The Advantages and Disadvantages of Group Problem Solving
When we listen to someone present information or make recommendations, we usually hear only one side of a situation. The presentation may be biased or based on self-interest, or it may simply be wrong. When important issues are involved, we need to minimize the risk of such errors.
One way to minimize this risk is to empower a small group of people to investigate, analyze, share information and perspectives, and make recommendations about a problem.
Group problem solving has many advantages. When people from different cultures share their various ways of seeing a problem, they enrich our understanding.’ We begin to see the world through the eyes of others, and this may help us see misconceptions and biases in our own thinking. Listening to others’ points of view also can stimulate creative thinking about problems.
In well-run problem-solving groups, people on all sides of an issue have a chance to discuss the similarities and differences of their perspectives. Through discussion, they may discover some areas of agreement that can form a basis for resolving differences. Additionally, in small, face-to-face groups, people are often more willing to examine their differences and may feel free to explore compromises or new options for action. Because of these advantages, organizations often use groups to work on important organizational problems. In fact, it is estimated that approximately twenty million meetings take place each day in the United States.
Although working in groups has many advantages, there are also some problems that can make groups ineffective. Cultural gridlock, the inability to communicate because of profound cultural differences, can stand in the way of effective group deliberations. For example, an organization’s marketing people and its research and development scientists may see the world quite differently. Culturally diverse participants may bring different perspective,assumptions, expectations, priorities, agendas, procedures, ways of communicating, and standards of protocol to meetings. The scientists might fancy blue jeans and beards, an anathema to the marketing folks. In any organization, unwritten rules may dictate that some people speak first, while others defer or even remain silent. These differences may sidetrack constructive discussions.
Dealing with cultural gridlock is never easy. To minimize its impact, you
should:
• Allow time for people to get acquainted before getting down to business.
• Provide a comfortable environment. Be sure you have enough room so that people don’t feel crowded.
• Distribute an agenda so that people know what to expect.
• Minimize technical communication problems. Summarize discussions. Post key points. Discourage the use of jargon that some participants
may not understand.
• Be sensitive to cultural differences in protocol and nonverbal communication.
Tags: Reference