Traditional Organization Meeting Style Is Not Conducive to Group Decision-Making

Abstract

Traditional group meeting style in an organizational setting is a common platform for collaborative decision-making. This setting can be disruptive and fraught with bias, resulting in unhealthy conflict and failure to accomplish the goals of the meeting. The outcome of said meetings can offer false representation of support for a given decision. The author sought out to devise a new decision-making model that will attempt to remove unwanted bias from the decision-making process. Common attributes that result in bias include the lack of information and under time constraints, decisions made without enough background information and in a perceived limited time frame. The makeup of the organization meetings with supervisors, subordinates, mentors can create bias when votes are verbal, not anonymous. This paper explores problems with group decision-making and why the current method provides a false representation of support. Current methods for group decision making are defined and include the Naturalistic Decision-Making model, Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis, and Decision Analysis. The Nominal Group and Delphi techniques are explored as options available, but not successful in this situation. Based on the current models, techniques, and the needs of the organization meetings, a successful alternative to decision-making in a group environment is characterized and explained.