Page 246 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

Problem Solving and Decision Making in Groups 229

In the course of solving the water problem, O’Fallon officials had to make many
different decisions. Decision making refers to the act of choosing among alternatives. Decision Making
The most obvious choice the O’Fallon group made was selecting the membrane treat- Choosing from
ment plant, but, in fact, members made many less obvious decisions along the way. among a set of
For example, they had to decide who should be involved in the process, what the main alternatives.
issues were, what sort of process they would use to make the decision, where they
would meet, what their time frame would be, how they would go about getting the
information they needed, and so forth. Thus, although problem solving and decision
making refer to different processes, they are so inextricably linked that we have chosen
to discuss them together.

Group Versus Individual Problem Solving and Decision Making
Groups can be much better problem solvers and decision makers than individuals. At
their best, groups achieve an assembly effect in which the decision is qualitatively and Assembly Effect
quantitatively better than the best individual judgment of any one member or the The decision of
averaged judgments of all the members. In this kind of positive synergy, mentioned in group members
Chapter 3, the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. A number of studies collectively is better,
2
have found evidence of the assembly effect. However, remember it is when group qualitatively and
members interact and work interdependently on the task is positive synergy possible; quantitatively, than
3
groups whose members work independently do not achieve this result. If group adding or averaging
members complete individual assignments on their own and just compile their indi- the individual
vidual products into the final group product without discussing each members’ indi- judgments of the
vidual work as a group, that group will probably not achieve an assembly effect. members.
Communication among members is what makes synergy happen. 4
However, there are tradeoffs, and the advantages must be balanced against the
disadvantages. Let’s take note of the advantages. First, members can compensate for
5
each others’ weaknesses. By sharing what they know, members give the group a
larger pool of information and ideas to draw from. Second, group members can spot
each other’s errors, recognize fact from opinion, and process more information than
individuals can. Third, they also provide different perspectives to a problem. For
6
example, an O’Fallon taxpayer may feel differently about the cost of building an
expensive membrane treatment facility than the city manager does, but both perspec-
tives need to be taken into account. Fourth, groups can get much more done than an
individual can. Can you imagine the time it would take for one person to do just the
preliminary research that O’Fallon needed about types of treatment facilities, costs,
and so forth? Instead, group members and their staffs spent a lot of time finding the
needed information. Fifth, group involvement in decision making increases accep-
tance of a decision. Workers who have a voice in changing a work procedure are
7
8
more productive than when the change is imposed on them and are more committed
9
to the change. Finally, as we noted in Chapter 1, groups meet our human needs for
belonging and affection.
On the flip side, though, groups usually take more time to make decisions than
individuals take. One of us participated on a committee revising the Faculty Handbook;
out of curiosity, a member calculated how many person- hours went into the project,

gal37018_ch09_225_258.indd 229 3/28/18 12:37 PM