DOC PREVIEW
ECU COMM 1001 - Group Decision Making

This preview shows page 1 out of 3 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Lecture 10Current LectureFunctional Perspective on group decision MakingGroup decision MakingHirokawa and gouran believe that group interaction has a positive effect on decision makingThe functional perspective illustrates the wisdom of working togetherFunctional perspective- describes and predicts task group performance when four communication functions are fulfilled1)analysis of the problemtake a realistic look at current conditionsdetermine the nature, extent and probable cause of the problemEXAMPLE: problem not enough parkingcause: every one is aloud to have cars2)goal settingestablish criteria for judging proposed solutions. If the group fails to meet these the decision will likely be driven by power or passion rather than reasonEXAMPLE: limits on who can driveraising tuition to make new lots3) identification of alternativesstress the importance of having a number of different viable options from which to choosegroups need to identify courses of action4)evaluation of positive and negativesome group tasks have a positive bias-spotting the favorable characteristics of alternative choices is more important than identifying negative qualitiesother group tasks have a negative bias-the downside of each alternative is more important then identifying the positive qualitiesPath to good decision makingall four functions need to be accomplished to maximize the probability of high quality decisionno single function is inherently more central/ important as long as a group covers all four functions the can make a good decision the route taken is not the key issueCommunication and fulfilling the functionstalk is conduit through which information travels between participantsverbal interaction makes it possible for members to share information catch and fix errors and influence each othercommunication is best when it does not obstruct or distort the free flow of ideas1) Promotive- interaction that calls attention to one of the four decision – making functions2) Disruptive- interaction that detracts from the groups ability to achieve the four task functionsmeeting in a group you always find something else to talk about3) counteractive- interaction that refocuses the groupADIVE FOR THISE WHO KNOW THEY ARE RIGHT Be skeptical to personal options’do not let the persuasive efforts of other self assured group members take the group off courseunstupported intuition is untrustworthy“I just have a good feeling about this”Working in groupsReflective thinking- thinking that favors rational consideration over hunches or pressure from those with powerhow can your boss pressure u to make a decisionthey can threaten your job1) recognize symptoms of illness2) diagnose the cause of the ailment3) establish criteria for wellness4)consider possible remedies5) test to determine which solutions will work6)implement or rescribe the best solutionEthical refection: Habermas discourse ethicshabermas ethical approach seeks after the fact discussion of what we did in a particular situation and why we decided to do itDISCOURSE ETHICS ideal situations in which diverse participants could rationally reach a consensus on universal ethical standardsValidity of any ethical approach reached to extend that 3 requirements are metaccess for all affected partiesargument to figure out the common good justification or universal applicationComm 1001 1st Edition Lecture 10Current LectureFunctional Perspective on group decision Making Group decision Making - Hirokawa and gouran believe that group interaction has a positive effect on decision making - The functional perspective illustrates the wisdom of working together - Functional perspective- describes and predicts task group performance when four communication functions are fulfilled o 1)analysis of the problem  take a realistic look at current conditions  determine the nature, extent and probable cause of the problem  EXAMPLE: problem not enough parking  cause: every one is aloud to have cars o 2)goal setting  establish criteria for judging proposed solutions. If the group fails to meet these the decision will likely be driven by power or passion rather than reason  EXAMPLE: limits on who can drive  raising tuition to make new lots o 3) identification of alternatives  stress the importance of having a number of different viable options from which to choose  groups need to identify courses of actiono 4)evaluation of positive and negative  some group tasks have a positive bias-spotting the favorable characteristics of alternative choices is more important than identifying negative qualities These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute. other group tasks have a negative bias-the downside of each alternative is more important then identifying the positive qualities Path to good decision making - all four functions need to be accomplished to maximize the probability of high quality decision o no single function is inherently more central/ important - as long as a group covers all four functions the can make a good decision the route taken is not the key issue  Communication and fulfilling the functions - talk is conduit through which information travels between participants - verbal interaction makes it possible for members to share information catch and fix errors and influence each other - communication is best when it does not obstruct or distort the free flow of ideas  1) Promotive- interaction that calls attention to one of the four decision – making functions  2) Disruptive- interaction that detracts from the groups ability to achieve the four task functions - meeting in a group you always find something else to talk about  3) counteractive- interaction that refocuses the group - ADIVE FOR THISE WHO KNOW THEY ARE RIGHT Be skeptical to personal options’ - do not let the persuasive efforts of other self assured group members take the groupoff course - unstupported intuition is untrustworthy o “I just have a good feeling about this” Working in groups - Reflective thinking- thinking that favors rational consideration over hunches or pressure from those with power o how can your boss pressure u to make a decision  they can threaten your job 1) recognize symptoms of illness 2) diagnose the cause of the


View Full Document

ECU COMM 1001 - Group Decision Making

Download Group Decision Making
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Group Decision Making and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Group Decision Making 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?