Chapter 5

Dr. Fadi FayezUpdated by: Ola A. Younis

Many of the decisions in today's workplace are made by groups of individuals

Groups bring many advantages to the choice process:◦ Multiple source of knowledge and experience◦ A wider variety of prospectives◦ Potential synergy associated with collaborative

activity Some times too many decision makers result in either

a bad decision or no decision at all.

Group in term of decision making can be defined as : a collective entity that is independent of the properties of its members.

Multiparticipant decision maker (MDM): An activity conducted by a collective entity composed of two or more individuals and characterised in terms of both the properties of the collective entity and of its individual members

Decision structure, two types:◦ Collaborative

Group decision structure: Formal participants and multiple decision maker Negotiation decisions Majority decisions

◦ Noncollaborative Team decision structure: Formal participants and

single decision maker Negotiation decisions Majority decisions

Individual decision structure

The structure of an MDM is primarily based on the interaction and flow of communication among the various members.

Communication can be thought as any means by which information is transmitted to one or more members of the MDM.

Basic Types of Networks Structures1. Wheel Network2. Chain Network3. Circle Network4. Completely Connected Network

Highly Centralised◦ They are efficient to routine and recurring decisions.◦ They tend to strengthen the leadership position of the central

members.◦ They tend to result in a stable set of interactions among the

participants.◦ They tend to produce lower average levels of satisfaction

among the participants.

Highly Decentralised◦ They tend to produce higher average levels of satisfaction

among participants.◦ They facilitate nonroutine or nonrecurring decisions.◦ They promote innovation and creative solutions.

1. The importance of the quality of the decision.

2. The extent to which the decision maker possess the knowledge and expertise to make the decision.

3. The extent to which potential participants have the necessary information.

4. The degree of structuredness of the problem context.

5. The degree to which the acceptance or commitment is critical to successful implementation.

6. The degree of motivation among the participants to achieve the organisational goals.

7. The degree of potential conflicts among the participants over a preferred solution.

1.Size

◦ The most widely studied and consequential component of group decision making.

◦ Studies show that as the size of a group increases, individual satisfaction tends to decrease.

As the size increases, the less active members tend to become noticeably less productive.

◦ Logic suggests that the management of an MDM requiring consensus or majority is easier when the size is small.

◦ Member cohesiveness decreases as MDM size increases. When membership is high, subgroups and internal coalitions tend to form that serve redirect the focus of the participant away from the common goal.

◦ The increased likelihood for certain members of large MDMs to feel threatened reluctant to participate because the size magnifies the impersonal nature of the problem context.

◦ Despite the disadvantages when the size of the MDM increases, in certain situations such as quantitative judgment in statistics, the larger the membership of the MDM, the more likley it is that the results of the judgment must be made.

◦ Participant interaction tends to decrease as size increase

◦ Affective or emotional relationships tend to decrease as size increases

◦ Central, dominant leadership tend to increase as size increases

◦ Conflicts is resolved with political rather than analytical solutions as size increases

◦ Despite the disadvantages when the size of the MDM increases, in certain situations such as quantitative judgment in statistics, the larger the membership of the MDM, the more likely it is that the results of the judgment must be made

2. Groupthink: a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group.◦ Group thinking results in a deterioration of the collective

mental efficiency, the leaning to test reality, and the overall moral judgment of an MDM.

◦ The more friendly and cooperative the members of a group, the greater the likelihood that independent critical thinking will be suspended in deference to group norms.

Unfavourable outcomes associated with Groupthink◦ Tends to prevent a complete open-mind analysis of

opportunities in the development of objectives◦ Holds back a meaningful search for information and tends

to bias any searches toward a self fulfilling selectivity◦ Limits the participant’s ability to appraise possibilities

associated with the cost of failure◦ Tends to eliminate the formation of incident of fallback

position

2. Social issues◦ Conflict

The desire to be viewed as a “good” member and to be accepted by the other participants often leads to conflict avoidance

Natural group dynamics such as struggle of power can result in some form of conflict

◦ Anonymity One common method used to control sources of

potential conflict and to support other MDM processes is participant anonymity, i.e. vote.

In many cases anonymity results in the generation of more and better information

3. Gender differences and similarities◦ At the early stages women were not commonly involved in the

managerial decision making ◦ Today, women constitutes 40% of the US workforce◦ Men tend to accept risk more readily than women. Also,

females tend to be more participative than males in the MDM decision making context and demonstrate significantly different values from males

◦ Studies showed gender-related value differences such as females placing a higher value on issues of ability, skills, cooperation. Whereas, males consider achievement as the most important.

Two important issues need to be note:◦ Differences in decision making related to gender must be

categorised as either inferential or actual.◦ Differences in decision making related to gender are more

often not a source of strength rather than weakness in an MDM setting

◦ When more than one person is involved in the role of decision maker, the probability of negotiation increases

◦ A common scenario of negotiation can be found in in contract talks between management and labour union

◦ Issues such as organisation and control of conflicting criteria and preferences, support of wide variety of possible communication structures must be addressed when deciding on an MDM support technology

◦ Tools used in MDM environment to support the processes and activities related to the decision making process

◦ An early example of support technologies is Winston Churchill war cabinet. The primary support technology consisted of maps on the walls

◦ In the 1960s and 1970s many organisations were introducing new media technologies such as slide projectors and overheads

◦ In the late 1970s and early 1980s was the next logical step in the development of new MDM support technologies due to the computer invention. For instance, EMISARI system was deployed at the U.S office of Emergency Procedures to support the decision-making activities of close to 200 people scatted all over the U.S during the periods of national emergencies

◦ Today, a number of facilities through out the world support group activities and MDM context such as Claremont graduate school and University of Arizona

The four basic levels of MDM technology◦ Organisational Decision Support System (ODSS): A

complex system of computer based technologies- including those that facilitate communication- that provides support for decision makers

◦ Group Support Systems (GSS): A collective of computer based technologies used to aid MDM in identifying and addressing problems, opportunities, and issues

◦ Group Decision support System (GDSS):A collective of computer based technologies designed to support the activities and processes related to MDM

◦ Decision Support System (DSS): a computer program under the control of one or more persons that provides staff within organisations with support tools capable of enhancing the results of the decision making process.

Some of the Gain◦ Collective has greater knowledge than a single

participant◦ Allows for synergistic results ◦ Interaction stimulates the generation of knowledge◦ Participants can improve individual performance

through learning from others

Some of the Losses◦ Can block the production of ideas◦ Can produce information overload much faster◦ Relative collection of speaking time is reduced with

MDM size◦ Increase opportunities of socialising over goal focus

Types by features

◦ Reduce communication barriers such as electronic messaging and computer networks Message passing among participants Access to data files during meeting Organisation and analysis of ideas and votes Agenda planning and schedule coordination

◦ Reduce uncertainty and noise such as automated planning, decision tables and trees Problem structuring and solution scheduling Uncertainty analysis Analysis of resource allocation Data and preference analysis

◦ Regulate decision process such as automated procedure mechanism and rule sets and inference mechanisms Enforcement of formal decision procedures Increase clarity of options for decision procedures Development of deliberation governance rules

Types by technology

◦ Electronic boardroom Conference room with controlled audio visual wide-

screen projection capabilities The software used is an application for storage and

retrieval Requires teleconferencing technician to be present

◦ Teleconference room Conference room with controlled audio virtual

transmission between locations Application to control digital transmission of audio,

video, and data Same time different place synchronous interaction

Types by technology

◦ Group network Separate office facilities connected via computer

network Real time or synchronous desktop conferencing Same time different place synchronous interaction

◦ Information centre Conference room with video projector for wide

screen viewing Application for database management, statistical

analysis and graphics generation Same-time same place interaction

Types by technology

◦ Collaboration laboratory Conference room with electronic white board and

networked computers Applications for collaborative interaction and

information exchange Same or different time- same place interactions

◦ Decision room Conference room video projector for wide screen

viewing and networked computers Applications support brainstorming, voting, modelling

and decision analysis Same or different time- same place interactions

Groupware: A particular type of MDM support technology specifically focused on issues related to collaborative processes among people. You can think of it as a tool that, when deployed and used appropriately, positively affects that way people communicate with each other, resulting in an improvement in the way people work.

Current market leaders of Groupware:◦ Lotus Notes◦ Microsoft Exchange◦ Oracle Office◦ GroupWise◦ Team Office

Groupware Classification:

1.Messaging systems 2.Conferencing System3. Intelligent agent systems4. Coordination system5. Collaborative authoring systems6. Group decision support systems

Forces Favour of Groupware Adoption:

◦ Increased cost control◦ Improved productivity◦ Improved customer service◦ Reduced the number of meetings◦ Support of total quality management activities◦ Increased automation of routine workflow

processes◦ Need for better global coordination's

MDM coordination methods◦ Nominal group technique◦ Delphi technique◦ Arbitration◦ Nemawashi◦ Issue based information system

Nominal Group TechniqueThe activities performed by a participant using the following

procedures:◦ Each participant writes down his opinions and ideas

relating to what the decision should be.

◦ Each participant presents the idea on his list. Each idea is recorded in a summary list using flip chart or whiteboard so that all the participants can view the list as it develops.

◦ After all ideas are presented and listed, the participants ask questions of each other for clarification of any of the alternatives on the list.

◦ Each participant votes on each idea in the list using a predetermined scale or ranking system.

Delphi Technique◦ Assemble MDM members based upon expertise in the

problem context.

◦ Send a survey instrument to all the members to collect their view regarding the decision at hand.

◦ Organise and analyse the survey results.

◦ Send a second survey to each member along with a summary of the results obtained from the first questionnaire.

◦ Repeat step 2 through 5 until a consensus is reached among the members

Nemawashi◦ This technique is not particularly well suited to MDM

structures since of the diverse levels of the organisational authority among members.

The activities performed by a participant using the following procedures:

◦ Once the problem context has been identified, one or more members of the MDM are designated as coordinator(s). The coordinator selects the remaining participants in the MDM process and begins soliciting their views regarding the decisions at hand.

◦ Based upon the solicited views of the members, the coordinator(s) constructs a choice set. Experts are then asked to specify criteria for evaluating the items contained in the choice set and to rate each of the alternatives with respect to their choice criteria

◦ The coordinator(s) selects a candidate alternative based on the results obtained in step 2.

◦ The selected alternative is presented in a formal document that is circulated to all of the MDM members. The document may be altered due to the negotiating among the different members views.

◦ Once a consensus is reached, the coordinator(s) prepares a formal document containing the details of the selected alternative and begin circulating the document among the members