Thursday, October 2, 2008
Four Functions of Decision Making (Ch. 17)
Researchers Randy Hirokawa and Dennis Gouran came up with the idea of there being four functions when it comes to effective decision making. They came up with these functions in response to group decision making, saying that these four functions help the group decision-making. The four functions are (1) problem analysis, (2) goal setting, (3) identification of alternatives and (4) evaluation of positive and negative consequences. Despite the fact that theo ther functions are very important in their own right, I somehow feel that the third function is of the utmost important. I assume I believe this only because I personally like to evaluate a situation and figure out all of the possible outcomes despite what my choice of action may be. In the book, Hirokawa and Gouran stress the importance to find the different alternatives to give the opportunity to find an acceptable answer to their problem. For people who simply give up on an issue without sitting down and thinking through all of the various alternatives, they are only limiting themselves from finding a possible solution that could actually be the better solution compared to others. I know that I do this best when I am in a group setting, only because it is much easier to brainstorm your ideas while hearing the ideas of others. As a leader in my sorority, we have come across many different issues whether it be an event we are throwing, or an issue with the girls in the house breaking rules. Coming up with different alternatives in a group setting instead of each officer doing it on their own proved to be very beneficial because we were all able to express our own concerns and ideas, and even picked up on things that we may have missed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I don't know that any one function is more important than the other because each builds on the one before it. Still, I suspect many groups leap to the third function, trying to solve the problem before they've fully identified it. Groups also can encounter difficulties in the identification of alternatives when they choose a solution too early in their discussions, as you note. By not considering a full range of solutions, groups may make a choice that's okay but not the best, or even a poor choice because they haven't thought through it enough. I've observed this in classes when students have to choose a project topic. Often, they pick one after only a few minutes of discussion, then later in the semester, when the topic isn't working out all that well, regret that hasty decision.
I think the 2nd function of goal-setting is also really important. In group discussions, it's essential to set a goal that everyone agrees on and then have people offer alternatives. I agree with you though that sometimes we get so caught up in our own train of thought and plan, we don't stop to think of the alternatives until someone brings it up.
My biggest problem comes after the decision making--putting the decision into action!
I found it interesting that you said that function 3 identification of alternatives is the most important function. i believe it is a very important one for sure. I am in a group for my business class, we came up with a mediocre idea (in the opinion of myself and two other group members). The group got so stuck on the first idea that any other suggestion was quickly vetoed by someone as soon as someone spoke up. This led to a very bad environment for people to express their ideas. Our teacher suggested to us that we changed our idea but the one overbearing member convinced the group that our idea was "fine". So it is always good for a group to be open to discusses alternatives otherwise you may end up with a mediocre result.
Post a Comment