In his book "Principles of Human Relations," Maier provides guidelines on how to choose the appropriate method of decision-making. Works great since 1952.
First, you have to ask yourself two questions:
How important is it to make the best possible decision (quality)? High-quality decisions require thorough analysis and expertise.
How much does the decision impact the people involved, and how much do they care about the outcome (concern)?
Then, you choose the method of decision-making:
High Quality, Low Concern: If the decision requires high quality but the group is not highly concerned, the leader can make the decision alone or to delegate it to the expert(s).
High Quality, High Concern: If both quality and concern are high, the leader should involve the group in making the decision (discussion leader, decision-making facilitated by the expert).
Low Quality, High Concern: If the decision doesn’t require high quality but the group is very concerned, it’s beneficial to consult with the group to ensure they feel heard (group discussion).
Low Quality, Low Concern: If neither quality nor concern is high, the leader can still decide alone, or just to flip a coin and save time.
Quality vs. Acceptance dilemma
When planning a facilitated group discussion, a leader may face the dilemma: ask the whole group for the input, or ask experts to provide several options first? Asking experts first ensures the high quality and feasibility of these options, and asking the whole group ensures high acceptance of the decision. But there is also “but”:
Focus on quality (experts first) can lead to lower acceptance because group members might feel their input is undervalued or ignored, reducing their commitment to the decision.
Focus on acceptance (group first) can lead to lower acceptance because group members might feel their input is undervalued or ignored, reducing their commitment to the decision.
Are you struggling with a similar problem now? Email us at info@r2p.solutions, we will figure it out.
