Transcript Chapter 4 PowerPoint - The Group in Society

Communication
in Small Groups
Chapter 4
Synergy
• aka, Assembly effect bonus: the group judgment
is superior to the avg. individual judgment
• Common explanations for synergy (the group
whole being
– greater than the sum of its parts) include
complementary group member expertise,
– original insight generated through interaction, and a
“hive effect,” whereby working
– side by side with fellow group members motivates
people to put forth more effort than they would
otherwise.
Decision Rules
• Executive
• Proportional Outcomes
in this case, it means average ranking
• Random selection
randomly assign group ratings
• Simple majority rule (50%+1)
• Supermajority rule (2/3 majority required)
• Consensus
unanimity, with “standing aside” allowed
Moon Landing exercise
Sample Calculations
• Oxygen
– you ranked it #5
– experts ranked it #1
– give yourself a score on that item of 4
abs. value of |5 – 1|
• Map
– you ranked it #1
– experts ranked it #3
– give yourself a score of 2 on that item
abs. value of |1 – 3|
Space Survival
Ranking of Items by Experts
Oxygen
Water
Map
Food
FM receiver
1
2
3
4
5
Rope
First aid kit
Parachute
Raft
Flares
Pistols
Milk
Heating unit
Compass
Matches
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Fills respiration requirements
Replenishes loss by sweating, etc
One of principal means of finding directions
Supply daily food required
Distress signal transmitter, possible communication
with another ship
Useful in tying injured together, help in climbing
Oral pills or injection medicine available
Shelter against sun’s rays
CO bottles for self propulsion across chasms, etc.
Distress call when line of sight possible
Self propulsion devices could be made from them
Food mixed with water for drinking
Useful only if party landed on dark side
Probably no magnetized poles, therefore useless
Little or no use on moon
Groupthink and Group Structure
Beneficial
procedures
High group
cohesion
Structural faults
(homogeneous,
isolated, lacking
impartial leadership
and procedures)
Provocative context
(high stress from
external threats and
low self-confidence)
Groupthink
Bad
Decisions
Group Decision Support Systems
Degree of
consensus
GDSS with
decision guidance
(vs. without)
+
R2 = .66
Faithfulness
of appropriation
+
avg. R2 = .40
Duration of
discussion
Decision quality
and confidence
Embedded System Framework
Task complexity
and importance
Formal codes
and bylaws
Procedural expertise
and traditions
Resources available
for training/support
Designated group
longevity and mission
Procedural legal
requirements
Norms for arranging
physical space and
comm. networks
Strong reciprocity
Political culture
(democratic norms,
power relationships)
Group structure:
comm. network,
arrangement,
discussion
procedures, and
decision rule
Faithfulness of
procedural
appropriation
Discussion
functions and
sequencing
Group
development
Degree and
intensity of conflict
Procedural
knowledge,
expectations,
and preferences
Consideration
of others’ views
Quality and
representativeness
of group decision
Duration of
discussion
Confidence in
(and commitment to)
decision and group
Different Communication Networks
The Chain
The Wheel
The Circle
The Comcon
• For each type of network, name a type of small group
that you would expect to use it.
• For each type, name a situation in which it might be most
effective for a group to use it?
DA & DI
•
•
•
•
Assignment of Devil’s Advocacy and
Dialectic Techniques
Read scenario
Discuss and draft recommendations
Class reflections on exercise
Likelihood of convening group again in future
Future motivations of
group and leader
Discussion
functions
Task importance
Local procedural
requirements
Likely continuity
of the group within
the organization
Group structure:
insularity,
group maturity,
power concentration,
leader impartiality,
and decision rule
Time pressure
Relational cohesion
Stress felt from
external threat
Member homogeneity,
political motives,
morality, vulnerability
Organizational norms
Timing of
convergence
Development of
contingency plans
Response to
negative feedback
and dissent
Shifting attitudes
and cohesion
Potential
external threat
to organization
Effect of decision on addressing
or aggravating external threat
Self-censorship
and mindguarding
Quality of
group decision
Decision
acceptance,
adherence, and
implementation
Group member
satisfaction with
leader, process,
and decision