Group Decision-Making: Group vs Individual; Group think and Groups Shift

Group decision-making commonly known as collaborative decision-making is a

situation faced when individuals collectively make a choice from the alternatives before
them.
The decision is then no longer attributable to any individual group member as all the
individuals and social group processes like social influence contribute to the decision
outcome.
The decisions made by groups are mostly different from those made by individuals. For
example − groups tend to make decisions that are more extreme than those made by
individual members, as individual’s tend to be biased.

Advantages of Group Decision-Making

Group decision-making has two advantages over individual decision-making.

Synergy

It is the idea that the whole is greater than the aggregate of its parts. When a group
makes a decision collectively, its judgment can be powerful than that of any of its
members. Through discussing, questioning, and collaborative approach, group
members can identify more complete and robust solutions and recommendations.

Sharing of Information

Group decisions take into account a wider scope of information as each group member
may contribute distinct information and expertise. Sharing information increases
understanding, clarifies issues, and facilitates movement towards a collective decision.

Disadvantages of Group Decision-Making

The major disadvantages of group decision-making are as follows −

Diffusion of Responsibility

Group decision making results in distribution of responsibility that results in lack of

accountability for outcomes. In this way, everyone is responsible for a decision, and no
one really is.
Moreover, group decisions can make it easier for members to refuse personal
responsibilities and blame others for bad decisions.

Lower Efficiency
Group decisions can sometimes be less efficient than individual decisions. It takes
additional time because there is a need of active participation, discussion, and
coordination among group members.
Without good facilitation and structure, meetings can get eliminated in trivial details that
may matter a lot to one person but not to the others.

Groupthink

One of the biggest disadvantage of effective group decision making is groupthink. It is

a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the wish for
harmony or conformity results in an illogical or dysfunctional decision-making outcome.
By refraining themselves from outside influences and actively suppressing opposing
viewpoints in the interest of minimizing conflict, group members reach a consensus
decision without critical evaluation of substitute viewpoints.
Groupthink sometimes produces dehumanizing actions against the out-group.
There is a major difference between group discussion, group decision making,
groupthink and groupshift. In order to maintain a well-functioning group, one should
encourage group discussions and collaborative decision making but in the same place
should try to eliminate groupthink and groupshift.
It sounds a bit confusing now but by the end of this chapter we will get a clear idea
about these two topics.

Groupthink
Sometimes we feel like speaking up in a meeting, classroom, or informal group, but
decide against it. Why?
Mainly due to shyness, or we may have been victim of groupthink. The phenomenon
that arises when group members become so enamored of seeking concurrence that
the norm for consensus alters the realistic appraisal of substitute courses of action and
the full expression of deviant, minority or unpopular views.
It worsens an individual’s mental efficiency, reality, testing, and moral judgment due to
group pressure.
The symptoms of the groupthink phenomena are −
 Group members justify any resistance to the assumptions they have made. No matter how
firmly the evidence contradicts their basic assumptions, members behave in way so as to
reinforce those assumptions continually.
 Members apply direct pressure on those who briefly present their doubts about any of the
views shared by the group or the one who question’s the validity of arguments supporting
the substitute favored by the majority.
  Members reserving doubt or holding contradicting viewpoints seek to avoid deviation from
what appears to be group consensus, by maintaining silence about misgivings and
minimizing the importance of their doubts to themselves.
 An illusion of unanimity appears in the picture. If someone doesn’t speak, it is assumed that
he or she is in favor. In other words, silence becomes viewed as a ‘Yes’ vote.

Groupshift
In balancing group decisions with the individual decisions of members within the group,
evidence hints that there are differences. In some cases, the group decisions are more
timid than the individual decisions. More often, the shift is close to greater risk.
What appears to happen in groups is that the discussion results in a significant shift in
a position of members towards a more extreme position in the direction in which they
were already leaning before the discussion.
So conservative types become more cautious and the more intrusive types take on
more risk. The group discussion tends to fabricate the initial position of the group.
Group shift is the phenomena in which individual decisions make way for exaggerated
group decisions. Group shift can be seen as a special case of groupthink.
The decision of the group shows the dominant decision-making norm that is developed
during the group’s discussion. Whether the shift in the group’s decision is towards
greater deliberation or more risk depends on the dominant pre-discussion norm.
The greater episode of the shift towards risk has generated several explanations for
the phenomenon. It has been argued, for instance, that the discussion creates
familiarization between members. As they become more comfortable with each other,
they also become more bold, confident and daring.
Group decisions free any single individual from accountability for the group’s final
choice. Greater risk can be taken as even if the decision fails, no single individual can
be held wholly responsible.

Techniques to Eliminate Groupthink & Groupshift

In order to eliminate group think and group shift from a group, we can use four different
techniques that will help us make a collaborative decision that is best for the group.
These techniques are −

 Brainstorming
 Nominal group thinking
 Didactic technique
 Delphi technique

Brainstorming
This technique includes a group of people, mostly between five and ten in number,
sitting around a table, producing ideas in the form of free association. The main focus
is on generation of ideas and not on evaluation of these ideas.
If more ideas can be originated, then it is likely that there will be a unique and creative
idea among them. All these ideas are written on the blackboard with a piece of chalk so
that all the team members can see every idea and try to improvise these ideas.
Brainstorming technique is very effective when the problem is comparatively precise
and can be simply defined. A complex problem can be divided into parts and each part
can be dealt with separately at a time.

Nominal Group Thinking

This technique is similar to brainstorming except that this approach is more structured.
It motivates individual creativity.
Members form the group for namesake and operate independently, originate ideas for
solving the problem on their own, in silence and in writing. Members do not
communicate well with each other so that strong personality domination is evaded.
The group coordinator either collects the written ideas or writes them on a large
blackboard so that each member of the group can see what the ideas are.
These ideas are further discussed one by one in turn and each participant is motivated
to comment on these ideas in order to clarify and improve them. After all these ideas
have been discussed, they are evaluated for their merits and drawbacks and each
actively participating member is needed to vote on each idea and allot it a rank on the
basis of priority of each alternative solution.
The idea with the highest cumulative ranking is selected as the final solution to the
problem.

Didactic Interaction

This technique is applicable only in certain situations, but is an excellent method when
a situation actually demands it.
The type of problem should be such that it generates output in the form of yes or no.
Say for example, a decision is to be made whether to buy or not to buy a product, to
merge or not to merge, to expand or not to expand and so on. These types of decision
requires an extensive and exhaustive discussion and investigation since a wrong
decision can have serious consequences.
There are many advantages as well as disadvantages of this type of situation. The
group that makes the decision is divided into two sub-groups, one in favor of the “go”
decision and the opposing in favor of the “no go” decision.
The first group enlists all the “pros” of the problem solution and the second group lists
all the “cons”. These groups meet and discuss their discoveries and their reasons.
After tiring discussions, the groups switch sides and try to find weaknesses in their own
original standpoints. This interchange of ideas and understanding of various viewpoints
results in mutual acceptance of the facts as they exist so that a solution can be put
together around these facts and ultimately a final decision is reached.

Delphi Technique

This technique is the improvised version of the nominal group technique, except that it
involves obtaining the opinions of experts physically distant from each other and
unknown to each other.
This isolates group members from the undue influence of others. Basically, the types of
problems sorted by this technique are not specific in nature or related to a particular
situation at a given time.
Say for example, the technique could be used to explain the problems that could be
created in the event of a war. The Delphi technique includes the following steps −
 The problem is first identified and a panel of experts are selected. These experts are asked
to provide potential solutions through a series of thoughtfully designed questionnaires.
 Each expert concludes and returns the initial questionnaire.
 The results of the questionnaire are composed at a central location and the central
coordinator prepares a second set of questionnaire based on the previous answers.
 Each member receives a copy of the results accompanied by the second questionnaire.
 Members are required to review the results and respond to the second questionnaire. The
results typically trigger new solutions or motivate changes in the original ideas.
 The process is repeated until a general agreement is obtained.