Test 3 Small Group

C10: Problem-Solving and Decision-Making

Group Decision Making: Choosing process from alternatives

Ex. In deciding which college or university to attend, you probably considered several choices. Perhaps you started by gathering information about as many as fifteen or twenty schools and then narrowed the alternatives as you considered the advantages and disadvantages of each institution.

Effective Decision-Making Elements: predictable patterns and better decisions “What is the status quo”

Seek input from each member- cohesiveness and taps knowledge of base of many people than few which is no opportunity
Identify what needs to be accomplished- identify objectives than fail to establish clear and appropriate goals (Ex. Difficult to select college without future plans and major)
Identify decision alternatives- brainstorming= greater likelihood make goo decision and review options (1 to 2)
Review pros and cons of alternatives- before making a decision based on the information
Select best alternative- take action/ maximum positive outcomes and minimal negative outcomes/ carefully assessed situation, identified several choices, considered group goals

Groups sometimes have a tendency to make overly risky decisions, especially if they are making a decision that affects others and not themselves. Research suggests that very young and elderly group members tend to make less risky decisions for others.

To avoid making decisions that may place others at risk, imagine how you would feel about the decision you are making for others if someone were imposing a policy or procedure on you.

Decision-Making Methods:

In-Group Expert- One person in a group may seem to be the best informed about the issue, and members can turn to this person to make the choice.

This expert may or may not be a group’s designated leader.
Deferring to an expert from within a group may be an efficient way to make a decision; let person take charge, ideas serious consideration

Out-Group Expert- group who has authority to make a decision.

Although an outside expert may make a fine decision, a group that gives up its decision-making power to one person loses the advantages of the greater input and variety of approaches that come from being a group in the first place

“Need outside of the box”

Ranking Alternatives- group members can be asked to rank or rate possible alternatives.

After the group averages the rankings or ratings, it selects the alternative with the highest average. This method of making decisions can be a useful way to start discussions and to see where the group stands on an issue.
Looking all possible solutions and decisions

Random Choice- sometimes groups become so frustrated that they make no decisions.

They resort to coin tosses or other random approaches. These methods are not recommended for groups default and low mistakes

Majority- be swift and efficient but can also leave an unsatisfied minority.

Unless it allots time for discussing an issue, a group that makes a decision on the basis of majority rule may sacrifice decision quality and group cohesiveness for efficiency.

Minority- The minority may yell the loudest or threaten to create problems for the group unless it gets its way.

Members may ask, “Does anyone have any objections?”
Majority of members support an idea and then the majority evaporates because several group members change their minds, the group is in a vulnerable position; a view that was previously held by a minority can

swiftly become the majority view.

So, in cases when you side with the minority, keep in mind that things change.

Consensus- time-consuming and difficult, but members are usually satisfied with the decision.

If group members must also implement the solution, this method works well. To reach a decision by consensus, group members must listen and respond to individual viewpoints and manage conflicts that arise.
Consensus is facilitated when group members are able to remain focused on the goal, emphasize areas of agreement, and combine or eliminate alternatives identified by the group.
Although desirable, consensus sometimes is not possible. A fallback approach is to seek a supermajority
Decision (⅔) ; general agreement and strive equally
Additionally, virtual group members report less satisfaction with their computer-mediated group experience.
Virtual group members say that it typically takes more time, rather than less time, to work with people online compared with face-to-face interaction.

Group Problem Solving: process of overcoming an obstacle to achieve goal:

Problem solving allows a group to eliminate or manage the obstacles that keep it from achieving its objective.

Problem consists 3 components:

Undesirable existing situation- status quo isn’t good; something is wrong with the way things are
Achieve Goal
Obstacles- keep groups from achieving goal

Problem-Solving Continue:

Barriers: Capacity? Knowing what these barriers are can help you spot

and eliminate them from your group or team. Thus, before we spend the bulk of this chapter and the next one suggesting principles and strategies to help groups work better, we lay out problems you and your group may face.

HALT, which stands for hungry, angry, lonely, or tired. When you or other

group members experience these issues, you will not be functioning at your best, so it would be advantageous to take a break and recharge

Lack of structure- specific methods help group function more efficiency; no agenda and gatekeeping, do it
Lack of Cultural sensitivity- organizations and put off bad start like failure to take cultural differences, prejudices, biases
Lack of Planning- not prepared
Lack of Resources- meet in an inadequate physical space or just didn’t

have all the information and technical support to get the job done; scarce

Wrong people present- no authority or information; wasn’t thought
Time Pressure- want to tell authority about immediate results
Poor Communication- misunderstandings, inattentiveness, and dominance by one group member or a faction of members within the group were cited as reasons for ineffective communication; bad interaction
Unsupportive Climate- sometimes feel not cohesiveness working and no trust
Negative attitudes- weren’t flexible, were unwilling to compromise about procedures, or had unrealistic expectations about the group.
Lack of Problem- focus on the solution before defining the problem, or there was a lack of balanced participation solving Skill

3 Approaches to Group-Problem Solving:

Descriptive- typical patterns of communication that occur when people interact to solve problems.
Functional- identifies key task requirements and stresses the importance of effective communication as major factors that contribute to effective

problem solving.

Perspective- identifies specific agendas and techniques to improve group problem-solving performance.

Descriptive: attempted to identify the phases of a problem-solving group.

They have observed and recorded who speaks to whom and have categorized the comments group members exchange. Over the past fifty years researchers have used various labels to describe these phases, and despite differing terminology, they have reached similar conclusions.

Orientation- toward getting to know one another, sharing backgrounds, and tentatively approaching the group’s task.

That group members’ communication is directed at orienting themselves toward others as well as to the group’s task, which can also be said about the other phases. What sets this phase apart from the others is the degree to which the social dimension is emphasized and the tentative, careful
Primary tension- occurs when group members are uncertain how to behave and feel somewhat awkward about what to do or say. Clear group role expectations have not emerged; clear social norms are not yet developed.
Some group members may be quiet, others may be exceptionally polite, yet others may laugh nervously and smile ally in which the task dimension is approached.
Interpersonal trust—an essential ingredient for an effective working environment—does not happen all at once. You begin slowly, with small talk, to determine whether it is safe to move on to deeper levels of interaction.

Emerge- new patterns of communication indicate a group’s emergence from the conflict phase.

Task and process dimensions are interwoven at this stage. Although the group is divided, there is also clarity.
Leadership patterns and roles have been established, the issues and problems confronting the group have been identified, and the need to settle differences and reach consensus has become apparent.
One of the factors that helps decisions and solutions emerge is to listen to group members who are perceived as experts. As more people perceive someone has having high credibility and an expert point of view, groups will tend to agree with the expert as away to manage conflict.
Ambiguity appears.

Such ambiguous statements might take the form of qualifiers or reservations to the previous position:

“I still would like to see our company merge with the Elector Electronics Corporation, but maybe we could consider a merger later in the year. A merger may be more appropriate next fall.” Such a statement allows a person to save face and still allows the group to reach consensus.

Conflict- members begin to form opinions about their own positions in the group and about the group’s task.

This jockeying for leadership, power, and position in a group has been called secondary tension.
Secondary tension- occurs after the initial, or primary, tension has diminished and the group settles down to focus on both the task at hand and who will be influential in helping the group reach a conclusion. Secondary tension can occur abruptly. The group may be making progress, but conflict suddenly erupts over an issue and the group gets off its agenda
By persuasive attempts at changing others’ opinions and reinforcing one’s own position. Some participants relish the idea of a good argument, whereas others see conflict as something to avoid at all cost.
Avoiding conflict, however, means avoiding issues relevant and even crucial to the group’s success. You begin to identify the task issues that confront the group and clarify your own and others’ roles.

This clarification leads toward greater predictability, less uncertainty, and the establishment of group norms.

Reinforcement- through getting acquainted, building cohesiveness, expressing individuality, competing for status, and arguing over issues.

The group eventually emerges from those struggles with a sense of direction, consensus, and a feeling of group identity.
Not surprisingly, then, the fourth phase is characterized by positive feelings toward the group and its decisions.
Finally, members feel a genuine sense of accomplishment.

Models of Group Problem Solving (Descriptive):

1.Dialectical Theory- things to balance; suggests that during communication there are often competing tensions pulling the conversation into multiple directions.

Ex., groups like a sense of stability; they want to predict what will happen because many group members like familiar patterns. Yet, because communication is dynamic, there is also an interest in developing new ideas and procedures—groups expect change.

2.Spiraling Model- group go same steps over and over again

Ex. The first issue confronting the group may be “What’s the purpose of this group?” A group will probably spend some time getting oriented to this task, conflict may follow as members learn each person’s objectives, and after discussion, a consensus may emerge about the group’s purpose.

Finally, members may assure one another that their purpose has been developed clearly. Perhaps the next issue to come before the group is “How will we organize our work—should we have a subcommittee?” Again, the members may go through orientation, conflict, emergence, and reinforcement about a specific issue. Because group discussions tend to hop from topic to topic, a group may get bogged down in conflict, abandon the issue, and move to another issue.

3.His theory includes the dimensions of time (T), interaction(I), and performance (P), which he calls TIP theory.

McGrath hypothesizes that groups do what they need to do at a given moment based on their needs at that moment and on what function the group needs to perform.

4.Punctuated Equilibrium Model- work in ways; During the first half of a group’s existence, group members may experience uncertainty and indecision about what to do or how to proceed, resulting in inertia; nothing seems to be happening. And then, about midway through the group’s deliberation, a revolutionary transition, or breakpoint, punctuates the seeming equilibrium, and “nothing happening” changes to “something happening.”

The equilibrium of inertia is punctuated by a burst of activity. Then there will be a second inertia phase—a phase when the group seems to stop and again ponder which direction to go next before moving on to accomplishing the task.

Multisequence Model- necessary for steps for group following; Yet another descriptive, non-phase model of how groups and teams typically function is

doing several things at once rather than cycling though predictable phases.

Poole builds on Fisher’s phase research by suggesting that groups engage in three types of activity tracks that do not necessarily follow logical step-by-step patterns.:

Groups switch activity tracks at various breakpoints, which occur as groups switch topics, adjourn, or schedule planning periods.
Another type of breakpoint, called a delay, occurs because of group conflict or inability to reach consensus.
Whereas groups may expect and schedule some breakpoints, they usually do not schedule delays.
Poole notes, “depending on the nature of the delay and the mood of the group, [a] breakpoint can signal the start of a difficulty or a highly creative period.”
A disruption, the third type of breakpoint, results from a major conflict or a realization that a group may not be able to complete its task.

2. Functional (elements): perform certain task requirements in communication (observed groups and described the task requirements of effective groups

Examine behaviors of effective and ineffective groups

Accurate Understanding of the Problem- Identify Problem
Acceptable Choice Requirements- Criteria
Develop Many Alternatives to Solve the Problem- brainstorm
Assess the Positives and Negatives of Alternatives or Options for Solving the Problems

Vigilant Thinkers- critical thinkers

Best predictors- analyze proble (data/facts), establish criteria (solution look like), evaluate potential negative criteria (possible solutions)
Positive climate= good climate

Essential:

Network with others and outside group for gather information
Skill Acquired and Data Splitting analyze information
Evaluate Solutions
Manage relationships by listening, feedback and negotiation

Reflective Thinking: John Dewey

Identify Problem- what the actual issue is, “People are behind on deadline”
Analyze Problem- break it down, 5W and 1 H about the happen or incident
Generate possible solutions- brainstorming requires withhold judgment until it’s over
Evaluate options- 1 by 1 proposed solution
Test and implement solution- if you have the chance, put on the drawboard and try it

Effective Group Problem-Solving:

Analyze- see the problems from variety of viewpoints, gathers data and researches issues, evidence effectively, asks appropriate questions
Idea-Generation- search for many solutions, high-quality statements, revitalize the group by taking a vacation from the problem
Evaluation- pros and cons, opinions and assumptions of others, tests proposed solutions if meet pre established criteria
Personal-Sensitivity- show on group task and feelings, listen to minority arguments

3. Prescriptive: take a measured dose of a particular medicine to treat your medical problem.

Group problem solving is based on the assumption that groups need more than a general understanding of how groups solve problems or what the key functions of group communication are.
Offers specific do’s and don’ts for structuring a group’s problem-solving agenda. Prescriptive approaches invite group members to perform certain behaviors in a specific order to achieve a group goal.

Fisher describes the prescriptive approach as providing “guidelines, a road map, to assist the group in achieving consensus. A prescriptive approach is based on an assumed ‘ideal’ process.”

Two assumptions underlie the prescriptive approach to problem solving:

Group members are consistently rational,
The prescribed agenda or set of techniques will result in a better solution.

The descriptive approach to group problem solving and decision making helps a group understand how groups usually solve problems.
The functional approach identifies tasks that should be performed to enhance the group’s effectiveness.
The prescriptive approach offers specific recommendations for sequencing certain types of communication in a group.

Which approach is best? Some scholars advocate the descriptive approach, pointing out that it does not constrain a group from its normal or natural process. These scholars reject the prescriptive approach as being too rigid. Others suggest that groups should consciously perform key functions to maximize effectiveness.
Yet others contend that the prescriptive approach gives a group needed structure for solving problems because working in groups often results in uncertainty and ambiguity.
Arthur VanGundy categorizes problems as either structured or unstructured.

An unstructured problem is one about which we have little information and thus high uncertainty. The more unstructured the problem, the greater the need for a prescriptive technique of gathering and analyzing information to solve the problem.
One study suggests that leaders who give a group a structure by setting goals, monitoring time, and providing suggestions about procedure enhance the group’s perceived effectiveness.
VanGundy has identified over 70 techniques that help provide structure to the problem-solving process.

Cultural Assumptions:

As we conclude this chapter, we remind you that assumptions about the descriptions, functions, and prescriptions of group and team problem solving and decision making will be filtered through the cultural perspective group members hold.
Some cultures (notably those of the United States, Britain, and northern Europe) assume an individualistic approach to accomplishing work, whereas other cultures (such as Asian cultures) assume a collaborative or collectivistic mind-set.
In addition to culture, gender also contributes to group differences that researchers suggest influence how group members interact.
In the United States you are likely to encounter individuals with a wide range of cultural and ethnic traditions. Even within one region of the United States, group members may differ in their approaches to and assumptions about problem solving, collaboration, and teamwork.

What strategies can bridge these cultural differences?

Consider these suggestions:

Develop mindfulness. To be mindful is to be consciously aware of cultural differences and to note that there are differences between your assumptions and the assumptions of others.

Consciously say to yourself, “These group members may have a different assumption about how to accomplish this task. Before I impose my strategies on them, I’ll listen and make sure I understand what they are saying.”

Be flexible. realize that you may have to adapt and change according to the perceptions and assumptions others hold.
Tolerate uncertainty and ambiguity.

Working with others from a culture or cultures different from your own is bound to create a certain amount of uncertainty and confusion.
Being patient and tolerant will help you manage cultural differences when collaborating with others.

Resist stereotyping and making negative judgments about others. Ethnocentrism is the assumption that your cultural heritage is superior.

Assuming superiority when evaluating others typically produces defensiveness.
Ask questions. An essential element of any effective team is common ground rules; these can best be established simply by asking others how they work and solve problems and about their preferences for establishing norms and ground rules.

Be other-oriented. Empathy and sensitivity to others are keys to bridging cultural differences.

Although simply considering an issue from someone else’s point of view will not eliminate the difference, it will help enhance understanding.
One of the seven habits of highly effective people identified by Stephen Covey nicely summarizes this principle: Seek to understand before being understood.

C11: Using Problem-Solving Techniques

Prescriptive:

Reflective thinking- logical steps based on scientific method of defining/analyzing and solving a problem

Reflective thinkers by Dewey- Questions

Felt difficult or concern- subjective
Where it is and how it’s defined- analyzing
Possible solutions- hopefully
Logical reasons support the solution
Additional testing to confirm validity of solution- test drive/ reliability and validity (thought to fix)

Group Structure: agenda and other techniques/ procedures to help a group stay and focused on the task at hand (rules/ problem-solving steps)

No planned= more procedural problems-

More time deliberate; interaction inefficient and often off task
Members prematurely focus on solutions
Jumps on 1st solution mention
Idea hopping without seeing large issues
Conflict unmanaged
Dominanted by outspoken group member

Keep on track-

Member have relatively short attention spans and from group’s definition of the task
Preference= more rigid procedures arrive high quality decisions than less-structural
Write information down and then share help for remembering

Group Interaction: simply the give-and-take conversion occurs when people collaborate (talk/feedback/ reaction)

Not enough interaction= listening someone giving a speech than engaging in discussion
Balance between structure and interaction-

High quality contributions early in the group’s deliberation improve performance
Share information= performance improves
Understand the value and importance of individual contributions

Reflective Thinking Cont.:

Identify and Analyze Problems

Tool for defining the problem:

Is/ Is Not Analysis- ensuring the group is in fact and investigating a problem. What is/is not the area with a problem? Declining test scores in 1 elementary school; write down their own answers
Journalist’s 6- 5W and 1H- quickly structure how problem is defined

Pareto charts- bar graph describe cause, source, or frequency of a problem (tallest bar to shortest bar %)/ Pool the results

SWOT Analysis Strength/Weakness (internal), Opportunities/ Threats (External), abilities good or bad at- help the group and team identify and analyze big issues help both identify and analyze problems

Tools for analyzing problem:

Force-field analysis- protection and keep thing in, external factors impact our situation, what can change and managing; clear statement of its goal more or less (We need more money/time or less interference from others)

Steps:

Identify the goal or objective (more money)
Right side- restraining forces keep
Left side- driving forces help achieve
Decision- increase driving forces, decreasing restraining/ over which group has control

Cause and Effect Diagram (fishbone):

1st, think of positive effect you want to analyze
Draw lines for possible causes from long line
Then, 4 angled lines each- list possible contributing factors for each of 4 main problem causes

Adv- work together to show cause and effect relationship

Common format
Shared space

PROMOD Technique- members have opportunity to 1st individually analyze problem

“Read summary of the problem= awareness”
Discussion Facilitation:

Individual Analysis- reading/ranking the decisions/identify (individually)
Exchange Information (group)- share/review/compare
Problem Resolution (individual solution)- revise/ rerank decisions for solutions/come up with solution (individually)
Integration Reach Consensus (group)- vote/share revised discussion and reach final decision

Criteria- standards or goals for an acceptable solution for developed good solution (articulated)

Outcome try to accomplish?
Important?
Solution should be…

Generate Solutions: creativity is important part

Creativity is needed at each step of the problem-solving process, but it is especially important when the group attempts to develop solutions. Creativity is such an important part of group deliberations.

Evaluate and Select Best Solution: advantages/disadvantages/does criteria need to be changed

Tools-

Analyze pros and cons

T-Charts and you want to make sure everyone participates, you can have members first write their own lists of pros and cons (or risks and benefits) and then share their responses with the group.
Ex.if a group is trying to decide whether to purchase a new piece of property, one side of the center line might list positive aspects of the purchase (good investment, property values increasing, good location, and so on). On the other side would be negative implications of the purchase (reduced cash flow, increased property taxes, expensive lawyer fees, and so on).
A thorough look at pros and cons can help a group consider alternatives before it makes a final decision. Evidence suggests that groups often find more positive benefits than negative implications when evaluating the pros and cons.

Average rankings and ratings-

No more than 5-7 solutions
Top 5 choices
Evaluate each alternative by ranking
Each solution could be rated on a five-point scale, with a rating of 1 being a very positive evaluation and 5 being a negative evaluation. Even a long list of 20 or more potential solutions could be rated.
Group members’ ratings for each solution could be averaged, and the most highly rated solutions could be discussed again by the entire group.

Test the Solution:

Prototype- small solution for test it “This is it”
Pilot program- tested on limited basis or testing small sample of people

Implementing the Solution:

Action chart- grid list of tasks need to be done and identify who going to responsible for their own part

Identify project goal/activities need to be complete/ sequence of activities, estimate amount of time, Determine responsibility for group members, develop a chart show relationships.
Aware of what needs to done

Flow Chart- step-by-step or multistep process

Help group see whether the various procedures identified solve problem and fit together like action plan
Logistics

How Do We Use Reflective Thinking in your Group or Team:

Groups work best when their discussions organized like a guide, understanding the problem-solving phases

Take time to reflect interaction- interacting.

To reflect is to consciously consider precisely how the group and individual group members are talking with one another.
Is the group following a structured plan? Are group members first

analyzing the problem before generating solutions?

Both face to face and virtual
Research supports the process of having at least one group member reflect and verbalize how the group is doing in following procedures and communicating effectively.
Groups that don’t have someone helping them reflect perform less effectively. Reflecting helps both face-to-face and electronically mediated groups.

Clearly identify the problem- Make sure that you are not just discussing a topic.

Ex. One group decides to discuss the quality of the U.S. judicial system. The group selects a topic area, but it does not identify a problem.
It should focus clearly on a specific problem, such as “How can we improve the quality of the judicial system in the United States?” or “What should be done to improve the education and training of lawyers in the United States?”

Phrase problem as a question for discussion- Stating your group’s problem as a question adds focus and direction to your deliberations.

Analyze problems but don’t suggest solutions yet- Many group communication researchers agree that until your group has researched the problem, you may not have enough information and specific facts to reach the best solution.

Definition and analyze steps, no confusion the causes- You should try to clarify the differences between the causes and the symptoms (effects) of a problem.

Perhaps your only goal is to alleviate the symptoms. However, you can better understand your group’s goal if you can distinguish causes and symptoms.

Evaluate group problem-solving method- For many years the only problem-solving method suggested to group-discussion classes was reflective thinking.

Some communication theorists suggest, however, that for certain types of problems, alternative problem-solving methods work just as well, if not better, than reflective thinking.

Appoint 1 or more group members use structural model for solve a problem-

One study found that groups in which one member is trained to help the group be mindful of the procedures it uses will make high-quality decisions.

Raters were trained to remind the group to use effective problem-solving and decision-making skills by asking the following questions at appropriate times:

Do we have enough evidence to support our choice of solution?
Have we looked at a sufficient number of alternatives?