“Group Decision Making”: Are Decisions Really Made by the Group?
GROUP DECISION MAKING: Many managers feel that they are well versed in areas of group effort, such as problem solving, goal setting, and action planning. Often, however, the implementation of such techniques never seems to go beyond the initial stage. This is often because managers don’t seem to fully understand that group brainstorming or decision making requires the comprehensive use of multiple processes. Managers may unknowingly perpetuate problems instead of solving them.
NON-RESPONSE DECISION: THE PLOP METHOD: The most common, and perhaps least visible, group decision-making method is one where someone suggests an idea, and before anyone else has said anything about it, someone else suggests other. idea, until the group finds one on which to act. This results in shooting down the original idea before it has really been considered. All ideas that are passed over have, in a sense, been rejected by the group because the “rejections” have simply been a common decision not to support the ideas, the proponents feel that their suggestion has “defeated”. The floors of most conference rooms are completely alphabetized with plops.
MINORITY RULE DECISION: A single person can “enforce” a decision, particularly if he or she is in some kind of chairman role, by not giving the opposition a chance to develop. For example, the manager may consult some members on even the most seemingly insignificant step and may get a negative or positive reaction. The others remained silent. If asked how they came to the conclusion that there was agreement, they are likely to reply, “Silence means consent, doesn’t it? Everyone gets a chance to express their opposition.” If group members are interviewed later, it is sometimes discovered that an actual majority was against a given idea, but that each hesitated to speak because he thought everyone else was silent in favour. They too were trapped by “silence means consent.”
WHAT IS WRONG? OTHER PROBLEMS IN GROUP DECISION MAKING: First, minority members often feel there was insufficient discussion period for them to really get their point across; hence they feel misunderstood and sometimes resentful. Second, members of the minority often feel that the vote has created two camps within the group, and that these camps are now in a win-lose contest: The minority feels that their camp lost the first round but that it is it’s only a matter of time until he can regroup, get some support, and win the next time a vote comes around. In other words, voting builds coalitions, and the losing coalition’s concern is not how to implement what the majority wants, but how to win the next battle. If voting is to be used, the group must be sure that it has created a climate where members feel they have had their day in court, and where all members feel compelled to accept the majority decision.