Creative Problem Solving,Creative Decision Making, Shared Decision Making

1. CREATIVE
PROBLEM
SOLVING
NURUL AIN BINTI ABD MANAN
2013160689
&DECISION
MAKING

2. The Relationship Between Problem, Problem
Solving, And Decision Making
Problem
Exists whenever objectives are not being met.
Problem Solving
The process of taking corrective action to meet
objectives.
Decision Making
The process of selecting an alternative course
of action that will solve a problem.

3. CREATIVEPROBLEM
SOLVING• Creative Problem Solving is a method for approaching a
problem or a challenge in an imaginative and innovative
way.
• It is a special form of problem solving in which the
solution is independently created rather than learned
with assistance.
• Creative problem solving always involves creativity.
• Creative problem solving is a part of overall problem
solving
CREATIVITY
• Creativity includes the generations of idea, alternatives
and possibility (Smith,1998)
• Creativity in psychology focusing in individual differences
in personality, cognitive abilities and problem solving
styles

4. CREATIVELEADERS
CHARACTERISTIC
Creative Leaders have modest Intelligence
• Arieti (1976) , the characteristic of creative thinker must be intelligent.
• Excessive intelligent cripples creativity by imposing examination of self and
idea that is too strict and too logical
Creative Leader Are Well Informed
• Creative leader must have a knowledge of a problem area in order to
understand the limit so that the creative thought will be fruitful
Creative Leader Are Original Thinker
• Original thinking will perquisite for creativity thought.
• Originality requires an active search for something different that will involve
deliberate attempt to come up with contrast and symbolic thinking
• Creative people will think out carefully what they are looking for and will
clarify the reason for their reaction to emerging idea.
Creative Leader Ask (the right) Questions
• Creative leader will not only ask a question but to ask question or pose
problem in the most effective ways and will not make too many
assumptions.
Creative Leader Are Prepared To Be Creative
• Creative people have a mindset that enable creativity to happen .

5. ORGANISATIONALMETHODS
TOENHANCECREATIVITY
Innovation and creativity are the life of an organization. So what
can the leader do to promote creativity and innovations?
Scratch-Pad of the Mind
• The 1st important step in creative thinking is to have clear understanding
of what the problem is and able to state it clearly.
• The effective thinker must focusing on the problem’s structure rather than
the technical details.
Creativity Cant’ Be Strategically Planned
• Discovery and creative thought cant be planned by a leader; its will just
happen.
Creativity CAN be stimulated by Leaders
• The creative can be develop in an organization the leader provide a
permissive environment that can nourish creativity.
The Unconscious Mind is Not Supernatural
• Some people believes that creativity emerges from unconscious thinking
The Way We Classify Things Become Blocks to New Idea
• Peoples tend to be so stereotype and that will blocks new and creative idea.

6. PROBLEM-SOLVINGTECHNIQUES
These techniques are usually called problem solving strategies. Some of these
are:
• Abstraction: solving the problem in a model of the system before applying it
to the real system
• Brainstorming: (especially by using groups of people) suggesting a large
number of solutions or ideas and combining and developing them until an
optimum solution is found
• Lateral thinking: approaching solutions indirectly and creatively
• Fractionalization / Divide and conquer: breaking down a large, complex
problem into smaller, solvable problems
• Hypothesis testing: assuming a possible explanation to the problem and
trying to prove (or, in some contexts, disprove) the assumption
• Means-ends analysis: choosing an action at each step to move closer to the
goal
• Morphological analysis: assessing the output and interactions of an entire
system
• Research: employing existing ideas or adapting existing solutions to similar
problems
• Trial-and-error: testing possible solutions until the right one is found
• Proof: try to prove that the problem cannot be solved. The point where the
proof fails will be the starting point for solving it

7. TECHNIQUESTOENHANCE
CREATIVEPROBLEM-SOLVING
• Create the right Environment : Creativity is Contagious
• Expect Creativity : Innovation correlate strongly with person
perception of whether or not he is expected to be innovative (Pel &
Andrew , 1976). Leader must encourages the workers to be
creative and innovative
• Challenge people : Workers should be challenged to stimulate
creative response but not too much challenge as it will overburden
the emotions and mind .
• Get a system of rewards for Creativity : Workers will generate new
idea when they know that the management rewards new idea.
Rewards can be in form of money such as bonuses and salary
increment.
• Give some people Freedom and Time for Reflections : Give the
workers freedom to think and give their own idea.

8. CREATIVEPROBLEM-SOLVING
PROCESS
• The Creative Problem Solving Process (CPS), also known as the Osborn-Parnes
CPS process, was developed by Alex Osborn and Dr. Sidney J. Parnes in the 1950s.
• Osborn-Parnes CPS process is different from other "creative problem solving"
methods that it uses both divergent and convergent thinking during each process
step, and not just when generating ideas to solve the problem. Each step begins
with divergent thinking, a broad search for many alternatives. This is followed by
convergent thinking, the process of evaluating and selecting
• .
• Thus CPS is a structured method for generating novel and useful solutions to
problems. It is flexible process as well.
• CPS follows three process stages, which match a person's natural creative process,
and six explicit steps.

10. 1. Explore the Challenge
OF : Objective Finding - Identify Goal, Wish or Challenge. It might be the initial
dissatisfaction or a desire that opens the door to using the CPS process.
FF : Fact Finding - Gather Data
Assess and review all the data that pertains to the situation at hand. Who’s
involved, what’s involved, when, where, and why it’s important. Make a list
of the facts and information, as well as the more visceral hunches, feelings,
perceptions, assumptions and gossips around the situation. In this step, all
the relevant data is collected & taken into consideration to review the
objective and begin to innovate
PF : Problem Finding - Clarify the Problem
In this step, we explore the facts and data to find all the problems and
challenges inherent in the situation, and all the opportunities they represent.
This is about making sure that we are focusing on the right problem. It is
possible to come up with the right answer to the wrong problem. Re-define
what we want or what’s stopping us

11. 2. Generate Ideas
IF : Idea Finding
Generating ideas is much more than brainstorming. During this step, be
vigilant about deferring judgment and coming up with wild, outrageous, out-
of-the-box ideas. This is where you explore ideas that are possible solutions.
It’s also where you need to stretch to make connections, take risks, and try new
combinations to find potentially innovative solutions.
3. Prepare for Action
SF : Solution Finding – Select and Strengthen Solutions
First, try to strengthen and improve the best ideas generated. Next, generate the
criteria that needs to be considered to evaluate the ideas for success. Apply that
criteria to the good ideas and decide which are most likely to solve the redefined
problem. The best idea needs to meet criteria that makes it actionable before it
becomes the solution. A creative idea is not really useful if it could not be
implemented.
• AF : Acceptance Finding
In this step, look at who’s responsible, what has to be done by when, and what
resources are available in order to realize this idea as a full-fledged, activated
solution.

12. DECISIONMAKING
• Decision making ??...Process of choosing among alternatives
• Important to an educational administration because choice processes
play a key role in motivation, leadership, communication and
organizational change
• Decision making pervades all others administrative functions as well
• Planning, organizing, staffing, directing, coordinating, and
controlling all involves decision making.
• In school, school administrator will make the decision that will
influence the school clients-student.
• It is important for the school administrator to develop decision
making skills as their decision will affect the organisation.
INSCHOOL

13. DECISIONMAKING
STAGESOF
•The decision maker recognizes a problem and opportunity and make
diagnosis
The identification phase
• The decision maker will searches for existing standard procedures or
solutions
The development phase
• Decision maker choose a solution.
• 3 ways of making a selection
• Judgement of the decision maker
• Ananlysis of the logical and systematic basis
• Bargaining – when selection involve group of decision maker
The selection phase

14. DECISIONMAKING
MODEL
1.Optimizing Model (Classical)
2.Satisficing Model
3.Muddling Model
4.Mixed Scanning Model
5.Contingency Model

15. CLASSICAL MODEL
• Classical decision theory assume that decision should be completely
rational ; it employs an OPTIMIZING strategy by seeking the best
possible alternative to maximize the achievement of goals and
objective.
• Classical decision theory assumes the manager faces a clearly
defined problem, knows all possible action alternatives and their
consequences, and then chooses the optimum solution.

16. ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL
SATISFICING STRATEGY
• First introduce by Herbet Simon (1957) to provide accurate
description of the way the administrators both do and make
organizational decision.
• Basic approach of this model is SATISFICING- finding a satisfactory
solution rather than the best one. (make satisfactory decision for all)
Existing
Situation
1. Recognize and Define the Problem
2. Analyze the Difficulties
•Get the Relevant Facts
•Classify the Problem
•Specify Problem
3. Establish Criteria for a
Satisfactory Solution
4. Develop a Plan of Action
•Consider Alternatives
•Weigh Consequences of Each
Alternative Deliberate
•Select Course of Action
5. Initiate Action Plan
•Program
•Communicate
•Monitor
•Appraise

17. ADMINISTRATIVEMODEL
STEP OF
Step 1: Recognize and Define the Problem or Issue
• Be sensitive to difficulties.
• Define the problem: conceptualize it.
• Don’t define problem either too narrowly or broadly.
• What is the short-term problem?
• What is the long-term problem?
Step 2: Analyze the Difficulties in Existing Situation
•Classify the problem.
•New problem or Old?
•Generic or Unique?
•Routine or Novel?
•Two common mistakes:
•Treat routine problem as new problem.
•Treat new problem as an old one.
•Get the Relevant Facts
•What is involved?
•Why?
•Where? And When?
•To what extent?

18. ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL
Step 3: Establish Criteria for a Satisfactory Outcome
•What are the minimum objectives to be achieved.
•Compare your “musts” with your “wants.”
•Compare the ideal with satisfactory.
•What is good enough?
•The minimums that you must get to have a satisfactory
decision--the boundary conditions.
Step 4: Develop an Action Plan or Strategy
Warnings:
• Do not decide questions that are not pertinent.
• Do not decide prematurely.
• Do not make decisions that cannot be effective.
• Do not make decisions that others should make.
Developing a strategy is the heart of the decision-making process.
1. Specify your Alternatives.
2. Predict the Consequences.
3. Deliberate and Develop a Plan

19. ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL
Step 5: Initiate and evaluate your plan of action
•Program.
•Communicate.
•Monitor.
•Assess success using criteria of satisfaction.
•The end is usually a new beginning.
Step 1: Recognize and Define the Problem or Issue
Step 2: Analyze the Difficulties in Existing Situation
Step 3: Establish Criteria for a Satisfactory Outcome
Step 4: Develop an Action Plan or Strategy
Step 5: Initiate and evaluate your plan of action
ADMINISTRATIVE MODEL
SUMMARYOF

20. INCREMENTAL MODEL:
MUDDLING THROUGH
• Muddling: Successive Limited Comparison
• Charles Lindblom first introduce and formalized the incremental
strategy
• Charles Lindblom describes the way most decisions are made as
the process of muddling through.
• A small and limited set of options are considered.
• Options are only marginally different from existing situation.
• Options are considered by comparing actual consequences.
• Try the option and then observe consequences.
• If consequences are fine, then a little more.
• If consequences are negative, then back off and try
something different.
• Focus is on outcomes and trial and error.

21. INCREMENTAL MODEL:
MUDDLING THROUGH
Summary of Distinctive Features
• Means-ends analysis is inappropriate because objectives and
generating alternatives occur simultaneously.
• Good solutions are what decision makers agree to
regardless of objectives.
• Alternatives and outcomes are drastically reduced by
considering only options similar to current state.
• Analysis is restricted to differences between existing state
and proposed alternatives.
• Muddling eschews theory in favor of successive comparison
of concrete, practical alternatives.

22. THE MIXED SCANNING MODEL
AN ADAPTIVE STRATEGY
• Mixed Scanning is guided by two questions:
1.What is the organization’s mission?
2.What decisions move the organization towards its mission and policy?
• Mixed scanning is a combination of the administrative model and mixed
scanning model; it is directed, incremental change.
• Mixed scanning has :-
• A broad goal, mission, or policy guides the decision process.
• Decisions are made incrementally, but with the broad goal in mind.
• Consequences are assessed in terms of the goal.
• Decisions are made with partial information.
• Then further small decisions are made if progress is good.
PRINCIPLES OF MIXED SCANNING MODEL
1. Use focused trial and error.
2. Be tentative--proceed with caution.
3. If uncertain, procrastinate.
4. Stagger your decisions in stages.
5. If uncertain, factionalize your decisions.
6. Hedge your bets.
7. Be prepared to reverse your decisions.

23. THE MIXED SCANNING MODEL
AN ADAPTIVE STRATEGY• Mixed Scanning is guided by two questions:
1.What is the organization’s mission?
2.What decisions move the organization towards its mission and policy?
• Mixed scanning is a combination of the administrative model and mixed
scanning model; it is directed, incremental change.
• Mixed scanning has :-
• A broad goal, mission, or policy guides the decision process.
• Decisions are made incrementally, but with the broad goal in mind.
• Consequences are assessed in terms of the goal.
• Decisions are made with partial information.
• Then further small decisions are made if progress is good.
PRINCIPLES OF MIXED SCANNING MODEL
1. Use focused trial and error.
2. Be tentative--proceed with caution.
3. If uncertain, procrastinate.
4. Stagger your decisions in stages.
5. If uncertain, factionalize your decisions.
6. Hedge your bets.
7. Be prepared to reverse your decisions.

24. COMPARISON OF THE CLASSICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE, INCREMENTAL, AND
MIXED-SCANNING MODELS OF DECISION MAKING
Classical
Objectives are set prior
to generating
alternatives
Decision making is
a means-ends
analysis: first, ends
are determined, and
then ALL the means to
obtain them are sought.
The test of a good
decision is that it is
shown to be the BEST
means to achieve the
end.
(Optimizing)
Engage in comprehensive
analysis; all alternatives
and all consequences
are considered.
Heavy reliance on theory.
Administrative
Objectives are usually
set prior to
generating alternatives.
Decision making is
typically means-ends
analysis; however,
occasionally ends change
as a result of analysis.
The test of a good decision
is that it can be shown to
result in a SATISFACTORY
means to achieve the end;
it falls within the
established boundary
conditions.
(Satisficing)
Engage in “problemistic
search” until a set of
reasonable alternatives
is identified.
Reliance on both theory
and experience.
Incremental
Setting objectives and
generating alternatives
are intertwined.
Because means and
ends are not
separable, means-
ends analysis is
inappropriate.
The test of a good decision
is that the decision
makers can agree an
alternative is the “right”
direction when the
existing course proves to
be wrong.
(Successive comparing)
Drastically limit the search
and analysis; focus on
alternatives similar to the
existing state.
Successive comparisons
Reduce or eliminate the need
for theory.
Mixed Scanning
Broad policy guidelines
are set prior to
generating alternatives.
Decision making is
focused on broad ends
and tentative means.
The test of a gooddecision
is that it can be shown to
result in a satisfactory
decision that is consistent
with the organization’s
policy.
(Adaptive satisficing)
Limit the search and
analysis to
alternatives close to the
problem, but evaluate
alternatives in terms of
broad policy. More
comprehensive than
instrumentalism.
Theory, experience, and
successive
Comparisons used together.

25. W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011
Decision
Opportunity
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sufficient
Information?
Important?
Sufficient
Time?
Important?
Important?
Important?
Satisficing
Truncated Satisficing
Adaptive Satisficing
Truncated Adaptive
Satisficing
Adaptive Satisficing
Muddling to
Adaptive Satisficing
Muddling
Sufficient
Time?
Truncated Adaptive
Satisficing
A CONTIGENCY MODEL :
MATCHING STRATEGY & SITUATION

26. SWIFT AND SMART
DECISION –MAKING PRINCIPLES
• Satisficing Rule: Optimizing is impossible in school administration: learn to satisfice.
• Framing Rule: Frame problems in positive terms for positive results.
• Default Rule: Consider as a first option “doing nothing.”
• Simplicity rule: Simplicity trumps complexity; start simple.
• Uncertainty Rule: Uncertain environments often require ignoring information;
trust your intuition in this regard.
• Take-the-Best Rule: Choose the first satisfactory option.
• Transparency Rule: Make transparency in decision making a habit of thought
and action.
• Contingency Rule: Reflect on your successes and failures; think conditionally.
• Participation Rule: Involve others in decisions when you deem they have relevant
knowledge, a personal stake, and are trustworthy.

27. TRAP IN DECISION-MAKING TO AVOID
Anchoring Trap : Giving disproportional weight to initial information
Comfort Trap : A bias toward alternatives that support the status quo
Recognition Trap: Tendency to place a higher value on that which is familiar
Representative Trap : Tendency to see others as representative of the typical
stereotype
Sunk-Cost Trap : Tendency to make decisions that justify previous decisions
that are not working.
Framing Trap : Framing of the problem impacts the eventual solution .Be
careful
Prudence Trap : Tendency to be overcautious when faced with high-stakes
decisions
Memory Trap : Tendency to base predictions on memory of past events,
which are often by both recent and dramatic events

28. SHARED
DECISION
EMPOWERING
MAKING:
TEACHER

29. GENERAL PROPOSITIONS FOR
DECISION MAKING
Power of perceptions
Dictates how problem is framed; broaden the context ;
use multiple perspective
Power of simplification
Power of decisiveness
Power of ownership
Power of deadlines
Power of emotional
self- regulation
Create value in problems and idea.
Promote decisiveness by structuring the endpoint of
the event
Help leader to cope with highly charged crisis situation
Gives decision maker path to solving complex
problems: Simplify complexity by identifying the core
idea of complex event
Ability to take action , balance between the decisive
action and reflective analysis in action

30. VROOM MODEL OF SHARED DECISION
MAKING
• The Vroom-Yetton-Jago Decision Model provides a useful framework for identifying the best
leadership style to adopt for the situation you're in.
• Identify that a set of problem that should ifluence the subordinates in decision making .
• Its defines by set of decision rules
RULES TO ENHANCE TO ENHANCE QUALITY
• Quality Requirement How important is decision?
• Leader Information Requirement Does the leader have expertise?
• Trust Requirement Can you trust subordinates?
• Problem Requirement Is the problem clear and structured?
RULES TO ENHANCE THE ACCEPTANCE DECISION
• Decision Quality – how important is it to come up with the "right" solution? The
higher the quality of the decision needed, the more you should involve other people
in the decision.
• Subordinate Commitment – how important is it that your team and others buy into
the decision? When teammates need to embrace the decision you should increase
the participation levels.
• Time Constraints – How much time do you have to make the decision? The more
time you have, the more you have the luxury of including others, and of using the
decision as an opportunity for teambuilding.

31. VROOM MODEL OF SHARED
DECISION MAKING
CONSTRAINTS
1. Time Constraint Time for Involvement?
2. Subordinate Development How important is subordinate development?
In general, involve subordinates if:
• Decision is critical.
• Leader has insufficient information.
• Subordinates can be trusted.
• Problem is structured.
• Acceptance is needed.
• Decision is controversial.
• Subordinate commitment is important.
• Subordinates have expertise.
• There is time.
• Subordinate development is important.

32. VROOM MODEL OF SHARED
DECISION MAKING
DECISION-MAKING STYLES FOR GROUP PROBLEMS
1. Autocratic (A) Unilateral Decision
2. Informed-Autocratic (IA) Get info then unilateral decision
3. Individual-Consultative (IC) Consult with key individuals by sharing problem,
then leader decides.
4. Group-Consultative (GC) Consult with group by sharing problem, then
leader decides.
5. Group-Agreement (GA) Get the group involvement in democratic decision
making.

33. VROOMMODEL OF SHARED DECISION MAKING
CONCLUSIONS
1. A good and sophisticated model
2. Supported by research
3. Comprehensive
4. Complex--need aids to use
5. Bottom Line--Too Complex for easy use

34. • In this model subordinates accept some decision without question because
they are indifferent
• Barnard (1938) explains, there is ZONE OF INDIFFERENCE - “in each
individual within which order are accepted without conscious questioning of
their authority”
• Simon (1957) come out with positive term ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE
HOY-TARTER MODEL OF SHARED DECISION
MAKING
ASSUMPTIONS OF THE HOY-TARTER MODEL
• As subordinates are involved in decision making located within their
ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be less effective.
• As subordinates are involved in decision making outside their ZONE
OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be more effective.
• As participants are involved in decision making for which they have
MARGINAL EXPERTISE, their participation will be marginally
effective.
• As subordinates are involved in decision making for which they have
MARGINAL INTEREST, their participation will be marginally
effective.

35. HOY-TARTER MODEL OF SHARED DECISION
MAKING
ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE
Outside Zone of
Acceptance
(Definitely include)
Marginal with
Expertise
(Occasionally include)
Marginal with
Relevance
(Occasionally
include)
Inside Zone of
Acceptance
(Definitely
exclude)
Dosubordinateshaveexpertise?
Do subordinates have a personal stake in the outcome?
YES NO
YESNO

36. HOY-TARTER MODEL OF SHARED DECISION
MAKING
TRUST AND SITUATION
• Trust is one more consideration that is useful if we are to be successful in
applying model to actual problem
• Trust subordinates should sometimes moderate their degree of involvement
• The test of trust : Are the subordinates committed to the mission of the
organization ? And can they be trusted to make the
decision in the best interest of the organization?
• Application of the test produce the following the viable situation, each with
different strategy of involvement:-
Democratic Situation: Extensive Involvement
Conflict Situation: Limited Involvement
Noncoloborative Situation: No Involment
Stakeholder Situation: Limited Involvement
Expert Situation: Limited Involvement

37. SITUATIONS FOR PARTICIPATIVE
DECISION MAKING
Relevance? Yes Yes Yes No No
Expertise? Yes Yes No Yes No
Trust? Yes No Yes/No Yes/No N/A
Democratic Conflictual Stakeholder Expert Noncollaborative
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011

38. DECISION-MAKING STRUCTURES AND
THEIR FUNCTIONS
Group
Consensus Group
Majority Group
Advisory
Individual
Advisory
Unilateral
Who is Leader Leader Leader Leader and Leader
Involved? and Group and Group and Group Selected Individuals
Nature of Group shares Group shares Group shares Individuals No subordinate
Involvement? information, information, information, provide data, involvement
analyzes and deliberates, analyzes and discuss, and
reaches and votes on recommends. recommend.
consensus. action.
Who makes Group by Group by Leader with Leader with Leader Alone
the decision? Consensus Majority Rule Advice Advice
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011
• Once the administrator has determined that the subordinates should be involved
in deciding , Hoy and Tarter suggest Five decision making structures.

39. 1. The integrator brings subordinates together for consensus
decision-making. Here the task is to reconcile divergent opinions
and positions.
2. The parliamentarian facilitates open communication by
protecting the opinions of the minority and leads through a
democratic process to a group decision.
3. The educator reduces resistance to change by explaining and
discussing with group members the opportunities and constrains of
the decisional issues.
4. The solicitor seeks advice from subordinate-experts. The quality of
decisions is improved .As the administrator guides the generation of
relevant information.
5. The director makes unilateral decisions in those instances where the
subordinates have no expertise or personal stake. Here the goal is
efficiency.
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011
FIVE RELATIONSHIP ROLES IN SHARED
DECISION MAKING

40. Role Function Aim
Integrator Brings together divergent positions To achieve consensus
Parliamentarian Facilitates open discussion To support reflective deliberation
Educator Explains and discusses issues To assure acceptance of decisions
Solicitor Solicits advice from teachers To improve quality of decisions
Director Makes unilateral decisions To attain efficiency
W. K. Hoy © 2003, 2008, 2011
FIVE LEADERSHIP ROLES

41. • Empower teachers: Involve them in key decisions when appropriate.
• Simplify complexity: Identify the core ideas of complex events.
• Strike a balance between decisive action and reflective analysis: Lean
toward action.
• Impose structure and deadlines for groups engaged in deciding: Deadlines
enhance the process.
• Maximize teacher involvement when teachers have expertise, interest,
and can be trusted: Empower and delegate authority to teachers.
• Limit involvement of others, however, to those domains over which you
have the authority: You can’t give what you don’t have—so don’t fake
shared decision making.
• Foster group ownership of problems and ideas: Ownership enhances both
value and motivation.
CONCLUSION

42. • Be prepared to make unilateral decision: Sometimes they are necessary.
• Develop teacher expertise, interest, and trust: Nurture shared decision
making.
• Vary your (principal) role in decision making from director to solicitor to
educator to parliamentarian to integrator as the situation warrants:
There is no best role for principals in decision making—it depends on the
situation.
• Vary the group decision-making process from consensus to majority rule
to group advisory to individual advisory to unilateral action as the
situation warrants: There is no best way to make decisions—it depends
on the situation.
• Avoid groupthink: Support divergent points of view in shared decision
making.
• Remember, successful participation in decisions requires useful knowledge,
interest, and a willingness to subordinate personal agendas to the good
of the group: Make sure all three are in place.
CONCLUSION