Como tornar a tomada de decisão em grandes grupos mais eficiente?

Unfortunately the question as posed is in error. To focus on "efficient" is to apply a brake as you squeeze, fine-tune or tinker with the issue. The question should be more about being "effective", which opens the question up to innovative solutions, breakthroughs and more robust outcomes. Please try again.

When engaging in group decision-making, it's crucial to steer clear of two potential pitfalls. Firstly, there's the risk of groupthink, where the team succumbs to the notion of 'they always do what they want anyway, so we'll just agree.' This conformity can stifle diverse perspectives and hinder innovation. Secondly, it's essential to be consistent when addressing problems by setting clear boundaries. A case in point is a client I worked with who formed a cross-departmental team to tackle an issue. Implementing rules such as no new hiring, no departmental restructuring, and a prohibition on finger-pointing can help maintain focus and ensure the group remains on track toward effective problem-solving.

There isn't a simple answer, it's dependent on contextual factors: the type of decision, the gravity of the decision, who will be involved in the decision-making process, how many will be involved in making the decision, the time-frame in which the decision must be made, the governance structure of the decision-making process, and the relevant stake-holders who will be impacted by the decision. That said, if the context is one in which democracy is precedent then simple virtual polling, survey, or some sort of roll-call vote can be maximally efficient given broad scope and reach. If the context, however, is top-down driven and hierarchical the same methods can apply, but the scope of the decision-making has to much narrower and focused.

Defining the purpose and scope is the first step in the co-design process with the sponsor and the teams: even if I may bring the first draft to the table, the final version needs to be decided with them. A powerful question then is: "do you imagine these objectives being shared with all the participants when we bring them to the room?". Having clear objectives is also the only way to assess whether the programme and the content are in line with the expectations when the project is over.

There are several approaches that can help make the process effective: -Clear articulation of the goals and objectives. -Ensure participants have all necessary data, and background information. -Use decision matrices or frameworks. -Manageable subgroups for focused discussions. -A main key here would be facilitation Skills. Employ skilled facilitators who can guide discussions, manage time effectively, and ensure that all voices are heard. -Use support tools/softwares to assist in collecting and analyzing data into digestible format. -Prioritize and rank options to help narrow down choices. -Establish feedback loops to gather input and reactions at various stages of the process. -Open/transparent communication is key.

The parallel thinking process of Six Thinking Hats will greatly increase group efficiency and effectiveness, as well as output. I have used the process with as many a 88 people in the group, breaking them down into smaller groups of 4-5, then providing them with the parallel thinking process, then processing each group, with answers building on the previous set. Glad to chat with you about this if you like. Simply use the 800 phone number on the website, 888-572-2190. Also see below, Omid Aslani and this comments.

In two prior companies (given the right initiative and team), I utilized the Six Thinking Hats to facilitate the discussion. This is a fun yet creative way that ensures all voices are heard and various angles considered. Six Thinking Hats divides thinking into six distinct areas and perspectives, which will help you, your team, and your company tackle problems from different angles, thus solving them with the power of parallel thinking and saving time, money, and energy as a result. The six thinking hats are: Blue hat: Metacognition, or the organization of the thinking process White hat: Neutral information Red hat: Emotions Black hat: Criticism Yellow hat: Positive feedback and solutions Green hat: Creative ideas

Me gusta incorporar herramientas tecnológicas a las reuniones de grupos grandes. Al plantear el estado de un tema, por ejemplo, "¿Qué creemos que deberíamos hacer de manera diferente el próximo año?", suelo hacer una ideación rápida a través de Jamboard o alguna pizarra colectiva sencilla. Tiene muchas ventajas: 1.- Extraemos rápido todas las ideas fundamentales. Esto ahorra tiempo de la fase de descarga y libera tiempo para el debate y los acuerdos, que son la clave del avance. *Yo suelo aprovechar para sembrar ideas arriesgadas y difíciles de expresar que creo que el grupo necesita oír para avanzar. 2.- No se ve quién dice cada cosa: se desvincula la idea de la persona que la emite. Nada es personal. 3.- Debatimos sobre las ideas.

Out of experience agile methodologies can help a lot in this specific situation. From the development of individual points in small groups to the bigger picture of the whole group. The small groups should already be selected heterogeneous and cross-functional. This already identifies many dependencies, which contributes purposefully to finding a solution. In order to understand this principle more precisely, you should take a closer look at the 1-2-4-All method from the method kit of the Liberating structures. This toolbox contains many other approaches that can be applied individually.

Customize the decision process in function of the stake, the potential impacts at entreprise level, always appear as smart and wise. Obviously, the more the impact is important, the more the decision process should integrate as many dimensions as possible. Yet, a question remains : what if part of the stakeholders are not aligned with the Customized format for the coming decision ? That's the key discussion before to perform Customized format decision...

Muy importante construir reglas consensuadas con el grupo sobre la calidad de la interacción y la comunicación durante los encuentros, como reglas acerca del proceso mismo: horario, lugar de reuniones, frecuencia de encuentro. En la medida que estas reglas sean acordadas y validadas por todas las partes se cuenta con un primer momento de logro respecto a la toma de decisiones sobre el proceso, separando las conversaciones y asuntos que el grupo va ir desarrollando durante los encuentros. Es clave tomarse tiempo inicialmente, con el grupo que participa para validar estas reglas.

One item I try to always emphasize is that disagreement is encouraged to come to the best decision but must be expressed with respect and dignity during the time together. Another thing I’ve learned is to set up the agenda clearly where we start at the 30,000 foot level with brainstorming and ideas, then we descend to the 20,000 level for working on the strength and weaknesses of a specific plan and then tell everyone we’re heading to 10,000 and “landing the plane” for tactics and details of the decision. This is Patrick Lencioni’s analogy used in the Six Types of Working. This way, if you’ve encouraged everyone to participate in some way, they know the point in the meeting when their perspective and strengths would fit in best.

Keeping to time (when to start, end, come back from break, etc.) is critical to best use the time for the larger group. I've found it helpful to place a countdown timer on my screen projector that clearly shows when the team needs to return from break. There are Google Chrome add-ons and many other free tools to achieve this in a fun manner. We also used chimes as a heads-up with 5 min remaining. Another effective (although it might sound silly) rule I set at the onset is asking all members to hang their egos outside the door before entering the conference room, as the work is not about a person but the holistic organization, our clients, and the value we provide.

Suelo proponer unas reglas básicas de participación para el grupo, como: 1.- Respeto. 2.- Curiosidad: ante una idea que te desafíe, ábrete con curiosidad para conocerla mejor y considerar lo que puede aportar. 3.- Coraje: para generar progreso deberemos adentrarnos en espacios que exigen nuestra audacia para empujar los límites. Por mi parte, mantengo mucha disciplina con los tiempos y los objetivos de la sesión para tratar de acompañar al grupo hacia resultados productivos.

A key for this discussion is to build an undisputed rule or norm for your decision procedure. Among a large number of stakeholders, there will always remain people that are not aligned. A hint for this discussion : what are the main sources of the Law ? Two major sources : Tradition and Jurisprudence. 1. Tradition : A decision procedure that is in place for a long time has more chance to be accepted; 2. Jurisprudence : A decision procedure that is updated in function of the experience, old and recent, at the entreprise level, has even more chance to be accepted by a larger number of stakeholders.

Sólo avanzaremos en la conversación cuando se hayan escuchado todas las voces. Las dinámicas de poder suelen impedir que esto suceda. Para ello, suelo intentar: 1.- Invitar a las voces no escuchadas: "Hay voces que no se han escuchado todavía". Al hacer esto hay que tener cuidado de no señalar a las personas que no se han pronunciado. No estamos exigiendo la obligación de pronunciarse, estamos buscando todos los ángulos. 2.- Cuando sobre un asunto se ha escuchado sólo un punto de vista y las personas que hablan continúan enfatizándolo, invito a las voces disidentes: "¿Todo el mundo comparte este punto de vista? Es posible que no sea tan sencillo como parece". 3.- Proteger a las voces minoritarias es clave. Especialmente las disidentes.

Large group decision-making events can sometimes present challenges to some team members who need more time to contemplate the issues before being able to bring their ideas forward. To ensure that their voices can be fully heard, a best practice is to provide meeting participants with a detailed agenda, pre-read material, and/or pre-work assignments.

Wenn man den Teilnehmenden stets die Möglichkeit gibt, zunächst für sich über ihre Antworten und Präferenzen nachzudenken, und sie erst dann dazu einlädt, in Austausch miteinander zugehen, ermöglicht man echte Partizipation. Das berücksichtigt besonders die Bedürfnisse introvertierter Menschen. Ohne dieses Prinzip berücksichtigt der Entscheidungsfindungsprozess die Meinung nur der beteiligten Menschen, die schnell sind und schnell denken.

Diversity and Inclusion are necessary conditions for a better decision procedure for a large number of stakeholders. But they are not sufficient conditions. Diversity and Inclusion may enlarge the perimeter of stakeholders taking part and buying a decision. A potential risk induced by too much diversity and inclusion is to loose the target by deflecting the decision to mickey-mouse decisions.

Choosing your framing language as a facilitator is key. This language and expectation sets the tone for inclusion and models this to the group to use this as an asset instead of a divider. I’ve used framing statements such as “You’ve all been chosen strategically to best represent a wide range of perspectives. This diversity was intentional and we want to hear each of your voices and perspectives.” I’ve also found it’s helpful to briefly include a research note or data point about how diversity makes for a better outcome in the long run but can be messy in the middle. This helps model to the group that wading through complexities of diversity of thought is worth it because in the end we’re all better for it.

Administrar la energía es fundamental para el éxito: deberemos establecer un ambiente con un nivel de tensión suficiente como para que haya una incomodidad que active nuestra audacia y la necesidad de aprender más. A la vez, el ambiente debe ser suficientemente seguro como para que la conversación progrese. Para subir y bajar la tensión son claves dos elementos: el desafío compartido y la responsabilidad común. 1.- La tensión subirá cuanto más nos acerquemos a nombrar y profundizar en el desafío. 2.- La tensión subirá cuanto más apelemos a una responsabilidad compartida. Para bajar la tensión cuando sea demasiado alta, llevemos la atención al propósito compartido, los valores y los vínculos humanos que nos unen.

Time and Energy are two factors to be considered in Total Cost of Ownership. Since a large number of stakeholders wish to align themselves on a decision, this decision surely has a huge impact on the company. Then, the more time and energy (assumption : efficiency does not fluctuate in the company in function of the process...) you spend upstream, the more you will lift up risks for the processes downstream.

~ Don’t let fear of failure prevent you from committing. ~ Years ago, I started to use a term called “White board Express”. Using a white board to write ideas and suggestions allowing the team to express their opinions toward the success of the project. ~ Celebrate little victories along the way, giving credit where credit is due. “Good job” goes along way when you are sincere.

One tool I often use in small and large meetings is the Fellow.app This tool allows me to show up with an agenda and leave with tasks created and assigned. This way, the time we have spent together is fruitful, and everyone is clear on the next steps with transparency and traceability of the task.

Complemented by affinity diagrams, brain storming, qualitative ranking, nominal group technique, multi voting will allow to take out bias and group think and facilitate more effective decisions.

Wichtig ist hier transparent zu sein und offen und präzise darüber zu kommunizieren, was und wie berücksichtigt werden kann und was nicht.

Do not wait for consensus among large groups. Encourage (or even demand) full disclosure and debate about the options. Someone (Sponsor, GM, Convener) is accountable to make the call. That person needs to hear the advocates and their arguments from all contingents in the group, then make a clear decision. Small groups may work their way to consensus, but a larger group or leadership team needs to debate options courageously and honestly so that the leader can make an informed call.

Most of the items that make large group decision-making more efficient relate to 2 key elements: experience and togetherness. Decisions are not only a rational exercise, they rely on emotions and postures that need to be seen and shared. The more people are involved in the decision and the earlier, the more it will be robust and last long.