Working in GroupsPresentation

FPT UNIVERSITY (HCMC -Vietnam)

Class: IA1161

CHAPTER 10Structured & CreativeProblem Solving in Groups

Jan 28, 2016

TEAM I.S

Duc LTM

Project Manager

Phuong TLN

Group Energizer

Binh NTQ

Group Leader

Tan PN

Information Deeper

AGENDA

• Group Decision Making

• Structured Problem Solving

• Creative Problem Solving

• Problem-Solving Realities

• Q/A

GROUP DECISION MAKING

Duc Lai Trung Minh

DucLTMSE62220@fpt.edu.vn

CONTENTS

• Decision-Making and Problem Solving

• Methods

• Questions

• Styles

DECISION-MAKING

PROBLEM-SOLVINGWorking in Group, Chapter 10, Group Decision Making, p.236-242

A JUDGEMENT

According to Management experts Perter Drucker

(Working in Groups, p.236)

Source: NextBigWhat.com

A JUDGEMENT

Whom should we invite?

What should we discuss?

Where should we meet?

When should we meet?

Table 10.1, Working in Group, p.236

Source: NextBigWhat.com

A COMPLEX PROCESS

According to the author in Working in Groups

(Working in Groups, p.236)

Source: SCMEP.org

A COMPLEX PROCESS

Why doesn’t our promotional campaign

attract students?

How should publicize the college’s new

program?

Table 10.1, Working in Group, p.236

Source: SCMEP.org

DECISION-MAKING

METHODSWorking in Group, Chapter 10, Group Decision Making, p.236-242

DECISION-MAKING METHODS

Voting Consensus Seeking Authority Rule

DESCRIPTION

“A formal choice that you make in an

election or at a meeting in order to

choose somebody or decide something”

According to

OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com

Source: ChicagoToNight.com

CATEGORIZING

• Majority vote: > 50%

• Two-thirds vote: > 66.6%

Source: ChicagoToNight.com

USAGE

- Limited time

- Not highly controversial issue

- Too many members

- The last solution to break a deadlock

- The rules require voting

Source: ChicagoToNight.com

PROS:- Easiest way to make decision

Source: ChicagoToNight.com

CONS:-Very hard to persuade all members willing to approve the decision

DESCRIPTION

“All members have a part in shaping and that

all find at least minimally acceptable as a means

of accomplishing some mutual goal.”

Working in group, p.238Source: CrossCollaborate.com

Consensus Seeking

Consensus: Dong thuan

CONSENSUS GUIDELINES ON DECISION-MAKING

Source: CrossCollaborate.com

PROS:- All members may willing to do the decision

CONS:- Lacking of time - Hard to implement into a large group

DESCRIPTION

“Groups gather information for and

recommend decisions to ANOTHER

person or a LARGER group”

(Working in Groups, p.239)Source: Web.Wellness-institute.org

PROS:- Independent decision

Source: Web.Wellness-institute.org

CONS:- May demotivate members

DECISION-MAKING

QUESTIONSWorking in Group, Chapter 10, Group Decision Making, p.236-242

DECISION-MAKING QUESTIONS

Fact Conjecture Value Policy

DESCRIPTION

- True or False

- Something caused

Fact

USAGE

- What ?

- Did/ Had/ Was/ Were/ … ?

Seek & scrutinize the best information

availableFact

DESCRIPTION

- WILL / WILL NOT happen

- Only the FUTURE holds the ANSWER

- Predict the FUTUREConjecture

Conjecture: Su phong doan/ uoc doan

USAGE

- Reputable facts

- Expert opinions

Conjecture

DESCRIPTION

- Asking for the worthwhile (Good/Bad –

Right/Wrong - …)

- Difficult to discuss

USAGE

- Start with “It’s depend”

DESCRIPTION

- Asking for addressing a problem

- Require answers to sub-questions of

face, conjecture, and valuePolicy

USAGE

- How?

- Which?

Policy

DECISION-MAKING

STYLESWorking in Group, Chapter 10, Group Decision Making, p.236-242

DECISION-MAKING STYLES

Rational Intuitive Dependent Avoidant Spontaneous

DECISION-MAKING STYLES

RATIONAL

I’ve carefully considered all the issues

INTUITIVE

It just feels like the right thing to do

DEPENDENT

If you think it’s okay, then I’ll do it

AVOIDANT

I just can’t deal with this right now

SPONTANEOUS

Let’s do it now and worry about the consequences later

RATIONAL DECISION-MAKER

- Carefully weigh information

- Logical reasoning to justify the

conclusion

- Shouldn’t analyze problem too longSource: Blogs.Baruch.Cuny.Edu

INTUITIVEDECISION MAKER

- Based on INSTINCTS and FEELINGS

- Non-specific reason “FEEL” right

Source: CauldronSandCupcakes

DEPENDENTDECISION-MAKER

- Information/ Opinion seeker

- Feel uncomfortable on making an

disapproving/ opposing decision.

- Maybe making the regret decision

AVOIDANTDECISION MAKER

- Uncomfortable making decision

- May not think about the problem at all

- May make the decision at the last minute

SPONTANEOUSDECISION-MAKER

- Impulsive and make very Quick decision

- Usually regret on the decisions

Spontaneous : not planned but done

because you suddenly want to do it

STRUCTURED PROBLEM SOLVING

Phuong Tran Long Nhat

PhuongTLNSE62194@fpt.edu.vn

CONTENT

• The Standard Agenda

• The Functional Perspective

• The Single Question Format

STRUCTURED PROBLEM-SOLVING PROCEDURES

Problem-solving Procedures

STANDARD

AGENDAReflective

Thinking

Procedures

FUNCTIONAL

PERSPECTIVECommunication

Behavior

Procedures

SINGLE

QUESTION

FORMATQuestion/Answer

Procedures

THE STANDARD AGENDA

• Task clarification

• Problem Identification

• Fact finding

• Solution Criteria

• Solution Suggestions

• Solution Evaluation and Selection

• Solution Implementation

THE FUNCTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

• The preparation function

• The competence function

• The communication function

THE SINGLE QUESTION FORMAT

• Identify the problem

• Create a Collaborative setting

• Analyze the issues

• Identify possible solutions

• Answer the single question

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

Tan Pham Nhat

TanPNSE62463@fpt.edu.vn

CONTENT

• Creative Problem Solving

• Brainstorming

• Nominal Group Technique ( NGT)

• Decreasing Options Technique (Dot)

• Enhancing Group Creativity

CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING

• Creativity has two components: (1) the nonjudgement process of searching for,

separating, and connecting unrelated ideas and elements (2) combining these

elements into new ideas.

• Usually there are 4 stages:

• investigation

• imagination

• incubation

• insight

BRAINSTORMING

• A technique for generating as many ideas as possible in a short period of

time.

• But it can be counterproductive under certain circumstances.

• For example, in the case of the boss limiting the direction of ideas.

NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE ( NGT)

• Developed by Andre L.Delbecq and Andrew H. Van de ven.

• It is a way of maximizing participation in problem solving and program planning groups while

minimizing some of the personal problems associated with group interaction.

• There are 2 phase:

+ Phase 1: idea generation

+ Phase 2: idea evaluation and voting

• It provides which of many possible solutions receives the most support, to establish

budget priorities and to reach consensus on the causes of a problem.

• But it requires a great deal of time and a skilled moderator to make it work efficiently.

I.4/ DECREASING OPTIONS TECHNIQUE (DOT)

• It is a decision making tool that helps groups reduce and refine a large

number of suggestions into manageable number of ideas. This method

works best when a group must process a multitude of ideas and options.

• There are 4 steps:

+ Generate ideas

+ Post the ideas

+ Sort the ideas

+ Dot the ideas

I.4/ DECREASING OPTIONS TECHNIQUE (DOT)

• When a group generates dozen of ideas, members use valuable meeting

time to discuss each idea, reagardless of its merit or relevance.

• Consider using DOT when:

+ The group is too large

+ So much competing ideas

+ Group wants to ensure equal opportunities for input by all members

+ Group wants to restrain dominant members from exerting too much influence

+ Do not have enough time to discuss

I.5/ ENHANCING GROUP CREATIVITY

• 4 strategies: control judfment, encourage innovation, ask " what if ",

use metaphors.

• Control judgment: reduce as much as possible negative response.

• Encourage innovation: inertia, instruction, imitation, innovation.

• Ask "What if " : can set aside the constraints.

• Use metaphors: make us easy to imagine and understand the

things better.

PROBLEM-SOLVING REALITIES

Binh Nguyen Quoc Thanh Binh

binhnqtse62572@fpt.edu.vn

LIFE IS NOT BLACK OR WHITE

•1 Politics

•2 Preexisting preferences

•3 Power

1 POLITICS

no one is THE SAME

Each individual have their own plans and agenda (it may or may not

clash with one another)

influence behavior

EX: but kissing, arguing,sabotage,....

THAT'S WHY THERE ARE RUDES

1 PRE EXISTING REFERENCE

IDEAL IDEA

is our knowledge always correct ??

do we try to defense what we know ??

should we be open ??

3 POWER

POWER = RIGHT ???

the boss is always correct

go with the flow

he(she) is so beautiful so he(she) is right

REFERENCE

• Working in Groups (Allyn & Bacon, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-205-65882-4)

• Lac Viet MTD

• Oxford Dictionary

• MindDisorders.com

• Barrett.com.au

• ……

Q/A

Duc LTM

Project Manager

Phuong TLN

Group Energizer

Binh NTQ

Group Leader

Tan PN

Information Deeper

THANK YOU !!!If You Have Any Questions, Please Send An Email To

DucLTMSE62220@fpt.edu.vn For More Information.