GRA 6820
The Sociology of
Decision Making
(Harrison, Ch.7)
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
1
I – S Types
SENSING
INTROVERTS
ISTJ
ISFJ
Serious, quiet, earn success by
concentration and thoroughness. Practical,
orderly, matter-of-fact, logical, realistic, and
dependable. See to it that everything is well
organized. Take responsibility. Make up
their own minds as to what should be
accomplished and work toward it steadily,
regardless of protests or distractions.
Quiet, friendly, responsible, and
conscientious. Work devotedly to meet their
obligations. Lend stability to any project or
group. Thorough, painstaking, and
accurate. May need time to master
technical subjects, as their interests are
usually not technical. Patient with detail and
routine. Loyal, considerate, concerned with
how other people feel.
ISTP
ISFP
Cool onlookers – quiet, reserved, observing
and analyzing life with detached curiosity
and unexpected flashes of original humor.
Usually interested in impersonal principles,
cause and effect, how and why things work.
Exert themselves no more than they think
necessary, because any waste of energy
would be inefficient.
Retiring, quietly friendly, sensitive, kind,
modest about their abilities. Shun
disagreements, do not force their opinions or
values upon others. Usually do not care to
lead but are often loyal followers. Often
relaxed aout getting things done, because
they enjoy the present moment and do not
want to spoil it by undue haste or exertion.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
2
I – N Types
INTUITIVE
INTROVERTS
INFJ
INTJ
Succeed by perserverence, originality and
desire to do whatever is needed or wanted.
Put their best effortsinto their work. Quietly
forceful, conscientious, concerned for
others. Respected for their firm principles.
Likely to be honored and followed for their
clear convictions as to how best to serve the
common good.
Usually have original minds and great drive
for their own ideas and purposes. In fields
that appeal to them, they have a fine power
to organize a job and carry it through with or
without help. Skeptical, critical,
independent, determined, often stubborn.
Must learn to yield less important points in
order to win the most important.
INFP
INTP
Full of enthusiasms and loyalties, but
seldom talk of these until they know you
well. Care about learning, ideas, language,
and independent projects of their own. Tend
to undertake too much, then somehow get it
done. Friendly, but often too absorbed in
what they are doing to be sociable. Little
concerned with possessions or physical
surroundings
Quiet, reserved, impersonal. Enjoy
especially theoretical or scientific subjects.
Logical to the point of hair splitting. Usually
interested mainly in ideas, with little liking for
parties or small talk. Tend to have sharply
defined interests. Need careers where
some strong interests can be used and
useful.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
3
E – S Types
SENSING
EXTRAVERTS
ESTP
Matter-of-fact, do not worry or hurry, enjoy
whatever comes along. Tend to like
mechanical things and sports, with friends
on the side. May be a bit blunt or
insensitive. Adaptable, tolerant, generally
conservative in values. Dislike long
explanations. Are best with real things that
can be worked, handled, taken apart or put
together.
ESFP
Outgoing, easygoing, accepting, friendly,
,enjoy everything and make things more fun
for others by their enjoyment. Like sports
and making things. Knows what’s going on
and join in eagerly. Find remembering facts
easier than mastering theories. Are best in
situations that need sound common sense
and practical ability with people as well as
with things.
ESTJ
ESFJ
Practical, realistic, matter-of-fact, with a
natural head for business or mechanics.
Not interested in subjects they see no use
for, but can apply themselves when
necessary. Like to organize and run
activities. May make good administrators,
especially if they can remember to consider
othersæ’ feelings and points of view.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Warm-hearted, talkative, popular,
conscientious, born cooperators, active
committee members. Need harmony and
may be good at creating it. Always doing
something nice for someone. Work best
with encouragement and praise. Little
interest in abstract thinking or technical
subjects. Main interest is in things that
directly and visibly affect people’s lives.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
4
E – N Types
INTUITIVE
EXTRAVERTS
ENFP
Warmly enthusiastic, high-spirited,
ingenious, imaginative. Able to do almost
anything that interests them. Quick with a
solution for any difficulty and ready to help
anyone with a problem. Often rely on their
ability to improvise instead of preparing in
advance. Can usually find compelling
reasons for whatever they want.
ENTP
Quick, ingenious, good at many things.
Stimulating company, alert and outspoken.
May argue for fun on either side of a
question. Resourceful in solving new and
challenging problems, but may neglect
routineassignments. Apt to turn to one new
interest after another. Skillful in finding
logical reasons for what they want.
ENFJ
ENTJ
Responsive and responsible. Generally feel
real concern for what others think or want,
and try to handle things with due regard for
other person’s feelings. Can present a
proposal or lead a group discussion with
ease and tact. Sociable, popular,
sympathetic. Responsive to praise and
criticism.
Hearty, frank, decisive, leaders in activities.
Usually good in anything that requires
reasoning and intelligent talk, such as public
speaking. Are usually well-informed and
enjoy adding to their fund of knowledge.
May sometimes be more positive and
confident than their experience in an area
warrants.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
5
Overview of chapter 7
• Profile of a group
• Theories of group behavior
• Group norms and conformity
• Group structure
• Group communication
• Characteristics of effective groups
• Groupthink
• Group decision making perspectives
• Group decision making profiles
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
6
Definitions
• Sociology
– The scientific study of society and human
(decision making) behavior.
• Sociological perspective
– An approach that seeks to understand human
(decision making) behavior by placing it within a
broader social context:
• Groups and teams
• Organizations
• Societies
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
7
Limits to team learning
Shared
vision
+
Defensive
Behaviors
+
Tendency to
generate shared
insight
+
+
B2
Fear of
failure
+
Blame or
defensive
behaviors
+
Willingness
for public
reflection
B3
The Sociology of Decision-Making
+
+
Number of
diverse
viewpoints
+
B4
Interpreting
actions as
“failures”
+
Potential for
conflict
+
Willingness to
Communicate
Joint
experimentation
R1
+
Expectations
Collaborative
Learning
Degree of
collaborative
design
Conflict
avoidance
behaviors
+
-
Interpreting
Actions
+
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Level of
trust
8
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
9
Classification of collective decision
theories
Theoretical
Perspective
Individual
Preferences
Information
Group Decision
Theory
Different
Not considered
Same
Considered
Different
Considered
Team Theory
n-Person Game
Theory
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
10
Nested hierarchy of team design
problems
Decision
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
11
Why do groups fail...?
(or, when 2 + 2 = 3)
• Ineffective leadership skills
• Lack of rigorous methods
• Wrong group structure
• Group member homogeneity
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
12
Factors affecting group judgment
• Input variables
• Conformity
• Polarization
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
13
Input variables affecting group
processes
• Task norms.
• Process norms.
• Group size.
• Group communication patterns.
• Perceived member status.
• Individual personality characteristics.
• Group experience.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
14
Conformity
• Tendency for individual responses to conform
more closely to those of the group after exposure
to the group’s opinion.
• Factors affecting strength of the effect.
– Response uncertainty.
– Concern for self image.
– To avoid possible censure.
• Classic example - Groupthink.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
15
Conformity and consensus
• When consensus is the goal, there is additional
stimulus to assent to the group’s position even
though one may personally disagree with it.
• Group’s decision rule.
• Factors affecting weight given to individuals’
opinions...
• Quality of resulting consensus...
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
16
Conformity
(likhet, ensrettethet)
Definition:
– A change in a person’s behavior or opinions as
a result of real or imagined pressure from a
person or a group of people.
Dilemma of being a social animal…
– Resultant tension between:
1. Values associated with Individuality.
2. Values associated with Conformity.
The ”Establishment” tends to like
Conformists better than Non-conformists.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
17
Conformity
• Variables that affect conformity behavior
Whether the majority opinion unanimous or not.
Kind of person the individual is (low in selfesteem, for example).
Who is in the reference group.
• Group influence increases if…
– It is composed of experts.
– The members are important to the individual.
– The members are comparable to the individual
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
18
Group cohesiveness:
Causes and consequences
Causes
Consequences
Positive
Enjoy group membership
Severe initiation
Lots of time
together
Small groups
Group
Cohesiveness
External threat
Low absenteeism
and turnover
Negative
Lose sight of goals
May work against
organizational interests
History of
success
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Participate in group
activities
Accept group’s goals
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
19
Conformity in extremis:
Groupthink
Tight knit,
cohesive group
Observable behaviors
* Incomplete statement of
objectives or problem
definition.
Group leadership and
structural problems
* Group is insulated.
* Ineffective leadership
* Wrong structure.
* Lack of rigorous
methods.
* Similar group members.
COMPULSIVE
NEED FOR
AGREEMENT
* Failure to reconsider
rejected alternatives.
* Poor information search.
* Lack of critical thinking
due to biases.
Situational factors
* Failure to re-examine risks
of the first choice.
* High stress.
* Low expectations.
* Recent failure.
* Difficulty with the
problem.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
* Incomplete search for
alternatives.
* Failure to develop a
contingency plan.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
20
Polarization
• Reported tendency for average group members’
responses to shift further in the direction of the group’s
initially dominant tendency after interaction and
discussion.
• Associated primarily with attitudes and preferences.
• Processes leading to polarization...
– Information effect.
– Predominant influence of argument and facts.
– Active espousal of a position.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
21
Dysfunctional group behaviors
• Anchoring Effect
• Inequality of Participation
Causes...
• Deference to seniors
• Have less to offer
• Less data
• Wrong group structure
Percent
Participation
High
“Old hands”
Extroverts
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Low
Status
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
“Newcomers”
Introverts
22
Self-justification (selvberettigelse)
• Definition
– Actions taken by people to justify or explain
their behaviors to convince themselves (and
others) that the selected action was logical and
reasonable.
• Basic process – Cognitive Dissonance
– A state of tension that occurs when an
individual simultaneously holds two cognitions
(ideas, attitudes, beliefs, opinions) that are
psychologically inconsistent.
– An unpleasant experience that people try to
reduce.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
23
Self justification – an example
Washington Post News Service, November, 1971
24
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Theory of cognitive dissonance
• Man is not a rational animal.
• Man as a rationalizing animal.
• People are not motivated so much to be
right – rather, he/she is motivated to believe
that he or she is right (wise, decent, good…)
”It’s better to look good than to be good…”
Fernando Lamas
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
25
Aspects of dissonance
• As a consequence of making a decision
– Importance of irrevocability
– Immoral behavior
• Justification of effort
– Dissonance theory predicts that if a person
works hard to achieve a goal, that goal will be
more attractive to him than for someone who
achieves the same goal with little or no effort.
• Justification of cruelty
– Why do ”good” people inflict pain on others?
– And how do they deal with it?
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
26
Dissonance reduction and rational
behavior
• Dissonance reducing behavior
– Negative consequences:
• Maladaptive, keeps us from learning important facts or
finding real solutions
– Positive consequences:
• Ego defensive behavior, maintains positive self image.
• Results from the lab…
– People do not remember in rational-functional manner.
– Remember plausible arguments for personal position
– Remember implausible arguments in agreement with
opposing position.
Selective Perception
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
27
• Definition
Prejudice (fordom)
– A hostile or negative attitude toward a distinguishable group
based on generalizations derived from faulty or incomplete
information.
• Closely related to stereotyping.
– An over-generalization – attribution of identical characteristics
to any person in a group, regardless of actual variation within
the group members.
– Done all the time, can have either positive or negative
connotations.
• Characteristics
– Most stereotypes are not based on valid experiences.
– Hearsay or images from the media are influential.
– Oten the stereotypes are constructed from pure fantasy to
justify prejudices and cruelties.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
28
Causes of prejudice
• Economic and political competition.
– Given limited resources, the dominant group
might try to exploit a minority group in order to
gain a material advantage.
– Prejudice tends to increase in difficult times.
• Displaced aggression.
– Scapegoating.
– Focusing aggression on visible and relatively
powerless groups that are disliked to begin with.
– Examples?
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
29
Causes of prejudice (continued)
• Personality needs.
– Some research has shown that there are certain
personality types that are predisposed to being
prejudiced, not because of external factors.
– Implications for management?
• Conformity to existing social norms.
– Pressure to conform can be very strong.
– Examples?
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
30
Responses to social influence
• Compliance (imøtekommelighet)
– Mode of behavior of a person who is motivated to gain
rewards or avoid punishment.
– Lasts as long as reward/punishment exists.
• Identification
– Response brought about by individual’s desire to be
like the influencer.
• Internalization
– Most permanent, deeply rooted response to social
influence; reward for the belief is intrinsic.
– The behavior becomes independent of the source and
can be hard to change.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
31
Group processes
•
Interacting group
•
Nominal group technique
•
Delphi group
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
32
Interacting group characteristics
• Most common group structure.
• Problem statement by the group leader.
• Unstructured discussion.
Consequences for problem solving...
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
33
Interactive group:
Disadvantages
• Lack of structure.
• High variability in leaders and members.
• Effort used to maintain socio-emotional relationships.
• Generalization leads to low quality.
• Reactive search behavior, short focus, task avoidance,
tangential discussions.
• Dominant individuals control the agenda.
• Group norms emphasize conforming behavior.
• Tendency to conclude without a sense of closure.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
34
The Nominal Group technique
1. A small group identifies the
issue and receives instructions.
3. Each participants’ ideas are
presented, one at a time,
and recorded.
2. Participants privately write
down ideas about problem solving.
4. Each idea is discussed, clarified
and evaluated by the group.
5. Participants privately rank the
ideas in their order of preference.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
6. Highest ranking idea is
taken as the group’s decision.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
35
Nominal group:
Advantages
• Consistency in decision making.
• Balanced concern for socio-emotional and task
instrumental roles.
• Opportunity to think and write ideas increases
tendency for focused ideas of higher quality.
• Tolerance for “off the wall” ideas.
• Structure forces equality of participation.
• Higher sense of closure, greater feeling of
satisfaction, greater willingness to work towards
implementation.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
36
The Delphi technique
ISSUE
1. Enlist
cooperation
of experts
2. Present
the issue to
the experts
3. Experts record
solutions and
recommendations
4. Experts’ responses
are compiled and
reproduced
5. Responses shared
with all others
6. Experts comment on
others’ ideas and
propose a solution
If no consensus is
reached…
If consensus is
reached…
7. Solutions are compiled
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Solution
37
The Delphi method:
Characteristics
• Physically dispersed.
• Systematic collection and combination of
information.
• Consensus achieved through feedback.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
38
The Delphi method
Advantages
Disadvantages
• Isolated generation of
ideas.
• Lack of socio-emotional
satisfaction.
• Problem complexity
addressed in the process.
• Possible communication and
interpretation problems.
• Proactive search behavior.
• Conflicting and
incompatible ideas are
resolved by pooling.
• Anonymity and isolation.
• No face-to-face problem
solving to resolve conflicts.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
39
Dimensions for comparing group
processes
• Overall methodology
• Equality of participation
• Role orientations
• Problem solving methods
• Relative quantity of ideas • Closure decision process
• Search behavior
• Resources utilized
• Nominal behavior
• Time requirements
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
40
Overall methodology
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Unstructured
face-to-face
group meeting.
Structured
face-to-face
group meeting.
High flexibility.
Low flexibility.
High variability in
behavior of groups.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Low variability in
behavior of groups.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Delphi
groups
Structured series
of questionnaires
and feedback
reports.
Low variability in
respondent
behavior.
41
Role orientation
Interacting
groups
Socio-emotional.
Group maintenance
focus.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Nominal
groups
Balanced focus on
social maintenance
and task role.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Delphi
groups
Task instrumental
focus.
42
Relative quantity of ideas
Interacting
groups
Low.
Nominal
groups
Higher.
Independent writing.
Focused “rut” effect.
Hitch-hiking round
robin brainstorming.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Delphi
groups
High.
Isolated writing of
ideas.
43
Search behavior
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Delphi
groups
Reactive search.
Proactive search.
Proactive search.
Short issue focus.
Extended issue
focus.
Controlled issue
focus.
High task
centeredness.
High task
centeredness.
New social and
task knowledge.
New task knowledge.
Task avoidance
tendency.
New social
knowledge.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
44
Normative behavior
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Delphi
groups
Conformity
pressures inherent
in face-to-face
discussions.
Tolerance for
nonconformity
through
independent search
and choice activity.
Freedom to not
conform through
isolated anonymity.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
45
Equality of participation
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Delphi
groups
Member dominance
in search, evaluation
and choice phases.
Member equality in
search and choice
phases.
Respondent equality
in pooling of
independent
judgments.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
46
Method of problem solving
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Delphi
groups
Person centered.
Issue centered.
Issue centered.
Smoothing over
and withdrawal.
Confrontation and
problem solving.
Majority rule of
pooled independent
judgments.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
47
Decision process closure
Interacting
groups
High lack of closure.
Low feeling of
accomplishment.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
Nominal
groups
Lower lack of
closure.
Higher feeling of
accomplishment.
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
Delphi
groups
Low lack of closure.
Medium feeling of
accomplishment.
48
Resource utilization
Interacting
groups
Nominal
groups
Delphi
groups
Low administrative
time and costs.
Medium
administrative time,
cost and
preparation.
High administrative.
High participant
time and cost.
High participant
time and cost.
The Sociology of Decision-Making
GRA 6820
Strategic Choice
49