Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 753bc8-NjgyZ


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups


Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups Advantage of Groups Core Assumption-Diversity Is Good Member differences in information, knowledge and perspectives ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:48
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 13
Provided by: UTA75
Learn more at:


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups

Groupthink As Routine In Decision Making Groups
  • Advantage of Groups Core Assumption-Diversity Is
  • Member differences in information, knowledge and
    perspectives leads to better decision making.
  • Diversity only leads to better decision making
    when it leads to the elaboration of task relevant
  • The deeper and more extensive consideration of
    task-relevant information may lead diverse groups
    to outperform more homogeneous groups on tasks
    with clear information processing and
    decision-making requirements

  • Think of a team of radiologists,
    anesthesiologists, and surgical nurses.
    High-quality performance requires that team
    members tell each other about the different
    issues involved in the specific operation (e.g.,
    how long the operation will take, what kind of
    surgical instruments are needed, where the
    fracture is) they need to process the
    information, opinions, and perspectives
    introduced by other team members to understand
    the implications

Characteristics Associated With Groupthink Found
In Ordinary" Groups.
  • Characteristics are
  • 1. Concurrence seeking pressure for all to be
    on the same page.
  • 2. Suppression of dissent self-censoring or
    pressure from others
  • 3. Selective group attention attend to shared
  • 4. Illusion of consensus Abilene Paradox
  • Can occurs even when antecedents of groupthink
    may not be there present
  • 1. Member of a cohesive group
  • 2. Charismatic Leader The leader that takes an
    initial position.
  • 3. Isolation of group from qualified outsiders.
  • 4. Crisis Situation
  • 5. Time Pressure

Need For Cognition Scale
  • 18 is considered "low" and a score of 90 "high"
    There is little guidance offered the differences
    between a score of 40 and one of 50, for example.
  • It relies on self-reporting. Therefore, the NCS
    evaluates how an individual perceives his or her
    cognitive motivations.
  • Furthermore, an individuals mood and affective
    state may influence his or her perception, which
    adds another variable to the survey results. 
  • Try to norm based on class averages.

Individual Cognitive Style and Contribution to
Poor Decision Making
  • Need For CognitionThis describes how individuals
    differ in their intrinsic need for and enjoyment
    of cognitive activities (thinking, analyzing,
  • High need for cognition individuals
  • Enjoy cognitive stimulation (mind games)
  • Preference for complex tasks
  • Willing to commitment effort and desire for
    understanding  (persistence seek why)

  • Base judgments and beliefs on hard information
    and rational considerations
  • Seek out, scrutinize, and use relevant
    information when making decisions and solving
  • Desire new experiences that stimulate thinking

  • Low Need For Cognition
  • Tendency to ignore, avoid, or distort new
    information-more close minded
  • More likely to rely on intuitive processesmatch
    with experiences
  • Use heuristics (mental short cuts) in making
    decisionsquality and price associated
  • Less open to new experiences
  • Lower innovativeness

  • Applied To Team Processes
  • Higher need to cognition people are likely to
  • Find the process of finding common ground a
    positive challengeintegrating divergent opinions
  • Willing to process large amounts of information
    in reaching decision.
  • Will enjoy the possibility to probe different
    alternatives and suggestions.
  • More actively encourage team members to share
    different perspectives

  • Individuals With Low Need for Cognition
  • See the task of reviewing and reconciling
    different perspectives as tedious and annoying
  • Get bored or frustrated with in depth discussion
  • More likely to be used heuristics in making
    judgments about issues-who favors the position
    and how similar they are to that individuals.
  • May be quicker to force a decision

  • Decision Outcomes
  • When tasks calls for elaboration of information
    to increase the likelihood of a good decision
    teams that are higher on average on Need For
    Cognition will perform Better.

  • Is need for cognition a fixed quantity that is
    not malleable. Individuals can not change.