Group decision making
Group decision making is a process in
which multiple individuals collectively analyze problems
to make a decision. Group decision-making also known as collaborative
decision making refers to a more specific focus on decision making to
create equilibrium, or balance task concerns and relationship management.
The group tries to figure out the real problems and symptoms of the issues to
provide possible solutions (Lumencandela,n.d.).
According to Lumencandela (n.d.), “Group
decision making provides two advantages which are synergy and sharing of
information. The group makes a decision collectively by discussion,
questioning, and collaboration to identify complete and robust solutions.
Another advantage of the group decision-making process is the sharing of
information among group members, which can increase understanding, clarify issues,
and facilitate movement toward a collective decision( Lumencandela, n.d.)”.
There are various types of the group decision-making
process.
1) Delphi Technique – This technique entails a
group of experts who anonymously reply to questionnaires and subsequently
receive feedback in the form of statistical representation. This method is
mostly used in identifying and prioritizing issues for managerial
decision-making (Okoli,2004).
2) Brainstorming
- This technique involves a group of people, usually between five and ten,
sitting around a table, generating ideas, and primary focus is on the generation
of ideas rather them on the evaluation of ideas (Chand, n.d.).
References
Chand, S.(n.d.). 4 Techniques for Group
Decision Making Process More Effective. Retrieved from https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/management/4-techniques-for-group-decision-making-process-more-effective/3506
Lumencandela (n.d.) Managing Group
Decision Making. Retrieved from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-management/chapter/managing-group-decision-making/
Okoli. C. (2004). The Delphi method as a
research tool: an example, design considerations and applications.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002
Comments
Post a Comment