Decision Making

Decision-Making Process

Orientation

*Defining problem, goals

*Planning the process
*Developing shared mental model
Decisions begin with a problem that needs a solution. The group reviews its objectives and
organizes the procedures it will use in its work.
Goal Clarity and Goal-Path Clarity
Some groups may know exactly what they want to achieve and how they will go about doing it,
but most must first clarify both the goals they seek and the path they will take to reach those
goals (Shaw, 1981).
Goal clarification requires not only setting specific, attainable goals, but also the review of the
group’s overall mission, the problems it is dealing with and the decisions it must make, the
results it intends to deliver, and the criteria it will use to evaluate the quality of its performance
and results.
Goal-path clarification, in contrast, requires spelling out just how the group will do its work,
including identifying tasks and subtasks, organizing members’ roles and responsibilities,
specifying how the members will work together, determining how the group will make its
decisions, and setting milestones and deadlines.
Effective teams, as noted in Chapter 11, take time to develop a shared mental model as the
members review their tasks, roles, goals, and procedures

Problems with Planning

planning fallacy: The tendency for individuals and groups to underestimate the time, energy, and
means needed to complete a planned project successfully. This fallacy occurs because most
people assume that the future will be pleasant rather than bleak, that issues that come up along
the way will be handled quickly and without great expenditure and effort, and that one’s choices
will be right rather than wrong. People tend to construct mental scenarios that err on the positive
side and underestimate the possibility of negative, time-draining problems and missteps.

Discussion

*Remembering information
*Exchanging information
*Processing information
*Detecting inaccurate information
Discussion - The communication of information between two or more people undertaken for
some shared purpose, such as solving a problem, making a decision, or increasing participants
mutual understanding of the situation.

They reviewed the issue in a series of meetings by sharing information, setting priorities,
expressing misgivings, and studying alternatives until they felt confident enough to make a
recommendation. If information is the lifeblood of decision making, then the discussion phase
must be the heart of that process (Kowert, 2002). An information processing model of decision
making assumes that people strive, in most cases, to make good decisions by acquiring the
information that is relevant to the issue and processing that information thoroughly, so that its
implications are clearly understood. A collective information processing model also assumes
that people seek out and process relevant information but that they do this cognitive work during
the group discussion. (a general theoretical explanation of group decision making that assumes
that group members combine and process information through group discussion to formulate
decisions, choices, and judgments) When people discuss the problem as a group, they improve
their memory for information, exchange information with each other, process the information
more thoroughly, and identify errors and mistakes.

Collective Memory Processes

collective memory - A group’s combined memories, including each member’s memories, the
group’s shared mental models, and transactive memory systems.
transactive memory system - a system in which information to be remembered is distributed
among various members of a group, who can then each be relied on to provide that information
when it is needed. (Members working in the same group often specialize, to a degree, in
different areas.)
Groups can also improve their access to information stored in members’ memories through
cross-cuing.
Cross-cuing - The enhancement of recall that occurs during group discussion when the
statements made by group members serve as cues for the retrieval of information from the
memories of other group members.

Information Exchange
strengthening their access to information as well as their recall of that information.

Processing Information
Alternative options are discussed, and the strengths and weaknesses of each option are
considered. Members dialogue with one another, sharing viewpoints and seeking a shared
meaning. Ideas are debated, with some group members seeking to convince others that their
position is better. The group members also monitor their work and intervene as necessary to
bring the group back on task.

Error Detection and Correction

This error checking process was identified as a crucial determinant of successful decision
making by psychologist Marjorie Shaw (1932) in one of the earliest experimental studies of
group performance. Groups were more proficient at noticing and correcting errors.

The Difficulty of Discussion

Groups Are Forgetful
Groups are more forgetful than individuals

Group Members Misunderstand

Group members make decisions by exchanging information, but they often make mistakes both
when expressing their message and when listening to what others say.
inaccuracies/different interpretations ng message
“what happens during a meeting that limits its effectiveness,”
● Poor meeting planning: the meeting was poorly organized; for example, it included the
wrong people, the time needed for the work was inadequate, and the agenda used to
structure the meeting was unhelpful or inaccurate.
● Lack of skill in communication: not only did members frequently fail to listen to what
others had to say, but they rarely communicated their ideas and opinions in engaging
and informative ways.
● Egocentric behavior: Some members dominated the meeting or used the meeting to
flaunt idiosyncrasies, intimidate others, grandstand, and complain.
● Low engagement: Too many members did not take part in an active way in the sessions;
the did not speak, volunteer to join with others working on projects, and sometimes just
stared silently at others.
● Sidetracked: The meeting did not stay on the topic, with many tangents and
irrelevancies.
● Interruptions: The meeting’s flow was disrupted as members interrupted each other, took
phone calls, or engaged in side conversations.
● Inadequate leadership: the leader was not organized, and so did not facilitate or control
the meeting’s process.
● Negative attitudes and emotions: Members did not communicate in a civil, respectful
way, they expressed anger, grumbled, and so on.
● Follow-up: Nothing ever happened as a result of the meeting; no implementation of
decisions.

Making the decision (aubrey)

● Social decision scheme- is a group’s method for combining individual member’s inputs
in a single group decision.
● Averaging Statisticized decisions- groups make decisions by combining each
individual’s preferences using some type of computational procedure
 ● Voting: Popularity decisions- Members express their indi- vidual preferences publicly
or, to reduce social pressure, by secret ballot.
● Reaching Consensus: Unanimous decision- Consensus decision schemes are often
galvanizing and can lead to high levels of commitment to the decision and to the group.
● Delegating: Sharing Decisions- The group as a whole does not make the decision
when the deci- sion is made by the group’s leader, or is delegated to one of the
members, a subgroup within the group, or someone outside of the group.

Implementation

● Social Justice- aimed to form networks of supportive relationships in which power and
control are shared, depending on perception of the fairness of the decision. Fairness
judgment are determined by two forms of social justice:
1. Distributive Justice- Concerns how rights, resources, and costs are granted to,
shared with, and imposed on (distributed across) a group’s members.
2. Procedural Justice- concerned with the methods used to make decisions about
the alloca- tion of resources. Procedural justice asks, “Did we make the decision
in a fair way?” Perceived fairness and legitimacy of the methods used to make
decisions, resolve disputes, and allocate resources; also, in judicial contexts, the
use of fair and impartial procedures.
● Normative model of decision making- A theory of decision making and leadership
that predicts the effectiveness of group-centered, consultative, and autocratic decisional
procedures across a number of group settings.
● Participation and Voice- Many factors influence perceptions of procedural fairness, but
when people believe that they had a voice in the matter— that they could have
expressed any concerns they had and others would have listened and responded—then
they tend to be far more engaged in the implementation of the final deci- sion.
● Evaluating the plan-

Judgemental biases

● Dysfunctional post decision tendencies- Groups should expend considerable time

and energy reviewing their efforts and outcomes
● Decisional sin- Groups, unfortunately, are not immune from these judgmental biases.
When social psychologist Norbert Kerr and his colleagues reviewed the research
literature looking for studies of these mental glitches in decision making. They identified
the three general categories of potential bias:
 1. Sins of commission: misusing information in some way, including continuing to
base judgments on false or irrelevant information.
2. Sins of omission: failing to seek out information, overlooking useful information,
or not check- ing for errors and mistakes.
3. Sins of imprecision: relying inappropriately on mental rules of thumb, or
heuristics, that oversimplify the decision or introduce errors into the decision
process.

Decisional Biases

● Restoring rationality-
● Confirmation bias-

Shared Information Biases

Also, known as the common knowledge effect. Instead of talking about knowledge that just one
of them is aware of, they spend an excessive amount of time discussing facts that two or more
members of the group know in common.

- What is The Hidden Profile Problem?

- How can it be avoided?

Group polarization

It takes place when like-minded individuals support one another's beliefs, whether favorable or
unfavorable, these opinions grow more extreme as they are discussed.

What is the Risky shift effect?

Causes of Polarization

- Social Comparison
- Persuasive arguments
- Social Identity

Group Think:

What is Groupthink?
● The term was coined by Social Psychologist, Irving L Janis in 1972
● ”A mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive
ingroup, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to
realistically appraise alternative courses of actions” (Janis, 1982, p. 9)
 ● To define simply, groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within cohesive
groups which strives to achieve consensus rather than encouraging critical and logical
thinking before arriving towards a decision (Cherry, 2020)

Symptoms of Groupthink
1. Overestimation of the Group
- Groups who are fallen into groupthink usually overestimate their decisions based
on these functions
● Illusions of Invulnerability: Refers to a phenomenon wherein groups think they
are performing well, and making wrong choices at the same time.
Example: The Bay of Pigs Invasion of 1962
● Illusions of Morality: Refers to the phenomenon where groups felt justified in their
decision-making based on the inherent morality of their actions
2. Close-Mindedness
- Groups who are fallen into groupthink tend to be close-minded, or rigid meaning
they do not accept novel ideas and perspectives.
● Collective Rationalization: According to Janis (1982) groups who reached the
consensus of groupthink do not reconsider their decisions as it was not needed
to debate upon it
● Stereotyping: Ignoring or demonizing people outside their groups
3. Pressure Towards Uniformity
- Groups who are fallen into groupthink usually are pressured to conform and
dissent is not considered taboo
● Self-Censorship: People who might have doubts in the decision making process
of the groups tend to hide their opinion, and keep quiet.
● Illusion of Unanimity: Refers to the phenomenon wherein an individual believes
that everyone in the group is within the consensus, and going through the flow.
● Direct Social Pressure: Group members are more likely to conform in order to
avoid being shunned and being a castaway within the group
● Mindguards: Refers to the censors that the group made in order to hide faulty
decision making process

Causes of Groupthink:
1. Cohesiveness
● Cohesiveness usually leads to groupthink due to strong pressures to conform
(Janis, 1982)
● Irving Janis argued that while lack of cohesiveness is a bad thing—”especially if
the members are engaging in internal warfare”—they cannot experience
groupthink (Janis, 1982, p. 176).
2. Structural Faults of the Organization
● While Cohesiveness is an essential part of groupthink, the structure of the
organization also contributes to groupthink.
 ● The Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba were mostly consist of members working
secretly which does not allow exchange of information within other essential
members of the committee
3. Provocative Situational Context
● Janis (1982) also suggested that any factors that work to lower members’
self-esteem, such as a history of mistakes or prior lapses of morality, may further
increase the possibility of groupthink.

Emergence of Groupthink:
● Researchers attempts to replicate Janis’ findings on groupthink through archival case
studies which sometimes challenged or clarify his findings
1. Irving Janis compared groups with poor decision making towards those who have
excellent decision making skills through archival research which attempts to
show those groups who are prone to error are more susceptible to groupthink.
Most studies agreed with Janis’ assessment on groups wherein those who are
more susceptible to error have higher rates of groupthink (Esser, 1998; Turner &
Pratkanis, 1998b)
2. He also stated that “a high degree of group cohesiveness is conducive to a high
frequency of symptoms of groupthink, which, in turn, are conducive to a high
frequency of defects in decision-making” (Janis, 1972, p. 199).
3. Leadership styles also contribute to groupthink such as closed-style leadership
where opinions are stated prior to the group discussion as opposed to open-style
leadership. Hodson & Sorrentino (1997) stated that leaders who lean towards
closed-style leadership are more biased.

Examples of Groupthink in History:

1. Bay of Pigs (April 17, 1961)
2. Rise of the Nazi Germany (1920)
3. Jonestown Massacre (1978)

Alternative Models:
Group Centrism Theory by Arie Kruglanski (2006)
● Group Centrism Theory refers to the theory developed by Arie Kruglanski and her
colleagues which states how individuals may develop a strong interpersonal attachment
to their group beliefs, norms and values even if its irrational or sometimes extreme
● According to the theory, group members tend to overestimate the importance of their
group's ideas, values, and norms, and become more convinced that they are correct in
their views.
● The group also strives for cognitive closure—”a desire for a definite answer to a
question, any firm answer, rather than uncertainty, confusion, or ambiguity” (Kruglanski
et al., 2002, p. 649)

Social Identity and Ubiquity Model by Robert Baron (2005)

 ● Baron (2005) agrees with Irving Janis’ model of groupthink and how groups limits dissent
in order to reach consensus with each other
● He further argues that the qualities mentioned by Janis are only a small part of the
problem which aligned according to his model of Ubiquity
● It is not cohesiveness that increases groupthink but rather threats to social identity
causes groups to fail
● Groupthink happens due to lack of confidence of members surrounding it causing to
conform

Preventing Groupthink:

Limiting Premature Seeking of Concurrence

● Former President John F Kennedy did not take the failure of Bay of Pigs so lightly that
he made reforms towards the decision making process of his committee
● He made changes such as not stating his personal beliefs at the start of the discussion,
allowing constructive criticism instead of having a “yes man” within the group, and
encouraged every member to be a devil’s advocate.

Correcting Misperceptions and Biases

● Due to the incident and reforms made by President John F Kennedy, the members
allowed criticism and accepted responsibility for their mistakes during the decision
making process.
● They turned in towards experts and ask for guidance to genuinely correct their mistakes
and misperceptions during the decision making process

Using Effective Decision-Making Techniques

● President John F Kennedy’s committee focuses on effective decision making techniques

by promoting critical thinking as a part of the process, and allowing dissent by giving
alternative viewpoints as much as needed.
● The group considered all possible options and alternatives on each decision they
partake and also outside members such as experts were consulted in order to maximize
the chances of success and minimize groupthink and faulty decision making