Advantages and Disadvantages, Pros and Cons, of Group Decision Making - Assignment Example

Advantages and disadvantages, pros and cons, of group decision making Introduction Keller & Price pointed out that an organisation that have to develop and maintain competitive advantage has to devise mechanisms of involving every employee into the decision making process. A study conducted by Freeman (1999) in an investigation of the importance of including employees in a decision making process documented that, organisations that include employees in decisions of the running of the organisation have higher chances of developing organisational culture that pushes the organisation to higher levels. In this regard, the facets of the success of any organisations are denoted by the strategic decisions made through initiatives such as group decision making and other strategic positioning plans. Nevertheless, specific aspects of decisions should be avoided in order to make departments effective. Stone (2013) articulated on core aspects that touches on sensitive matters and which should be avoided for effective running of organisations. In fact, Freeman (1999) further argued that group decision making can only yield good results if a set of conditions pertaining the group chemistry are met. Advantages of group decision making It is evident that group members have different skills and competence. Thus, sharing of ideas and information on a particular issue can lead to more information and more comprehensive. The ground for the argument is many alternatives are provided and the most appropriate one is chosen from the list. This is unlike in situations where one individual is left to make decisions that affect a whole company or department. Chances of getting the best outcome are minimal when compared to individual decision making. In addition, the whole process becomes effective since issues related to revising the decisions made are minimal especially because the whole group is present or representatives are present during decision making. Thus, group decisions are acceptable by all since everybody is represented during the process. DuBrin (2012) conversely observed that, with group decision making, biases are eliminated especially those that come in as a result of lack of inclusion of the target individuals. In a broader sense, group decision making acts a training ground for subordinate and new members. They learn skills of articulating on matters as well as the importance of collaborative workforce. Further, group decision making is viewed as a democratic style of leadership, which is inclusive and accommodates views from all the parties and consolidate them before arriving into a single decision that suits everybody. Disadvantages of group decision making Since the process involves many people, it translates to consumption of more time as compared to when decisions are made by one or two individuals. If an organisation wants to make decisions concerning adjustments of the employees’ performance, it may take time before the right individuals to represent the employees or departments are identified (Lewis, 2007). In addition, the whole process of deliberating on the issues to go by is tedious and meetings can keep on being postponed till a common agreement is reached. In some instances, some people might not be in favour of the decisions being deliberated on, so they might choose to oppose the decisions being made just to see that the decisions made favor them. In this regard, self centered interests tend to control most of the decisions made in group decision making. The end result of decisions made from such point of views diminishes the efficiency of the process as well as the intended quality of the decision made. In a different dimension, some social ties within members create confusion when it comes to participating in decision making. Social pressure makes such individuals to simply agree with their friends for sake of agreement for them not to look like odd-man out. Thus, the personality of wanting to be a good member of the group have the tendency of silencing them and actually finds it difficult to disagree with other members and always finds pleasure in favouring consensus. Aspects to be avoided in multi departmental decision making in order for them to be effective Lack of policy guidance should be discouraged at all costs. When a group is meeting to deliberate on different issues affecting the company, it is indispensable for the members to be given clearly defined policy guidance (Schermerhorn, 2010). This helps in clearing doubts about the intentions of such meetings. In addition, the desired outcomes are pointed out to have the theme of the meeting clearly spelt out. In addition, it is imperative to avoid low team authority. When there is no defined framework of what should be achieved or on how to achieve it, decisions are either ambiguous or unrealistic. When there is no authority in the group, the lead legacy gets confusing and it becomes difficult for members to constructively make sound decisions. Thus, designating roles in a group decision making is critical in that it makes things run effectively. Avoiding internal politics in group decision making is another concern that has to be addressed. Bias and intimidation of any kind in a group decision making can lead to poor decisions (Lewis, 2007). Group mindsets should only focus on organisational goals and objectives. Additionally, lack of integration is a critical issue that affects the quality of decisions made. When making decisions that affect every individual within the organisation, it is indispensable to ensure that every stakeholder is included in the decision making. Conclusion The facets of the success of any organisations are denoted by the strategic decisions made through initiatives such as group decision making. Sharing of ideas and information in group decision making on a particular issue can lead to more information and more comprehensive. Group decisions are acceptable by all since everybody is represented during the process. Biases are eliminated especially those that come in as a result of lack of inclusion of the absentees. Nevertheless, since the process involves many people, it translates to consumption of more time as compared to when decisions are made by one or two individuals. Additionally, some social ties within members create confusion when it comes to participating in decision making. Lack of policy guidance should be avoided. In addition, internal politics should be avoided to avoid poor decisions. Reference list: Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form Top of Form DuBrin, A. J. (2012). Essentials of management. Mason, Ohio: South- Western/Thomson Learning. Freeman, R. M. (1999). Correctional organization and management: Public policy challenges, behavior, and structure. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. Keller, S., & Price, C. (2011). Beyond performance: How great organizations build ultimate competitive advantage. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Lewis, P. S. (2007). Management: Challenges for tomorrows leaders. Mason, OH: Thomson/South-Western. Schermerhorn, J. R. (2010). Exploring management. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Stone, D. (2013). Stepping stones to business success. S.l.: Balboa Press International. Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Read More