideas with the total group. Based on the information
shared by the subgroups, participants vote a second time
and rank the items numerically. The overall group decision
on the top five ideas will be based on the pooled outcome
of all individual votes.
Evaluate
Once a group has chosen a solution to its problem, its
members may feel like erasing the matter from their
consciousness. That group is only three-quarters finished
with its task. What remains is to assess or evaluate the
deliberative process once it has been completed. What are
the dimensions of a "good" problem-solving method? Groups
will probably want to devise their own yardsticks. Some
of the measurements could be appropriateness, adequacy,
sufficiency and fairness. Having made some effort at
evaluation, the group leaders should record their
conclusions so that they may select problem-solving methods
in the future on the basis of experience and thought rather
than whim.
| Visual title - Visual size |
Visual title - Visual size |
This information is for educational purposes only. References
to commercial products or trade names does not imply
endorsement by MSU Extension or bias against those not
mentioned. This information becomes public property upon
publication and may be printed verbatim with credit to MSU
Extension. Reprinting cannot be used to endorse or advertise
a commercial product or company.
This file was generated from data base BD on 06/05/00.
Data base BD was last revised on 06/05/00.
For more information about this data base or its contents please contact
smalley@msue.msu.edu . Please read our
disclaimer for important
information about using our site.