Individual / Team Decisions

Individual / Team Decisions

George Edw. Seymour

What do Asch, Brehm, Farley, Festinger, Milgram, Shakespeare, Sherif, Simon, Zimbardo, and a host of other social scientists have in common? They inform us that human behavior, and presumably its predisposing cognitive (human decision?) process, often have been less than rational at best or not a conscious choice at worst. And this is by no means a recent phenomenon. [1]

Under most normal circumstances we tend to assume that the groups we associate with, either socially or at work, behave rationally. In fact, individuals and organizations require that assumption, and engage in activities and processes to support it (Ritti and Levy, 2007).

“TheFirst serious attempts to study team processes began in the 1950s and 1960s, with a focus largely on military teams and team processes that enabled them to function more effectively under conditions of extreme time pressure, high stress, ambiguous and incomplete information, and severe consequences for actions taken. Much of the impetus for team research over the years has been tied to team failures, particularly those associated with high visibility (e.g. aircraft accidents, military accidents) (Ilgen 1999).” [2]

“Back in the 1960s Wilfred Bion, founding father of the Group Dynamics programme at the Tavistock, occasionally noticed what he took to be religious responses on the part of people in his Small Group. Members would sometimes behave in a manner suggesting they believed that in some God-like miraculous way the consultant (Bion) would solve all their problems. In the example mentioned in his book, Experiences in Groups, Bion took it that the response came from the person’s unconscious, since at the overt level he claimed to be an atheist. If Bion is correct there certainly seems to be a case for linking such behaviour with implicit religion, though of an immature and regressive kind. Margaret Rioch, who introduced the Tavistock model to the United States, made the connection more overt in a well-known paper published in 1971, ‘“All we like sheep…” [Isa. 53.6]: Followers and Leaders’. The reference is to dependency, one of the Basic Assumptions that Bion claimed operated in groups, and which he saw as socially expressed in the religious institution. Rioch’s point is to highlight Isaiah’s insight that ‘leaders bear the iniquity and also the virtue of the group’, or to put it in psychoanalytic terms, they tend to have the sins and the redemption of the group projected onto them.” [3] [4]

“While groups can often be quite productive, it is indeed true that groups can prevent tasks from being accomplished. I expect that everybody has experienced the frustration of groups that get bogged down. What is it that so frequently leads groups to get stuck?....Bion perceived three basic assumption groups: the dependency group, the fight-flight group, and the pairing group. Dependency groups operate on the assumption is that there is a leader (not necessarily the therapist) who can magically gratify the group's need for security and nurture. Another Basic Assumption is that the group must protect itself. It does this by either fighting or running away from something threatening. Naturally enough, Bion called this the "fight-flight" group. Since it is not unusual (especially in a therapy group) for the Work-Group tasks themselves to feel threatening, it is not uncommon for the nominal leader to be avoided or fought against.” [5]

Here are some of the common pitfalls that await the unwary decision maker.

Common Pitfalls Associated with Individual Team Decision Making
Pitfall [6] / Concept
Analogy / Analogies are unacceptable forms of proof.
Anchoring / Give disproportional weights to some information instead of waiting as long as possible, to have more or all the information.
False Hopes / Hoping for something to happen over which we have no control over its outcome.
Misattribution of causes / Attribute task or project success to your personal skills and hard work, and your failures to unavoidable external forces.
Sunk Cost / Repeat the same decision because you have invested so much in this approach (or your current job) that you cannot abandon it or make another decision
Symbolic Decision / One will fight hard for a policy and then be indifferent to its implementation.
Toe the line / When faced with questions such as "What should I do?", "How should I live?” etc., you may "Toe the line", that is, follow the group, don't disagree and do what others are doing in your profession.

According to Arsham (2007), the characteristics of "Good" decision makers include:

· Having a high tolerance for ambiguity.

· Having a well-ordered sense of priorities.

· Being a good listener.

· Always building the consensus around a decision.

· Avoiding stereotypes.

· Remaining resilient with feedbacks.

· Being comfortable with both soft and hard input.

· Being realistic about cost and difficulty.

· Avoiding a decision minefield.

Moreover he states that, “In the decision-making modeling process we must investigate the effects of presenting different decision alternatives retrospectively; that is, "as if" you have implemented your strategy. The decision has already been made under a different course of actions. The key to a good decision is reflection before action, therefore, the sequence of steps in the above decision-making modeling process must be considered in reverse order. For example, the output (which is the result of our action) must be considered first.”

Things to Think About

As noted by Kozlowski and Ilgen (2006), “given the centrality of work teams, it is more than a bit remarkable that we have a strong individual-centric perspective in the western world. We school our children as individuals. We hire, train, and reward employees as individuals. And, yet, we have great faith that individuals thrown together into a team with little thought devoted to team composition, training and development, and leadership will be effective and successful.”

Organizations have become too complex, as has their competitive environment, to waste the team potential. We require more efficient models of human decision process and how that interacts with others in teams. Thus we should start with self-examination to improve our own process, and the following table is a small step in that direction.

Four Common Decision Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them [7]
Rationalization:
”When we rationalize, we place the blame of our defeat or failure upon outside persons or circumstances. This is a defense mechanism used to take the sting out of a difficult situation. We devise self-satisfying but flawed reasoning for our behaviors and actions (or lack of action). It seems logical in the moment, but it simply disconnects us from the truth. / No improvement is possible unless we take responsibility for all of our actions, inactions, choices, and behaviors. A choice to take action, even when things seem most difficult, sends a powerful message to yourself about what you are creating and what you believe about your own self-worth. Write down what you want to achieve, what is important to you. Then create an excuse money jar. Every time you hear yourself making an excuse for why you cannot or will not take action today, put a pre-defined amount of money into your jar. When you decide to move forward on your goal again, use the money to reward yourself for showing up and making your life important!”
Perfectionism:
”Perfectionism can be a double-edged sword. It has the capacity to provide either great joy and personal growth . . . or misery. Perfectionism can be a gift that offers with it a driving energy, determination, and the ability to achieve success. Used as a positive characteristic, it has the capacity to motivate you to achieve your dreams. However, if perfection-ism is combined with a self-punishing attitude, it can drive you into feelings of inferiority, despair, and inaction. Driving yourself to do everything perfectly creates unrealistic self-imposed rules, stress, and quitting when things do not go perfectly. Realize that it is okay to make mistakes and allow yourself to be flexible. / Perfectionism is, in its purest form, an inner calling to find and fulfill one's destiny; to realize one's potential. For this to occur, perfectionism must be joined with the courage to follow your own inner passion. Perfectionism contains the energy to continually explore and search and grow and evolve. Come to understand that you grow because that is who you are. You are not trying to become perfect or better than others, rather exploring new avenues of self-expression. You achieve not to gain approval from others, but because you were born to journey.”
Procrastination:
Sometimes procrastination is glaringly obvious. However, procrastin-ation also comes in many guises. There are infinite subtle ways to keep your self from taking positive action. Sometimes people make it look like they are "working" hard to figure out how to reach their goals. They stay very busy "trying" to "solve" the problem. If you notice this behavior in your own life, you may fool others and even yourself, but really, you are just stalling. You are either taking action to make your dreams come true or not taking action. If you are not taking action, that is okay, but notice how your choices make you feel. Be honest with yourself. Do your choices bring your more joy? Or, do they decrease the amount of joy in your life? / Remind yourself that you do not have to take action. You alone decided that your goal was important to you, and you are choosing to utilize free will to make it happen. Go back to basics and reaffirm why you first committed to creating change. Read your goals and notice if they are still important to you. This will lessen the feelings of resentment and rebellion. If having your goal is still important, commit to taking daily action. Even if it is small action. Do not allow yourself to put things off until tomorrow or Monday. What can you do today that says in no uncertain terms that your decisions and dreams are important to you? No one owes you a great life - except for you. Embrace your opportunity and responsibility to affect your life. Not only do you deserve to have what you want, you have the power to make your dreams happen.
Creative Avoidance:
Cleaning, laundry, shopping, mowing the lawn. You are just too busy, with too many chores, and too many obligations. The dog, the kids, the house, and your elderly parents. These excuses seem so real, because in a way they are real. They exist. However, the truth is that you make time for the things that you feel are important. If everything and everyone comes before you, what you are really saying is that your life and your happiness does not matter to you, and it just is not your responsibility. Face up to excessive busyness. Of course, your dreams are important! Put yourself at the top of your priority list and take action everyday. / Your life is all up to you! No matter how bad you have got it, you alone determine your thoughts, attitudes, and behaviors. No more leaving important decisions up to others. No more blaming others for what goes wrong. Hold yourself accountable for your actions. At the middle of each day take an honest assessment about whether your current choices feel good or not. Participate in a straightforward reflection about whether you have put forth effort into your goal. Did you do something to move yourself forward and allow success? If not, that is okay; it is only midday and not too late. Take action now. Go for it. Your success and your happiness are in the choices you make right now.

Resources:

A Collection of Keywords and Phrases for Decision Making: http://home.ubalt.edu/ntsbarsh/stat-data/DsAppendix.htm

Crupi, J. A. (2005). Rubrics cubed: are we prisoners of ORSA-style decision makings. Defense Acquisition Research Journal, December. http://tinyurl.com/29jbgg

Davenport, T. H. & Harris, J. G. (2005). Automated Decision Making Comes of Age. MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2005, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 83-89. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/smr/issue/2005/summer/14/

Grove, W. M. (2006). Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction: The Contribution of Paul E. Meehl. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 115 (2) 192-194: http://www.psych.umn.edu/faculty/grove/114meehlscontributiontoclinical.pdf

Harvey, J.B. (1974) The Abilene paradox: The management of agreement, Organizational Dynamics, 17, 17-48.

Kozlowski, S & Ilgen, D. (2006). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_7_3_article.pdf

Loach, S. (1991). Study Group Consultancy: Styles of Interpretation: http://www.continents.com/SGC2.htm

March, J. G. Sevon (1984). Gossip, Information, and Decision-Making. Advances in Information Processing in Organizations. Greenwich, CT, JAI Press, Inc. http://projects.ischool.washington.edu/chii/PowerPoint/short_defense_v7.ppt

Meehl PE. (1954). Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction: A Theoretical Analysis and a Review of the Evidence. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. See also:

Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. New York, Harper & Row. See also: Mintzberg: The Managerial Roles: http://www.bola.biz/mintzberg/mintzberg2.html

Pareto's Law: http://www.businessballs.com/quotes.htm#pareto_principle_pareto's_law

Power, D. J. (2000). Supporting Business Decision Making: http://dssresources.com/dssbook/ch1sbdm.pdf

Prisoner’s Dilemma. Ethical Spectacle, Volume 1, Number 9: http://www.spectacle.org/995/

Rioch, M. J. (1970). Group relations: Rationale and techniques. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 20, 340-355. Her brief bio is here: http://www.continents.com/rioch.htm

Rioch, M. J. (1971). ‘All we like sheep-‘(Isaiah 53:6): Followers and leaders. Psychiatry, 34, 258-273.

Ritti, R. & Levy, S. (2007). The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know. Hoboken: Wiley.

Shalman, A. (2007). Using Compliments to Control Communications: http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/using-compliments-to-control-communication-2.html

Simonton, Dean Keith (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, Personal, Developmental, and
Social Aspects. American Psychologist, 55, 151-158.

Teach, E. (2004). Avoiding Decision Traps. CFO Magazine: http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/3014027?f=home_featured

The Tavistock Method: http://www.wbcgrouprelations.org/tavistockmodel.htm