20141005 Team 3 - Week 4 Presentation v.8

3D WATERPROOF PLASTIC CASETHE DECISION MAKING PROCESS

BUSINESS CONSULTING

PROJECT TEAM 3

NORTHEASTERN STUDENTS

Project Team Three Presentation by Christine Hoffmann, Matthew, Regis, and Mary

Northeastern University, Leading Teams Course, LDR 6110Professor Jeffrey LaPoint

October 06, 2014

=++ BEHAVIORAL STYLES

INGENUITY LEADERSHIP DECISIONMAKING

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Decision Making

23%

9%68%

• Introduction Slide 3

• Decision making process Slide 4

• Advantages and disadvantages to Group Decision Making Slide 5

• Decision making approaches Slide 6

• Case study questions Slide 7

• How can the decision outcome change based on the analysis

methods applied?

Slide 8-17

• What are the pros and cons of the decision making techniques? Slides 18

• How does group polarization or group think effect the project

team? And why?

Slides 19-23

• Summary Slide 24

• Final questions to consider Slide 25

• References Slide 26



INTRODUCTION

Project Details

• Our organization received numerous requests to design a clear waterproof

plastic box that could house various equipment underwater. The project

charter was written by the project manager/team and approved by the

sponsor and subsequently the stakeholders. The real idea is to print the

3D clear plastic box on a 3D printer so the design/prototype process would

be faster. The presentation will describe the decision making process.

• Included in the charter was information on how our team would interact

and our processes for making decisions.

• Our team brings different skillsets to the team, strives to communicate on a

regular basis, respects other opinions, works to solve issues in a timely

manner, and completes our work on time.

• The team makes decisions as a group using tools such as NEU group

email, NEU Wiki group board, phone conferences, group discussion board

and Gmail.

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013

=++ STRATEGYINGENUITY ACUMEN BUSINESSANALYST



DECISION MAKING

Decision Making Process

• The concept of the decision making can be simply defined as process of

making up your mind. The idea for the project came about since I wanted

to create a 3D printer project and Matt wanted to create a waterproof box,

so the two were combined.

• When there are multiple people involved in the process, it can take longer

to make a decision and more thought is needed to define the problem.

• When in a group, it is beneficial to understand the background of each

team mate in order to be better equipped to respond to the issues.

• The process of making a decision can occur quickly or be done over time

as more information becomes apparent.

• Levi explains that teams “bring together multiple skills and perspectives in

making decisions.”

• What leadership style is the best one for making project decisions?

• Do we have to change the decision making due to the complexity of the

waterproof box project? (Levi, 2014, p.163)

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




DECISION MAKING

Advantages and Disadvantages to Group Decision Making

Advantages

• There many team members that can contribute to the generation of ideas.

• Being in a group motivates the team members to participate and bring

good ideas to the meeting.

• The team benefits from participating in the discussions.

• A lot of ideas will be generated for the waterproof box that may not

otherwise be discussed.

Disadvantages

• Groups can be less efficient with making decisions because they are too

busy working on housekeeping tasks.

• Groups can experience communication issues.

• Emotions can cause the group to waste time.

• Team members do not respect each other’s opinion and conflict arises.

• The team will have to decipher which project ideas will move forward.

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




DECISION MAKING

Decision Making Approaches

Leader Oriented

• Decision make by the project leader

• Decision made by appointee

• Decision made by the project leader after discussing with the team.

Group Technique

• Decision made by using “mathematical” exercises

• Decision made by using “decision making” exercises (“nominal group”)

• Decision made by a group vote or majority

Full Participation

• Decision is made by everyone in the group

• Structured & unstructured brainstorming sessions can be held to support

the waterproof box design process.

• A facilitator can be appointed so the group will stay on task and establish a

creative environment where ideas are free flowing.

(Levi, 2014, p.167)

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




STUDY QUESTIONS

QUESTION ONE

How can the decision outcome change based

on the analysis methods applied?

QUESTION TWO

What are the pros and cons of the decision

making techniques?

QUESTION THREE

How does group polarization or group think

effect the project team? And why?53%

78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




DECISION MAKING

HOW CAN THE DECISION OUTCOME CHANGE

BASED ON THE ANALYSIS METHODS APPLIED?

Decision Making Techniques

• Nominal Group Technique

• Delphi Technique

• Ringi Technique

• Consensus Decision Making

“Group members pool their knowledge, their interaction leads to new

ideas that no single member would have developed.” (Levi, 2014, p. 164)

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013






1. Nominal Group Technique

Allows a group to make a decision without developing any social relations

(Levi, 2014, p.174)

1. Facilitator states the problem

2. Individuals publicly answers the question

3. Participants may ask questions for clarification but may not criticize

4. All participants rank in order everybody’s answer

5. The top ranked answer determines the group’s solution to the problem53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013






1. Nominal Group Technique

Pros

•Quick

•Discourages Group Think

•Participates do not need to

know each other

•Anonymous voting

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Cons

•Requires trained facilitator

•Addresses one specific problem at a

time

•Ideas are limited, constrained

Example: Facilitators can use this technique in helping staff, clients, volunteers

and consumers to improve their ability to make solid decisions. (Sample, 1984)



2. Delphi Technique

Uses a series of written surveys to make a decision. (Levi, 2014, p.175)

• Starts with a facilitator stating the problem

• A group of experts fill out a survey of open-ended questions

• Results are summarized and organized into a set of proposed solutions.

• Participants then comment on the solutions

• Process is repeated until they reach an agreement on a solution

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013






2. Delphi Technique

Pros

•When particpates are located

geographically

•No limit of particpates

•Useful with wide range of

opinions

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Cons

•Time consuming

•Requires somebody to develop and

analyze surveys

Example: In developing countries, this could be used as an open ended

approach to identify and develop policies.



3. Ringi Technique

Allows a group to deal with controversial tops while avoiding face-to face

confrontation (Levi, 2014, p.175)

1. Starts with an anonymously written document that proposes a solution to

an addressed issue

2. Each reviewer individually edits the documents with written comments and

then passes it on

3. After the document has been passed around it will be re-written with the

edits

4. The document will be passed around until the group decides there are no

more edits

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013






3. Ringi Technique

Pros

•Allows for true unedited

comments

•Avoids confrontation

•Avoids potential

embarrassment

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Cons

•Time consuming

•No guarantee for a solution or for team

agreement

Example: When it is considered culturally inappropriate to have face-to-face

confrontations.



4. Consensus Decision Making

The goal is to develop a collaborative solution that allows all participants to

win. (Levi, 2014, p.176)

• When all team members can support a decision even though they may not

agree.

• Achieved when each member can say “yes“ to each question:

• “Are you willing to agree that this is what the team should do

next?”

• “Can you go along with this position?”

• “Can you support this alternative?”

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013







• Guidelines for the process

•Listen to position of others before you argue your point

•Do not avoid conflict

•Encourage others to explain their position to understand key differences

•Look for creative and collaborative solutions instead of compromises

(Levi, 2014, P. 177)53%

78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013







Pros

•Every team member does not

need to agree

•Improves teams decision making

skills

•Builds social relations

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Cons

•Slow process

•Not a natural process for teams

Example: If one partner at a firm wants to layoff an employee, and other

partner could go either way, this process will allow them to make a joint

decision.

WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS OF THE

DECISION MAKING TECHNIQUES?

LOREM DOLORESIT ALIQUAM

23%

9%68%





Decision Making – Nominal Technique, Delphi Technique, &

Ringi Technique

Pros Cons

Nominal Technique:

It is relatively quick and does not

require group members to know

each others opinion. Bring ideas for

the waterproof box to the meeting.

Requires a trained facilitator to

conduct it and it can address only

one narrow problem at a time.

Additional risk mgt. of each idea

should be reviewed later.

Delphi Technique:

A large group of people can

participate at the same time.

It is time consuming and requires

skills in developing and analyzing

surveys.

Ringi Technique:

Anonymous comments allow

everyone to state their true

convictions of the waterproof box.

Can be a slow process and there is

no guarantee that the group will

come to an agreement. Include

SME’s in this process to get previous

project information.

HOW DOES GROUP POLARIZATION OR GROUP

THINK EFFECT THE PROJECT TEAM? AND WHY?

Groupthink

• “Groupthink occurs when group members’ desire to maintain good

relations becomes more important than reaching a good decision” ( Levi,

2014. p172).

The influence that aid this behavior:

•Leader is domineering: no expert advice & member input is limited.

•Group becomes unified: relationship with members are number one

priority.

•Internal & external pressure: organization limited on time

•The group has spent a long time on a project together.

•Team members have similar backgrounds and upbringing

•The most common issue is disagreements among the team

•The group may refine one idea for the waterproof box that may require

further review from project SME’s.

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013






Asch Paradigm

• 1950’s Solomon Asch had

several individuals participate in a

psychology experiment. The

members were shown a picture of a

drawn line and had to match it s’

length to one of three segment lines

. Everyone had to speak their

answer. At first everyone got the

answer correct. Then the actors all

stated the same wrong answer and

the test member went along with the

wrong answer. (Solomon Asch,

1950’s, Conformity Tests).

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Groupthink



• The leader made a decision for all.

• Pressure placed on the

nonconformist supplier to change

their decision to conform.

• The group conformed too fast for the

sake of making a decision due to

group cohesion according to Hartzell

(2013).

• Not enough thought went into the

risk if the part failed upon launch.

• Independent thinking was not

encouraged at this stage in the

game.

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Groupthink

How did Groupthink alter the outcome

of the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster?

Watch video using link below in the notes

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/group-think-definition-examples.html#lesson

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/group-think-definition-examples.html#lesson

Group Polarization

– Based on the disposition of a group, the final decision can be more

radical than group’s original position.

• Decisions are either: more cautious or riskier

– Normative & informational influences



Normative Informational

Effects

Group

Norms –decision making

development

Information –disclosure of

material

Members Change their position to

group norm

Reward of mutual

information

Reason Follow in character of

group’s opinion

Dialogue from dominate

view defends opinion

Outcome The shifts in positions

lead to extreme decisions

Exposed to one view-

opinions swing

Decision Making

23%

9%68%




NORMATIVE AND INFORMATIONAL



“Risky Shift Phenomenon”

• “Groups tend to make riskier

decisions than individuals.”

• Groups will gravitate toward risk or

be more conservative.

• The “existing group norm effects the

decision making process.”

• In an effort to be different the group

will change their answers many

times in a group but eventually

move to the extreme, like the polar

bears.

• Ensure all the waterproof box ideas

have been vetted before using a

final list. (Levi, 2014, p.171).

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Group Polarization

CASE SUMMARY


• Group decisions are vital to the trust and confidence the project team will

have when conflict or consensus is not reached.

• Groups will be able to contribute many ideas to the design of our

waterproof plastic box.

• Being on a team will motivate them to contribute better ideas.

• A diverse group of people can have different backgrounds for resolving

issues.

• Typically group decisions can yield a higher value of resources on

average.

• There are many techniques for making decisions and it really depends on

the situation or the response you are seeking as to which one to utilize.

• Groups are useful for generating a lot of ideas in a short amount of time

and additional analysis is required to breakdown the most important ones.

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




FINAL QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER


• What action do you take if a decision by consensus in a group is not

reached?

• If group polarization occurs, how do you instill attributes of an open

mind to the group?

• Which decision making technique should the team use on a project

with great uncertainty?

• When a team appears to be heading in the direction of groupthink,

why would the leader have members write down their decision or

answer?

• On a Consensus Decision Making, what preparation does the

facilitator needs in order to help the team with the decision making

process?

• Did the group decide what design features the waterproof box would

be most beneficial or do they need a focus group?

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




REFERENCES

• Levi, D (2014). Group Dynamics for Teams. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.

SAGE Publications.

• Hartzell, S. (2014). Groupthink: Definition & Examples. Retrieved from

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/group-think-definition-

examples.html#lesson

• Hauenstein, G. (2013). Group polarization. Retrieved from

http://boozerfinal.pbworks.com/w/page/10328334/Group-polarization

• Vitech Corporation (2013). Retrieved from

http://community.vitechcorp.com/home/image.axd?picture=%2F2013%2F1

1%2Fgroup.png

53%78%

34%

92%

46%

1973 1983 1993 2003 2013




Documents

20141005 Team 3 - Week 4 Presentation v.8