Slide 1

11 Decision Making People turn to groups when they must solve problems and make decisions. Groups often make better decisions than individuals, for groups can process more information more thoroughly. But groups, like individuals, sometimes make mistakes. When a group sacrifices rationality in its pursuit of unity, the decisions it makes can yield calamitous consequences. How do groups make decisions? What problems undermine the effectiveness of deci- sion making in groups? Why do groups make riskier decisions than individuals? What is groupthink, and how can it be prevented? Slide 2 Functional Perspective Orientation Stage Discussion Stage Decision Stage Implementa- tion Stage Who Decides? Problems and Pitfalls Planning to Fail The Difficulty of Discussion The Shared Information Bias Cognitive Limitations Dysfunctional Post-decision Processes Group Polarization Decisions Involving Risk What Causes Group Polarization? The Consequences of Polarization Groupthink Symptoms of Groupthink Defective Decision Making Causes of Groupthink Emergence of Groupthink Alternative Models Preventing Groupthink Slide 3 The mob has no judgment, no discretion, no direction, no discrimination, no consistency. Cicero Madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups. Nietzsche When "a 100 clever heads join a group, one big nincompoop is the result. Carl Jung Decision Making in Groups Slide 4 Why Use Groups? Why Not Use Groups? Making Decisions in Groups: The Pluses and Minuses sometimes the group doesn't recognize the correct answer, even if proposed groups oversample shared information sometimes work done by just a few (social loafing) discussion can be manipulated groups sometimes make riskier decisions groups sometimes suffer from groupthink more people = more information more people to do more work more people means people can do what they are best at groups can discuss, process information (check for errors, etc.) groups have standards for deciding (e.g., majority rules) people are more likely to follow through if part of a group that decided Slide 5 The ODDI Functional Model of Decision Making Functional Perspective Slide 6 identifying the problem, setting goals planning the process developing a shared mental model Orientation: collaboration among members time management Groups are tempted to bypass this stage, but time spent in orientation improves: Functional Perspective Slide 7 improved memory exchange of information processing of information error detection Discussion: combined individual memories cross-cueing transactive memory Collective memory processes Functional Perspective Slide 8 The key to effective group decision making is the quality of groups discussion Baless observations indicate that groups spend the majority of the time during the discussion dealing with suggestions, expressing opinions, and developing a shared orientation to the task. Slide 9 Social Decision Schemes: How Groups Make Choices Functional Perspective Delegation Averaging: Statistical aggregation Voting Consensus (discussion to unanimity) Random choice Crowdsourcing as averaging (statistical aggregation) Functional Perspective Slide 10 Distributive justice Procedural justice Implementation: Coch & French verified the voice effect More participation means better engagement in implementation Participation effects are strong Functional Perspective Slide 11 Vrooms Model of Decision Making Functional Perspective Who Decides? Decide: Leader makes decision Consult ( Individual): Leader discusses with individual members, then makes decision him or herself Consult (Group): Leader discusses with group, but makes decision him or herself Facilitate: Leader coordinates problem solving session Delegate: Leader turns problem over to the group Slide 12 Orientation Stage Discussion Stage Decision Stage Implementa- tion Stage Who Decides? Problems and Pitfalls Planning to Fail The Difficulty of Discussion The Shared Information Bias Cognitive Limitations Dysfunctional Post-decision Processes Functional Perspective Group Polarization Groupthink Groups are prone to the planning fallacy Individuals underestimated the time they would need for each phase of the task (planning, analysis, etc.), but groups estimates were even less accurate than individuals. Slide 13 The Difficulty of Discussion Discussion can be challenging: Poor discussion skills Meetings (death by) Wasted time (law of triviality) Muddling through Slide 14 Discussion is rarely equal: most group members voices are not heard Percentage Slide 15 The Shared Information Bias Oversampling shared information leads to poorer decisions when a hidden profile would be revealed by considering the unshared information more closely Causes Informational influence Normative influence Emphasis on consensus vs. correctness Initial preferences Impression management goals Slide 16 Reducing the Shared Information Bias The SIB can be reduced by improving information exchange by: Good leadership Increasing diversity Using a GDSS (group decision support system ) Discussion Slide 17 Cognitive Limitations Type of Error Sins of Commission Sins of Omission Sins of Imprecision Slide 18 Cognitive Limitations Type of Error Sins of Commission Sins of Omission Sins of Imprecision Slide 19 Dysfunctional Post- decision Processes Denials of Responsibility Abilene Paradox Entrapment (sunk costs) Groups do not systematically check their work. Instead, they defend their choices, seeking reassurance rather than effectiveness. Slide 20 Group Polarization Decisions Involving Risk What Causes Group Polarization? The Consequences of Polarization Functional Perspective Problems and Pitfalls Groupthink Groups are not more cautious than individuals: They tend to be riskier ! The Risky Shift Effect Slide 21 Polarization and Risk Group polarization: A shift in the direction of greater extremity in individuals' responses Decisions Involving Risk Slide 22 Social comparison theory Persuasive- arguments theory Social identity theory What Causes Group Polarization? Risk and Caution are Cultural Values Americans postdeliberation judgments Chineses postdeliberation judgments Americans predeliberation judgments Chineses predeliberation judgments Slide 23 Functional Perspective Problems and Pitfalls Group Polarization Groupthink Symptoms of Groupthink Defective Decision Making Causes of Groupthink Emergence of Groupthink Alternative Models Preventing Groupthink Slide 24 Symptoms of Groupthink IIrving Janis, in his book Victims of Groupthink, used case study methods to identify the factors that combine to cause a group to make a disastrous decision. Slide 25 Defective Decision Making Slide 26 Causes of Groupthink Research suggests groupthink becomes most likely when cohesion is combined with one or more other causal factors. Slide 27 Emergence of Groupthink Janis suggested that groupthink occurs only in cohesive groups less cohesive groups can make bad decisions, but they cannot experience groupthink. Slide 28 Alternative Models Group-centrism: the tendency for groups tend to rush to make judgments on the basis of insufficient information, particularly if they face situations that interfere with their capacity to process informationtime pressures, severe ambiguity, noise, or fatigue (Kruglanski 2006). Ubiquity model: groups commonly groups often strive for consensus and that, in doing so, they tend to limit dissent, denigrate the outgroup, and misjudge their own groups competence, and these tendencies undermine decision making when Failure would threat the groups social identity Norms constrain open communication Members lack self-confidence (Baron, 2005) Ubiquity model: groups commonly groups often strive for consensus and that, in doing so, they tend to limit dissent, denigrate the outgroup, and misjudge their own groups competence, and these tendencies undermine decision making when Failure would threat the groups social identity Norms constrain open communication Members lack self-confidence (Baron, 2005) Slide 29 Preventing Groupthink Limiting premature seeking of concurrence Open style of leadership Devils advocate, subgroup discussions Correcting misperceptions and biases Using effective decision- making techniques Janis suggests that, rather than limiting cohesion, groups take alternative steps to minimize the possibility of groupthink. Slide 30 Functional Perspective Orientation Stage Discussion Stage Decision Stage Implementa- tion Stage Who Decides? Problems and Pitfalls Planning to Fail The Difficulty of Discussion The Shared Information Bias Cognitive Limitations Dysfunctional Post-decision Processes Group Polarization Decisions Involving Risk What Causes Group Polarization? The Consequences of Polarization Groupthink Symptoms of Groupthink Defective Decision Making Causes of Groupthink Emergence of Groupthink Alternative Models Preventing Groupthink