To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
Over the past 9 weeks of working in our house groups, we have gone into and exited a number of problem resolving and decision making procedures. Although we have produced some excellent services, the total procedure might be improved. In order to make our group more successful in executing our selected solutions we need to: enhance on problem solving and decision making methods, using conversation questions successfully with factor to consider of dispute management styles in the group. Using these concepts can assist accomplish true group agreement and increase the groups efficiency.
In accordance with the functional theory, 5 job requirements need to be satisfied in order to ensure success. Our group requires improvement in 3 of 5 of the task requirements: talking about and developing requirements, identifying options, and completely assessing option (strengths and weak points) based on criteria.
To refocus the group on enhancing our execution of the job requirements connected with functional theory, I hypothesize that PMOPS and PERT would be extremely effective.
Verified writer
Proficient in: Decision Making
5 (204)
“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”
PMOPS, acronym for procedural model of issue fixing, is a versatile standard that leads through stages of issue solving process. We need to also enhance our review process of procedures and proposed final decision. Using systematic problem resolving treatments, like PMOPS, keeps groups of point. This type of treatment ensures group doesn't miss any essential steps, which assists in producing reliable services. As a group we need to produce and rank our criteria, based upon value to group members. Clarifying what is very important to specific group members promotes group satisfaction and supplies insight to personal worths.
To the identify other alternatives, making use of critical thinking methods can be efficient for instance: brainstorming and problem mapping.
As we move through the decision making process and begin proposing solutions, a member should be listing all that are discussed. Often there are too many options to be thoroughly discussed due to time constraints. When encountered with the issue of time, narrowing the list of solutions becomes paramount. Some of the solutions may be similar, and therefore can be combined. If combining doesn’t eliminate enough options, we can take a vote on which are most favored. Voting, as a process of elimination, could assist members who are less verbal in stating their opinion (Nancy and Albert). However, charting pros and cons can be a more effective and objective procees of elimination. All options need to be assessed for meeting out criteria. we seldom establish criteria at the start of a discussion, or follow through with any of the previously mentioned techniques. After selecting a solution we must implement it, preferably in my opinion, using PERT. " Pert helps do this by asking those responsible for implementation to makes a chart showing deadline dates for completion of various tasks and the names of individuals or groups responsible" (Adams, 2012).
We can also improve our decision making process by effectively using discussion questions, to unearth true nature of problem/charge. Discussion questions allow the group to locate a solution, for problem, question, or issue, that focuses on what "should" be done. The use of vague or limiting question s could be stifling production of alternatives. " As an impact variable, the discussion question has a far-reaching effect on the systems throughput process and its subsequent output. We should try to avoid using either-or structure and including answers in questions. This is a manipulative ploy that is often used in our group, especially by me. Also using ambiguous or double-barreled vernacular can mislead or confuse the group. I am also a perpetrator of this, often used to persuade opposing members. Thoroughly discussing the problem also keeps group from becoming solution minded prematurely. My group often does this, jumping headfirst in deciding on a solution.
We completely skip evaluating a generating alternatives. This can limit options that may be more beneficial for the group to perform better. PMOPS and other systematic procedures my correct this frequent group behavior. Putting to use the different conflict management styles in the group could possibly aid in our reducing the time used during our decision making process. If we better understand the styles in play we can become more cohesive and increase member involvement. Our group is seemingly fairly cohesive, but lack of member involvement (Albert and Nancy) possibly prove otherwise. Their lack of involvement, avoidance style, limits their input of opinions. So we cannot be absolutely sure where they stand and if they agree with decisions. Christina exhibits some avoidance, as it relates to conflict, and switches to collaborative style to eventually referee lengthy arguments.
Mason usually takes on a competitive style, usually arguing adamantly and proposing supportive evidence for his arguments. When this becomes fleeting, he turns to a more collaborative style to meet his needs. I was observed to be quite competitive until stalemate is reached, and the transition into an accommodating style is used to reach a consensus. I have assessed the problem solving and decision making processes my group most readily uses, as well as flaws in its execution. Our group could really benefit from the use of systematic problem solving procedures like, PMOPS and PERT. Coming to the realization that discussion questions are important, has influenced me to use them in discussion. They are necessary for clarifying the problem and coming up with the best possible solutions. With that being said; understanding and proper application of our conflict management styles will aid in all areas needing improvement.
Bibliography
Adams , K. , Galanes , G. (2012). Communicating in groups: Applications and skills New York: McGraw-Hill.
Larson , C. E. , Lafasto , F. M. J. , (1989). TeamWork: What Must Go Right, What Can Go Wrong. Newbury Park: Sage.
Problem Solving & Decision Making Techniques. (2016, May 05). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/problem-solving-decision-making-techniques-essay
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
