 |
DETAILS!
Brainstorming
is a technique that generates a large number of ideas in a short time period. It works best when group members know
each other and have some degree of trust. The most important thing to remember about brainstorming is that it is intended
to generate ideas -- not judge ideas.
Brainstorming is a technique to help groups generate proposals for alternative courses of action. It was not
intended as a method for carrying out the entire decision-making process. Osborn (1957) proposed the idea of brainstorming.
He believed it was a way to help people make more creative proposals than they otherwise could have.
We distinguished between theorists who
are wholists and those who are reductionists. Wholists
believe that people perform tasks better when they are members of a group than when they are alone. In contrast, reductionists believe that people perform tasks better when they work alone than when
they are in groups. Osborn was a firm believer in wholism.
He believed that people working in groups have the potential to generate more ideas and more creative ideas than when they
work alone.
Osborn also believed,
however, that people often do not realize this potential because individuals working in groups are often afraid that other
group members will evaluate their ideas negatively. People are particularly afraid that the group will dislike their "craziest"
notions. Therefore, group members often are afraid to express their ideas in public. This is a significant drawback because
"crazy" ideas are sometimes the most creative and best solutions to problems. Hence, Osborn wanted to provide a technique
for generating ideas in groups that would make people comfortable enough to express even their most "off-the-wall" ideas.
To do this, he created the brainstorming method.
The "Brain Drain"
is like brainstorming except it introduces a competitive element into the activity. Begin by dividing the participants into
groups of three to five and provide each group with a sheet of paper and a marker. Ask them to write down as many ideas as
they can in one minute that relate to the topic under consideration.
After one minute, stop and find out which group has the most
ideas. Give the groups one more minute to add to their list. Stop and once again find out which group has the most ideas.
Give the groups another additional minute. Stop and ask each group to report on their ideas.Consolidate ideas by listing them on a master list.
Encourage combining and clarifying ideas if necessary, but don't eliminate ideas. Once again, elimination is done using other
decision-making techniques.
Effectiveness of Brainstorming
Brainstorming
is most appropriate when the group's task is specific and fairly limited in range. Under these conditions, the technique will
lead to proposals that are most likely to be feasible and least likely to be so numerous that they overwhelm the group.
A disadvantage of brainstorming is that the sheer
number of options can force a group to spend a great deal of time evaluating possible courses of action. Further, members
express many potentially good ideas in a vague form as they brainstorm. Consequently, the group needs a great deal of time
to formulate more precise versions of these options to evaluate them properly. Student organization members and leaders make decisions in the group all the time. The decision
making process can be stressful because people view it differently. For example, some people see it as a form of power struggle,
some people can not bear the idea of losing an argument and some people simply do not like to make decisions.
THE NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE
In this section we will describe the procedure called the Nominal Group Technique, or NGT,
proposed by Delbecq, Van de Ven, and Gustafson (1975). This procedure is a complete method for decision making, moving from
idea generation to the final decision. It also provides a procedure for generating ideas, which has both advantages and disadvantages
in comparison with the brainstorming technique.
NGT consists of the following six-step
procedure:
Step I--Silent
Generation of Ideas. The leader first
presents the group with the issue that it needs to resolve. They have a predetermined amount of time in which to do
this. If someone disrupts this silent, independent activity, the leader should speak to the group as a whole rather than to
the guilty person.
Step 2--Round-Robin
Recording of Ideas. Under direction of the leader, the members
take turns speaking. One at a time, the leader and all members each present one proposal to the group. The leader writes down
the ideas, in the form of short phrases, on a sheet of paper, chalkboard, or similar medium and places the list so that it
is clearly within each member's sight. The leader should try to phrase a member's proposal in the same wording that the member
used. Alternatively, the leader can ask for the member's approval if any paraphrasing of the idea is necessary. Participants
continue taking turns and offering one proposal at a time until no new ideas are forthcoming. Members should not restrict
themselves by saying only the alternatives that they have written on their personal lists. They should voice any further ideas
that come into their minds during this period. As in brainstorming, the participants should piggyback on the ideas of one
another. If a person has no new proposals when his or her turn comes around, the person should say "Pass" and give the floor
to the next member. People who pass may reenter when their turn comes again if they think of new ideas. If all members pass
on any round, the leader should declare that Step 2 is over.
Step 3 -- Serial Discussion for Clarification.
Starting at the top of the list, the leader covers each proposal in turn. He or she leads a group discussion to ensure
a common understanding of each alternative. As the leader comes to each new item on the list, the member responsible for the
idea can take the major role in the discussion. The group should, however, encourage all members to express their thoughts
about the meanings and implications of all ideas. The rules for this discussion include keeping evaluation to a minimum and
not allowing arguments about the ideas. The leader is responsible for enforcing these rules. Again, if someone breaks a rule,
the leader should criticize the group as a whole rather than the guilty person.
Step 4--Preliminary Vote on Item Importance. The intention of this step is to shorten the list of alternatives.
The group does this by eliminating proposals that have little support among group members. To do so, participants work silently.
They rate each idea and write down their ratings on a piece of paper. The members use a predetermined method to rank each
alternative. One method is for each person to choose five favorite ideas and rank-order them with number one being the favorite.
Ideas that do not fall into these top five do not receive a ranking
DELPHI is a group decision technique in whch individual members acting seperately put
together their judgement in a systematic and independent passion
Six Thinking Hats
is the title and subject of a book by Edward De Bono, published in 1985.In it De Bono describes
a process of deliberately adopting a particular approach to a problem as an implementation of Parallel Thinking™ as
well as an aid to lateral thinking. Six different approaches are described, and each is symbolized by the act of putting on
a coloured hat, either actually or imaginatively. This he suggests can be done either by individuals working alone or in groups.
De Bono's six hats are:
- White hat (Blank sheet): Information & reports (objective)
- Red hat (Fire): Opinion & emotion (subjective)
- Yellow hat (Sun): Praise, positive aspects, (objective)
- Black hat (Judge's robe): Criticism, negative aspects, modus tollens (objective)
- Green hat (Plant): Intuition, new approaches & 'everything goes' (speculative)
- Blue hat (Sky): "Big Picture," "Conductor hat," "Meta hat," "thinking about thinking", overall process (overview)
The main purposes of using Six Thinking Hats are:
- focus and improve the thinking processencourage creative,
- parallel and lateral thinking
- improve communication
- speed up decision making
- avoid debate
A mind map (or mind-map)
is a diagram used for linking words and ideas to a central key word or idea. It is used to visualize, classify, structure,
and generate ideas, as well as an aid in study, problem solving, and decision making.
It is similar to a semantic network or cognitive map
but there are no formal restrictions on the kinds of links used. Most often the map involves images, words, and lines. The
elements are arranged intuitively according to the importance of the concepts and they are organized into groupings, branches,
or areas.
In other words, a mind map is an image-centered radial
diagram that represents semantic or other connections between portions of information. The uniform graphic formulation of
the semantic structure of information on the method of gathering knowledge, may aid recall of existing memories. It is also
advertised as a way of increasing motivation to work on a task. For example, the map can graphically illustrate the structure
of government institutions within a state. A mind map well-structured and well-established can be subject to review (e.g.
with spaced repetition).
Lateral thinking is a term coined by Edward de Bono, a Maltese psychologist, physician, and writer.
He defines it as a technique of problem solving by approaching problems indirectly at diverse angles instead of concentrating
on one approach at length.
The most useful ideas listed above are outside the simple
mathematics implied by the question. Lateral thinking is about reasoning that is not immediately obvious and about ideas that
may not be obtainable by using only traditional step-by-step logic.
Techniques that apply lateral thinking to problems are
characterized by the shifting of thinking patterns away from entrenched or predictable thinking to new or unexpected ideas.
A new idea that is the result of lateral thinking is not always a helpful one, but when a good idea is discovered in this
way it is usually obvious in hindsight, which is a feature lateral thinking shares with a joke
In decision
theory (for example risk management), a decision tree is a graph of decisions and their
possible consequences, (including resource costs and risks) used to create a plan to reach a goal. Decision trees are constructed
in order to help with making decisions. A decision tree is a special form of tree structure.
Force field analysis is one of the most influential developments
in the field of social science. Force field analysis
provides a framework for looking at the factors (forces) that influence a situation, originally social situations.
It looks at forces that are either driving movement toward a goal (helping forces) or blocking movement toward a goal (hindering
forces).
Future pacing is a technique of asking a person to imagine doing something in the future and observing
their reactions. It is typically used to either check that a change process has been successful by observing body language
when the person imagines being in a difficult situation before and after an intervention. If the body language is the same
then the intervention has not been successful. You can also use future pacing to "embed" change into the future - to give
the person an experience of dealing positively with a situation before they get into the same situation again. The idea is
that when they are then in the situation the previous experience will serve as a model for how to behave, even though the
previous experience was imagined.
The website is done by Carmela Dalisay and
Carolyn Nazareno and Argie Lyne Molina as a project in Decision
Making subject. We hope to help other students and researchers. Thank you for visiting our sites, hope it will help you a
lot in your research.
|
|
