Group Decision-Making Methods

Group decision-making is the process by which a collective of individuals attempt to reach a required or minimum level of consensus on a given issue (Eliaz, Ray, & Razin, 2005).  Group decision-making can largely be divided into two phases:  deliberation where there is much dialogue or debate about the pending outcome and aggregation, the phase when the decision actually made.  In group decision-making, it is important that group members recognize that disagreement and/or not coming a conclusion or making a decision can have a profound if not disastrous effect on all involved and the process itself (Eliaz, Ray, & Razin, 2005).  Even when deliberation becomes heated debate, the objective still is to make a decision.

There are numerous techniques employed to facilitate group decision-making.  The choice of the group decision-making method is often driven by the context, i.e. the decision that needs to be made and/or the personnel involved (Bang & Frith, 2017).  This post discusses two such group decision-making methods:  the Delphi method and the instructed dissent method.

The Delphi Method

The Delphi method was developed by the RAND Corporation in the 1950s (Bang & Frith, 2017).  It is a technique that ensures that the opinion of groups is heard resulting in a combined judgement (Powell, 2003).  The Delphi group decision-making method is recognized and thereby commonly implemented because of its controlled responses and feedback; it is a very orderly decision-making process.  In complying with this method, group members privately outline their individual opinions and rationale.  Subsequently, the opinions are passed onto a moderator who aggregates the opinions into an anonymized summary (Bang & Frith, 2017).  To ensure a reliable consensus, occasionally, multiple rounds by which opinions are offered are employed (Powell, 2003).  The iterative process gives group members an opportunity to change their minds (Bang & Frith, 2017).

The Instructed Dissent Method

This group decision-making method, in contrast to the one discussed above, is greatly about dialogue.  Groups that comply with this method ask a group member or subset of the group to advocate for one side of the argument (Bang & Frith, 2017).  In accordance with this method, it is possible that group may argue for a position other than or in opposition to the one that member or members actually agrees with.  This may be where this method if flawed.  An individual group member or subset of groups making a contrived argument may argue with less enthusiasm and/or less confidence than those that argue from a place of genuine advocacy (Bang & Frith, 2017).

Comparing the Two Methods

The obvious difference between the two methods is one is centered around verbal communication whereas the other employs little verbal communication if any.  With the Delphi method, the group members write out their opinions as opposed to verbalizing them to keep the opinions anonymous.   By contrast, with the instructed dissent method, opinions of one argument or another may sway with the personality that presents it.

References

Bang, D. & Frith, C. D.  (2017).  Making better decisions in groups.  Royal Society Open Science, 4(8), 1 – 22.  doi:10.1098/rsos.170193.

Eliaz, K., Ray, D., & Razin, R.  (2005).  Group decision-making in the shadow of disagreement.  Journal of Economic Theory, 132(1), 1 – 38.  doi:10.1016/j.jet.2005.07.008.

Powell, C.  (2003).  The Delphi technique:  Myths and realities.  Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376 – 382.