GROUP DECISION-MAKING: Many managers feel they are well-versed in areas of group effort, such as problem-solving, goal-setting, and action planning. Frequently, however, the implementation of such techniques never seem to get beyond the initial stage. Often, this is because managers can not quite seem to understand that brainstorming or group decision-making requires comprehensive utilization of various processes. Managers may unknowingly find themselves perpetuating problems instead of solving them.

DECISION BY LACK OF RESPONSE--THE PLOP METHOD: The most common—and perhaps least visible—group decision-making method is that in which someone suggests an idea and, before anyone else has said anything about it, someone else suggests another idea, until the group finds one it will act on. This results in shooting down the original idea before it has really been considered. All the ideas that are bypassed, have, in a sense been rejected by the group because the “rejections” have been simply a common decision not to support the ideas, the proposers feel that their suggestion has “plopped." The floors of most conference rooms are completely littered with plops.

DECISION BY MINORITY RULE: A single person can “enforce” a decision, particularly if they are in some kind of chairmanship role, by not giving opposition an opportunity to build up. For example, the manager might consult a few members on even the most seemingly insignificant step and may get either a negative or positive reaction. The others have remained silent. If asked how they concluded there was agreement, chances are that they will say, “Silence means consent, doesn’t it? Everyone has a chance to voice opposition.” If the group members are interviewed later, it sometimes is discovered that an actual majority was against a given idea, but that each one hesitated to speak up because she thought that all the other silent ones were for it. They too were trapped by “silence means consent.”

WHAT IS WRONG? OTHER PROBLEMS IN GROUP DECISION MAKING: First, the minority members often feel that there was an insufficient period of discussion for them to really get their point of view across; hence they feel misunderstood and sometimes resentful. Second, the minority members often feel that the voting has created two camps within the group, and that these camps are now in win-lose competition: The minority feels that their camp lost the first round but that it is just a matter of time until it can regroup, pick up some support, and win the next time a vote comes up. In other words, voting creates coalitions, and the preoccupation of the losing coalition is not how to implement what the majority wants, but how to win the next battle. If voting is to be used, the group must be sure that it has created a climate in which members feel they have had their day in court, and where all members feel obligated to go along with the majority decision.

Copyright AE Schwartz & Associates All rights reserved. For additional presentation materials and resources: ReadySetPresent and for a Free listing as a Trainer, Consultant, Speaker, Vendor/Organization: TrainingConsortium

CEO, A.E. Schwartz & Associates, Boston, MA., a comprehensive organization which offers over 40 skills based management training programs. Mr. Schwartz conducts over 150 programs annually for clients in industry, research, technology, government, Fortune 100/500 companies, and nonprofit organizations worldawide. He is often found at conferences as a key note presenter and/or facilitator. His style is fast-paced, participatory, practical, and humorous. He has authored over 65 books and products, and taught/lectured at over a dozen colleges and universities throughout the United States.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Andrew_E._Schwartz