Rationale
The lesson on reading Gabriel Garcia-Marquez’s “A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings” is developed for students from Grade 9 in order to explore the principles of Magical Realism as a specific genre of literature. Students are self-motivated readers who prefer reviewing interesting and surprising stories. Therefore, strategies for the lesson are selected to involve students in discussing the most striking parts of the story with the focus on themes of Magical Realism. Much attention is paid to students’ discussions of the text with the limited involvement of the teacher in the process.
The ‘Bookmark’ technique used by students independently allows for encouraging the discussion of specific details of the text. The ‘Say Something’ technique allows for clarifying the vocabulary, making comments, and asking questions that demonstrate the understanding of the text. The ‘Red Light, Yellow Light’ and ‘Chalk Talk’ techniques are important to structure the work of students and draw their attention to the key aspects of the discussed topic. The use of these techniques allows for making the lesson that is based on the principles of active learning and scaffolding.
Lesson Plan
| TEACHER: X | SCHOOL NAME: X
GRADE: 9 |
|||
| UNIT: Magical Realism in Literature
TEXT: Gabriel Garcia-Marquez’s “A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings” |
||||
| Learning Objectives | ||||
| By the end of the lesson, students will be able to:
|
||||
| STANDARDS | ||||
| CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.9-10.2 – Students determine and analyze texts’ central ideas.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.9-10.5 – Students analyze the author’s choice of devices to organize the text. CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RL.9-10.6 – Students analyze cultural perspectives. |
||||
| VOCABULARY | ||||
| Magical Realism
Magnanimous Impertinences Terrestrial |
||||
| Pre-Assessment | CulturalRelevance | |||
| Students are asked to read the story at home while applying the ‘Bookmark’ technique and selecting the most interesting parts of the story and vocabulary to discuss. The teacher asks students to discuss their choices and explains the vocabulary. | Students discuss different cultural perspectives with the focus on the Latin American literature.
Students work with illustrations and portraits of writers to discuss differences in Magical Realism depending on the culture, and they refer to their personal experiences. |
|||
| Teacher Moves | Purpose | |||
| Pre-Reading Activities:
During-Reading Activities:
Post-Reading Activities:
|
Students receive the background knowledge regarding Magical Realism.
Students analyze the main themes of the story.
Students distinguish elements of Magical Realism in the text.
Students focus on differences of Magical Realism in comparison to other genres. |
|||
| DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION | ||||
| English Language Learners are provided with simple definitions of terms and handouts to support the information from the PowerPoint Presentation.
Students with hearing impairment are provided with additional tables and graphs. |
||||
| ASSESSMENT | ||||
| Formative Assessment | Evidence | |||
| To assess:
|
|
|||
Reference
Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
General Motors Company: Strategic Implementation
Introduction
The following essay is concerned with the strategic implementation aspect of organization. The essay examines the strategic implementation of the General Motors Company where I work. The essay determines as to whether it is true that the implementation is the most difficult aspect of strategic management. The main objective of this argument is to bring theory and practice into play through critical evaluation of implementation in the General Motors Company where I work.
In doing so, it furthers my knowledge of strategic management and my ability to apply theory to practice. It also compels me to look beyond current practice, top what could be done through the provision of recommendations for the enhancement of strategic implimentation.However, it is important to determine the meaning of strategic implementation first before describing the elements that affects the implementation of Strategic management. Strategy implementation is concerned with ensuring that strategies are working in practice.
Determination of a workable strategy
A good strategy is one that is workable. A workable strategy is thought of in terms of the following i.e. organization, resource allocation and change. With regards to organization, it involves departmentalization, designing organizational processes well, defining the boundaries and encouraging a mutual work relationship. With regards to resources, a proper resource allocation enables success. It is concerned with evaluating as to whether the organization has resources and technology to implement its strategy. With regards to change, a strategy cab is successfully implemented if resistance to change is overcome.
Organizational change is the modification of an organization’s process ad activities to deal with environmental changes and arising problems. Organizational change is influenced by both the internal as well as the external factors. In the case of General Motors, the external factors that influences change includes the following; change in customer needs, threatening strategies of competitors e.g. Ford and Toyota, new market entrant, government changes among others.The internal factors that influences change in the General Motors are revision goals as well as missions, cultural changes in management styles, change in personnel policy among others.
The strategic change implementation may be faced with challenges due to people’s resistance to change.This is due to the following reasons; uncertainty on the aftermath of change, cohesive social groups may be broken, fear of obsolescence of skills, fear of loss of jobs, awareness of the weakness of these changes, unwillingness to learn new skills among others. The management may thus find it hard to overcome the resistance to change and this makes the strategic implementation aspect to be the most difficult as far as strategic management of an organization is concerned (Hill & Jones, 2007, P.34-36).
Description of the elements that affects the implementation of strategic management
The following are the main factors that affect the implementation of strategic management in organizations i.e. organizational leadership, organizational culture, the organizational structure and the human resource. The following thus discusses how each of the above factors affects the implementation of strategic management (Bryson, 1988, P.5-11).
Leadership
Leadership is usually a crucial factor to consider with regards to the implementation of strategic management. The leaders have the responsibility of coming up with decisions that enables a firm to get used to and also thrive in competitive business environment (Hubbard, & Beamish, 2010, P.36-45). The role of leaders is most visible when a firm decides to change and also implement its strategy. For effective implementation of strategy, the leaders in the organization are bound to reinforce it i.e. they are supposed to ensure that there are adequate resources allocated for strategic implementation, they should also ensure that there is no resistance, they should also convince the workers that the implementation is crucial with regards to their interests.
Leadership affects the strategic implementation in such aspects as communication and motivation. The success of organization in the modern business environment strongly hinges on strong managerial leadership of the Chief Executive Officer (Louise, 1990, P.87). Strategic leadership requires that the Chief Executive Officer embraces and implement change. In so doing, the leader must clarify strategic intent i.e. set out a clear vision, build a strong organization i.e. come up with a common mission that drives both the management and employees and also, shape organizational culture i.e. build values and believes that shape the organizational positively.
The organizational leaders usually understand that it is difficult to implement strategy as compared to crating it. Many strategic implementations fails due to the fact that leaders underestimates the challenges associated with implementation therefore taking their eyes off what requires to be completed. The leaders thus fail to focus on doing the right things implying that their staff members imitate their actions. The lack of a framework that guides the leaders all through the strategic implementation journey is also a factor that contributes to the failure of strategic management implementation. The leaders are supposed to know that any shift with regards to strategy entails changes in the daily activities a of the organization.
Therefore, small shifts calls for significant changes and it is only successful once it is implemented systematically (Ring, & Perry, 1985, P.7-10).The leaders should therefore concentrate on doing their work by stepping back and reconsidering how the strategy will be executed and implemented. They have a key role of creating the right conditions that enhances the strategic implementation.Therefore,they must motivate the employees,comminucate the objectives of strategy, cerate the key performance indicators, support the culture, spruce up the processes, transform the manner in which the employees are reinforced sop as to enhance the right behaviors as well as actions that are essential for the successful implementation of strategy and also make frequent reviews.
However,many organizational leaders views this list as an overwhelming one and they therefore ignores some action leading to the failure of strategy implementation( Paul, 1983,P.25-29).Many leaders fails to identify specifically what requires to be completed and also where to focus. The strategy for General Motors is to be the market leader as far as car manufacturing is concerned. The leaders once they identify the strategy to be completed should therefore lead the employees towards performing the right actions and behaviors. After the strategy is crafted, the leaders should in turn manage the resources and ensure that there is strong leadership. They should thus move from thinking to action.
Many organizational leaders often fail during this transition. For instance, translating strategy into the daily activities that the employees must carry out is difficult (Sadler, & Craig, 2003,P.90).The failure of leaders to explain on what the staff members should do differently is a reason behind the failure of new strategy implimentation.With regards to leadership,communincation is an important aspect as far as strategy implementation is concerned. The interaction between managers as well as their employees plays an important role with regards to strategy implimenttaion.Both lateral and vertical communication determines the success and failure of strategy implementation (Tichy, 1983,P.24-25).
The two forms of communication provides such guidelines as obtaining the broad-based input as well as the firm’s participation during the strategy formulation period, assessing the barriers to implementation in advance, acting promptly in order to ensure that the resources are allocated effectively, communicating the strategy to the affected members of the organization, fine tuning as well as making the adjustments to the trends and events that arises among others. The failure of strategy implementation is as a result of lack of proper organization of strategic initiative i.e. when there is no clear specification of the implementation behavior. The members of the organization thus lacks a proper understanding how they can succeed in implement the strategy and hence the failure (Dess et.al.2009, P.45).
With regards to leadership and strategy implimentation, there General Motors finds challenges in the following context i.e. unfreezing the present company mindset as well as processes, changing the processes so as to match with the strategy and refreezing the resources so as to match with the firm’s activities. The leadership of GM has failed to provide the staff members with the skills as well as resources so as to successfully implement the strategy and hence the failure.
Organizational structure
Organizational structure has an effect as far as the strategic implementation is concerned. Organizational structure helps improve the interaction and coordination of people within the organization and giving them direction on how to achieve the organization goals. One aid of visualizing the organizational structure is organizational chart. An organizational chart is a summarized form of organizational structure that shows how the authority and power flows from one level to another in the hierarchy.
According to Professor Henry Mintzberg,the organizational structure is classified into five major segments i.e. the strategic apex made of Board, Chief Executive Officer and top managers, the middle line which is made of the functional managers or departmental heads, the operating core which is made of the supervisors and operational managers, the techno-structures which refers top the functional specialists and the support staff which is made of the messangers,cleaners e.t.c.There are three common forms of organizational structures i.e. the functional organizational structure which is the grouping of employees into specific areas of specialization, the geographic organizational structure and the divisional or strategic business unit structure.
The General Motors where I work is bound to develop and implement the Divisional or Strategic Business Unit organizational structure (Hubbard, & Beamish, 2010,P.26).The General Motors Ltd which is a vehicle manufacturing firm have diversified its products/service lines, utilizes new market channels and also serves heterogeneous customer groups. The functional structure of General Motors is thus broken down and is replaced with the divisional or strategic business unit organizational structure divisional or SBU structure allows corporate management to delegate authority for the strategic management of distinct business entities. This thus expedites decision making in the face of environmental dynamics of the General Motors.
The organizational strategies usually influence the organizational structure i.e. Organizational structure usually results from the organizational strategy.Therefore,the act of seeking ways to achieve the objectives as well as resource allocation so as to achieve the desired objectives are the main elements of strategy (Academy of Management Review, 1985, p.276–286). The structure is composed of the organizational hierarchy, specialization, delegation as well as communication. The organizational structure is deemed to have an impact as far as the original operational structure is concerned. The structure usually affects the implementation of the strategy in the following aspects; clarifying responsibilities, information sharing in the organization, centralizatiion as well as decentralization (Hayes, 1986, P.82).
In GM, the current structure has problems as it focuses on the cost reduction measures and ignoring differentiation.Also, the regional Strategic Business Units lacks control over the regions. This thus causes conflict as far as the structure is concerned implying that the new strategy is difficult to be implemented.
Organizational culture
The organizational culture is another aspect that should be considered for successful implementation of organizational strategy.Organizational culture is the set of important assumptions that members of the organization share in common. Leaders usually find it challenging in implementing the culture change due to the following reasons; the act of emphasizing key themes pr dominant values is challenging, it is difficult to institutionalize practices that re-enforce desired beliefs and values, linking culture to organizational mission is often challenging and also it is challenging to reformulate the strategy or culture.
The extent upon which the organizational culture is aligned usually has an effect as far as the strategic management implementation is concerned (Third-Sector Organizations, 1987, P.44-47). Culture usually combines with such aspects as the goals to be accomplished, the objectives, activities, rewards, behaviours, organizational proactive among others in order to ensure that strategy is successfully implemented. The lack of supporting the organizational culture is the reason behind the failure of strategy implimentation.On the other hand, proper alignment of organizational culture with the strategy ensures that the strategy is effectively implemented (Barry, & Jeffrey, 1990, p.26-31).
The General Motors’ current organizational culture does not provide an incentive for employees to be productive and they therefore becomes uncomfortable as far as their jobs are concerned. This implies that they are not fully committed to the firm and their propensity to leave GM is high and hence a barrier to new strategy implementation.
People
The other element that affects the implementation of strategic implementation is the people or human resources. The human resources professionals play an important role as far as the strategy implementation is concerned. They usually bring unique knowledge which is essential in implementing the strategy. The human resource p [professionals are positioned well in advance to contribute to the organizational’ strategic implementation. Unlike the rest of the organizational departments, the Human Resource department in the organization is concerned with an understanding of the entire business organization.
Strategy implementation thus is an inherent issue as far as people are concerned and the human resource department by virtual of its title usually bears the greatest responsibility. The Human Resource department in an organization is concerned with ensuring that there are the required skills in place so as to ensure that there is successful implementation of strategy. The Human resource Professionals who anticipates to make valuable contributions with regards to strategy implementation should first understand the barriers that affects the implementation (Hissey, 1998, 30).With strategy implimentation, there are some resistances especially in a case where the new strategy is completely different with the old strategy and therefore, the Human Resource department is deemed to help the firm to deal with the resistance.
The barriers to successful implementation of strategy with regards to the human resources are the following; lack of proper organization at the top level i.e. the top management should be properly coordinated so as to ensure that the strategy is successfully implemented (Pascale, 1990, P.51).many organizations thus fails to harmonize the top management with the strategy to be implemented and hence the failure. The other toot cause of the failure of strategic management implementation with regards to human resource is the lack of putting the employees on-board i.e. the staff members may not have a clear understanding of the strategy.
The employees may not have the feeling of being part and parcel of the whole strategy implementation process due to the fact that they might feel powerless and also due to the fact that they might be skeptical about the executives. The employees may also lack the urgency sense to implement the strategy and hence leading to the failure of implementation (Wilson, &, Gilligan, 2005, P.18).Also, the staff members may not feel inspired so as to effectively implement the strategy. The other root cause of barriers of strategic implementation with regards to the human resource is the inadequate changes wit regards to the work units.
The managers in this case may not feel the urge to refocus the employees efforts in their work units and hence a failure of strategy implementation. The managers may also operate in such a manner that demoralizes the staff members.Also, the managers may direct the employees to proceed with their daily activities despite the fact that the strategy to be implemented calls for a significant change hence leading to the failure.The fourth root cause of failure of strategy implementation as far as the human resource is concerned is the lack of collaboration between the management and the employees.
In most cases, the new strategy to be implemented requires that the management works closely with the staff members so as to successfully implement the strategy. The lack of proper collaboration thus leads to the failure of strategy implementation. The fifth root cause of failure of successful implementation of strategy is the lack of proper measure systems.This implies that there is insufficient means of determining the progress as far as the strategy implementation process is concerned. The staff members thus fail to know the progress so far and hence the failure (Hubbard, & Beamish, 2010, P.36-45).
GM often finds difficulties in new strategy implementation due to the fact that the employees resist changes. This is as a result of such factors as poor coordination i.e. lack of clear goals.Also,the employees usually do not understand fully the strategy i.e. they don’t buy in. The General Motors have also failed with regards to new strategy implementation due to weak collaboration in the inter-departments.
Recommendations on how strategy implementation could be enhanced
The following are recommendations with regards to overcoming the barriers of strategy implementation;
The management needs to focus only on the significant actions that must be accomplished so as not to become distracted as a result of several priorities. Thus, in order for the organization to successfully implement the strategy; it requires having specific goals so as to avoid the conflicting priorities (Czajkowski, & Woods, 2001, P.67)
The management should also ensure that there is clear vertical communication. Thus al the leadership levels should be able to effectively communicate the organizational goals to the subordinates. The employee’s role with regards to organizational goals’ attainment should also be communicated (Alkhafaji, A, 2003, P.8).
The other aspect that requires to be considered is teamwork. The top management team should establish the cause of the conflicts and then come up with solutions on how the conflicts can be resolved so as to enhance the organizational goal’s attainment. This entails a trade-off as well as negotiation. It entails the senior leadership team to make sound decisions concerning the allocation of the organizational resources. The teamwork also requires that the management comes up with clear expectations about the duties of each staff in the organization (Nutt & Backoff, 1987).
The other recommendation that the management needs to consider so as to ensure effective implementation of strategy is regular check-ins.This ensures that tasks are completed within the required time. The employees thus do not work under pressure so as to meet their deadlines (Lynch, 2009, P.81).
Another important aspect with regards to successful implementation of the strategy is the accountability. All the employees should be held accountable with regards to the organizational activities. This will ensure that the organizational tasks are completed and there is no procrastination. The management should thus come up with punitive measures against those staff members who fails to perform their expected roles in due time (Dobson & Richards, 2004, P.87).
Conclusion
The organizational leadership, organizational culture, the organizational structure and the human resource are the main factors that affects the successful implementation of strategic management in organizations.Business organizations operates in a competitive environments and therefore strategy implementation is crucial for the organizations to remain competitive.
However,implimentation of strategies is usual a major challenge and most organizations fails in doing so. The elements that effect the implementation of strategic management such as the leadership, organizational structure, people, and the innovational technology have been discussed in this essay. Strategy implementation has an impact as far as the General Motors Company is concerned. The General Motors company is usually different as compared to many organizations due to its diversification as well as broadness of the survives and this makes strategic implementation a crucial aspect.
The understanding of the elements that affects the implementation of strategic implementation is important due to the fact that it enables an organization to attain its strategic objectives which had been previously planned in the strategic planning. The implementation is the most difficult aspect of strategic management due to the fact that it is often difficult to determine the kind of organizational structure that the firm should. Most companies both large and small are often faced with challenge with regards to the strategy implementation.
Reference List
Alkhafaji, A. (2003).Strategic management: formulation, implementation, and Control in A dynamic environment. London: Routledge.
Barry, B & Jeffrey, D. (1990). Straussman, Public Management Strategies: Guidelines For Managerial Effectiveness. Oxford: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bryson, J.M. (1988). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. Oxford: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Czajkowski, J & Woods, A. (2001).Strategic management: a fresh approach to Developing skills, knowledge and creativity. London: Kogan Page Publishers.
Dess, A. et.al. (2009). Strategic Management: Creating Competitive Advantages. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dobson, P, & Richards, J. (2004).Strategic management: issues and cases. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hayes, R.H. (1986). “Why Strategic Planning Goes Awry.” The New York Times.
Hill, C & Jones, F. (2007). Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hissey, D. (1998). Strategic management: from theory to implementation. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hubbard, G & Beamish, P (2010) .Strategic management: Thinking analysis and action (14 editions). Australia: Pearson education.
Hubbard, G. & Beamish, P. (2010). Strategic management: Thinking, analysis and Action (4th Ed.). Australia: Pearson Education.
Louise, G. W. (1990). Managing Policy Reform in the LDCs. Boulder. Colorado: Lynne ReinnerPublishers.
Lynch, T. (2009). Strategic management. London: Prentice Hall/Financial Times.
Nutt, P.C., & Backoff, R.W. (1987). A Strategic Management Process for Public and Third-Sector Organizations. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53, 1987. pp.44–57.
Pascale, R. (1990). Managing on the Edge. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Paul, S. (1983). Strategic Management of Development Programmes: Guidelines for Action. Geneva: International Labor Office, Management Development Series, No. 19.
Ring, P.S., & Perry, J.L. (1985). “Strategic Management in Public and Private Organizations: Implications of Distinctive Contexts and Constraints.” Academy of Management Review, 1985, 10, pp.276–286.
Sadler, P, & Craig, D. (2003). Strategic management. London: Kogan Page Publishers. Stamford: Cengage Learning.
Tichy, N. (1983). Managing Strategic Change: Technical, political, and cultural Dynamics. New York: John Wiley.
Wilson, R, &, Gilligan, C. (2005).Strategic marketing management: planning, Implementation and control. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Group Decision Making Theory
Introduction
Group decision-making refers to a situation where individuals have to make a choice collectively based on the alternatives presented to them (Fox, 2015). It is common to find cases where decisions have to be made by a group of people because of the prevailing circumstances. Sahin (2014) “Since managing diversity and conflict in teams are emerging issues to study in the context of knowledge intensive services in general, it is also important to know that managing agreement can be a big concern.” Scholars have looked at how to manage teams and conflicts that may arise from such units. One of the most important issues that cannot be ignored in such units is the decision-making process.
According to McMahon (2017), it may not be easy for a team to come up with a universally accepted decision within a short time unless they are facing a common problem that influences their decision in the same manner. In the modern society, cohesion in teams is increasingly becoming important. The need to bring together ideas of people with diverse background has never been as critical as it is in the modern organizational setting.
However, Brantly (2017) warns that the more diverse a group is, the more complex it is for them to come to an agreement over a given issue. People often tend to base their decisions on their knowledge, experiences, and background. Even in such diverse settings within an organization, when a decision has to be made by a group, then one must ensure that views of everyone is factored in before a decision is made. In this communication theory paper, the focus will be to look at how groups make decision, focusing on Groupthink Theory as a model that can explain such processes.
Groupthink Theory in Group Decision-Making
According to Rodríguez (2017), “Groupthink is a communication theory that explains the behavioral pattern that is demonstrated by team members in order to avoid conflict and reach to a consensus without a critical analysis of the issue.” The theory seeks to explain how groups make mistakes when making decisions by avoiding issues that may be considered controversial. When teams have to come up with a common solution or opinion, compromises have to be made, especially when the members have varying opinions.
This theory argues that people tend to ignore the need to make critical analysis of the issues presented to them when they are in groups. They emphasize so much on the need to avoid conflicts at the expense of making a decision based on facts. Sometimes group pressure causes deterioration of mental efficiency, moral judgment, and reality testing, especially when there are two or more extreme points of view (Fox, 2015). Reason fails to reign and people opt to go for the alternative that is least controversial to the team, irrespective of how effective it is in solving a given problem.
It is important to note that decisions made by groups are always compromised, as explained in this theory. Pautz and Forrer (2013) say, “Groups bring out the worst as well as the best in terms of decision-making.” Some of the decisions made by groups are always superior to that made by individuals. That is so because the group members can discuss the options presented critically before selecting the most appropriate one. Shortcomings of an individual are often addressed by the presence of other members of the group. It means that one only needs to understand how to manage group decision-making process to achieve the most appropriate result.
According to McMahon (2017), when there are no clear rules and patterns for decision-making in an organizational setting, then the team will be vulnerable to groupthink problem. Before the team can settle down to make a decision, the biggest problem they will have to deal with is how the process itself is to be conducted. Successful organizations around the world have learnt how to build structures and systems that facilitate decision-making processes (Kaba et al., 2016).
In the current competitive business environment, firms cannot afford to make mistakes. It is easy for an individual to make a mistake that may be very costly to an organization. That is why companies are now setting up systems and structures to facilitate decision-making at group level. By using Groupthink Theory, it is now possible to identify these shortcomings and to come up with an effective solution to the associated challenges.
Group Decision-Making Approaches
When an individual is making a decision, the process is often simple and straightforward. Factors such as background, level of knowledge and experience, and personal desires and interests often define the decision that one makes when presented with such a situation. However, the process is very different when it comes to group decision-making process. In this case, two or more minds- sometimes having conflicting views towards an issue- have to come together and agree on a given issue or choose a given alternative (Murata et al., 2015). In this section, it is important to look at the approaches that can be used in, group decision-making processes, and how groupthink affects them as explained in the Groupthink Theory.
Consensus Decision-Making
One of the most common and popular approach of making decisions is through consensus. In this approach, members agree that whenever they have to make a decision, then they have to come together, discuss the issue, and reach a consensus based on facts presented. This is one of the approaches worst affected by groupthink syndrome. Sometimes members deliberately slow the process to influence the outcome, not necessarily considering facts necessary for the conclusion to be made. Many people prefer consensus because it allows every member of the team to share his or her ideas. It is an inclusive approach of decision-making process in teams.
However, Kaba et al. (2016) warn that in such settings, not everyone is always willing to share their views. One may have the best idea that can help address the problem at hand but fail to present it to the team, allowing inferior decisions to prevail. Consensus also requires small teams where individuals can easily engage with all other team members before an alternative is selected. When dealing with large teams, it is almost impossible to use this method effectively.
However, when a decision is finally made, members often feel entitled to and responsible for the outcome. According to Edman (2006), “If groups are subject to groupthink in a business game, they are committed to their decisions in the game regardless of their performance.” They will be willing to put more effort to ensure that their decision yields success.
Voting-Based Approach
Voting-based approach of making decisions is also very popular, especially in democratic settings. In this approach, Brantly (2017) says that members have to accept the fact that sometimes it is impossible to have a consensus over a given issue. The difference in opinion of the members may be so strong that it may not be possible to reach a unanimous decision. In such cases, members of the team must allow the opinion of the majority to prevail.
After a discussion, members will be requested to choose a given alternative through a secret ballot, acclamation, or any other voting pattern that the team considers appropriate. The decision of the majority will prevail. This approach of decision-making is less affected by groupthink syndrome compared with consensus because in the end every group member will make a personal choice based on his or her knowledge, experience, and interest.
However, sometimes the majority’s decision may not be the right one or the most appropriate. It means that a group can be forced to adopt a given alternative, not because it is the most desirable one, but because it is supported by the majority. Another problem with this approach is that a section of the members may feel that they are not responsible for the outcome of the decision because their views were defeated by that of the majority.
Delegated Approach
In large groups where consensus decision-making is not possible, the team may decide to delegate the task to a select subcommittee. The subcommittee must consist of trusted individuals who can represent the interest of the other members. Such approaches to decision-making are common in large corporations where board of directors have to be appointed. The board will be expected to make decisions based on not only their personal interests but also the interest of all other members who have trusted them with that responsibility.
When making decisions, the subcommittee may use either the consensus or voting-based approach based on the predetermined pattern. The main problem with this approach is that members who are not part of the subcommittee will always want to own positive outcomes of such decisions but distance themselves from outcomes that fail to meet expectations.
Benefits of Group Decision-Making
It is easy for one to conclude that decision-making by groups is less desirable based on the tenets of Groupthink Theory. However, McMahon (2017) says that decisions made by groups are often more effective and respected than those made by individuals. If a group is able to address challenges discussed in the next section, then the alternative they would select often have good impact on their organizations. In this section, it will be necessary to look at the specific benefits associated with this approach of making decisions.
Knowledge Sharing
According to Murata et al. (2015), one of the greatest benefits of group decision-making processes is that it facilitates sharing of knowledge. When two or more people come together to make a decision, they will have to share their knowledge and experiences over the issue. When one gives an opinion, members can discuss it by identifying its strengths and weaknesses and how it can be improved. Positive criticism in such discussions also promotes critical thinking among members.
Every team member will know that coming up with a decision over an issue is not enough to convince the members. One must have justification why their decision is the most appropriate. Through such engagements, members become more committed and interested in investigating the issue under investigation to gather facts other than allowing emotions and experiences to inform the decision.
Task Sharing
Task sharing is another benefit of groups when making decisions. Sometimes a decision may need thorough research before making a conclusion. When it is one person involved in the process, a lot of time will be wasted trying to do everything. When working in groups, members can be assigned specific responsibilities. Each member will then share with the team the outcome of the responsibilities assigned to them.
A decision will then be made based on the outcomes of the tasks done by the individual members. The approach is common in marketing strategies where a firm must make a decision based on information from various sources (Fox, 2015). Each marketing representative would be assigned a given task that must be completed within a specified time. The outcome of their tasks would inform the approach that the firm takes in the market.
Peer-Review
Peer-review is another major benefit of group-decision making processes. However, Brantly (2017) says that this only happens in organizations that have established systems and structures of group decision-making processes. In such systems, employees are allowed to make decisions over a given issue and justify their decisions. Group members would then be required to review the decisions of their colleagues and provide feedback based on facts and personal opinion.
One can then go through the feedback provided by the colleagues to identify areas of strength and weaknesses. McMahon (2017) says that although such an approach is time consuming, it creates a learning culture. Members get to improve their knowledge by constantly learning from their peers. It also promotes cohesion.
Challenges Associated with Group Decision-Making
Groupthink Theory identifies significant challenges associated with decision-making by groups. The theory holds that although it is not possible to avoid making decisions as a group, it is important to appreciate that such processes are affected by a number of challenges. In this section of the paper, it is important to look at the fundamental challenges of group decision-making processes.
Avoiding Responsibilities
According to Kaba et al. (2016), one of the biggest challenges associated with group decision-making, as explained in groupthink theory, is the tendency to avoid important responsibilities by group members. The feeling that it is the responsibility of every group member to contribute towards making the decision may make some of him or her lazy and less committed. The problem is common in cases where voting is used to select the most appropriate decision.
Those who feel that they may be outvoted will feel less committed in doing research and coming up with the most effective solution. They will feel that their input is less relevant to the alternative that will be finally selected. It means that such teams will miss the important contributions that would have been made by these team members if they were to remain active.
Procrastination
Procrastination is one of the biggest challenges associated with group decision-making processes. The problem is common when dealing with the younger generation whose are generally influenced to act based on what their peers are doing. Hogg (2013) says, “Generation Y makes decisions in the workplace regarding time to promotion or fair remuneration by comparing themselves against their peers.”
Such individuals would avoid making decisions until such a time that their colleagues in other organizations act on a given issue. The problem with procrastination is that when the team finally settles to make a decision, they are affected by time constraint. They rush to reach a consensus or vote without fully understanding the facts associated with the issue. In such cases, it is often difficult to make the right decision because of the limited research.
Trivialization
Trivialization is another common problem when making decisions as a team. Some people tend to consider some things as being less important or complex than what they really are. Others ignore problems as being minor, expecting normalcy to return after a short while and without a major action being made. Murata et al. (2015) say, “Normalcy biases represent our propensity to regard minor abnormalities as normal.” It becomes a problem when an urgent decision cannot be made because those who should be making it consider the issue as less significant to the organization.
McMahon (2017) says that the problem may be worsened if those who are expected to lead the teams are involved in the trivialization. Such teams may not deliver on their mandate because the leaders will fail to bring together members in time to help in the decision-making process.
Bearing Mistakes of Others
Bearing mistakes of others is another major problem that is associated with group decision-making processes. It is easy and pleasant to enjoy success and benefits resulting from the right and timely decisions made by group members even if one had a contrary opinion. In fact, it is rare for one to admit that they had a contrary opinion to the chosen alternative if the desired outcome is achieved. However, if the chosen alternative fails to work, then many people tend to distance themselves from it. Those who had conflicting opinion, some of which would have had more disastrous outcome, would blame their colleagues for making wrong decisions. Such blame games kill team spirit (Fox, 2015).
It makes team members reluctant to share their ideas in future when another decision is needed. At the same time, it is important to appreciate that when a team makes a wrong decision, then those who had the right opinion but failed to convince members will have to bear the mistake of their colleagues. Bell (2016) “Beyond political realities, groupthink can cause individual loss of life or other forms of human tragedy.” Some mistakes can have disastrous outcome on the organization and the involved parties. It is unfair for one to pay the ultimate price for a mistake committed by others.
Conclusion
Making decisions as a group is not as easy as when it is done by an individual. Groupthink Theory identifies challenges associated with the process of making decisions as a group. Some of these challenges may completely paralyze the ability of the team to make timely decisions in an organizational setting. However, it is clear from the research that it is not possible to avoid group decision-making processes.
It is important to find ways of addressing the challenges through various strategies. The improved communication platform should be used to ensure that members of the team could engage more effectively when they have to make decisions. They have to understand the importance of embracing facts over emotions in such important processes.
References
Bell, M. (2016). First century groupthink: An exegetical case study. Journal of Biblical Integration in Business, 19(26), 27-36.
Beran, T., Kaba, A., Caird, J., & McLaughlin, K. (2014). The good and bad of group conformity: A call for a new programme of research in medical education. Medical Education, 48(9), 851-859.
Brantly, A. (2017). The polythink syndrome: U.S. foreign policy decisions on 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and ISIS. Perspectives on Politics, 15(1), 299-300.
Edman, J. (2006). Group composition and groupthink in a business game. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 33(1), 278-282.
Fox, S. (2015). Relevance: A framework to address preconceptions that limit perceptions of what is relevant. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 8(4), 804-812.
Hogg, D. (2013). Application of groupthink to generation Y decision making processes within a professional services context in New Zealand. International Journal of Business and Management, 8(8), 69-76.
Kaba, A., Wishart, I., Fraser, K., Coderre, S., & McLaughlin, K. (2016). Are we at risk of groupthink in our approach to teamwork interventions in health care? Medical Education, 50(4), 400-408.
McMahon, P. (2017). Human rights protection in global politics: Responsibilities of states and non-state actors. Perspectives on Politics, 15(1), 298-299.
Murata, A., Nakamura, T., & Karwowski, W. (2015). Influence of cognitive biases in distorting decision making and leading to critical unfavorable incidents. Safety, 1(1), 44-58.
Pautz, J., & Forrer, D. (2013).The dynamics of groupthink: The Cape Coral experience. Journal of International Energy Policy, 3(2), 1.
Rodríguez, P. (2017). Conceptual model of communication theories within project process. INNOVA Research Journal, 2(3), 42-51.
Sahin, C. (2014). Managing communication in knowledge-intensive service teams: Groupthink theory revisited. Business Management and Strategy, 5(2), 183-193.