Sign in
My current job required me to work with several people to resolve a problem. This was the time we needed to devise a marketing plan for our product. We were able to find a solution for everyone, despite having different expertise and backgrounds. Retrospectively, it seems that our brainstorming and group dynamics were the problem.
First, the lack of structure and communication within the group was problematic. Everyone had their own ideas and perspectives, but we didn’t establish a clear process for discussing and evaluating these ideas. This led to a lot of confusion and frustration among group members, as we didn’t make progress and our meetings felt unproductive.
We also succumbed to groupthink. There was a strong desire to reach a consensus among the group and we didn’t encourage dissenting opinions or ideas. We didn’t consider all options, and we ultimately failed to find the right solution.
Retrospectively, we would have been able to hold more productive meetings if the meeting agenda was clearly defined and all participants were encouraged to voice their opinions. A neutral facilitator could have been a great help in guiding the discussions and making decisions.
My experience shows that two heads don’t always make a better decision. The situation is important and it depends on who involved. It is possible for a group of people with diverse perspectives to come up with more innovative and efficient solutions. Sometimes, though, group dynamics can cause confusion or inefficient decision making.
Personally, I think it is better to have other people involved in decision-making, especially when the issue involves complex and important matters. This gives you the opportunity to hear different points of view and helps to make better decisions. To ensure that effective decision making is possible, however, I believe it’s important to have clear communication within the group.
