Dr. Aly, O.
Computer Science
Purpose
The purpose of this discussion is to discuss the research group decision-making methods. The discussion will include the Delphi technique, and at least two methods with a comparison among these methods.
Discussion
There are different techniques in group decision-making. These techniques include Brainstorming, Normal Group Technique, Delphi Method, Dialectical Inquiry (Sarkissian, 2002). The techniques in group decision-making also include the “Plop” Method” (Ozcan, Misir, & Kheiri, 2013; Schwartz, 1994), Decision by Authority Rule (Schwartz, 1994), Decision by Authority without Consultation (Minnesota, 2007), and Decision by Authority after Consultation (Minnesota, 2007). Moreover, the group decision-making techniques also include Average of Group Member Opinion (Minnesota, 2007), and Decision by Minority Rule (Minnesota, 2007; Schwartz, 1994). The decision by Majority Rule (Minnesota, 2007; Schwartz, 1994) also known as “Voting and Polling” (Schwartz, 1994), Decision by Experts (Minnesota, 2007), and Consensus (Minnesota, 2007) are also group decision-making techniques. The two group decision-making techniques for this DB are limited to the Delphi method, and to the Plop Method.
The Delphi method is described as “a general way of structuring the group communication process and making it effective enough to allow a group of individuals, functioning as a whole, to deal with complex problems (Saizarbitoria Iñaki, Arana Landín, & Casadesús Fa, 2006). It is also described as a systematic process attempting to obtain group consensus resulting in much more open and in-depth research as each member of the group has a unique contribution to identify a new aspect of the problem for more research (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). The Delphi method is also described as “a panel of experts is asked individually to provide forecasts in a technical field, with their views summarized and circulated for iterative forecasting until a consensus is reached” (Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls, & Ormston, 2013). The Delphi method a commonly used technique for research in the fields of medicine or sociology (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). The techniques of Delphi are rooted in the social representation more than in statistics representation. This social representation is based on views of experts in the field of the research and investigation (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). The key factors to this type of research are the selection of the members of the panel which should be based on their knowledge, capabilities, and independence (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). It is highly recommended that the panel should include at least seven members and at most thirty members (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). Studies show that when the panel has a large group of experts, many of them do not demonstrate sufficient knowledge or capabilities, and accordingly, they withdraw from the panel prematurely increases (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). To minimize such premature withdrawal from the panel, it is critical that the experts must be selected carefully and receive the information about the objective of the study (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). The selected experts should be notified of the estimated time required for their participation, and the potential of the research and possible benefits they can obtain by participating in such a study (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). Delphi method minimizes the danger of dominant influence of any of the panel members by not identifying the members when expressing their opinions (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006). Another success factor for Delphi method is rooted in the writing of the questions to be included in the different questionnaires (Saizarbitoria Iñaki et al., 2006).
The “Plop” method as a group decision-making technique works by providing different ideas about a subject and arguing them until the group reaches consensus on one of them (Ozcan et al., 2013; Schwartz, 1994). It is described to be simple and commonly used technique (Ozcan et al., 2013). However, it is not regarded to be appropriate for all types of group decisions (Ozcan et al., 2013). In (Ozcan et al., 2013), the “Plop” method is described similar to (Ozcan et al., 2013). However, (Schwartz, 1994) elaborated on the technique indicating that a member from the group proposes an idea before anyone else in the group, followed by another member proposes another idea until the group eventually finds one and agree upon it to act on (Schwartz, 1994). The result in shooting down the original idea before it is considered and the rejection of all other ideas, the members who proposed these rejected ideas feel their proposals have “plopped” (Schwartz, 1994). The member feels ignored and possibly rejected (Lauby, 2015). In (Rebori, NA) the “Plop” method is described as “no decision” technique where members avoid making decision consciously or unconsciously and thus make the decision not to decide (Rebori, NA). In this techniques member jumping from one topic to another, allowing the member to shift the topic before a decision is reached and by the “plop” (Rebori, NA). The plop is a board decision by “omission” (Rebori, NA). Thus, it is a decision not to decide (Rebori, NA). While the “Plop” method is common, it is the least visible technique for group decision making (Ozcan et al., 2013). The “Plop” method can be very useful when a person just refuses to believe the idea has any merit (Lauby, 2015).
References
Lauby, S. (2015). Essential Meeting Blueprints for Managers: Packt Publishing.
Minnesota, U. O. (2007). Typical Methods of Group Decision Making. Retrieve from http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@ncr/documents/webcontent/convert_274389.pdf.
Ozcan, E., Misir, M., & Kheiri, A. (2013). Group decision making hyper-heuristics for function optimisation. Paper presented at the Computational Intelligence (UKCI), 2013 13th UK Workshop on.
Rebori, M. K. (NA). Community Board Development: Series 5. University of Nevada, Retrieved from https://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/cd/other/fs9856.pdf.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers: Sage.
Saizarbitoria Iñaki, H., Arana Landín, G., & Casadesús Fa, M. (2006). A Delphi study on motivation for ISO 9000 and EFQM. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 23(7), 807-827.
Sarkissian, A. (2002). Different Techniques in Group Decision-Making. Retrieve from https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/different-techniques-group-decisionmaking-17366.html.
Schwartz, A. E. (1994). Group decision-making. The CPA Journal, 64(8), 60.
Think and Knowledge Tank 