Case Study: Decision-Making Pitfalls

Submitted By neelum06
Words: 1251
Pages: 6

Chapter 3, 4, 5 Teams

Decision-Making Pitfalls ▪ Groupthink ▪ Escalation of commitment ▪ Abilene paradox

Team processes and Outcomes ▪ Symptoms of Groupthink • Incomplete survey of alternatives • Incomplete survey of objectives • Failure to reexamine alternatives • Failure to examine preferred choices • Selection bias • Poor information search • Failure to create contingency plans

▪ Avoiding Groupthink • Monitor team size • Provide face-saving mechanism for teams • Risk technique • Invite different perspectives • Appoint a devil’s advocate • Structure discussion principles • Establish procedures for protecting alternate viewpoints • Second solution • Beware of time pressure

▪ Escalation of Commitment ▪ [[Determinants]] – Project, psychological, social, structural

▪ Avoiding escalation of commitment to a losing course of action • Set limits • Avoid Bystander effect • Avoid tunnel vision • Recognize sunk costs • Avoid bad mood • External review

Causes of Team Imbalance *Company tries to build teams whose members have complementary skills and background o The team as Boss’s Clones o The team as Usual players o The team as Those Most Suited for the task o The team as One Personality type

CYBER NOTES: Characteristics of Effective Teams ▪ Teams are common place in business o Synergy ▪ Team effectiveness o Members share a common goal o Members work together o Members communicate frequently and openly with one another o Members trust and are willing to cooperate with each other o Members accept conflict as a healthy and have a process for working through conflict o Members have a feeling of “we” about the project rather than “I”

Successful Teams: The 3 C’s ▪ Effective teams perform the assigned task at a high level and create satisfying experiences for their members. ▪ Three C’s: cohesiveness, coordination, and communication ▪ COHESIVENESS: - Extent to which the team members are attracted to and motivated to remain part of the team. - How to? ( Task, goals, and norms

• 1. Task = team members share their interpretation of the assignment and drafts a mission statement. • 2. Goals = relating to the task statement which is followed by structured deadlines. • 3. Administrative Norms vs Interpersonal Norms o Administrative Norms: Standards of behavior that focus on the operations of the team o Interpersonal Norms: define the behaviors expected from members in interacting with each other.

o COORDINATION: - Synchronization of the team’s activities - It’s working together, or forming a action plan. • Plan of action details: what, who, when. • Coordination easier: o Detailed plan of action with individual responsibilities clearly described o Communication among individual team members o Cohesiveness of the team o Agendas of all meetings

o COMMUNICATION: - Frequent and open communication among the team members. - Centralized vs. decentralized • Centralized: all communications relating to the team are funneled