I’ll Have What She’s Having … An Explanation for Inaccurate Group Decisions

Topic:  Decision Making
Publication: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Article: Knowing others’ preferences degrades the quality of group decisions (MAY 2010)
Author: A. Mojzisch, S. Schulz-Hardt
Reviewed by: Sarah Teague

Not too long ago I wrote a review about a technique for generating ideas called “brainwriting.” According to Heslin (2009), asking individuals to generate ideas independently before pooling them with a group is likely to improve the final quality of ideas (compared with traditional group brainstorming) – largely because this independent initial process eliminates social pressures associated with group decisions. A recent article by Mojzisch and Schulz-Hardt (2010) provides some support for these ideas.

Hidden profiles are a traditional paradigm used to study group decision-making involves distributing providing each group member with only a few pieces to the puzzle and observing how they work toward a solution. In order to reach the correct (or best) solution, each piece must be shared AND adequately attended to. The authors of the current article proposed that a lack of attention, as opposed to a lack of information sharing, is often the root of group failure. Findings from four different experiments supported their hypothesis, showing that individual group members pay less attention to future information after learning other members’ preferences, resulting in incorrect selection decisions  

This study is directly relevant to any organization that utilizes selection committees or any other decision-making group. Results suggest that it is important for individual group members to minimize expressing preferences prior to sharing all pertinent objective information. In fact, this is one situation where “brainwriting” could prove to be extremely useful. Stay tuned for further updates on this emerging topic!

Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2010). Knowing others’ preferences degrades the quality of group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(5), 794-808.

Brainwriting – a New Trend for Increased Innovation?

Topic: Creativity
Publication: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (MAR 2009)
Article: Better than brainstorming? Potential contextual boundary conditions to brainwriting for idea generation in organizations.
Author: P. A. Heslin
Reviewed By: Sarah Teague

The generation of innovative ideas is essential to the success of modern organizations. In attempts to facilitate this idea generation, group brainstorming has become a fixture in many organizations today. The current article compiles a list of the potential limitations of brainstorming and describes why brainwriting may be more effective.

Brainstorming involves the oral sharing of ideas within a group. In such a setting, there are several factors that may prevent group members from sharing ideas. Some individuals may feel that their ideas are not good enough, or they may hold back to avoid upstaging their superiors. Additionally, the value of the process can be negatively impacted by those who contribute too much (monopolizing the conversation), as well as those who contribute too little due to a lack of accountability (social loafing).

Brainwriting refers to the sharing of ideas among group members in a written form. The author cites evidence that suggests that this method could promote accountability and potentially eliminate the social pressures involved in a face-to-face group setting, thereby improving  productivity. While the author strongly emphasizes the need for continued empirical research, this technique shows promise as a viable alternative to traditional brainstorming and builds on the adage that, “Two heads are better than one” – just not at the same time.

Heslin, P. A. (2009). Better than brainstorming? Potential contextual boundary conditions to brainwriting for idea generation in organizations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 129-145.