Introduction
Making decisions is a crucial aspect of business life that influences an organization’s performance and direction. It has always been controversial to choose between collective and individual decision-making. The situation at the Mudge Paper Company illustrates the significance of these collective decisions. In this instance, the notion that including the group may have produced better outcomes for the decision to sell the company is supported.
Case Background
You are the CEO of Mudge Paper Company and Lauren’s boss. You have come into the office early on the day after the Memorial Day Holiday to find Lauren’s report on your desk explaining the events of the Friday before and her subsequent decision. You are not happy because this is why you wanted group decisions, and, as a result, you would like to bring Lauren up on the carpet. However, you decide to take a moment and collect your thoughts.
Analysis
I understand the importance of gathering all perspectives and making group decisions, especially regarding important issues like selling the company. For this reason, I would be disappointed to find a report on my desk from Lauren explaining that she has decided to sell independently without involving the group. From Lauren’s perspective, she may have felt an urgency and confidence in her judgment that led her to decide alone. Lauren may have believed that the group decision-making process could sometimes be time-consuming and inefficient and that she had the necessary experience and information to make the right choice.
On the other hand, as CEO, I wanted to make sure that the decision-making process was comprehensive and inclusive, utilizing the knowledge and skills of the different team members. I tried to include the group to encourage teamwork, creativity, and a sense of ownership among the workers. I wanted to use the team’s collective intelligence to make informed judgments considering various viewpoints, potential dangers, and long-term effects. Moreover, I aimed to build a healthy work environment by involving the group and developing a sense of shared responsibility. In light of the current situation, I chose to debate Lauren’s choice with her on the carpet.
I’ll let her discuss her thinking at the meeting and hear what she says. I will also make it evident that her choice to forego the group’s participation violates the established procedure and jeopardizes the values of cooperation and shared decision-making I have been advocating. I will carefully assess the issue before deciding whether or not to proceed with the sale, considering how it will affect the team’s trust and unity, the company’s financial viability, and employee morale.
A corporation might compare the benefits and drawbacks of adopting a group decision-making process to an individual one using a case study as an illustration. One of the key benefits is viewing the problem from several angles. When choices are made jointly, individuals from various backgrounds, departments, and experiences can provide distinctive contributions (Linabary, 2021). This variety can help people comprehend the issue more thoroughly and develop original solutions.
Also, according to Ludden (2016), group decisions create a collective intelligence that, compared to individuals’ predictions, is better at making the right decisions. Therefore, in this case, a group decision would be truer for both employees and the company. Along with its numerous benefits, collaborative decision-making has drawbacks that should not be overlooked.
Firstly, collective decision-making frequently involves lengthy deliberation, argument, and consensus-building, which can take time (Hamada et al., 2020). This might cause delays and lost chances, particularly when hasty judgments are required. Because of this drawback, Lauren may have decided on her own to expedite things in this case if the transaction required fast action. Secondly, in a group situation, those with dominant personalities or greater levels of authority may steer the conversation in favor of their point of view.
Lauren may have made the decision alone due to her prejudice during the decision-making process. Two forms of confirmation bias and confidence bias can be analyzed here. People seeking evidence to support their preexisting views or attitudes exhibit confirmation bias because they disregard or undervalue contradictory information (Simkus, 2020). Lauren could have already had a favorable opinion of the transaction in this instance and deliberately sought evidence to back up that opinion. A person with a propensity to overestimate their skills, expertise, or judgment is said to have a self-confidence bias.
Considering any prejudices that could have affected the CEO’s judgment is crucial. The status quo prejudice is the most significant bias in this situation. As CEO, one could have acquired a predisposition to preserve the collaborative decision-making system. This bias may have developed due to a conviction in the viability of the current strategy, aversion to upsetting the established balance, or resistance to ceding control of the decision-making process.
Conclusion
In this scenario, multiple business considerations justify using a group decision-making process rather than relying on an individual decision. First, deciding to sell a company is a complex and important business issue. It involves various factors, such as financial implications, strategic fit, potential risks, and long-term consequences (Norris & Norris, 2019).
Second, applying the group in decision-making promotes employee engagement and commitment. When employees feel that their opinions are valued and their voices are heard, they become more engaged in the decision and its outcomes (Yadav, 2023). It is also vital to emphasize that defining roles for each member is crucial in successfully implementing a group decision (Larson, 2023). Team decision-making may be hampered by conflict and dissatisfaction if members are unclear about their duties or if any positions go unfilled.
The scenario at Mudge Paper Company sheds light on the importance of group decision-making in complex business situations. The analysis of business-related facts supports the argument that involving the group in the decision-making process would have been more beneficial for the sales decision. Group decision-making allows for a comprehensive evaluation of various perspectives, risk mitigation, employee engagement, and the generation of innovative solutions. By emphasizing the value of group decision-making, the CEO can foster a culture of inclusivity and accountability and ultimately drive the company toward its long-term success.
References
Hamada, D., Nakayama, M., & Saiki, J. (2020). Wisdom of crowds and collective decision-making in a survival situation with complex information integration. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1). Web.
Larson, E. (2023). 3 best practices for high-performance decision-making teams. Forbes. Web.
Linabary, J. (2021). Making decisions in groups. PressBooks. Web.
Ludden, D. (2016). Are two heads better than one? Psychology Today. Web.
Norris, S. E., & Norris, A. R. (2019). Applying the full range of leadership. IGI Global, 109–125. Web.
Simkus, J. (2020). Confirmation bias. Simply Psychology. Web.
Yadav, M. (2023). The power of democratic leadership: Empowering your team for success – wisely. Risely. Web.
