Effective Group Problem Solving
How to Broaden Participation, Improve Decision Making, and Increase Commitment to Action
by
Book Cover & Preview Text
Chapter One
How ParticipationImproves Problem Solving
Despite the many frustrations that go with conventional group problem solving, studies show that the benefits gained are usually worth the effort. Typically, several concerned and knowledgeable people will outperform one person in solving problems which do not have standard solutions. Because it increases understanding and commitment, participation increases the likelihood of good solutions and of their effective implementation. Participation helps us to know the whys as well as the whats that are involved. It gives us a personal stake in what happens. Other benefits of participation are enhanced team spirit, increased respect for an acceptance of the leader, and increased self-respect. We turn now to some concrete evidence.
People Want to Participate
Sirota (1969) surveyed IBM employees in forty-six countries about the type of supervision preferred. Consultation and joint decision making were clearly favored. Samuel (1972) obtained a similar result when he surveyed several hundred employees in nineteen organizations, representing six different industrial settings. Those surveyed indicated a practically uniform desire for greater participation, collaboration, and mutual responsiveness than they were getting. Lawler, Renwick, and Bullock (1981) found that a group of 2,300 employees wanted significantly more influence over work-related decisions. A survey by IDE Research Group (1981) of 8,828 employees in 134 establishments in twelve countries found a desire for greater involvement in work-related decisions on the part of foremen and middle managers as well as workers. Surveys show that a large group of priests and nurses also feel this way. A survey of 801 priests indicated that perceived influence in determining policies and actions was the most important factor associated with their satisfaction (Carey, 1972). Seventy-five percent of a group of 197 supervisory and nonsupervisory nurses, from all departments and levels in two urban hospitals, indicated that they felt deprived of participation on the job (Alutto and Vredenburgh, 1977). These and other studies make it clear that there is an increasing demand on the part of better educated and rights conscious group members for a bigger role in defining, analyzing, and solving problems that concern them, both in the community and in the workplace. One survey, in particular, dramatizes this trend: the percentage of employees who rated their managements favorably dropped from 40 percent in 1975-79 to just over 20 percent in 1980-84 (O’Boyle, 1985). Undoubtedly, reluctance on the part of managers to share influence is a key reason for this decline. As Lawler observes: “People are becoming less comfortable with a society in which work organizations are autocratic while the political and other features of their lives are democratic.” (1986, p. 19).
Participation Produces Better Results
On the average, several people will produce more and better solutions to a nonroutine problem than will a single person. This is the conclusion of a review of research studies which compare individual problem solving with conventional group problem solving (Shaw, 1976). Participation by group members facilitates understanding. Good solutions and challenging goals are valuable only to the extent that they are understood. Participation in goal setting and in problem solving increases our understanding of what is to be done and of how it is to be done (Latham and Saari, 1979). Even when solutions or goals are well understood, they have limited value unless they are fully accepted. High commitment distinguishes superior performers from poor performers, highly satisfied performers from dissatisfied performers. Participation in group problem solving is one of the most effective means for gaining commitment. We have abundant research evidence to support this conclusion, as the following studies, conducted in a variety of work environments, demonstrate.
Formats
Book Details
About the Book
This book provides a set of proven and easy-to-use procedures for conducting problem-solving meetings more efficiently and productively, with less frustration, effort, and conflict. The effectiveness of conventional meetings is seriously limited by such factors asthe added time required for the use of in-meeting rather than pre-meeting introduction of ideas;meeting time being allocated on the basis of the order in which individuals get the floor, rather than on the relevance and importance of the ideas being presented;an individual’s fear of being punished for publicly opposing the ideas of a boss or other important person;reluctance on the part of low-status members to contribute;the pursuit of personal objectives on group time; time required to brief absentees, latecomers, and consultants on what has transpired; andcompulsive talkers.
Author William M. Fox presents an approach called the Improved Nominal Group Technique (INGT) that eliminates or minimizes these limitations. He also tests of its use in many different, ongoing groups to show that most participants indicate, anonymously, that they prefer it to what they had been doing.
“Very interesting and practical … It can serve as a handbook for the novice or a reference book for the experienced problem solver.”—James Showkier, supervisor of Training and Development at TRW
“This is a book of basic theoretical importance as well as a manual for practitioners … A new and distinctive contribution.”—Eric Trist, founder of the sociotechnical systems approach to organizational design
“This short, highly readable book should find its way into the hands of managers truly willing to tap the wellspring of employee creativity and motivation … its prescriptions and recommendations, if followed, could do much to improve organizational productivity.”—William Werther, Samuel Friedland Professor of Executive Management, University of Miami
About the Author
William M. Fox is a professor emeritus of management at the Graduate School of Business Administration of the University of Florida and a consultant. He received his B.B.A. and M.B.A degrees in organizational behavior from the University of Michigan in 1948 and his Ph.D. degree in organization and management theory from Ohio State University in 1954. Fox has conducted leadership studies for the Office of Naval Research, studied Japanese management as a Senior Fulbright Research Scholar, and served as a management consultant to the air force. He has published several books and numerous articles. He is a member of the American Psychological Association and a Fellow in the Academy of Management. Bill was a Fulbright Lecturer at the Finnish School of Economics and the Swedish School of Economics in Helsinki, Finland in 1958. He was a Fulbright Senior Research Scholar studying Japanese management and lecturing at Kyoto University in Kyoto, Japan in 1974. He is a member of the American Psychological Association and was elected a Fellow in the Academy of Management.Additional book publications: He was editor of READINGS IN PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT FROM FORTUNE, Henry Holt, 1957 (Revised Edition, 1963); author of THE MANAGEMENT PROCESS: AN INTEGRATED FUNCTIONAL APPROACH, Richard Irwin, 1963 (a finalist for the 1963 McKinsey Foundation Book Award; an Italian edition was published in 1969); AMERICAN VALUES DECLINE: WHAT WE CAN DO, Bookman, 2005; BEHAVIOR MODELING TRAINING FOR DEVELOPING SUPERVISORY SKILLS, (Instructor and Trainee Manuals, 2009), Information Age Publishing. Co-Principal Investigator for P developing effectiveness criteria for the evaluation of research activity, NASA, 1970-72. Principal Investigator for Longitudinal Studies On The Effects of Leader Behavior, US Office of Naval Research, 1970-74.