Teamwork is an important part of nearly all work environments.  One of the interesting findings in the research on groups is that, sometimes, groups comprised entirely of very smart and capable individuals get together and make very poor decisions as a group.  This tutorial explores several reasons that this might be the case, and offers several tips on how you can guard against decision making breakdowns in groups you are involved in. 

How do groups make decisions?

Let’s start by looking at the steps involved in a basic problem solving or decision making process.  After that, we can look at where problems might arise.   

We often solve problems in five different stages³:

 
Stage 1: Problem Recognition

• It is difficult to address a problem unless you are aware that there is one!  At some point, you must become aware of a deficiency or opportunity that exists in order to kick start the rest of the problem solving process.       

Stage 2: Information Search

• Once a problem has been identified, information is gathered about the nature of the problem and the options that are available.  This stage might involve the examination of sources for information, or it might be more like “brainstorming” to generate various possibilities that might be considered as methods of addressing the problem.              

Stage 3: Evaluation of Alternatives

• After you have information about the problem and possible approaches to addressing the problem have been laid out, the alternatives must be evaluated.  This might involve outlining the “pros and cons” of a scenario, or calculating the probability of success if a particular approach is used.

Stage 4: Action

• Once a choice has been made as to the course of action to take, the action then must be taken.

Stage 5: Outcomes

• The relationship between actions and outcomes is often a complicated one.  Many situational and environmental factors can impact whether an action has a desired or even a predictable outcome.  It is also notable that the outcomes feedback to the problem recognition stage.  Thus, whether or not outcomes are successful impacts whether future problems arise.

What is “groupthink?”

You might have heard “groupthink” discussed in the popular media as a term to describe group decision making breakdowns.  This term refers to “a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity overrides their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action¹.  The original theory of “groupthink” asserted that high levels of group cohesion (or a strong pull for togetherness and unanimity in decision making) caused groups to consider less information and fewer alternatives, and this led to poor decision outcomes.  However, this theory has not been supported by research².

Evidence has been found that group cohesion is actually an important part of group functioning².  Other studies have suggested that not group cohesion, but “collective efficacy” is to blame for poor decisions in groups.  This refers to groups being overconfident about how successful they are likely to be in their endeavors.  Because the group does not see failure as a viable option, they don’t gather as much information and recognize obstacles to their success as being such.  

How can my team avoid “groupthink” and other types of process breakdowns?^1;2;3;4

Several important strategies to avoid groupthink can be applied during the first three stages of the decision making process.

Stage 1: Problem Recognition – Encourage feedback throughout the team and organization to identify issues that might be necessary for the group to deal with.  Remember, no team or organization is invincible.  Seek out environmental threats or situational contingencies to address as a group.  Don’t settle for surface manifestations of a problem as being the ‘real problem;’ probe deeply to identify the root causes of problems.

Stage 2: Information Search – Research indicates that individuals that see themselves as “experts” in an area tend to gather little information before making a decision in their area of expertise.  Interestingly enough, those seeing themselves as novices, apparently intimidated by approaching something they are not familiar with, also tend to gather very little information before making a decision about a course of action.  It is key to maximize the amount of useful information gathered. 

Groups should continually strive to avoid exceedingly high levels of collective efficacy or an arrogance the group develops about their chances of being successful.  This has been related to very poor decision outcomes.  One result of high levels of collective efficacy is that the group might gather less information about a problem, and individuals in the group might be much less likely to generate alternative solutions to a problem, and emphasize tradition over innovation (especially if the group has met with past success).

Stage 3: Evaluation of Alternatives – As a leader in a group, it appears to be important that you do not state your preferences prior to discussing an issue.  Giving your preferences appears to bias the group in the favor of your preferred solution, and appears to reduce the amount of debate and discussion about how favorable possible solutions are.

Group composition is also an important factor in the evaluation process.  Having a group that is as heterogeneous in as many areas as possible (seniority, department, expertise, age, etc.) is more likely to lead to a scenario where the relative merits of different solutions are examined.

Finally, a group should seek out the opinions of others and avoid isolating themselves from other groups and individuals in their organization and discipline.  A group keeping themselves too insulated from the outside world can lead to the sense of “invincibility” that is characteristics of groups that have high levels of collective efficacy (which you want to avoid).

As indicated in the leadership competency model, several of the competencies in the innovation dimension involve what we have discussed thus far.  Specifically, several competencies within the innovation dimension (generating ideas, critical thinking, synthesis/reorganization, creative problem solving, problem identification, gathering information, independent thinking, openness to ideas, collaborating) are particularly relevant to the present discussion.

In summary, perhaps the most important thing is to be aware of group decision processes in groups you are involved with.  As a leader, be especially aware of how, by your actions (how you invoke discussion on a topic, whether you determine gathering information (what and how much) is important, how you delegate this task, etc.), you have a great deal of influence on the group decision making process.  Remember the guidelines above to avoid high levels of consensus-seeking behaviors in groups and minimize the occurrence of faulty decision making processes.

Relevant Competencies: (Innovation Dimension) generating ideas; critical thinking; synthesis/reorganization; creative problem solving; problem identification; gathering information; independent thinking; openness to ideas; collaborating

References

¹Jex, S. M. (2002). Organizational psychology: A scientist practitioner approach. John

Wiley & Sons: New York.

²Park, W. (2000). A comprehensive empirical investigation of the relationships among

Variables of the group think model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 873-887.

³Solomon, M. R. (2004). Consumer behavior: Buying, having, and being in the 21^st 

            century.  6^th ed.  Prentice Hall: New Jersey.

⁴Whyte, G. (1998). Recasting janis’s groupthink model: The key role of collective

efficacy in decision making fiascoes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 73, 185-209.

~Contributed by Brian Siers