Communication and Team Decision Making
Part 1: Sharpening the Team Mind: Communication and Collective Intelligence
A. What are some of the possible biases and points of error that may arise in team communication systems? In addition to those cited in the opening of Chapter 6, what are some other examples of how team communication problems can lead to disaster?
B. Revisit communication failure examples in Exhibit 6-1. Identify the possible causes of communication or decision-making failure in each example, and, drawing on the information presented in the chapter, discuss measures that might have prevented problems from arising within each team’s communication system.
Part 2: Team Decision-Making: Pitfalls and Solutions
A. What are the key symptoms of groupthink? What problems and shortcomings can arise in the decision-making process as a result of groupthink?
B. Do you think that individuals or groups are better decision-makers? Justify your choice. In what situations would individuals be more effective decision-makers than groups, and in what situations would groups be better than individuals?
Read and respond to your classmates’ posts. See posting/discussion requirements.
Be sure to support your work with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources and any additional sources.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ postings.
Respond to at least 3 of your colleagues’ posts in one or more of the following ways:
• Ask a probing question, substantiated with additional background information, evidence or research.
• Share an insight from having read your colleagues’ postings, synthesizing the information to provide new perspectives.
• Offer and support an alternative perspective using readings from the classroom or from your own research in the Campbellsville University Library
• Validate an idea with your own experience and additional research.
• Make suggestions based on additional evidence drawn from readings or after synthesizing multiple postings.
• Expand on your colleagues’ postings by providing additional insights or contrasting perspectives based on readings and evidence.
Communication and Collective Intelligence:
Team and industrial organization verbal exchange are very necessary for the smooth waft of facts and for environment-friendly delegation of obligations in any organization. Communication might also desire to make or smash an organization. However, in today’s present day society greater than a few biases exist in team communication. Below are few such biases:
1. Failure or lack of ability to listen.
2. Location from the workplace.
3. Cultural and racial differences.
4. troubles and flawed attitude.
5. Problems bobbing up due to position or authority in an organization.
6. Poor written communication.
7. Gender bias.
8. Lack of knowledge.
9. Extreme Groupthink and team cohesion.
Possible procedures to keep away from the above problems:
1. Managers and leaders want to stress the significance of listening before starting discussions.2. Gather assembly minutes and distribute the factors mentioned in the conferences to all involved participants.3. Mix or damage the companies usual due to cultural, racial similarities.
4. Managers desire to deal with human beings with ego troubles and put their point at some point of for the multiplied excellent of the team.
5. Adopt a “speak up” organizational lifestyle to foster ideas and creativity.
6. Good records sharing and education applications can make up for lack of know-how or specialized skill sets.
7. Proofreading in the past than sending out written verbal change ought to reduce bias in crew communication.Groupthink, its key symptoms, shortcomings, man or woman, and crew preference making:In 1972, the ordinary social psychologist, Irving Janis got here up with the time period – Groupthink which refers to the phenomenon when of poor or erroneous selection making thru a crew of individuals. Such organizations or persons are usually a team comprising of folks with related backgrounds and competencies or humans with various backgrounds. Groupthink can take place due to group pressure, time pressure, excessive crew cohesion, negative moral judgment, terrible leadership, lack of facts or so on. It has been located that groupthink is more typical when the crew includes members with related backgrounds.
Though groupthink is just a theory, it does exhibit sure key signs and symptoms which assist affirm if a group is experiencing Groupthink. Below are some of the symptoms:
1. Sometimes organizations take immoderate risks which can be due to an illusion of invulnerability.2. Lack of recognizing warning symptoms and hasty determination making.
3. Increased faith in an agenda may want to lead to unethical choice making.
4. Poor dealing with of struggle decision interior and outside the team ought to occur.
5. Members resist arguing or challenging the group’s views or intentions. Any deviation from crew consensus is now not entertained.
6. There is an prolonged assumption that the crew consensus is constantly unanimous.
7. Sometimes, wonderful people disguise information that may favor to damage them or the crew leader or the group’s views, crew brotherly love and crew decisions.
Problems and shortcomings associated to Groupthink:
1. Poor evaluation or consideration of feasible alternatives.
2. Unclear objectives.
3. No evaluation of the dangers worried in taking the decisions.
4. Lack of information.
5. Selective bias in preference making and statistics processing.
6. Extreme crew brotherly love leading to predictable work patterns.
7. Lack of presence of contingency plans and their implementation.
8. Poorly described scope and planning.
9. Failure of team reflexivity.
10. Lack of worthwhile outcomes.
Decision making suffers when a crew is involved. Leaders and managers typically come throughout the quandary of which is higher – person choice making or crew choice making. It depends on the state of affairs and the effect that the desire will have on the human beings involved.If the crew consisting of only a single individual, then the decision-making device is straightforward as it only issues one person. However, when the whole team can also be impacted, it is fundamental to discuss to all the folks in the crew earlier than making the selection in order to keep away from struggle and loss of motivation. For example, when the group’s input is no longer needed, the group chief or supervisor can make the decision except impacting the group. In cases, when the decision entails the complete group, the choice maker can both pose many picks to the group, collect feedback and then select the group’s consensus preference (consensus choice making) or assume about the inputs at the same time as making a determination (consultation desire making).
Thus, both a man or lady and crew decision making have their professionals and cons. An correct evaluation be made earlier than taking a selection involving agencies or single individuals.
A. The word bias has an adverse undertone, yet it’s frequently accidental and a consequence of heuristics– alternate mental ways that enable individuals to make brisk, effective choices. Biases function admirably in light of the fact that they’re frequently deliberate and unsurprising. However, issues emerge when people constantly depend on this technique for basic leadership, barring or overlooking extra data.
The word bias has an antagonistic implication, yet it’s regularly accidental and an aftereffect of heuristics– easy mental routes that enable individuals to make brisk proficient decisions. Biases function admirably because they’re regularly orderly and unsurprising, yet issues emerge when people routinely depend on this strategy for decision making, barring or overlooking extra data.
B. Breaking down a portion of the normal purposes behind communication disappointment can help a business to maintain a strategic distance from these association entanglements.
Inability to Communicate Fully
In a work environment overwhelmed by fast answers using content and email, points of interest can be lost, disregarded or misjudged. Replying “yes” to a progression
Of inquiries in an email isn’t clear. Reacting “alright” when inquired as to whether you can survey an archive doesn’t address the topic of where the report dwells, what sort of audit is asked for, or when alters should be returned.
Solution: Make email asks for clear and itemized and makes reactions finish and complete. Before you press Send, ask yourself:
Accepting Someone Else Has the Ball
When you’re a piece of a gathering meeting to generate new ideas, a gathering email or a gathering venture, there’s dependably the possibility to expect another person has an undertaking secured. At the point when everybody accepts another person is taking care of things, the ball unavoidably is dropped, which prompts blame dispensing, fault and missed due dates.
Solution: In any group dynamic, there should be a go-to person to set and illuminate parts at the end of dialog or level-headed discussion. A group email that elucidates who is doing what and when streamlines group activities.
A.Some possible key symptoms:
What the group think is a kind of congruity tends to increment as group cohesiveness increments. Group think includes nondeliberate concealment of critical thoughts because of the disguise of the group’s standards.
Generalizations: Victims of groupthink hold stereotyped perspectives of the pioneers of “foe groups,” that “They are evil to the point that bona fide endeavors at arranging contrasts with them are unjustifiable,” or that “They are excessively powerless, making it impossible to excessively imbecilic, making it impossible to bargain adequately with whatever endeavors we make to vanquish their motivations.” Organizations where contending groups exist together ought to be careful about this manifestation because the harm of between group assault and potentially miscommunications can neutralize the totality of efficiency of all groups.
Mind guards: Lastly, casualties of groupthink here and there name themselves as mind guards to shield the pioneer and kindred individuals from antagonistic data that may break the carelessness they shared about the adequacy and ethical quality of past decisions.
B. A few organizations work with high accentuation on individual decision-making, while
Others center on coordinated effort and group decision-making forms. Either approach can work.
· Individual decision-making can expand proficiency since you have one individual dissecting the circumstance and making a judgment. This productivity additionally implies less time and cost goes into the decision.
· In group decision situations, you have an opportunity to pull in thoughts, and contemplation’s from individuals with different foundations, abilities, and perspectives. Numerous organizations utilize work groups since this shared procedure can prompt more thoughts and better quality decisions
Kowert, P.A. (2002). Groupthink or deadlock: When do leaders learn from their advisors? Albany: Blackwell Publishing.
Correspondence is the main test of any group pioneers or undertaking administrators look upon when constructing a group. Correspondence is one of the primary parts of a group which can build the profitability and drive extends forward. Conceivably this is the place the mythic lies: in a delineation reiterated boundless conditions yet each time in another specific circumstance and with a result undetermined. The “little thought” of the old lady watches out for the bounce forward, the “set breaker” in the vernacular of frameworks considering. There is an instigate reversal of the statutes that guide their framework. We thought about groups that used PC mediated correspondence (CMC) to explore whether the total information is similar or differing when packs work using CMC. A total understanding variable did not ascend among groups using CMC, suggesting that total information shows itself contrastingly depending after setting.
The diverse pathologies that harrow small assembling frames are eminent and have been the subject of broad research. One may sensibly be concerned that more joint exertion will essentially mean more issues, more interagency battles. In any case, as cleared up here, unexpectedly the usage of sorted out logical methods regularly empowers analysts to keep up a key separation from an impressive parcel of the ordinary small assembling process entrapments. Some social affair method issues are obvious to any person who has shared in trying to land at decisions or judgments in a get-together gathering. Principles for how to run social occasions feasibly are by, and large open, anyway most assembling pioneers disregard to take after them. Key individuals are truant or late, and individuals are badly prepared. Recalling the genuine target to the desire for the disasters with the correspondence disappointments, the alliance should reinforce the two-way input structure to guarantee accomplishment with the basic organization process. In ignorant, passive consent. The social gathering considers the deal with likeness looks for the extension as get-together cohesiveness increases. Indiscreet comparability combines non-consider cover essential examinations in light of shroud of the get-together’s benchmarks.
Barlow, J. B., & Dennis, A. R. (2016). Not As Smart As We Think: A Study of Collective Intelligence in Virtual Groups. Journal Of Management Information Systems, 33(3), 684-712.doi:10.1080/07421222.2016.1243944
Calder, L., Mastoras, G., Rahimpour, M., Sohmer, B., Weitzman, B., Quinn, A., & … Parush, A. (2017). Team communication patterns in emergency resuscitation: a mixed methods qualitative analysis. International Journal Of Emergency Medicine, 10(1), 1-9. doi:10.1186/s12245-017-0149-4