Group-Decision Making: 6 Modes That Tell Us How Teams Decide

ByGeorges Lteif

I. Group-Decision Making: Introduction

In previous articles on complex problem-solving (see Complex Problem-Solving in Groups: An Exploratory Overview of the Process), we discussed two cycles each problem-solving group exercise generally goes through. The first cycle is about formulating the problem and finding the root cause and one or more potential solutions. The second cycle deals with solution implementation, monitoring and evaluation. The group makes countless small decisions in each of these cycles and their various stages, eventually culminating in a major one.

This article will discuss how these decisions come about. In particular, we explore six different methods that make decision-making in a group possible and the context in which such modes offer the best results. These six modes appear in Dr. Edgar Schein’s book Process Consultation: Its Role in Organization Development. We will explore their implications for software development teams within an organisation aspiring for Operational Excellence.

II. Series Agenda

This article is part of a more considerable discussion, the topics of which are listed below.

1

Complex Problem-Solving Guide in 7 Steps

The 7 Timeless Steps to Guide You Through Complex Problem Solving

2

The Nature of Complex Problems

What Does the Nature of the Problem Tell Us About Its Solution

3

Gaussian Distributions vs Power Laws

Your Ultimate Guide to Making Sense of Natural and Social Phenomena

4

Complex Problem-Solving in Groups

An Exploratory Overview of ProbleSolving Processes in Groups

5

The Power of Critical Thinking

An Essential Guide for Personal and Professional Development

6

Group-Decision Making

6 Modes That Tell Us How Teams Decide

III. How Do Groups Decide?

A. Group Decision-Making: A Complex Process with Emerging Order

When confronted with a problem, it is assumed that a group will objectively examine all the relevant data and make an informed and rational decision considering the group’s best interest. As anyone who has ever attended such problem-solving exercises would tell you, things seldom go this way. The following are some common reasons why this is the case.

Group members might disagree on issues like:

  • Problem diagnosis
  • Accountability for the problem at hand
  • Selecting the right solution
  • Responsibility for implementing the solution
  • The party that will bear the cost
  • Etc.

Alliances and factions can form along these lines, and reaching a unanimous shared view will become challenging. Other factors might also come into play.

group decision-making

Factors impacting a group’s ability to efficient and rational decision-making

  • Insufficiency of information to confirm a single diagnosis or support one solution
  • Historical feuds or grievances, such as those between individuals or departments
  • Power differentials and the desire to maintain the current order, especially when the solution disrupts the latter and potentially modifies the former
  • A conflicting personal need to simultaneously differentiate from the group and conform to its norms
  • The ease of discussing and debating trivial topics over more challenging, effort-intensive, but more relevant ones (Parkinson’s Law of triviality).

These factors and the potential disagreements that may arise during problem formulation, root cause analysis, solution production and implementation make group decision-making particularly challenging.

The decision-making process normally proceeds through small steps punctuated by larger but rarer ones. At each step, a decision is made through one of six modes, each taking the team farther into the process and eventually closer to the outcome. With every decision made, the tree of potential paths is pruned, leaving a single branch–the consequences of the last choice. Every new idea explored adds a branch to the tree. Sometimes, a branch might be abandoned if it proves unviable, and the group traces its steps back to the last decision. However, this does not revive old branches but creates new ones whose root is the current one. The tissue of those new branches forms from old ideas mixed with new knowledge.

B. The Six Different Group Decision-Making Modes

Schein describes six decision-making modes that groups use in their discussions based on an original formulation by Robert Blake. These are:

Six group decision-making modes:

  • Decision by Lack of Response
  • Decision by Authority Rule
  • Decision by Minority Rule
  • Decision by Majority Rule
  • Decision by Consensus
  • Decision by Ultimate Consent.

We will explore each mode in great detail later.

IV. Decision by Lack of Response

  • What is “Decision by Lack of Response”?
  • Schein defines “Decision by Lack of Response” as follows. One person presents an idea, and another person follows up with a different one before the original idea gets the chance to be analysed and debated.
  • This method is the most common in group deliberations and almost always goes unnoticed. Ideas crop up during discussions and are immediately shot down by the group through lack of support.
  • Pros
  • “Decision by Lack of Response” is a very efficient way to prune ideas by requiring participants to support them explicitly.
  • Cons
  • When an idea does not gather support, its originator might feel that their voice is not heard and may refrain from participating in further idea-creation exercises.
  • Good ideas can be lost if members who support them are not vocal enough. In this case, the idea’s originator or the team leader might need to solicit feedback from the team.

V. Decision by Authority Rule

  • What is “Decision by Authority Rule”?
  • In the “Decision by Authority Rule”, a group’s leader might intervene in an ongoing discussion and decide to proceed with a particular decision.
  • Pros
  • This decision-making mode can be very efficient, especially during crises, provided the leader has gathered enough information about the problem.
  • Cons
  • Sometimes, a premature decision can be made based on insufficient information or deliberations.
  • It can be challenging for leaders (especially in senior positions, when they have too many direct reports or the problem is very specialized) to find enough time to study all the information required to decide. In such cases, delegating the decision-making to people they trust rather than those with the best solutions is common.

VI. Decision by Minority Rule

One of the commonest complaints of group members is that they “feel railroaded” in reference to some decision. […] Usually this feeling results from one, two, or three people employing tactics which produce action and therefore must be considered decisions, but which are taken without the consent of the majority.

— Process Consultation, by Edgar Schein, 1969

  • What is “Decision by Minority Rule”?
  • In the “Decision by Minority Rule”, a powerful figure in the group (such as its leader) employs tactics that lead to a decision without having heard enough opinions about the idea being discussed.
  • Schein gives a few examples of this type of group behaviour. On one occasion, the person running the meeting might propose an idea and take the group’s silence as consent, only to discover later that this was not the case. On this occasion, the leader did not give time for opposition to build up, thus leaving them with a feeling of being railroaded.
  • Pros
  • Sometimes, the group might feel that such quick decisions are required, especially under time pressure.
  • Cons
  • Schein believes the first issue with this type of decision-making is that it is not considered as such, and its outcomes may go unnoticed. In this case, the group did not have the time to deliberate on the idea as much as they felt it deserved.
  • Another issue Schein has with this approach: it is often used to decide on procedures for running meetings or resolving problems. Schein believes group members must have a say in whether they like the processes and procedures in place or prefer something else.

VII. Decision by Majority Rule

  • What is “Decision by Majority Rule”?
  • Most consider the “Decision by Majority Rule” the default mode in group decisions. In this mode, the group votes on one or two alternatives, and whichever idea gets the majority vote is implemented.
  • Pros
  • The “Decision by Majority Rule” is the “democratic” way to proceed and, in the proper climate, can produce good results, allowing everybody a say in the outcomes.
  • Cons
  • Schein has severe reservations about this method. He believes that, in most cases, it creates coalitions or camps, one for and one against. Once the voting is over, the minority might not be committed enough to make the solution succeed.
  • In his interviews with group members from the minority faction, Schein noted frustration and resentment as these members felt they did not have enough time to argue their case.

VIII. Decision by Consensus

  • What is “Decision by Consensus”?
  • Schein defines “Decision by Consensus” as follows: consensus does not mean unanimity. Consensus means that after the discussions are concluded, everyone feels they have had the chance to be heard and are committed to the group’s final decision.
  • In such situations, the minority is ready to proceed with the winning solution despite not supporting it during decision-making.
  • Pros
  • In Schein’s view, consensus is the best group decision-making mode, allowing everybody to participate in the process and to feel involved and committed.
  • Consensus also ensures that the best decisions have been made and the strictest chances for success have been afforded.
  • Cons
  • Decisions by consensus are also very time-consuming, making them affordable only when important but non-urgent matters are being discussed.

IX. Decision by Unanimous Consent

  • What is “Decision by Unanimous Consensus”?
  • “Decision by Unanimous Consensus” is where a decision is adopted only if everyone perfectly agrees with it.
  • Pros
  • When possible, unanimity provides the best outcomes, both psychologically for the team and regarding the outcomes of the discussions.
  • Cons
  • Unanimity is the least attainable of all the modes discussed. While highly desirable, it is not strictly necessary as it can be especially inefficient.

X. Conclusion

In presenting these six modes, Schein wanted to draw attention to the following ideas:

  • There are various ways in which groups make decisions. While some are better than others, no method is universal enough to apply to every context. This is the essence of complexity and complex problem-solving.
  • Certain actions taken in the meeting are, in effect, decision-making. Although they impact the outcome, they are not visible enough to receive the desired attention. Schein believes the consultant’s role in this case is to step in and highlight those instances.
  • The objectives of any problem-solving or decision-making exercise are to simultaneously produce the best solution or decision and afford it the best chances of success through a maximal commitment from the group.

Group decision-making is a complex activity that requires much more than information gathering, technical expertise, or rational reasoning. It also has a psychological, individual, social and emotional dimension. Strategic and complex problems require the group to consider all these accounts before committing to any alternative.

XI. References

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *