Decision MakingDecision Making

Magnificent SevenMagnificent Seven

Decision making is like Decision making is like solving a puzzlesolving a puzzle

It is not complete unless you have all piecesIt is not complete unless you have all pieces

ConsensusConsensus Most group decisions in America are Most group decisions in America are

made by reaching consensusmade by reaching consensus

Decision is better than those reached aloneDecision is better than those reached alone

People feel good and closer to team People feel good and closer to team membersmembers

People feel invested in decisionPeople feel invested in decision

Greater acceptance of group decisionGreater acceptance of group decision

Consensus negativesConsensus negatives

Groupthink: Why is it dangerous?Groupthink: Why is it dangerous?

• Little critical testing, analyzing, and evaluating Little critical testing, analyzing, and evaluating of ideas of ideas

• Research shows decision is of lower qualityResearch shows decision is of lower quality

• Quiet members may feel disenfranchised Quiet members may feel disenfranchised

Benchmarks of good decision-making Benchmarks of good decision-making processprocess

Clear objectivesClear objectives

BATNAData collection & analysis

Evaluation

Implementation

Framing and Reference Points

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

From: “Advances in Decision Analysis”, W. Edwards, R. Miles, and D. von Winterfeldt, Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Devil’s Advocacy & Devil’s Advocacy & Dialectical InquiryDialectical Inquiry

Devil’s AdvocacyDevil’s Advocacy

• One person proposes a plan, one person One person proposes a plan, one person takes role of adverse critictakes role of adverse critic

Dialectical InquiryDialectical Inquiry

Dialectical InquiryDialectical Inquiry

• Two groups: proposal and counter-Two groups: proposal and counter-proposalproposal

Benefits of DA/DI Benefits of DA/DI

More rigorousMore rigorous

Higher quality decisionHigher quality decision

Questions underlying assumptionsQuestions underlying assumptions

Can be speedier than consensusCan be speedier than consensus

Negatives of DA/DINegatives of DA/DI

Needs to be learnedNeeds to be learned

Can be hard to implement when buy-Can be hard to implement when buy-in tends to be lowerin tends to be lower

Can increase conflictCan increase conflict

Healthy environment Healthy environment for decision makingfor decision making

High cognitive dissonance High cognitive dissonance • Not being afraid to disagree on the Not being afraid to disagree on the

contentcontent

Low affective dissonance Low affective dissonance • Find ways to reduce personal conflictFind ways to reduce personal conflict

Institution Level: Nature of the decision

If we are all in agreement on the decision - If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all understanding of what the decision is all about.about.

Alfred P. SloanAlfred P. Sloan

Magnificent Seven teamMagnificent Seven team

Susan BorgesSusan Borges Kristen DerenKristen Deren Jennifer GilmoreJennifer Gilmore Jim JepsenJim Jepsen Nina JoshiNina Joshi Michael SouliosMichael Soulios Mariya StoevaMariya Stoeva

ReferencesReferences Amason, A. C., & Sapienza, H. J. (1997). The Effects of Top Management Team Size and interaction Amason, A. C., & Sapienza, H. J. (1997). The Effects of Top Management Team Size and interaction

Norms on Cognitive and Affective Conflict. Norms on Cognitive and Affective Conflict. Journal of ManagementJournal of Management , 495-516. , 495-516.

Berniker, E., & McNabb, D. E. (2006). Dialectical Inquiry: A Structured Qualitative Research Method. Berniker, E., & McNabb, D. E. (2006). Dialectical Inquiry: A Structured Qualitative Research Method. The Qualitative ReportThe Qualitative Report , 643-664. , 643-664.

Dialectical ApproachesDialectical Approaches. (2006, April 16). Retrieved May 03, 2009, from Creativity & Innovation: . (2006, April 16). Retrieved May 03, 2009, from Creativity & Innovation: Mycoted Science & Technology: Mycoted Science & Technology: www.mycoted.com/Dialectical_Approaches

Frederic, A., & Humphreys, P. (2008). Frederic, A., & Humphreys, P. (2008). Encyclopedia of Decision Making and Decision Support Encyclopedia of Decision Making and Decision Support Technologies.Technologies. Idea Group, Inc. Idea Group, Inc.

GroupthinkGroupthink. (2009, September 06). Retrieved May 03, 2009, from University of Twente: Enschede - . (2009, September 06). Retrieved May 03, 2009, from University of Twente: Enschede - The Netherlands: The Netherlands: http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Organizational%20Communication/groupthink.doc/

Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Milkman, K. L., Chugh, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). How Can Decision Making Be Improved?How Can Decision Making Be Improved?

Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. W. (1986). Group Approaches for Improving Strategic Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. W. (1986). Group Approaches for Improving Strategic Decision Making: A Comparitive Analysis Of Analysis of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Decision Making: A Comparitive Analysis Of Analysis of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Consensus. Consensus. Academy of Management JournalAcademy of Management Journal , 51-71. , 51-71.

Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task Conflict and Relationship Conflict in Top Management Simons, T. L., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task Conflict and Relationship Conflict in Top Management Teams: The Pivotal Role of Intragroup Trust. Teams: The Pivotal Role of Intragroup Trust. Journal of Applied PsychologyJournal of Applied Psychology , 102-111. , 102-111.