Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Communication in Small Groups Chapter 4 Synergy • aka, Assembly effect bonus: the group judgment is superior to the avg. individual judgment • Common explanations for synergy (the group whole being – greater than the sum of its parts) include complementary group member expertise, – original insight generated through interaction, and a “hive effect,” whereby working – side by side with fellow group members motivates people to put forth more effort than they would otherwise. Decision Rules • Executive • Proportional Outcomes in this case, it means average ranking • Random selection randomly assign group ratings • Simple majority rule (50%+1) • Supermajority rule (2/3 majority required) • Consensus unanimity, with “standing aside” allowed Moon Landing exercise Sample Calculations • Oxygen – you ranked it #5 – experts ranked it #1 – give yourself a score on that item of 4 abs. value of |5 – 1| • Map – you ranked it #1 – experts ranked it #3 – give yourself a score of 2 on that item abs. value of |1 – 3| Space Survival Ranking of Items by Experts Oxygen Water Map Food FM receiver 1 2 3 4 5 Rope First aid kit Parachute Raft Flares Pistols Milk Heating unit Compass Matches 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Fills respiration requirements Replenishes loss by sweating, etc One of principal means of finding directions Supply daily food required Distress signal transmitter, possible communication with another ship Useful in tying injured together, help in climbing Oral pills or injection medicine available Shelter against sun’s rays CO bottles for self propulsion across chasms, etc. Distress call when line of sight possible Self propulsion devices could be made from them Food mixed with water for drinking Useful only if party landed on dark side Probably no magnetized poles, therefore useless Little or no use on moon Groupthink and Group Structure Beneficial procedures High group cohesion Structural faults (homogeneous, isolated, lacking impartial leadership and procedures) Provocative context (high stress from external threats and low self-confidence) Groupthink Bad Decisions Group Decision Support Systems Degree of consensus GDSS with decision guidance (vs. without) + R2 = .66 Faithfulness of appropriation + avg. R2 = .40 Duration of discussion Decision quality and confidence Embedded System Framework Task complexity and importance Formal codes and bylaws Procedural expertise and traditions Resources available for training/support Designated group longevity and mission Procedural legal requirements Norms for arranging physical space and comm. networks Strong reciprocity Political culture (democratic norms, power relationships) Group structure: comm. network, arrangement, discussion procedures, and decision rule Faithfulness of procedural appropriation Discussion functions and sequencing Group development Degree and intensity of conflict Procedural knowledge, expectations, and preferences Consideration of others’ views Quality and representativeness of group decision Duration of discussion Confidence in (and commitment to) decision and group Different Communication Networks The Chain The Wheel The Circle The Comcon • For each type of network, name a type of small group that you would expect to use it. • For each type, name a situation in which it might be most effective for a group to use it? DA & DI • • • • Assignment of Devil’s Advocacy and Dialectic Techniques Read scenario Discuss and draft recommendations Class reflections on exercise Likelihood of convening group again in future Future motivations of group and leader Discussion functions Task importance Local procedural requirements Likely continuity of the group within the organization Group structure: insularity, group maturity, power concentration, leader impartiality, and decision rule Time pressure Relational cohesion Stress felt from external threat Member homogeneity, political motives, morality, vulnerability Organizational norms Timing of convergence Development of contingency plans Response to negative feedback and dissent Shifting attitudes and cohesion Potential external threat to organization Effect of decision on addressing or aggravating external threat Self-censorship and mindguarding Quality of group decision Decision acceptance, adherence, and implementation Group member satisfaction with leader, process, and decision