Why Group Decision-Making Is More Effective Than Individual Decision-Making

Answer

Why Group Decision-Making Is More Effective Than Individual Decision-Making

Group work entails all kinds of activities with groups which are the basic ingredients to enable the group members engage in collaborative problem solving (Denjamin, Bessant, & Watss, 1997). Group decisions in group work is a practice that involves more than two individuals working towards the same goal. In a group, according to Beckmann et al. (2015), it requires two or more individuals to communicate and interact with each other to decide while on the other hand, an individual does not. The type of leadership used in the group does have an influence on effective decision making. Individual decision making, on the other hand, entails decisions being made without the input of a group or a decision reached regardless of the group’s opinion (Melkonyan & Safra, 2015). Although the traditional decision-making approach of individual decision making can be effective for a manager who does not require the inputs of a group, group decision making is more effective in the contemporary context as it ensures that the views of the members of the group are included in the final decision. This essay will be discussing how group decision making is more effective than individual decision making.

In group decision making, some of the models which can be employed include consensus and consultation. In consensus decision-making, several options are posed to the group and the most popular option is used to decide. However, consultation entails taking the opinions of the group into consideration before making the ultimate decision (Beckmann et al., 2015). Both methods of group decision-making call for the leader to respect the opinions and inputs of the group in the decision-making process. There are a number of reasons on why group decisions are more effective than individual decision making. In groups, Perez et al. (2018) assert that there is a wide range of information that can be exchanged with different views and perspectives on the issue that is being focused on. Sharing each other’s information increases understanding, clarifies issues, and facilitates movement towards a collective decision. Synergy is an idea that goes by the saying “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” and this applied to the group because when making decisions, its reasoning can be keener than any of the members. A group’s motivation increases when deciding on how to make quality decisions because when group members collaborate, discuss and question, they come up with more complete and sturdy solutions (Yang et al., 2017). However, group decision-making has the disadvantage of consuming too much time taken in consultations and consensus to ensure that all their information is incorporated into the final decision (Perez et al., 2018).

Individual decision making has the advantage of timely decision making as an individual; most likely the leader; will decide quicker than it would take if an entire group was to be consulted. Additionally, according to Beckmann et al. (2015), prompt decisions can be made especially when the decision to be reached is one of an emergency. There is a greater accountability with individual decision making as individuals will not escape responsibility. Moreover, apart from time, individual decision-making saves money and energy which are spent on assembling the members of the group and making deliberations on issues of interest (Melkonyan & Safra, 2015). Furthermore, it has been established that individual decisions are more focused as well as rational compared to those of groups. However, one of the cons of individual decision making is that decisions are mostly subjective as a leader will make the decision based on his/her own intuition and views. Additionally, an individual’s decision making is deprived of the full information which is used in groups when making decisions. As such, the final decisions reached by individuals have various loopholes.

The group dynamics play a critical role in the originality and quality of their outcome (Adams, 2015). One of the issues arising from group decision-making is that it is impeded by the existence of different leadership styles and approaches from each of the group members. It has been known that leaders can affect the quality of the group decision making (Janis. 1982: Janis & Mann. 1977). Johnson, Johnson, and Stanne (2000) identify a variety of different group leadership approaches, each of which has implications for how groups make decisions. An effective leader will be able to understand their position in the group, be able to control the group’s situation, recognize the appropriate degree of the task, and gather all resources needed as outlined by Milson (1973). Due to the fact that a large group consists of people with varied views and opinions as well as styles of leadership, reconciling them presents an enormous challenge in group decision making. For instance, some of the group members can have a transformative leadership style which means that they will challenge the status quo while others can favor a Laissez-faire leadership style where group members will be allowed to make decisions (Yang et al., 2017). These differences will lessen the ability of the group to make effective decisions.

Having an effective group decision making can result in increased productivity. However, when the decisions made from the group are not effective, then their effect will be adverse. One of the fundamental elements which will affect group decision making is the level of collaboration and consultation (Perez et al., 2018). In specific, it is critical that all key members of the group are consulted and their opinions sought. Group facilitation and consultation will ensure that there is a proper process for the getting of the opinions of the group members and reaching of a conclusion as to the most popular decision. Additionally, choosing the group decision-making method is fundamental in ensuring that the combination of the individual views and the generation of specific incomes.

Group decision making has been applied in many areas of real life such as lawmaking, and medicine among other areas. In specific, lawmakers use group decision making to establish the various alternatives which exist in terms of the policies and the adoption of the most effective ones (Yang et al., 2017). For instance, in most parliaments, most of the motions are voted by members and the most supported issues are passed into law. Additionally, group decision making is applied in the medical sector where different healthcare practitioners deliberate on the best treatment options for a patient and thus, form an informed decision as to the next course of action. Such aspects make group decision making vital.

In conclusion, although the traditional decision-making approach of individual decision making can be effective for a manager who does not require the inputs of a group, group decision making is more effective in the contemporary context as it ensures that the views of the members of the group are included in the final decision. Group decision-making ensures that the decision made is objective and rationalized. However, it is time-consuming and has a low level of accountability. Individual decision making is quicker and more accountable despite the decisions being subjective. Group decision making is vital in lawmaking and medicine as it ensures the making of the most effective decisions through consultations and in other times consensus.