Structured Conflict and Consensus Outcomes in Group Decision Making

Pressures for early consensus during group decision processes often lead to poor choices. However, consensus as an outcome of group decision processes is often desirable for implementing choices. We propose and test hypotheses that structured decision making techniques designed to enhance the expression of cognitive conflict will, paradoxically, (1) strengthen group consensus about and individual acceptance of the group S eventual choices, and (2) increase member satisfaction with the group. Faced with a realistic managerial scenario, nineteen groups in this study deliberated using the structured, conflict-enhancing dialectical inquiry (DI) approach; nineteen used the consensus (C) approach. Group consensus on the decision, individual acceptance of the decision, and member satisfaction with the group were higher in the DI than in the C conditions. We discuss implications for group decision aids and for future laboratory and field studies of group consensus on a course of action.

[1]  E. Paul Torrance,et al.  Group Decision-Making and Disagreement , 1957 .

[2]  L. Bourgeois.  STRATEGIC GOALS, PERCEIVED UNCERTAINTY, AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE IN VOLATILE ENVIRONMENTS , 1985 .

[3]  D. C. Feldman,et al.  The Development and Enforcement of Group Norms , 1984 .

[4]  L. R. Hoffman,et al.  Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. , 1961, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[5]  D. Farmer.  Strategies for Change. , 1990 .

[6]  R. A. Cosier,et al.  Cognitive conflict and goal conflict effects on task performance , 1977 .

[7]  A. Lott,et al.  Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: a review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Using a GDSS to Facilitate Group Consensus: Some Intended and Unintended Consequences , 1988, MIS Q..

[9]  David M. Schweiger,et al.  The comparative effectiveness of dialectical inquiry and Devil's advocacy: The impact of task biases on previous research findings , 1984 .

[10]  Kenneth L. Bettenhausen.  Five Years of Groups Research: What We Have Learned and What Needs to Be Addressed , 1991 .

[11]  M. Afzalur Rahim,et al.  Measurement of Organizational Conflict , 1983 .

[12]  V. Vroom,et al.  Leadership and decision-making , 1975 .

[13]  Robert Folger,et al.  Effects of "Voice" and Peer Opinions on Responses to Inequity , 1979 .

[14]  Richard O. Mason,et al.  A Dialectical Approach to Strategic Planning , 1969 .

[15]  P. Nystrom,et al.  Camping on Seesaws: Prescriptions for a Self-Designing Organization , 1976 .

[16]  M. S. Poole,et al.  Communication and Group Decision-Making , 1986 .

[17]  B. Tuckman.  DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE IN SMALL GROUPS. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  John A. Pearce,et al.  Linking technology and structure to enhance group performance. , 1989 .

[19]  Charles R. Schwenk.  Effects of devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry on decision making: A meta-analysis , 1990 .

[20]  Paul B. Paulus,et al.  Psychology of Group Influence , 1981 .

[21]  Jennifer M. George,et al.  Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. , 1990 .

[22]  D. Schweiger,et al.  Group Approaches for Improving Strategic Decision Making: A Comparative Analysis of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Consensus , 1986 .

[23]  Thomas J. Peters,et al.  Thriving on Chaos: Handbook for a Management Revolution , 1988 .

[24]  Gregory G. Dess.  Consensus on strategy formulation and organizational performance: Competitors in a fragmented industry , 1987 .

[25]  David G. Mathiasen.  Groups that work (and those that Don't): Creating Conditions for Effective Teamwork, edited by J. Richard Hackman. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass 1990, 512 pp. Price: $39.95 cloth , 1991 .

[26]  J. Levine,et al.  Progress in Small Group Research , 1990 .

[27]  Peter R. Monge,et al.  Participation, Satisfaction, and Productivity: A Meta-Analytic Review , 1986 .

[28]  B. Fisher,et al.  Decision emergence: Phases in group decision‐making , 1970 .

[29]  C. H. Castore,et al.  Determinants of support for group decisions , 1978 .

[30]  S. Floyd,et al.  The strategy process, middle management involvement, and organizational performance , 1990 .

[31]  Dean Tjosvold,et al.  Participation: A Close Look at Its Dynamics , 1987 .

[32]  Paula L. Rechner,et al.  Experiential Effects of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy and Consensus Approaches to Strategic Decision Making , 1989 .

[33]  E. Sundstrom,et al.  Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. , 1990 .

[34]  B. Aubrey Fisher,et al.  Small Group Decision Making , 1980 .

[35]  A. Hare,et al.  Handbook of small group research , 1962 .

[36]  H. Triandis,et al.  Member Heterogeneity and Dyadic Creativity , 1965 .

[37]  D. Schweiger,et al.  The utilization of individual capabilities in group approaches to strategic decision‐making , 1989 .

[38]  M. E. Shaw.  Group dynamics : the psychology of small group behavior , 1971 .

[39]  D. Norburn,et al.  Planning for Existing Markets: Perceptions of Executives and Financial Performance , 1975 .

[40]  R. Folger.  Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of voice and improvement on experienced inequity. , 1977 .

[41]  W. Bennis,et al.  A Theory of Group Development , 1956 .

[42]  C. Nemeth.  Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[43]  L. A. Hayes.  The use of group contingencies for behavioral control: a review. , 1976, Psychological bulletin.

[44]  J. McCann.  Strategies for Change: Logical Incrementalism , 1980 .

[45]  Victor D. Wall,et al.  Small Group Conflict , 1987 .

[46]  Barbara W. Keats,et al.  Environmental Assessment and Organizational Performance: An Exploratory Field Study. , 1987 .

[47]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Knee-deep in the Big Muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. , 1976 .

[48]  Paul B. Paulus,et al.  Basic group processes , 1983 .

[49]  L. R. Hoffman,et al.  Differences and disagreement as factors in creative group problem solving. , 1962, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[50]  H. Kelman.  PROCESSES OF OPINION CHANGE , 1961 .

[51]  M. Rosenberg,et al.  The Logic of Survey Analysis. , 1968 .

[52]  Charles R. Schwenk.  The Essence of Strategic Decision Making , 1988 .

[53]  L. Bourgeois.  Performance and consensus , 1980 .

[54]  Richard L. Priem.  Top management team group factors, consensus, and firm performance , 1990 .

[55]  H. Simon,et al.  Models of Man. , 1957 .

[56]  S. E. White,et al.  The effects of group decision-making process and problem-situation complexity on implementation attempts. , 1980, Administrative science quarterly.

[57]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  Procedural Justice, Participation, and the Fair Process Effect in Groups and Organizations , 1983 .

[58]  L. J. Bourgeois,et al.  Five Steps to Strategic Action , 1984 .

[59]  Dean Tjosvold,et al.  Effect of Concurrence, Controversy, and Consensus on Group Decision Making , 1985 .

[60]  A. Gero.  Conflict Avoidance in Consensual Decision Processes , 1985 .

[61]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[62]  H. Kelman.  Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change , 1958 .

[63]  Kenneth H. Price,et al.  Process and Outcome Expectations for the Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Consensus Techniques of Strategic Decision Making , 1991 .

[64]  I. Janis.  Victims Of Groupthink , 1972 .

[65]  Roger C. Pace.  Personalized and Depersonalized Conflict in Small Group Discussions , 1990 .

[66]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Threat-rigidity effects in organizational behavior: A multilevel analysis. , 1981 .

[67]  Charles R. Schwenk,et al.  Agreement and thinking alike: ingredients for poor decisions , 1990 .