Community decision-making processes cover every aspect of the modern lifestyle, whether or not we consider these possibilities. Before finalizing decisions, personal and professional circumstances inspire us to search for additional knowledge from others. This strategy removes the need to put all the emphasis on a single position in leadership while benefiting from the benefits of diversity and experience.
With the individual buy-in of the final decison, group actions build forward momentum. That means that everybody has a slice of ownership of the outcomes that happen. It is a strategy that forces everybody to come together to enact solutions, even though there is no 100 percent consensus about what steps to take within the system. But as with everything there is a good and bad with the process.
Advantages of Group Decision Making:
1. More input from everyone in the decision-making process.
If you had dedicated and enthusiastic individuals on your team when making decisions, it would be best because their energy is the only way to produce any buy-in for the process. This advantage is required for the personal and professional decisions that teams make on a daily basis.
When people are asked to engage in a process that could influence their needs, they are normally prepared to look for new solutions and greater efficiencies. Active engagement helps a good result to be produced that works for everyone. Even when teams do not have access to unique knowledge that solves a specific necessity of an upcoming project, if there is a desire to keep an open mind, the input on each idea allows everyone to see things differently.
2. Diversity in opinions:
Well, because a community has a lot of members and they come from diverse backgrounds as individuals, they eventually have specific and distinct ideas and views about the matter at hand. In contrast to individual decision making, all the proposals can be as distinctive and better. With the aid of the number of suggestions, a large number of alternatives can be generated and eventually a good conclusion can be reached at the end.
3. Collective contribution of ideas.
The community debate helps in the decision-making process to remove the obstacle of monopoly. It is unreliable at times if a decision is taken by a single person. Therefore the unreliability aspect is minimized with the aid of getting a collective concept. A single person’s decision can be partial and functions solely in his favor, so collective decision-making is important since it can favor all the individuals in the company.
4. Team building.
Active engagement from all the individuals in the organization helps to boost the team’s morale and builds a positive and organized relationship between the group’s team members. As this takes place, the participants acquire some decision-making skills that support the members of the community and the group as a whole.
5. Wealth of information.
More insight is passed on as a group shares their ideas and thoughts and certain ideas are contrasted to individual decision-makers that have fewer ideas restricted to their limited knowledge. Team decision-making or group debate is often much more advantageous and effective in making a straightforward and specific or definitive decision that will impact the plan’s outcome.
The expert’s information is to the point and the distribution of the ideas presented by them is more quality assurance rather than general opinions, as the expert may have some background knowledge or expertise on the topic currently discussed. For this, an expert can already be active in the community or he calls to suggest the decision to be taken from outside.
Disadvantages of Group Decision Making:
- Being silent in disagreement.
Some members vote in support of a certain decision only to agree or obey the standards agreement at times when the decision process in groups is carried out. An person may consent to the point of not standing up to his opinion by a firm that may contradict the opinion of the opposite individuals. This discourages the person from making ideas and opinions of quality and from standing firm in his decision.
2. Time consuming.
The Group discussion strategies frequently consume and take more time to come to a consensus agreed by each person in the group as each person in the group has their own unique and creative ideas that result in so many choices being taken into account. The bigger the group’s size, the greater their time spent. When it comes to group conversation, time waste still occurs.
3. Uncertainty in the risk taking.
When the community takes decisions, the risk-bearing element will still emerge. The group can however, at times, choose to continue to take less risk or to take more risk for the entire group. When a business wishes to take a higher risk, once the target has been reached, it will yield a higher and greater reward. But some form of risk needs to be undertaken by the group to achieve success in the sector.
4. Avoiding important decisions.
Some decisions give more or are of high importance as the decision-making process takes place in the community and some decisions are of low priority in the eyes of the group members. Often, thus certain high priority tasks are replaced by low priority tasks. This way of doing so is referred to as procrastination, as members of the group avoid certain high-priority activities because they do not research them or find alternative alternatives to replace them. Do not address them, but instead substitute them at that moment with activities of less significance.
5. Diffusion of responsibility.
A representative chosen by the members of the group in each group is sufficiently accountable to see that anything happens in an organized manner. The leader appoints such committees to provide assistance before making a decision. If there is not enough time to unanimously carry out a decision and there is a rush to enact a decision, the responsibility for future events after the decision has been taken into action is assigned to the committee by the team leader, leading to a reckless attitude and actions.
You could take the following important steps in order to optimize the potential of a group decision process.
- Set specific goals and responsibilities.
Managers help team members understand their decision roles and parameters by setting expectations (for example, deadlines). Managers can delegate roles to help organize the decision process, build a sense of accountability for parts of the work of the community, and explain duties.
2. Create the team goal.
A manager may eliminate uncertainty and help group members concentrate their research, conversations, and decisions by articulating the aspects of the decision, including its meaning. A clear statement of the problem to be discussed will help unify the community and build cohesion that engages members and promotes cooperation.
3. Facilitate a working environment.
The working environment must facilitate effective, truthful and transparent contact between group members after the decision-making objective has been defined. In order to promote meaningful dialogue, the manager will help develop guidelines for how participants can communicate with each other.
4. Provide resources.
Administrators need to be aware that the community has enough resources to analyze and decide on alternatives. In order to fully engage in the decision-making process, required changes can include providing additional personnel, giving more time, or freeing members from other job assignments.
5. Get out of the way.
The best thing to do is step back and let the team perform after the manager has defined the framework for the community to make its decision. At this point, the most useful function is that of the coach, such as if the group needs support to handle interpersonal relationships or whether more clarity about an option is required.
When it is a subject linked to the interest of many individuals at stake, it is more of a benefit because collective decision-making can offer their views without being partial. As only those persons have not been involved in a particular situation, collective decision-making action is always a stronger approach to such a situation. But if there is a relevant or a matter concerning group discussion involving restricted individuals, it is a disadvantage or is a backlog when such a case is at hand.
Check out my related post: What to do if you are left out of important meetings?