Group decision-making methods
According to Marquis (n.d) the more minds working on a single problem, the more potential solutions are created. However, making final decisions in a group may prove to be difficult in certain situations. Thus the introduction of group decision making techniques.
This post will highlight two techniques used for this purpose along with their strengths and limitations.
According to Nasa (2011) The Delphi technique was developed in an attempt to make the most effective use of informed intuitive judgement by creating conditions that allow group of experts to perform skillfully and their answers combined into a single group opinion. Yousuf (2007) adds that the Delphi technique by definition is a group process that involves interactions between the researcher and a group of identified experts on a given topic. This technique is useful where the opinions and judgements of experts and practitioners are necessary.
Yousuf (2007) identifies the basic steps f the Delphi process as follows:
1. A questioner is sent to the panel of experts asking for a list of opinions involving experiences and judgements, a list of predictions and a list of recommendations.
2. A second questioner containing a collective list is sent to each expert asking them to rate or evaluate each item by some criteria of importance
3. A third questioner is sent including the list, ratings indicated and consensus if any. If not the group is asked to either revise their opinions or discuss their reasons for not coming to a consensus.
Strengths
· Assists when a precise analytical technique cannot be applied to the problem but can benefit from subjective judgements on a collective basis
· Useful when the individuals needed to contribute to the study of a broad and complex problem have no history of adequate communication and may represent diverse backgrounds.
· Increases the efficiency of face to face meetings by supplemental group communication process
· The method is particularly useful for its anonymity thus is there are disagreements among individuals that communication is an issue, anonymity is assured
Limitations
· The consensus reached using the method may not be a true consensus, it may be a product of manipulated consensus
· Cultural bias can lead to similar answers to some questions that are poorly known
· Judgements are of the selected group of people thus do not represent the rest of the population
· Requires adequate time and participant commitment.
This is a structured variation of a small group discussion to reach a consensus. The technique gathers information by asking individuals to respond to questions posed by a moderator and then asking the participants to prioritize the ideas or suggestions of all group members. According to Sample (1984) it is a possible alternative for brainstorming and was originally developed by Delbecq and VandeVen. Del et al (1977) state that the nominal group technique is a structured process that taps the experience, skills or feelings of participants. The techniques involves a four step process that includes:
Generating ideas: The moderator presents a question to the group and asks them to write ideas in brief phrases or statements working silently and independently.
Recording ideas: Group members engage in a round robin feedback session without debate to record each idea. The moderator writes an idea from each group member on a chart visible to the whole group
Discussing ideas: Each recorded idea is discussed to determine clarity and importance
Voting on ideas: Individuals then vote privately to prioritize ideas. (CDC, 2006)
Advantages
· Generates a greater number of ideas than a traditional group discussion
· Balances the influence of individuals by limiting the power of opinion makers
· Diminishes competition and pressure
· Encourages participants to confront issues through problem solving
· Allows the group to prioritize ideas democratically
· Typically provides a greater sense of closure
Disadvantages
· Requires preparation
· It lends itself only to a single topic meeting
· Minimizes discussion, thus not allowing full idea development.
References
CDC. (2006). Gaining consensus among stakeholders through the nominal group technique (7).
Deip, P., Thesen, A., Motiwalla, J., & Seshardi, N. (1977). Systems tools for project planning. Bloomington, Indiana: International Development Institute.
Marquis, A. (n.d.). Different Techniques in Group Decision-Making. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/different-techniques-group-decisionmaking-34816.html
NASA. (2011). The delphi technique.
Sample, J. (1984). Nominal group technique: An alternative to brainstorming. Ideas at work, 22(2).
Yousuf, M. I. (2007). The delphi technique. Essays in Education, 20.
Delphi Techniques
According to Nasa (2011) The Delphi technique was developed in an attempt to make the most effective use of informed intuitive judgement by creating conditions that allow group of experts to perform skillfully and their answers combined into a single group opinion. Yousuf (2007) adds that the Delphi technique by definition is a group process that involves interactions between the researcher and a group of identified experts on a given topic. This technique is useful where the opinions and judgements of experts and practitioners are necessary.
Yousuf (2007) identifies the basic steps f the Delphi process as follows:
1. A questioner is sent to the panel of experts asking for a list of opinions involving experiences and judgements, a list of predictions and a list of recommendations.
2. A second questioner containing a collective list is sent to each expert asking them to rate or evaluate each item by some criteria of importance
3. A third questioner is sent including the list, ratings indicated and consensus if any. If not the group is asked to either revise their opinions or discuss their reasons for not coming to a consensus.
Strengths
· Assists when a precise analytical technique cannot be applied to the problem but can benefit from subjective judgements on a collective basis
· Useful when the individuals needed to contribute to the study of a broad and complex problem have no history of adequate communication and may represent diverse backgrounds.
· Increases the efficiency of face to face meetings by supplemental group communication process
· The method is particularly useful for its anonymity thus is there are disagreements among individuals that communication is an issue, anonymity is assured
Limitations
· The consensus reached using the method may not be a true consensus, it may be a product of manipulated consensus
· Cultural bias can lead to similar answers to some questions that are poorly known
· Judgements are of the selected group of people thus do not represent the rest of the population
· Requires adequate time and participant commitment.
Nominal Group Technique
This is a structured variation of a small group discussion to reach a consensus. The technique gathers information by asking individuals to respond to questions posed by a moderator and then asking the participants to prioritize the ideas or suggestions of all group members. According to Sample (1984) it is a possible alternative for brainstorming and was originally developed by Delbecq and VandeVen. Del et al (1977) state that the nominal group technique is a structured process that taps the experience, skills or feelings of participants. The techniques involves a four step process that includes:
Generating ideas: The moderator presents a question to the group and asks them to write ideas in brief phrases or statements working silently and independently.
Recording ideas: Group members engage in a round robin feedback session without debate to record each idea. The moderator writes an idea from each group member on a chart visible to the whole group
Discussing ideas: Each recorded idea is discussed to determine clarity and importance
Voting on ideas: Individuals then vote privately to prioritize ideas. (CDC, 2006)
Advantages
· Generates a greater number of ideas than a traditional group discussion
· Balances the influence of individuals by limiting the power of opinion makers
· Diminishes competition and pressure
· Encourages participants to confront issues through problem solving
· Allows the group to prioritize ideas democratically
· Typically provides a greater sense of closure
Disadvantages
· Requires preparation
· It lends itself only to a single topic meeting
· Minimizes discussion, thus not allowing full idea development.
References
CDC. (2006). Gaining consensus among stakeholders through the nominal group technique (7).
Deip, P., Thesen, A., Motiwalla, J., & Seshardi, N. (1977). Systems tools for project planning. Bloomington, Indiana: International Development Institute.
Marquis, A. (n.d.). Different Techniques in Group Decision-Making. Retrieved from http://smallbusiness.chron.com/different-techniques-group-decisionmaking-34816.html
NASA. (2011). The delphi technique.
Sample, J. (1984). Nominal group technique: An alternative to brainstorming. Ideas at work, 22(2).
Yousuf, M. I. (2007). The delphi technique. Essays in Education, 20.