A Briefing Sheet on Common Biases in Group Decision Making Case Study Solution
If you are in the process of creating a case study or conducting a group decision making activity, you will definitely benefit from a quick overview of common biases that can influence the outcome of the task. This briefing sheet contains useful information to help you understand and avoid these biases, including a list of common biases, a brief explanation of how each one affects the process, and recommended actions. You'll also find a sample case study to assist you in identifying and developing a solution to overcome these biases.
Problem Statement
When group decision making, there are a number of variables that affect the quality of the process. These variables include the group's composition, the size of the group, and the decision at hand.
One of the most common biases to plague group decision making is groupthink. In its simplest form, groupthink is the tendency of competent members to make bad decisions because of a flaw in the group's decision-making process.
This can result in a variety of pitfalls. For example, a lack of information sharing can reduce the quality of a group's decisions. Brainstorming can also be counterproductive.
In addition, group processes were often arranged to maximize conformity. Groups tended to discuss some types of information more than others.
There is also a group-specific version of the heuristic of all heuristics. Research has shown that a group's collective memory can improve decision-making by improving the recall of important information.
It has been estimated that the average member of a group will bring in only one or two types of information to the table. However, when information is shared between group members, the total amount of data available to the decision-maker is increased.
Another cognitive bias to keep an eye out for is the availability heuristic. The availability heuristic is a tendency of group members to ignore information that only a select few members have access to.
Case Study Solution
If you're trying to make a good decision with a group, there are plenty of factors to consider. Groups tend to share unique information and draw on a larger volume of data than the individual. They also have superior transactive memory.
Several studies have shown that groups make better decisions. A good example of this is the ability to recognize the differences between multiple candidates. In one study, groups that had to pick a winner from two presidential candidates were able to do so despite a low likelihood of success.
Despite these advantages, some groups struggle to make the right decisions. Some common biases and other social forces impede group decision making. For instance, a lack of transparency can prevent group members from considering the merits of alternative opinions. Another problem is a tendency to side with the majority.
Fortunately, researchers have identified several tactics to reduce the impact of in-group bias. One of these is the use of diverse groups. Having diverse groups ensures a wider array of perspectives.
In the real world, this isn't always the case. Employees may not have looked at the last five hires, or they may not have surveyed the company's hiring policy for the past ten years.
This type of cognitive bias is difficult to overcome. It's often the case that group members ignore information that is only shared with a select few. However, if they are allowed to bring in the relevant data, they'll see it as more valid.
Porters Five Forces
In the early 1980s, Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter identified five factors that shape a market. He called them the "Five Forces." The Porters Five Forces Briefing Sheet on Common Biases in Group Decision Making gives a brief overview of these forces, including how they relate to one another and how they affect business strategy.
The first force is the number of competitors. The number of rivals is a critical factor in determining the profitability of a business. When there are more competitions, the company has less power to raise prices.
Another factor is the quality of the competitors. For example, if there are many products in a market that are of poor quality, it will be more difficult for a company to compete.
The third factor is the cost of finding new customers. The cost of acquiring new customers will determine how much profit a business can generate. A high price of a product can make it difficult for a company to stay in a competitive industry.
Lastly, the fifth factor is the ability of consumers to switch from a seller to a competitor. If the customer can easily replace the seller's offering, the consumer has the most power.
Porter's Five Forces model is used to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a company. This can help the business owner to determine which industries to target, and how to improve their profitability. It can also be used to identify opportunities that the business could take advantage of.
PESTLE Analysis
PESTLE analysis is a strategic management tool that helps companies identify the external forces affecting their organization. It provides contextual information about the business's direction and growth targets. In addition, it can be used to identify skills gaps and job reductions, as well as future workforce needs.
PESTLE is a useful strategic framework for analyzing and planning processes, such as product development, marketing and sales, and strategic business and technology planning. When used in conjunction with a SWOT analysis, PESTLE is a powerful tool for strategic decision making.
PESTLE analysis is useful in a number of scenarios, including assessing industry-wide risks. It can help you prioritize your business activities, assess future workforce needs, determine the validity of existing products and services, and define new product development.
PESTLE is one of the most widely-used strategic tools. The acronym stands for Political, Economic, Social, Technical, Legal, and Environmental factors. Using this model, you can identify the main overarching factors in your industry and determine if they are relevant to your business and to your long-term sustainability.
As uncertainty in the market continues to grow, organizations need to better understand and monitor external factors that could affect their business. The PESTLE framework is a simple and effective tool for identifying and understanding these external factors.
The PESTLE framework can be used in a variety of scenarios, including identifying external environmental factors and analyzing opportunities. It can also be used to identify threats and risks.
Financial Analysis
Whether you are an employee or a boss, you should be aware of the three major types of biases that plague your staff. It's time to take a hard look at each one, so you can better your company's bottom line. For instance, in the workplace, the sexiest hexadecimal number you've ever seen may not be as sexiest as it sounds. The most obvious example is a bias against women, but that is a subject for another time.
In the same vein, a bias that focuses on a single individual or a small team could have disastrous results. As an example, a manager with a starting salary of $80,000 might ignore the fact that several female employees have been promoted to managerial positions. Similarly, a group of employees may be oblivious to the fact that several minorities have been hired in recent months. Likewise, you will be hard pressed to come up with an effective group decision making policy when each of your top guns have the same view of the office. Fortunately, a few well-informed guidelines can avert a disastrous group decision making scenario. One such guide is the ol' fashioned frank-talk. Having a sound understanding of biases is the first step to improving morale and productivity.
Recommendations
Group decision making is often a challenging task. There are many factors that can affect the quality of a group's decision-making process. A few of these are known as cognitive biases.
Groupthink is one of the more common biases to emerge from a group. Essentially, groupthink occurs when a group is unable to converge on an appropriate answer. Instead, it makes decisions that are more extreme than individuals' initial opinions.
Another common type of bias is confirmation bias. This is where individuals tend to favor the opinion of others. For example, they are more likely to say that a given idea is the best, even if it is not.
Groups also tend to share information with each other. This increases the total amount of data that can be considered when deciding. However, it has its downsides. In an ideal situation, each individual has access to all of the relevant facts about a situation.
The process of generating new ideas through the sharing of information and ideas amongst members of a group may be a better way to go than brainstorming alone. It also provides a way to spot mistakes in a group's decision-making process.
One of the most common pitfalls of group decision-making is the lack of shared information. If a group only has the information of a few individuals, then their decision-making abilities will be severely limited.
A Briefing Sheet on Common Biases in Group Decision Making Case Study Solution
This is just a sample partial case solution. Please place the order on the website to order your own originally done case solution.
Related Case Solutions & Analyses:
Airbus A3XX: Developing the Worlds Largest Commercial Jet (A)
Meeting the Diversity Challenge at PepsiCo: The Steve Reinemund Era
Social media: The New Hybrid Element of the Promotion Mix
Cirque du Soleil–The High-Wire Act of Building Sustainable Partnerships
HubSpot: Inbound Marketing and Web 2.0
Symbian Google & Apple in the Mobile Space (A)
Sanctuary Soft: International Expansion Strategies
U.S. Subprime Mortgage Crisis: Policy Reactions (B)
The Walt Disney Company and Pixar Inc.: To Acquire or Not to Acquire
HP: The Computer is Personal Again
