Benefits And Problems Of Group Decision Making

Thus the role of group work can be seen as one which places emphasis on sharing of thoughts, ideas, problems and activities.

Randy Hirokawa and Dennis Gouran developed the Functional Perspective on Group Decision Making theory to “offer practical advice on how participants can act to ensure better group decisions” (Hirokawa, 1999, p. 170). They believe that as long as the members in a group care about the issue and are reasonably intelligent, the group interaction will have a positive effect on the final decision. In order for a group to reach a high-quality solution, Hirokawa and Gouran believe the group 's decision-making process needs to fulfill four task requirements they refer to as requisite functions of effective decision making. "Three core assumptions define the functional perspective: (1) groups are goal oriented; (2) group performance varies in quality and quantity, and can be evaluated; and (3) internal and external factors influence group performance via the interaction process.” (Wittenbaum, 2004 p. 19).

Collective leadership is a recent concept of leadership where individuals are given authority in their own work areas of an organisation which empowers them. Collective leadership is opposite to the well-known system in which members of an organisation or society are ranked according to relative status or authority: As effective

Decision making is affected by the Group Think because of the lack of openness that should be displayed and offered by everyone involved. The development of the organization is dependent on the ability of the group to make decisions that are thought through and not made solely on pressures and accepted or narrow minded ways that are not thought out.

When members in the team brainstorm ideas, they will ask a lot of questions pertaining to the problem at hand and do a lot of research on it. They will also break themselves up into smaller, more workable groups to increase efficiency. In addition, the members do not just limit themselves to finding information online, but they also find out firsthand about the problem from the people who are affected by it. During their firsthand experience, they are very observant and enthusiastic in gaining knowledge from the people affected. Then, they will demonstrate, communicate and share everything that they’ve learned with the other groups. There is focused chaos during the sharing and the members are all very lively, flexible, and open. All ideas are accepted, and no idea is “bad”, no matter how crazy it is. After much sharing, the team will narrow down ideas by voting for them, and the ideas with majority of the votes will be shortlisted. When the members are tired after the brainstorming session, they will call it a day and end off on a positive note.

From my experience, one situation I can think of where the “groupthink” phenomenon could be applied happened when I used to be a scribe/scribe trainer. Our leads had just hired a new group of scribes and prior to starting on the floor the trainees needed to complete a classroom training course covering medical terminology, understanding of the EMR template and then pass an examination. After that then they were able to start training shifts on the floor with an experienced scribe “shadowing” them. The first time scribing on the floor can be really daunting because some providers work very fast and they can be very particular (quality/length of HPI, what& where to document certain findings) which as a newbie you wouldn’t know unless you worked

Generally group learning is cost effective for employers, employees/learners and providers. Enabling continued and multi use of materials, resources and facilities. Group learning also ensures a consistent, common message and programme.

To add on to what Rachel said, groupthink can also occur if the leader is well respected or persuasive. It does have it pros and cons. If used properly the group can come to a solution with everyone contributing. It gives everyone of a sense if worth because they contributed. A con can be peer pressure as when everyone agrees on one solution. This leads mental inefficiency and decrease in moral judgement. As some patients may just go with everyone says in order to avoid conflict. If you want to avoid groupthink then you can have an outsider come in and question the views of the members or or assign the role of critical evaluator to each member of the group.

This method allows for employees to share in the decision making process. This allows for their voice to be hear, learn from others, and begin making managerial team decisions.

Since much of our time is spend in groups, it is helpful to work in groups because it will give an opportunity to improve their human functioning. Group work helps to develop individual skills in communication, relationship building and asserting oneself

When individual group members get stuck with an idea, another member's creativity and experience can take the idea to the next stage. Group brainstorming can therefore develop ideas in more depth than individual brainstorming.

When reviewing the concepts of groupthink, it is important for one to realize that not all group based decisions are necessarily bad decisions. The concept of groupthink and the negative results that arise are based on the reality that group decisions are made without regard to alternative measures, validity of information, or risks and consequences associated with such decisions. Groupthink seems to dispatch the critical thinking skills of the individuals in the process and decisions made can have disastrous results. The following essay will discuss the results of groupthink decisions made by the United States government that lead to Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, as well as critical errors made by US command that greatly increased the impact

the complexity of the group dynamics in the current era which makes these groups difficult to represent in a simple model. Furthermore, it fails to recognize that tasks benefiting the group and contributing to the group’s goal can and do happen at other stages than performing (Hall, 2010). Nonetheless, the model offers a useful framework for the group development through its applied perspective and common sense approach (Bonebright, 2010). The forming stage consists of orientation to the task at hand, gathering information on differences and similarities with other members of the group, desire for the acceptance, establishing communication methods and looking for guidance from the group leader (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).

Lastly, consensus by group decision making is not good because not everyone always builds trust within the people in their group. According to the article, "Is Consensus Decision-Making Right for your group?" Not everyone in the group has the ability to trust each other. "There is a lack or trust among group members" (consensus). A group can't come up with good ideas when there's no trust between the people in the group. If the group members don’t know each other or feel comfortable working with one another, consensus would be very

1. Generally, when we allow people to participate in decision making in any sort of group, we encourage group ownership, positive participation and openness to receiving, embracing and promoting change. Involving staff can significantly increase the business readiness to accept even difficult changes within the business.