Problem Solving and Group Decision Making
In every organization there are problems that arise from time to time. These problems affect the performance of the entire organization. When problems arise all the people who work in that particular organization must be involved on finding lasting solutions to the problems.
There are advantages and disadvantages that are linked to solving problems in relation to group decision making. This paper will highlight some of the pros and cons of solving the problems.
According to Jacobson (127) when a problem is being solved by many people its easier to come up with a lasting solution because every one will present his/her opinion regarding the problem unlike when its only one person who is solving the problem. This is because a group tends to have many ideas owing to the fact that everyone has their own solution which means the ideas can never be exhausted.
In fact, there are many ideas such that they have to be filtered. When there are adequate ideas it is for the benefit of the organization because if one idea does not solve the problem the group can always refer to the ideas that were previously drafted.
In group decision making, ideas are normally put down in writing according to their relevance hence there are many alternative solutions. The people who give ideas derive them from their experiences thus there is certainty about the ideas laid out because they must have worked somewhere.
The solutions that are presented by people collectively are of high quality because they are based on their intellectual knowledge. Since the people who participate in group decision making are from different careers they will apply their skills and experience in creating ideas. For instance, an accountant will approach the problem by applying the strategies of accounting.
This means that everyone will see the problem from a different perspective. Their perspectives will determine the effectiveness of their solutions. Whether the solutions they will create will work or not is not that crucial provided there are ideas to choose from.
When a problem is being solved by one individual there is no variety of solutions hence if the solutions of that individual do not work that person has to go back to the drawing board to draft fresh ideas.
Solutions provided by an individual may not work because they are limited to the person’s knowledge unlike in a group scenario because different people have different experiences.
In a group situation the quality of solutions is high because when a solution is tabled the other people in that group are given an opportunity to identify the errors in that solution and explain why that solution is inappropriate or appropriate for solving the problem.
When solutions are provided by one sole individual their quality may not be of high because the person does not have someone to help him identify the errors in his solutions and thus when the time for applying the solution comes failure is most likely to occur (Hadler 1).
Since solutions are arranged according to their suitability, there are high chances of success because for an idea to have the highest ranking it must have satisfied the opinions of the majority members. Furthermore, groups analyze a solution before they approve its appropriateness. When ideas are being drafted by a sole individual they may not be appropriate because that person may not analyze their suitability in solving the problem.
When everyone is made to participate in solving a problem there are solutions that are discovered that would not have been unveiled if some people were not allowed to give their views. This is because there are people who understand certain issues better than others regardless of their position in the organization.
The superiority of ideas is influenced by what the participants come across in their day to day lives within the organization and the outside world. The sources of their information vary from one person to another because there are those who draw their opinions from what they see on TV and the media in general.
Others owe their opinions from interactions with people from other organizations who have experienced the same problem in the past. Others base their opinion from personal experiences. In brief the sources of ideas are many.
When people come together for the purpose of solving a problem, their understanding is greater compared to when decision making is centered on a single individual. This is because they all analyze the problem tabled before them and this makes them have a common understanding of the effects posed by the problem.
An individual does not analyze a problem thoroughly because they just view the problem vaguely and thus they may not realize the different approaches that can be employed in tackling the problem (Jacobson 127).
Allowing all members of an organization to take part in solving the problem will make them feel they are recognized by the organization. This will make them see the organization as part of their lives. When employees develop a strong bondage with the organization they will sacrifice themselves towards solving the problem of the organization because they feel like its affecting them too.
This is because every individual in the group have ambitions which are dependent on the success of the organization in achieving its mission. They commit themselves because they know failure of the organization in overcoming obstacles spells doom to their future ambitions in the organization.
When employees are bonded with their organization the managers do not have to tell them what to do because they all know what is expected of them and when it comes to being creative they develop ideas like they are doing it for their own organization.
This sense of belonging makes them feel like the success of the organization is dependent on their efforts hence they will do anything possible to make sure the problem is solved once and for all. This is because to them the problem puts their individual progress at a standstill and unless the problem is solved they feel they might remain in their current situation for the rest of their lives.
Failure to make all members of an organization give their views concerning a given problem is ignorance of the highest order. This is because a solution may not be suitable to everyone.
For instance, if an organization that operates in the hospitality industry intends to computerize their operations it would do them good if they involved all their employees because by doing so they may help them address the issue of computer literacy among employees which can hinder the efficiency of the new trend.
Involving everyone in decision making is important because the people of lower ranks such as the attendants are the ones who understand problems better than the people above their ranks. This is because mangers just issue orders but they do not know what happens during the execution of their duties.
Ordinary employees are the ones who can provide an insight that can help everyone understand where and how the problem manifests itself. Even if these people are not the ones who develop the systems that are used in the organization they are the ones who interact with the systems the most compared to those of higher rankings.
For instance, when computers are not performing as they should, the IT manager does not exactly know where the users experience problems because his/her major role is to ensure the computers are in good working condition. Successful organizations are those that allow all their members to play a role in solving their problems (Hadler 1).
In as much as there are advantages of solving problems collectively, there are also disadvantages of engaging everyone in decision making.
First and foremost, when decisions are required urgently the group discussions may consume most of the time hence by the time their proposals are being applied they may not solve the problem. This is because there are problems that deteriorate with time and thus they require immediate solutions.
When decision making involves many people solutions cannot be provided within the shortest time possible because consultations have to be made. This happens because when an individual makes decisions without involving those who are concerned it might be seen as disrespect to authority.
For instance, if the operations manager of a given organization experiences a problem that requires immediate action and he/she is supposed to report the issue to a senior manager who is absent, the delay can cause the situation to get out of hand because the operations manager cannot take any action in the absence of his/her senior manager.
The delays in decision making are quite annoying because individuals feel that they would have arrived at a conclusion faster if they did not have to consult anyone. There exists a kind of competition among group members that is based on who makes the best ideas. When ideas of some people are not accepted they take it personally and they decide in their heart that if their ideas are not accepted no one else’s will.
This results in objections that are not founded for the sake of revenge against colleagues who pushed for the ejection of their ideas. Members who are interested in fame use the meetings to horn their skills. Most of the time they do not focus on the positive side of the points put across and at times they ask complex questions deliberately so that their opponent’s opinion is ejected like theirs (Hadler 1).
Conformity poses a great threat to the quality of ideas provided in a group. Because unity is vital to the success of a group even points that are not realistic or logical are accepted especially when they are derived from senior officials of the organizations.
In such case no one dares to criticize such views because objecting to opinions put across by seniors might imply that there is no respect for the seniors by juniors which might lead to future victimization.
Since group members have different understanding and thoughts, sometimes making them understand the importance of an issue is difficult. This can cause disagreements because there are some people who are slow in understanding things. In addition, time factor is another issue that affects group decisions. When groups meet they have very limited time because members have other matters to attend to.
Even if it’s before or after work they make decisions hurriedly so that they can beat their own time. When meetings are held after work members are usually very tired hence they just avail themselves for the sake of being present. This means that though they are physically present mentally they are miles away.
Therefore, the points in group discussions should be checked for their suitability in solving the problem. Personal differences should be put aside for the sake of solving the problem.
Every member of the organization should be allowed to express his/her views in group discussions. When points are being criticized members should not pay attention to the person who put the point across but should instead focus on the logic behind that point.
Works Cited
Hadler, Gary. ”Solving Problems Using Group-advantages and disadvantages.” ITS Tutorial School. 2011. Web.
Jacobson, Susan. Communication skills for conservation professionals, Washington DC: Island Press, 2009.