Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Groupthink and its impact on decision making
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Groupthink and its impact on decision making

1,998
views

Published on

Published in: Business

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,998
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
43
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. And its impact on decision making Presentation by: Iman M.Ahmed Rawda Hassan Dai Rowida A. Abd/ALrahman
  • 2. Unique features:  -Social influence (acting collectively).  -Analyze problems/situation.  -Consider alternative action.  -Select the most probable one.
  • 3.  Decision making (D.M) is a vital component of small business success. Many Organizational decisions are made by group that can be defined as “two or more interacting and interdependent individuals who come together to achieve a particular goals.
  • 4. Reasons behind D.M: -Synergy (mutual influences and encouragement in the group. -To gain commitment to a decision.
  • 5. Advantages: -More knowledge and information. -Increased acceptance of, and commitment to the decision. -greater understanding of decision . Disadvantages: -Pressure within the group to conform and fit in (group think). -Domination of the group by one forceful member or a dominant elite. -Time consuming.
  • 6.  Defined as: “ a type of conformity in which group members withhold different or unpopular views in order to give the appearance of agreement”
  • 7. “ A psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevent appraisal alternative in cohesive decision making” Janis, I.L.( 1972), p. 9
  • 8. a deterioration of mental efficiency, reality, testing and moral judgment resulting from in-group pressures.”, Robbins & Coulter (2002), “
  • 9. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Observable consequences Groupthink symptom: Cohesive Group 1. Overestimation of group: Illusion of invulnerability; Belief in own morality 2. Closed-Mindedness: Collective rationalization; Stereotyping of out- groups Structural faults Insulation 3. Uniformity pressures: Lack of impartial leadership 1Self Censorship 2Illusion of unanimity 3Direct Pressure 4Mind -guards Lack of decision method Homogeneous members Provocative context Concurrence seeking External threat Symptoms of defective decision making: Low self esteem from previous failure •Incomplete survey of alternatives Poor decision outcome Source: Janis,I.L.,(1972); (1982). P.244 Incomplete survey of objectives Failure to examine risk of preferred choice Poor information search Selective information bias Failure to workout contingency plan
  • 10. Group cohesiveness is:” the degree to which members are attracted to one another and share the group goals”, Robins….et.al, (2005) p.343. It is the “interpersonal glue” that makes members of a group stick together” Nelson & Quick (1996), p.139.
  • 11. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Cohesive Group Structural faults Insulation Lack of impartial leadership Lack of decision method Homogeneous members •Binding & filling of the group •Directive, subjective and biased. • No procedures for developing and evaluating alternatives. •Tendancy to avoid conflict and to demand conformity. Source: Janis,I.L.,(1072); (1982). P.244
  • 12. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Cohesive Group Structural faults Insulation Lack of impartial leadership Lack of decision method Homogeneous members Leading to high stress Provocative context External threat Low self esteem from previous failure Source: Janis,I.L.,(1072); (1982). P.244
  • 13. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Cohesive Group Structural faults Insulation Lack of impartial leadership Lack of decision method Homogeneous members Concurrence seeking Provocative context External threat Low self esteem from previous failure These conditions cause members to prefer concurrence or consensus in decisions and to fail to evaluate one another’s suggestions critically. That is the tendency of group think. Source: Janis,I.L.,(1072); (1982). P.244
  • 14. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Observable consequences Groupthink symptom: Cohesive Group 1. Overestimation of group: Illusion of invulnerability; Belief in own morality 2. Closed-Mindedness: Collective rationalization; Stereotyping of out- groups Structural faults Insulation 3. Uniformity pressures: Lack of impartial leadership 1Self Censorship 2Illusion of unanimity 3Direct Pressure 4Mind -guards Lack of decision method Homogeneous members Provocative context Concurrence seeking External threat Low self esteem from previous failure Source: Janis,I.L.,(1072); (1982). P.244
  • 15. Illusion of invulnerability: Group members feel they are above criticism. This symptoms leads to excessive optimism and risk tacking. Belief in own morality: Group members feel they are moral in their actions and therefore above reproach or blame. This symptom leads the group to ignore the ethical implications of their decisions.
  • 16. Collective rationalization: Group members make up explanations for their decisions to make them appear rational and correct. Members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions. The results are that other alternatives are not considered, and there is an unwillingness to reconsider the groups. Stereotyping of out- groups: Competitors are stereotyped as evil or stupid. This leads the group to underestimate its opposition.
  • 17. •Self Censorship: Members do not express their doubts about the course of action. This prevents critical analysis of the decisions. •Illusion of unanimity: Group members believe there is unanimous agreement on the decisions. Silence is misconstrued as consent.
  • 18. •Direct Pressure: Peer pressure. Any member who express doubt or concerns are pressured by other group members, who question their loyalty. •Mind –guards: Some members take it upon themselves to protect the group from negative feedback. Group members are thus shielded from information that might lead them to question their actions.
  • 19. Janis’s Groupthink model Antecedents Observable consequences Groupthink symptom: Cohesive Group 1. Overestimation of group: Illusion of invulnerability; Belief in own morality 2. Closed-Mindedness: Collective rationalization; Stereotyping of out- groups Structural faults Insulation 3. Uniformity pressures: Lack of impartial leadership 1Self Censorship 2Illusion of unanimity 3Direct Pressure 4Mind -guards Lack of decision method Homogeneous members Provocative context Concurrence seeking External threat Symptoms of defective decision making: Low self esteem from previous failure •Incomplete survey of alternatives Poor decision outcome Source: Janis,I.L.,(1972); (1982). P.244 Incomplete survey of objectives Failure to examine risk of preferred choice Poor information search Selective information bias Failure to workout contingency plan
  • 20. *Each member should be assume the role of critical evaluator who actively voices objections or doubts. *Have the leader avoid stating his/has position on the issue prior to the group.
  • 21. Create several groups that work on the decision simultaneously. *Bring in outside experts to evaluate the group process.
  • 22. *Appointed a “devil’s advocate” to question the group’s course of action consistently. *Evaluate the competitions carefully, posing as many different motivations and intentions as possible.
  • 23. *Once consensus is reached, encourage the group to rethink its position by reexamining the alternatives. *Stimulating conflict.
  • 24.  Brainstorming  Dialectic Inquiry  Devil’s advocacy  Nominal Group Technique  Delphi technique
  • 25. •Is a technique for generating alternatives. •Is relatively unstructured. •The situation or problem described in details. • Group members are encouraged to generate alternative and to build upon the suggestions of others considering imagination.
  • 26. Limitation and difficulties of brainstorming: •Although, brainstorming is good to generate alternatives, but does not offer much in the way of process for evaluating alternative or the selecting of proposed course of action. * Fear from judgment and criticism.
  • 27. • • • Dialectical Inquiry is a debate between two opposing sets of recommendations. It is a constructive approach. It brings out the benefits and limitations of both sets of ideas.
  • 28. The Dialectic Decision Method 1. A proposed course of action is generated 2. Assumption underlying the proposal are identified 3. A conflicting counterproposal is generated based on different assumptions 4. Advocates of each position present and debate the merits of their proposals before key decision makers 5. The decision to adopt either position, or some other position, e.g., a compromise, is taken 6. The decision is monitored
  • 29. *Similarly, in the Devil’s Advocacy decision method, is a group or individual that given the role of critic *The devil’s advocate has the task of coming up with the potential problems of proposed decision. *These techniques help organizations avoid costly mistakes in decision making by identifying potential pitfalls in advance.
  • 30. A Devil’s Advocate Decision Programs 1. A proposed course of action is generated 2. A devil’s advocate (individual or group) is assigned to criticize the proposal 3. The critique is presented to key decision makers 4. Any additional information relevant to the issues is gathered 5. The decision to adopt, modify, or discontinue the proposed course of action is taken 6. The decision is normal
  • 31. A structured approach to decision making that focuses on generating alternatives and choosing one is called nominal group technique (NGT
  • 32. A small group of 4-5 people gathers around a table. Leader identifies judgment issue and gives participants procedural instructions. Participants write down all ideas that occur to them, keeping their lists private at this point. Creativity is encouraged during this phase. Leader asks each participant to present ideas and writes them on a blackboard or flipchart, continuing until all ideas have been recorded. Participants discuss each other’s ideas, clarifying, expanding, and evaluating them as a group. Participants rank ideas privately in their own personal order and preference. The idea that ranks highest among the participants is adopted as the group’s judgment.
  • 33. *The Delphi technique adopted to gather the judgments of experts for use in decision making. *Experts at remote locations respond to a questionnaire. A coordinator summarizes the responses to the questionnaire.
  • 34. •The summary is sent back to the experts. •The experts then rate the various alternatives generated. The coordinator tabulates the results. •The Delphi technique is valuable in its ability to generate a number of independent judgments without the requirement of a face-to-face meeting.
  • 35. -There are various factors contribute to effectiveness of group decision making . This is why no one can say “a group decision making is always better or is always worse” than individual decision making. -For example a multinational companies work in external and internal environment , affected by these factors both positively and negatively. - Recently, most organizations are tend to turn groups into effective teams.
  • 36. -A work team is a formal groups made up of interdependent individuals who are responsible for the attainment of a goal. -Reasons behind uses of work team  increases flexibility.  creates esprit de corps.  increases performance.  take advantage of workforce diversity.  allows managers to do more strategic management.

×