# data[].attributes.body
Riggio offers a starting point in identifying that conflict may have individual or situational causes.

Individual causes will be; differences between two individuals.

Situational causes will be; working condition, salary levels, expectations.

Positive conflict is useful to some extent and organisations need to recognise the potential positve outcomes.

Range of strategies for managing conflict is important.

Collaboration and pursuit of superordinate goal strategies can lead to better understanding of workplace and reduce discrimination.

# data[].attributes.body
Thomas(1976) suggested 5 strategies:
COMPETITION : Individuals may persist in conflict until someone wins and someone loses.
ACCOMODATION : One individual will need to make sacrifice  in order to reduce conflict.
COMPROMISE : Each group or individual need to make compromise and give up something.
COLLABORATION: The group has to work together to overcome conflict.
AVOIDANCE: Suppressing the conflict or withdrawing from the conflict completely. This can be effective in creating a cooling-off period.
SUPERORDINATE GOAL: A goal that both groups and individuals have to achieve.

# data[].attributes.body
1- Conflict can distract workers from their jobs, reducing overall productivity and can waste time, resources and money.
2- Goals can become distorted as people become more focussed on the conflict than on their jobs.
3- It will impact the physical and psychological health of the people involved increasing absenteeism and turnover and reducing staff satisfaction.
4- Conflicts perceived as bullying and harassment can lead to severe impact on public perception of the company.

# data[].attributes.body
Pruitt&Rubin(2003)
1- Conflict will lead to change in small organisations where change can easily be implemented.
2- Resolution of conflict may lead to strengthening group unity and commitment to organisational goals or to groups.
3-  Conflict can ensure that decisions are fully considered and explored.
4- They can prevent 'risky' decision making such as groupthink and may also produce creative and innovative suggestions.
5- It can lead to healthy competitions.

# data[].attributes.body
Group think can lead to extremely poor DM. But it can have some benefits as well.

1- Working with a large no.of people often allows the groups to make decisions quickly and efficiently.

GROUP THINK OCCURS IN:
1- Similarity between group members and there is a very charismatic leader.
2- High level of stress or situations that are morally challenging.

# data[].attributes.body
1- INTRA- GROUP CONFLICT: when people within the same group are in conflict.
2- INTER-GROUP CONFLICT: conflict between two groups within the same organisation.
3- INTER-INDIVIDUAL CONFLICT: conflict between two or more individuals within a group.

Riggio(2009) suggested that these may be divided into two broad categories.

Organisational factors; conflict over status or salary, or disaggrements over how to achieve a goal. Lack of resources or space.

Interpersonal factors; personality clash between two people or two people can't work well together for some reason.  Conflict between 2 leaders of different group can create conflict very easily.

# data[].attributes.body
Wedley and Field identified several strategies to ensure that poor decisions are avoided these included pre-planning as well as the use of computer based decision support system.

Janis exploration of group think can be applied in organizations to ensure -ve outcomes of groupthink are avoided.

Forsyth examination of cognitive limitaions and errors in group DM would be valuable information within an organization that takes decision frequently.Acknowledging and recognising the possibility of these errors will allow an organisation to take steps to reduce them.

# data[].attributes.body
2- SINS OF OMISSION- overlooking key information.

Base rate bias; overlooking very basic relevant information.

Funamental Attribution Error; members of a group make decisions based on inaccurate appraisals of an individuals behaviour.

III CATEGORY OF POTENTIAL BIAS
3- SINS OF IMPRECISION -relying too heavily on heuristics that over simplify complex decisions.

Availibilty Heuristic; over reliance on the information that is most readily and easily available.

Conjunctive bias; failing to consider relationships between events.

Representativeness heuristics; group members rely too heavily on DM factors that may appear meaningful but are in fact misleading.

# data[].attributes.body
Forsyth(2006) suggested 3 categories of potential biases that may affect group decision making :
1- SINS of COMMISSION; Misuse of information in the DM process. Use of info.which has already been shown to be inaccurate(belief perseverance).

sunk cost bias; members remain committed to a plan beacuse some investment of time and money has been made.

extra-evidentiary bias; using info.despite having been told to ignore it.

hindisight bias; falsely overestimating the importance of past knowledge or experience.

# data[].attributes.headline
Strategies to reduce the risk of groupthink

# data[].attributes.subject
Strategies to reduce the risk of groupthink

# data[].attributes.body
1- Leaders need give group members the opportunity to expree their own feelings.
2- Breaking them into smaller group to discuss on the idea.
3- Leader should not be assertive at the start of the discussion, so that the members are able to expree their views.
4- A member could be instructed to take the role of "devil's advocate".

# data[].attributes.body
Groupthink is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of individuals reaches a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the consequences or alternatives. Groupthink is based on a common desire not to upset the balance of a group of people.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/groupthink.asp

Janis(1971) identified eight different "symptoms" that indicate groupthink :

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Is Groupthink?

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group. In many cases, people will set aside their own personal beliefs or adopt the opinion of the rest of the group. The term was first used in 1972 by social psychologist Irving L. Janis.

People who are opposed to the decisions or overriding opinion of the group as a whole frequently remain quiet, preferring to keep the peace rather than disrupt the uniformity of the crowd. The phenomenon can be problematic, but even well-intentioned people are prone to making irrational decisions in the face of overwhelming pressure from the group.

Signs of Groupthink

Groupthink may not always be easy to discern, but there are some signs that it is present. There are also some situations where it may be more likely to occur. Janis identified a number of different "symptoms" that indicate groupthink.﻿﻿

Illusions of unanimity lead members to believe that everyone is in agreement and feels the same way. It is often much more difficult to speak out when it seems that everyone else in the group is on the same page.

Unquestioned beliefs lead members to ignore possible moral problems and not consider the consequences of individual and group actions.

Rationalizing prevents members from reconsidering their beliefs and causes them to ignore warning signs.

Stereotyping leads members of the in-group to ignore or even demonize out-group members who may oppose or challenge the group's ideas. This causes members of the group to ignore important ideas or information.

Self-censorship causes people who might have doubts to hide their fears or misgivings. Rather than sharing what they know, people remain quiet and assume that the group must know best.

"Mindguards" act as self-appointed censors to hide problematic information from the group. Rather than sharing important information, they keep quiet or actively prevent sharing.

Illusions of invulnerability lead members of the group to be overly optimistic and engage in risk-taking. When no one speaks out or voices an alternative opinion, it causes people to believe that the group must be right.

Direct pressure to conform is often placed on members who pose questions, and those who question the group are often seen as disloyal or traitorous.

How It Works

Why does groupthink occur? Think about the last time you were part of a group, perhaps during a school project. Imagine that someone proposes an idea that you think is quite poor.

However, everyone else in the group agrees with the person who suggested the idea, and the group seems set on pursuing that course of action. Do you voice your dissent or do you just go along with the majority opinion?

In many cases, people end up engaging in groupthink when they fear that their objections might disrupt the harmony of the group or suspect that their ideas might cause other members to reject them.

A number of factors can influence this psychological phenomenon. Some causes:

Group identity: It tends to occur more in situations where group members are very similar to one another. When there is strong group identity, members of the group tend to perceive their group as correct or superior while expressing disdain or disapproval toward people outside of the group.

Leader influences: Groupthink is also more likely to take place when a powerful and charismatic leader commands the group.

Low knowledge: When people lack personal knowledge of something or feel that other members of the group are more qualified, they are more likely to engage in groupthink.﻿﻿

Stress: Situations where the group is placed under extreme stress or where moral dilemmas exist also increase the occurrence of groupthink.﻿﻿

Contributing Factors

Impact of Groupthink

Groupthink can cause people to ignore important information and can ultimately lead to poor decisions. This can be damaging even in minor situations but can have much more dire consequences in certain settings. Medical, military, or political decisions, for example, can lead to unfortunate outcomes when they are impaired by the effects of groupthink.

The phenomenon can have high costs. These include:

The suppression of individual opinions and creative thought can lead to inefficient problem-solving.﻿﻿

It can contribute to group members engaging in self-censorship. This tendency to seek consensus above all else also means that group members may not adequately assess the potential risks and benefits of a decision.

Groupthink also tends to lead group members to perceive the group as inherently moral or right. Stereotyped beliefs about other groups can contribute to this biased sense of rightness.

It is important to note that while groupthink and conformity are similar and related concepts, there are important distinctions between the two. Groupthink involves the decision-making process.

On the other hand, conformity is a process in which people change their own actions so they can fit in with a specific group. Conformity can sometimes cause groupthink, but it isn't always the motivating factor.

Potential Pitfalls

While groupthink can generate consensus, it is by definition a negative phenomenon that results in faulty or uninformed thinking and decision-making. Some of the problems it can cause include:

Blindness to potentially negative outcomes

Failure to listen to people with dissenting opinions

Lack of creativity

Lack of preparation to deal with negative outcomes

Ignoring important information

Inability to see other solutions

Not looking for things that might not yet be known to the group

Obedience to authority without question

Overconfidence in decisions

Resistance to new information or ideas

Group consensus can allow groups to make decisions, complete tasks, and finish projects quickly and efficiently-but even the most harmonious groups can benefit from some challenges.﻿﻿ Finding ways to reduce groupthink can improve decision-making and assure amicable relationships within the group.

Tips for Avoiding Groupthink

There are steps that groups can take to minimize this problem. First, leaders can give group members the opportunity to express their own ideas or argue against ideas that have already been proposed.

Breaking up members into smaller independent teams can also be helpful.﻿﻿ Here are some more ideas that might help prevent groupthink.

Initially, the leader of the group should avoid stating their opinions or preferences when assigning tasks. Give people time to come up with their own ideas first.

Assign at least one individual to take the role of the "devil's advocate."

Discuss the group's ideas with an outside member in order to get impartial opinions.

Encourage group members to remain critical. Don't discourage dissent or challenges to the prevailing opinion.

Before big decisions, leaders should hold a "second-chance" meeting where members have the opportunity to express any remaining doubts.

Reward creativity and give group members regular opportunities to share their ideas and thoughts.

When people in groups have diverse backgrounds and experiences, they are better able to bring different perspectives, information, and ideas to the table. This enhances decisions and makes it less likely that groups will fall into groupthink patterns.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Psychology Behind Why We Strive for Consensus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon in which people strive for consensus within a group. In many cases, people will set aside their own personal beliefs or adopt the opinion of the rest of the group. The term was first used in 1972 by social psychologist Irving L. Janis.

# data[].attributes.body
Wedley and Field(1984);
- Emphasized on the pre-planning phase of DM process and PS.
- They suggested that if the DM process starts then it is difficult to stop and this may lead to poor decisions.
- They identified a set of problem-solving stages that is widely considered to be logical and rational.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wmopen-principlesofmanagement/chapter/rational-decision-making-vs-other-types-of-decision-making/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Psychology tells us that emotions drive our behavior, while logic only justifies our actions after the fact. Marketing confirms this theory. Humans associate the same personality traits with brands as they do with people -- choosing your favorite brand is like choosing your best friend or significant other. We go with the option that makes us feel something.

But emotions can cloud your reasoning, especially when you need to do something that could cause internal pain, like giving constructive criticism, or when you need to move on from something you're attached to, like scrapping a favorite topic from your team's content mix.

There's a way to suppress this emotional bias, though. It's a thought process that's completely objective and data-driven. It's called the rational decision making model, and it will help you make logically sound decisions even in situations with major ramifications, like pivoting your entire blogging strategy.

But before we learn each step of this powerful process, let's go over what exactly rational decision making is and why it's important.

What is Rational Decision Making?

Rational decision making leverages objective data, logic, and analysis instead of subjectivity and intuition to help solve a problem or achieve a goal. It's a step-by-step model that helps you identify a problem, pick a solution between multiple alternatives, and find an answer.

Rational decision making is an important skill to possess, especially in the digital marketing industry. Humans are inherently emotional, so our biases and beliefs can blur our perception of reality. Fortunately, data sharpens our view. By showing us how our audience actually interacts with our brand, data liberates us from relying on our assumptions to determine what our audience likes about us.

Rational Decision Making Model: 7 Easy Steps with an Example

1. Verify and define your problem.

To prove that you actually have a problem, you need evidence for it. Most marketers think data is the silver bullet that can diagnose any issue in our strategy, but you actually need to extract insights from your data to prove anything. If you don't, you're just looking at a bunch of numbers packed into a spreadsheet.

To pinpoint your specific problem, collect as much data from your area of need and analyze it to find any alarming patterns or trends.
Example:
"After analyzing our blog traffic report, we now know why our traffic has plateaued for the past year -- our organic traffic increases slightly month over month but our email and social traffic decrease."

2. Research and brainstorm possible solutions for your problem.

Expanding your pool of potential solutions boosts your chances of solving your problem. To find as many potential solutions as possible, you should gather plenty of information about your problem from your own knowledge and the internet. You can also brainstorm with others to uncover more possible solutions.
Example:
Potential Solution 1: "We could focus on growing organic, email, and social traffic all at the same time."

Potential Solution 2: "We could focus on growing email and social traffic at the same time -- organic traffic already increases month over month while traffic from email and social decrease."

Potential Solution 3: "We could solely focus on growing social traffic -- growing social traffic is easier than growing email and organic traffic at the same time. We also have 2 million followers on Facebook, so we could push our posts to a ton of readers."

Potential Solution 4: "We could solely focus on growing email traffic -- growing email traffic is easier than growing social and organic traffic at the same time. We also have 250,000 blog subscribers, so we could push our posts to a ton of readers."

Potential Solution 5: "We could solely focus on growing organic traffic -- growing organic traffic is easier than growing social and email traffic at the same time. We also just implemented a pillar-cluster model to boost our domain's authority, so we could attract a ton of readers from Google."

3. Set standards of success and failure for your potential solutions.

Setting a threshold to measure your solutions' success and failure lets you determine which ones can actually solve your problem. Your standard of success shouldn't be too high, though. You'd never be able to find a solution. But if your standards are realistic, quantifiable, and focused, you'll be able to find one.
Example:
"If one of our solutions increases our total traffic by 10%, we should consider it a practical way to overcome our traffic plateau."

4. Flesh out the potential results of each solution.

Next, you should determine each of your solutions' consequences. To do so, create a strength and weaknesses table for each alternative and compare them to each other. You should also prioritize your solutions in a list from best chance to solve the problem to worst chance.
Example:
Potential Result 1: 'Growing organic, email, and social traffic at the same time could pay a lot of dividends, but our team doesn't have enough time or resources to optimize all three channels."

Potential Result 2: "Growing email and social traffic at the same time would marginally increase overall traffic -- both channels only account for 20% of our total traffic."

Potential Result 3: "Growing social traffic by posting a blog post everyday on Facebook is challenging because the platform doesn't elevate links in the news feed and the channel only accounts for 5% of our blog traffic. Focusing solely on social would produce minimal results."

Potential Result 4: "Growing email traffic by sending two emails per day to our blog subscribers is challenging because we already send one email to subscribers everyday and the channel only accounts for 15% of our blog traffic. Focusing on email would produce minimal results."

Potential Result 5: "Growing organic traffic by targeting high search volume keywords for all of our new posts is the easiest way to grow our blog's overall traffic. We have a high domain authority, Google refers 80% of our total traffic, and we just implemented a pillar-cluster model. Focusing on organic would produce the most results."

5. Choose the best solution and test it.

Based on the evaluation of your potential solutions, choose the best one and test it. You can start monitoring your preliminary results during this stage too.
Example:
"Focusing on organic traffic seems to be the most effective and realistic play for us. Let's test an organic-only strategy where we only create new content that has current or potential search volume and fits into our pillar cluster model."

6. Track and analyze the results of your test.

Track and analyze your results to see if your solution actually solved your problem.
Example:
"After a month of testing, our blog traffic has increased by 14% and our organic traffic has increased by 21%."

7. If the test solves your problem, implement the solution. If not, test a new one.

If your potential solution passed your test and solved your problem, then it's the most rational decision you can make. You should implement it to completely solve your current problem or any other related problems in the future. If the solution didn't solve your problem, then test another potential solution that you came up with.
Example:
"The results from solely focusing on organic surpassed our threshold of success. From now on, w e're pivoting to an organic-only strategy, where we'll only create new blog content that has current or future search volume and fits into our pillar cluster model."

As humans, it's natural for our emotions to hijack your decision making process. And that's okay. Sometimes, emotional decisions are better than logical ones. But when you really need to prioritize logic over emotion, arming your mind with the rational decision making model can help you suppress your emotion bias and be as objective as possible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rational Decision Making: The 7-Step Process for Making Logical Decisions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As humans, it's natural for our emotions to hijack your decision making process. And that's okay. But when you really need to prioritize logic over emotion, arming your mind with the rational decision making model can help be as objective as possible.

# data[].attributes.body
BELBIN'S
Strength:
1- He examines the type of people that are required in a group.
2- He emphasied and focused on the need for diversity within teams and the value of different characteristics and skills.

Weaknesses :
1- Practically many groups will be less than nine and members will have to take more than 1 role.
2- In many management teams there are many implementers and shapers and not enough plants and team workers.
3- Due to this plans are formulated quickly but they lack creativity.

# data[].attributes.body
TUCKMAN'S
Strength:
1- It is extremely useful in providing guidance on how groups form and in allowing organisations to see that these are part of the normal development processes.
2- His work is influential in understanding the stages that groups pass through.

Weaknesses:
1- This model was proposed as an explanation to small groups and may not be useful in understanding larger group development.
2- It does not produce a timescale for moving from one stage to another.
3- It fails to see that group formation is cyclical rather than linear.
4- It does not take into account differing team roles that members might have to adapt.

# data[].attributes.body
Acc. to him an ideal team contains people who are prepared to take on different roles.
1- ACTION- ORIENTED ROLES :

Shapers- Challenge the team to improve.

Implementers - Puts ideas into action

Completer-finisher- Ensure thorough, timely completion

2- PEOPLE-ORIENTED ROLES :

Coordinator- Acts as a chairperson

Team worker- Encourages cooperation

Resource Investigator- Explores outside opportunities

3- THOUGHT ORIENTED ROLES:

Plant- Present new ideas and approaches

Monitor-evaluator- Analyses the options

Specialist- Provides specialised skills

# data[].attributes.body
Tuckman's stages of group development(1965).
- He proposed that all groups go through the same five stages during their formation.