is in essence an attempt to provide business owners and managers with reliable and complete background information on proposed business deals, whether the deal in question is a proposed acquisition of another company or a partnership with an international distributor, so that they can make informed decisions about whether to go forward with the business action.Successful acquisition strategy depends on the structure and depth of the due diligence process."
Lead and co-investors, corporate development staff, attorneys, accountants, investment bankers, loan officers and other professionals involved in a transaction may have a need or an obligation to conduct independent due diligence. Target management typically assists these parties in obtaining due diligence information but because it is unwise to totally rely on management third party consultants such as Astute Diligence are often brought in to conduct due diligence.
A criterion for the selection of leader of group is seniority. Management gives the responsibility to that person which is senior most among the group members. Top management tries to create positive competition between the groups, which have independent task. If the groups have to depend upon one another for completion of task, then the management induces cooperation among the groups not competition. Nestlé completely discourages intragroup competition to avoid the coalition and groups within the groups. For avoiding intragroup competition, Nestlé gives rewards to groups, basis upon the group performance evaluation.
Every individual in the group is asked to think of the ways to achieve those objectives. Every person is free to give his idea. People are encouraged to give as many ideas as they can. . Then after all the ideas have been discussed, some of these are sorted out for later discussion by the consensus the final ideas are selected.
After the idea selection the group members discuss different implementation programs and sub-objectives are made which they have to achieve the overall objective of the group formation.
Then the group member starts work. During the work the group members meet after short intervals and see that whether they are going in a right way or not. If satisfactory situation is there then they go on the same way. If the sub-goals are not achieved or the group is facing certain problems then the group leader try to solve these problems. If the problem is at group level then the group leader tell the problem to the management.So the corrective actions are taken by the group in their meetings and the decisions are made by consensus regularly.
Nestlé increases the cohesiveness among the group members by collective performance rewards and by including the small number of persons in the group. Nestlé increases the group performance by providing them chart in which the clear-cut responsibilities of group members are written and group members also have opportunity to hold meetings with management. In this way, groups can increase their performance.Nestlé is booming its performance due to group work.
Clear, honest, two-way communication between management and employees at all levels is intrinsic to the culture of the Tata Steel Group.There are well-established and effective arrangements at each business location for transparent communication and consultation with Works Councils and Trade Union representatives.
Group Decision Making
Group Decision Making
Types, Theories & Due Diligence
Plus case studies on:
Nestle, Tata Steel, Pixar &
Kasparov vs the World.
Arpita Baxi #104
Disha Dorkadi #107
Nitisha Goyal #108
Chirag Chauhan #303
Kushal Karamchandani #309
Chittesh Khilnani #310
Ishan Parekh #315
• In a typical brainstorming session, a half dozen to a dozen people sit
around a table.
• The group leader states the problem in a clear manner so that it is
understood by all participants.
• Members then "freewheel" as many alternatives as they can in a
given length of time. No criticism is allowed, & all the alternatives
are recorded for later discussion and analysis.
Brainstorming, however, is merely a process for generating ideas.
The following two techniques go further by offering methods of
actually arriving at a preferred solution.
cars/suvs not recycling
chopping down trees
too many people
loss of polar ice caps
Dying of animals
Nominal Group Technique
• Group technique members are all physically present, as in a traditional
committee meeting, but operate independently. Specifically, a problem is
presented &then the following steps take place….
— Each member independently writes down his or her ideas on the problem.
— Members then present the idea to the group. Each member takes their
turn, presenting a single idea until all ideas have been presented &
recorded. No discussion takes place until all ideas have been recorded.
— The group now discusses the ideas for clarity & evaluates them
— Each group member silently & independently rank-orders the ideas. The
ideas with the highest aggregate ranking determine the final decision.
Brainstorming & NGT
• Brainstorming & NGT are most applicable when…
—Some members are very vocal.
—People work better in silence.
—Some members are reluctant to participate.
—There is concern that enough ideas will be generated.
—Some participants are new to the team.
—The issue is controversial and the discussion could
Delphi Stages Delphi Processes
Round 1: Participants
are chosen. Initial data
Participants present their
views on the policy.
Round 2: A list of
possible alternatives is
compiled & distributed
Ideas are synthesized & a smaller
number of possible policy
recommendations are compiled.
Round 3: An amended
list of alternatives is
Ideas are fine
tuned by the participants.
Study Results One collective policy
The Delphi Method
The Delphi method
• Most applicable when an expert panel &
judgemental data is required
▫ Clear-cut solutions not possible
▫ The problem is complex, large, multidisciplinary
▫ Uncertainties due to fast development, or large time scale
▫ Opinions required from a large group
▫ Anonymity is required
Motivation to decide
Cognitive Dissonance: we try to reduce the discomfort of dissonance.
Consistency Theory: we seek the comfort of internal alignment.
Commitment: we feel obliged to complete a public commitment.
Certainty Effect: a certainty that becomes less likely has high impact.
Choice-supportive bias: Distorting memories to make decisions seem
Confirmation Bias: we seek confirmation that we made a good decision.
Scarcity Principle: we anticipate regret and so want what is scarce.
Ambiguity Effect: We prefer a known probability to an unknown one.
Bias Blind Spot: We do not compensate enough for our own bias.
Elaboration Likelihood Model: We either think centrally or take
unthinking short-cut decisions.
Heuristic-Systematic Persuasion Model: We either use short-cuts or
logic to interpret arguments.
Hyperbolic discounting: We prefer short-term benefits.
Information Bias: Seeking facts when making decision, even when they
Information Processing Theory: Persuasion requires attention and
comparison with previous views.
Source Credibility: Who we are likely to believe.
Unconscious Thought Theory: Letting your unconscious do the thinking.
Augmenting Principle: evidence for a decision is accumulative.
Bounded Rationality: we only use limited logic in decisions.
Bias Correction: Well-meaning over-compensation.
Explanatory Coherence: we like simple, explainable hypotheses.
Filter Theory: we make choices through a series of selection filters.
Involvement: when we are involved we need more information.
Multi-Attribute Choice: we use various strategies for different types of
Mere Exposure Theory: simple exposure makes us like things more.
Perceptual Contrast Effect: we decide by comparing things.
Priming: Setting up memory to be used later.
• "The process of researching, understanding
and, in some cases, avoiding these risks is
known as due diligence.“
• Improving information will improve your ability
to make quality decisions
• Can save company from making costly mistakes.
• A reasonable investigation focusing on material
When it is carried
• Or a major product
contracts, rental contracts,
inventory lists, customer
lists, and equipment lists
When it is conducted?
• Initial data collection
• evaluation commences when a business
opportunity first arises and continues
throughout the talks.
• Thorough detailed due diligence is typically
conducted after the parties involved in a
proposed transaction have agreed in principle
that a deal should be pursued and after a
preliminary understanding has been reached,
but prior to the signing of a binding contract.
How is Due Diligence Conducted?
of the target
some of the
and site visits
How Much Due Diligence Needs to Be
is based on many factors-
• prior experiences
• the size of the transaction
• the likelihood of closing a transaction
• tolerance for risk
• time constraints
• cost factors
• resource availability.
• It is impossible to learn everything about a business but it is
important to learn enough such that you lower your risks to the
appropriate level and make good, informed business decisions.
Foci for due diligence study
• Who conducts due diligence?
• Commercial due diligence
• Technical due diligence
• Legal due diligence
• Financial due diligence
• Environmental due diligence
fast-changing business environment
• outsource the due diligence task to a reputable research firm.
• build an efficient in-house program within their legal,
marketing, or corporate security sectors
• It can only improve the odds. Risk cannot be totally
eliminated through due diligence and success can never be
Example Case: Nestle
• Nestlé both formal and informal types of groups are
• Formal groups are made for special tasks.
• Nestlé has fifteen basic principles for selection of
members of the groups.
• While selecting the persons, the management also
considers complementary skills and culture
• A criterion for the selection of leader of group is seniority.
• Top management tries to create positive competition between the
• If the groups have to depend upon one another for completion of
task, then it induces cooperation instead of competition.
• Nestlé completely discourages intra-group competition to avoid the
coalition and groups within the groups.
• For avoiding intra-group competition, Nestlé gives rewards to
groups, basis upon the group performance evaluation.
Group decision making
• The groups perform brainstorming sessions by keeping
in view the objective or task of the group. All the
different ideas are recorded.
• Then in the later session, the individuals are asked to
clearly discuss their ideas.
• They are asked that they should be fully clear about their
own ideas so that it won’t take much time in discussion
Group member starts work.
Meetings after short intervals to verify progress
If satisfactory situation is there then they
If the sub-goals are not achieved then the group
leader tries to solve these problems.
If the problem is at group level then the group
leader tells the problem to the management.
Improving group performance
• Nestlé increases the cohesiveness by:
• Collective performance rewards and by including the small number
of persons in the group.
• Charted clear-cut responsibilities of group members are written
• Group members also have opportunity to hold meetings with
• The evaluation of groups in Nestlé is a continuous process
• Established in 1907.
• India's second-largest and second-most
profitable company in private sector.
• Ranked seventh in the global steel sales.
• Tata Steel with Corus is the fifth largest
global steel producer with a combined
output of 23.5 MT.
• Tata Steel is among the lowest cost
producers of steel in the world.
Group Decision Making at Tata Steel
• High degree of employee involvement.
• Company Belief: Union is an asset to the
• Employees of tata steel represented by
independent trade unions.
• Effort to stay in touch with the employees.
• Ensure: Continuous performance
• Closer association of employees with
management began in 1919.
• Formalized in 1956.
Joint Consultation System (JCS)
• JCS existing for past 50 years.
• Objective: Ensure employee participation at all
levels including top management.
to the employees
of their role and
Satisfy the urge
Three-tier system at Tata Steel
• Study operational results and
• Improve productivity and
discipline and economize
• Encouragement of
• Improvement of working
• Discharge special function
Joint Works Councils
• Advising management on production
Council of Management
• Forum between MD and employees of company.
• Share concerns of employees.
• MD on first working day of month
communicates performance of organization.
• Uses webcast and receives feedback.
• Hotmail: An e-communication channel.
• Feedback provided in 48 hours.
• TISCO's experience with workers' participation
has been satisfactory.
• 1957-1972 : 14,104 suggestions
• 70% of them implemented.
• Covered a wide range of topics and issues.
• The councils have been successful in involving
workers equally in the process of production.
• An American computer animation film studio
• Based in Emeryville, California
• Won a number of awards
• CGI-animated feature films
• Photo Realistic Render Man: Personalized
Image rendering API
A Bug’s life
Four stages of Pixar Process
Each stage in the Pixar process involves Typical group decision making technique
Factors leading to excellent group
of outsiders to
free to express
‘All for one, one
Group Decision Making
• Its managers give its directors a lot of autonomy.
• Even though directors have autonomy, they get
feedback from others.
• Pixar uses a process for “postmortems” on the
major aspects of movies after they’re completed.
• Restart approach
• Extensive educational programme: Improves
• Giving people opportunities to fail together and
to recover from mistakes together.
Group decision making
Case Study – Kasparov vs the World
• Kasparov vs the World was a game of chess
played in 1999 over the internet.
• Playing white, Garry Kasparov faced over
50,000 players from 75 countries.
• After 62 moves played over 4 months, Kasparov
won the game.
• A good example of decision making process of
groups can be greater then for one person who is
smarter than the group.
1. Karpov vs the world (1996)
2. Kasparov vs the world (1999)
Decision Making for the world team
• A new IT system by microsoft to enable better
• Official forum to discuss & coordinate ideas
• 4 official advisors to the world team (incl. 2
• Publicly accessible analysis tree; showing
moves, countermoves; arguments & refutations
• Fascinating case study in the power of collective
How it worked
• Public analysis decision
• Basic idea – anyone could
vote for the preferred next
• On a typical move – over
5000 votes were registered
• 10% moves – bad; 2.4%
moves – illegal !
• In Kasparov’s own words,
“it is the greatest game in the history of chess. The
sheer number of ideas, the complexity and the
contribution it has made to chess make it the most
important game ever played.”