Download
1 / 16
160 likes | 341 Vues
Group decision making . Jargalmaa Erdenebat Social Identity Approach in Organizations Dipl.-Psych. Alina Hernandez Bark. Structure. I. An Overview of Group Decision making research 1. The Bay of Pigs Invasion
E N D
Group decision making JargalmaaErdenebat Social Identity Approach in Organizations Dipl.-Psych. Alina Hernandez Bark
Structure I. An Overview of Group Decision making research 1. The Bay of Pigs Invasion 2. The groupthink model 3. Group polarization research 4. Decision tree and other prescriptive approaches 5. Summary II. Social Identity and Group Decision making III. Discussion
The Bay of Pigs Invasion • The Bay of Pigs Invasion was an unsuccessful action by a CIA-trained force of Cuban exiles to invade southern Cuba, with support and encouragement from the US government, in an attempt to overthrow the Cuban government of Fidel Castro. • Damages: 53$ million worth of aid in exchange for the prisoners; Cuba went on to become a military stronghold for Soviet troops and home to a sizeable arsenal of nuclear weapons targeted at USA.
The Bay of Pigs Invasion(Video: White House administration of John Kennedy)
Question • Why did John Kennedy and his administration make a poor decision?(What factors influenced?) • What leads groups to collectively ‘lose their mind’ • How can they be helped?
The groupthink model by Janis • The Bay of Pigs invasion arose from the Groupthink syndrome. • The groupthink is seen to occur in any small cohesive group, when the members strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. • In groupthink-the groups tends to have both a polarizing and a consensualizing impact on individuals.
Group polarization → After group discussions, individual views become polarized in whichever direction they are already tending.
Decision tree and other prescriptive approaches • Vroom and Yetton’s model: • The decision requires a high-quality solution • The manager has sufficient information to make a high-quality decision on his or her own • The problem is structured • Subordinates acceptance of the decision is likely if they are not involved • Subordinates share the manager’s and organization goals • Subordinates are likely to disagree about the solution.
Social identity and group decision making • Comparative context determines which decisions and decision makers are prototypical for a group. • When social identity is salient, group decisions are consensualized around the prototypical ingroup position • Groupthink is a product of heightened social identity salience in the context of intergroup threat.
According to the principle of meta-contrast, any collection of people is unlikely to define themselves in intragroup as a members of a shared social identity, than in intergroup, that other groups threat to an own group.
Self categorization process • Individuals, who categorize themselves in terms of a common social identity, discuss and negotiate their differences with an expectation, and have motivational pressure to reach agreement.(→mutual social influence) • Accordingly, under conditions of shared social identity salience, group discussion should generally lead to convergence on a prototypical ingroup position.
Social identity model of groupthink (M.Turner and Pratkanis). Groupthink is a product of heightened social identity salience in the context of intergroup threat. • When the threat from an outgroupis associated with negative outcomes for individuals, who are highly identified with a group, the positive self image at all costs will be felt particularly keenly and the group will be polarized.
