During this week's study, I found that if I connect the Escalation of Commitment with a common mistake that poor decision-makers identify their issue incorrectly when trying to use the rational decision-making model, it will be a tragedy. For example, they FEEL they need a car and then jump into step two to consider which one they should buy. However, they probably do not even need a car at all in the first place. Oftentimes, there is a fine line between rational decisions and escalation of commitment. I am an investor myself, most of my investments are in the US stock market. I recognize that some bad decisions I made in the past few years are downplaying negative information or warnings that might cause me to reconsider my investments. The truth is many IPO stocks are usually bad investments in their early five years. However, I overestimated them and did not pull the plug when I should.
Groupthink
Groupthink is also a common cue that leads to a dead end. Many employees feel they are stuck in a decision-making group and heading in the wrong direction but didn’t stand out for themselves. Moreover, they even try to make it reasonable while taking extreme risks. For example, when Russian leaders decided to invade Ukraine in 2022, an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality occurs, which may incline the soldiers to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their actions. Those decision-makers probably stereotyped views of other countries are seen when their countries discount rivals’ abilities to make effective responses. Many people are also under direct pressure that was exerted who express strong arguments against any of the country’s stereotypes or commitments.
Personal Opinion on Nominal Group Technique (NGT)
As we know that the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is a technique designed to help with group decision-making by ensuring that all members participate fully. However, I think it takes too much time to process. Moreover, many ideas cannot be explained by just writing them down. Even they could, the ability to clarify these ideas are vary. The solution to the same math question may be explained differently by different teachers.
Majority Rule
With majority rule, each member of the group is given a single vote and the option receiving the greatest number of votes is selected. However, I reckon that the greatest number of the members does not always make correct decisions and those who did not vote in favor of the decision will be less likely to support it since they are forced to do the things they dislike.
Consensus Rule
Another decision-making rule that I found some bugs in is the Consensus rule. It is built for goals to get fully supported. So, the first bug is time-consuming when it may make sense when support is needed to enact the plan. It is absolutely suitable for big projects but not for daily operation routines. Secondly, it needs many repeated steps until consensus is reached. Therefore, although this decision-making rule is inclusive, participatory, cooperative, democratic, and helps members feel greater satisfaction with decisions, it takes longer with this approach. Moreover, if consensus cannot be reached, then it is sort of time-wasting, and time means money in the business world.
Reference
Roch, S. G. (2007). Why convene rater teams: An investigation of the benefits of anticipated discussion, consensus, and rater motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 14–29.
The nominal group technique (NGT) as a tool for ... (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2022, from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1609406919866049
Posts
