better decision making team problem solving without tension

Filter by Keywords

How to Facilitate Strong Team Decision-Making

Senior Content Marketing Manager

February 15, 2024

A business leader’s life can be summarized in three words: decisions, decisions, decisions. The number of high-quality decisions you’re expected to make daily can be mind-boggling. But you can take solace in the fact that you don’t have to do it all alone.

Hiring the right people, expanding your business in a new market, or adding a new product line—important business decisions are typically the result of a focused team effort and effective business evaluation . 💪

However, a team can make good decisions only when leadership effectively facilitates open discussions and collaboration. There are processes in place to synthesize diverse perspectives, and there’s a culture of accountability to implement the decision. 

That’s why team leaders must ensure they have the correct data, tools, and people to help them make quick, objective decisions. 

In this post, we’ll cover how you can create the conditions for optimal team decision-making. We’ll also explore the process, its benefits and challenges, the different models used, and offer some pro tips.

Why Is Team Decision-Making Important? 

1. identify the problem , 2. define the problem , 3. build solutions, 4. evaluate all options, 5. implement the solution and review the results, 6. provide feedback, benefits and challenges of team decision-making, types of team decision-making models, 1. assign tasks, 2. prioritize tasks, 3. brainstorm ideas, 4. meet with your team regularly, 5. create a structured workflow, 6. review progress, track key decisions with technology and smart work, common faqs.

According to a study by Zippia , 90% of employees believe decision-makers should not make a final decision without consulting their teams, but 40% feel that their leaders and decision-makers consistently fail to do so.

In many workplaces, managers and leaders assume it’s quicker and more efficient to make a decision alone or with a few hand-picked associates. To them, involving too many people is an unnecessarily complex endeavor that wastes time, adds minimal value, and delays problem-solving.  

But this approach could be doing your business more harm than good. 

Here’s why team decision-making is important for your organization:

Novel ideas

When your whole team—composed of people whose judgment you trust—works toward a shared goal, you can view a problem from multiple angles.

Each team member comes with a diverse background, experience, and skillset. They can bring unique perspectives to the table that you, alone, may not have considered. Multiple perspectives and viewpoints enable you to approach a challenge collectively and from all sides. And your final solution comes out to be holistic and inclusive. 

The ideas that emerge from team collaboration and consensus building might be precisely what your business needs—a creative, original, multifaceted solution. Studies show that diversity leads to better decision-making and fuels organizational innovation. 

Employee experience

Now more than ever, employees want to feel like their opinions and roles matter in the organization’s bigger picture. 

The same study by Zippia reveals that companies that promote group collaboration and communication see employee turnover rates drop by a staggering 50%.

Involving your team in decision-making increases employee satisfaction and acceptance of the decision. It also lets them know you value them. Employees are, on average, 17% more satisfied with their job when they collaborate actively.

When you value the views of your employees, they feel an increased sense of loyalty and accountability toward your business. So, collaborative decision-making can help improve your effectiveness as a manager and leader.

Information sharing

Group conversations and discussions can give your employees important information about the organization’s direction. 

It also allows leaders to identify areas of misunderstandings or confusion and quickly provide clarity. The result is increased alignment between your company’s strategic roadmap and employee buy-in. This creates a more harmonious workplace environment. 

Bonus: Team Charter Templates !

Understanding the Team Decision-Making Process

Now that we’ve established the importance of making decisions as a team, how do we do it? To define a process that is both outcome-oriented and fast, here are the steps to follow: 

First, acknowledge and accept that there is an anomaly in the business or an objective you need to achieve. Evaluate your business to determine what’s going wrong or needs a decision. 

Team members should be able to freely discuss and agree on the problem they are trying to solve. It prevents everyone from being pulled in different directions and saves valuable time. 

Next, you need to build a clear picture of the issue. So start by collecting all the relevant information and encouraging your team to contribute. 

In this step, you should ask specific questions such as: Who in the organization is most affected by the challenge? Who will be most impacted by a planned change? How did the issue arise? What is the scope of the issue?

Dive as deeply as you can to understand the situation. Get data to gain clarity and make sense of the problem. The more you know, the better you can plan your next steps. This will also help you avoid misdiagnosing the issue.

Once you have the complete picture, gather your team to brainstorm all plausible solutions. But before you do that, set clear parameters on how to measure the effectiveness of a solution. 

These parameters could be a checklist, a list of yes/no questions, or a tangible increase/decrease in specific business metrics. Ensure you specify the conditions that must be satisfied by the solution or the decision.

Then, welcome the ideas that emerge from your team.

Now that you’ve laid out all the possible solutions in detail, it’s time to pick the best one. 

Try to write down the real-world outcomes of each option. Evaluate the solution’s possible effect on your business, employees, customers, and other stakeholders, as well as the external environment. You can even create a mutually acceptable set of criteria and a scoring mechanism to guide your evaluation.

Of course, not everyone will agree on everything. Some team members will have to make compromises. That’s why it’s essential to remind folks that you’re trying to arrive at the ‘right’ decision, not the most ‘popular’ one. 

Once you reach a group consensus, you can finalize the plan. And then, of course, implement it. 

But the process doesn’t end there. Once your solution is in action, you must monitor it and see whether it yields the desired results.

If your solution was not a total success, communicate this clearly to your team and see if you can make tweaks to improve it. Also, assess if there was a deviation from your plan.

If the solution does not work, revisit the options list and implement the next best solution. This step is critical for improving future decision-making processes.

Every failure or victory is an opportunity to learn. After assessing the performance of your solution, make sure to share feedback with team members. Include details on how well your solution addressed the problem, how much of a positive impact it had, and how much time or effort it saved. 

Also, evaluate the group decision-making process itself. What worked well, and what could be improved?

Encourage honest feedback from team members so they remain as engaged in the process as you are.

Use the insights gained through feedback to refine your team’s decision-making processes for tackling future challenges.

If you’re still on the fence about collaboration for problem-solving, that’s understandable. To help you assimilate your thoughts, here’s a breakdown of its pros and cons:

• Enhanced creativity: Collaborative decision-making fosters innovation by allowing every team member to build on each other’s ideas, exposing them to thinking styles and mental models different from their own. That’s why highly creative teams are often composed of a mixture of eclectic individuals
• Improved problem-solving : When teams pool their collective problem-solving skills, they can comprehensively analyze the issue and are more likely to find effective solutions. Moreover, if decisions are complex, allowing team members to share their perspectives and ideas can increase the critical evaluation needed to make high-quality decisions
• Increased trust and commitment: Team members involved in the decision-making process feel a greater sense of connection, belongingness, and loyalty to the organization. It also indicates that the organization trusts its employees to have the business’s best interest at heart. This results in a higher level of commitment, ownership, and accountability among the team as well
• Time sink: Group decision-making can be time-consuming. A recent McKinsey Global Survey revealed that only 20% of respondents felt their organizations excelled at decision-making. The majority said most time spent on decision-making is ineffective. While consensus building and considering multiple viewpoints takes time, it may not suit urgent decisions
• Conflict and disagreement: Differing opinions within a team can lead to conflicts, slowing the process down and potentially creating interpersonal tension between team members
• Groupthink: The desire for harmony within a team may lead to groupthink, where members conform to a unanimous decision without critically evaluating alternatives. This could result in suboptimal choices
• Coordination and communication issues: Effective communication and coordination among team members can be challenging, especially in large teams or those spread across different geographies. Cultural differences may also come into play here. All of these factors could lead to misunderstandings or missed opportunities

As a team leader, you can have different styles of decision-making . Similarly, there are different models or approaches to making decisions as a team. Here are the six most popular ones.

• Consensus decision-making: In this approach, everyone can voice their ideas and opinions regarding an issue. Then, the team works together to choose which idea they find the most appropriate. Everyone has to vote for their favorite idea and reach a consensus on the solution before making the final decision
• Delphi technique : In this method, a team of experts is given a set of questions to answer. Their written answers are shared with the team, providing their written feedback. Based on the feedback, the team of experts can change or modify their answers through multiple rounds of back and forth until a consensus is reached
• Autocratic decision-making : In this technique, usually the group leader is the final decision maker regardless of whether the group supports their decision. Typically, the leader has the authority and tools to decide by themselves. This type of decision-making can be used to take action on urgent but low-impact matters
• Majority rules: This is the most common method used in group decision-making, where each member of the team votes for their choice. The option that gets the most votes wins. Although this technique seems fair, it might leave a minority group dissatisfied
• Nominal group technique: This is a structured brainstorming method used to generate ideas or solutions from a group. Participants independently generate ideas, which are then shared and collectively evaluated. By ranking and evaluating the ideas, the group works together to identify a list of the most promising solutions, leading to informed decision-making
• Multi-Voting: Each team member votes for multiple options from a list of choices. The ideas with the highest number of votes are then selected. This method helps prioritize ideas by allocating multiple votes to each participant, allowing for a fair distribution of preferences and identification of the most favored options based on the collective input

6 Tips for Successful Team Decision-Making

We’ve established the process and the pros and cons of teamwork-based decision-making. Here are some pro tips to get it right.

Ensure you’ve clearly explained and assigned tasks to everyone involved in the decision-making process. Invite any questions or doubts from the start because if your team members don’t understand the task well, they won’t be able to do it right. A well-organized team can collaborate better and progress faster.

Using a project management tool like ClickUp Tasks, you can simplify the task assignment process. It will help you assign tasks, create subtasks, and review the progress of each team member.

If you are finding it hard to manage and prioritize your tasks yourself, you can use ClickUp’s Task Management Template to visualize all the tasks your team is working on in a real-time dashboard.

With a ready-made template, you must add task details and let the platform do its magic. 

The ClickUp platform has built-in tools to help you visualize and organize tasks by status, priority, or department, track and optimize workflows, and collaborate across teams to finish tasks.

You can view your timeline in a way that works for you—in a calendar, board, list, or box view. 

And if you don’t find something you want on the template, you can add new Custom Fields for details like budgets, file attachments, feedback, etc.

As each team member works toward a common goal, setting priorities can help create a smooth workflow. Get your team members to decide what tasks to tackle first for maximum impact.

ClickUp Task Priorities makes this process a breeze. Use the feature to assign each task a priority level. You have four options: Urgent, High, Normal, or Low. You can also set filters for due dates to mark task deadlines.

To keep everyone on the same page, drop the high-priority tasks in the task tray so they’re always in your view. You can see which pending tasks block other high-priority ones and course-correct as needed. 

Brainstorming sessions allow your team members to collect their jumbled, scattered thoughts, assemble them before others, and tap into each other’s ideas and perspectives. If done right, these sessions can engender critical thinking and spark creativity. 

If you need a dynamic workspace to share, visualize, and develop ideas collectively, use ClickUp’s Whiteboard feature. Encourage your team members to share their ideas on this digital canvas and collaborate visually with the rest of the team in real time. 

The best part? You can even action these brainstorming sessions as soon as they’re concluded. Simply link your ClickUp Whiteboard to your ClickUp Tasks and give everyone the complete context of your project with linked files, documents, and more.

Transparent communication is critical for the success of any group exercise. Schedule regular meetings with your team, whether physically or virtually, right from the first step of decision-making till the last. This will help you strategize, plan better, and keep everyone in the loop on all developments.

It can be tricky to lead meetings, however. Especially with team members you haven’t worked with. As a leader, the onus is on you to break the ice. Once that’s done, you can easily steer the discussion in a productive, respectful, and engaging way. 

Check out these simple yet effective ideas for your next productive team meeting .

Assigning everyone their tasks and duties is essential. But then, you must create a structured workflow that details these tasks, duties, and interdependencies. 

This is particularly important to visualize progress, identify and eliminate bottlenecks, and keep everyone on the same page in a large team. You can also set and achieve goals faster with a systematic, step-wise workflow.

To clarify planning and organizing tasks, check out the ClickUp Mind Maps feature. You can use it to create tasks, build connections within them, and organize your projects with drag-and-drop nodes. ClickUp Mind Maps come with two modes:

• In the Task mode, you can swiftly rearrange your workspace by drawing and organizing branches logically. You can also create, edit, and delete tasks directly from your mind map. 
• In the Blank mode, generate free-form mind maps without linkages to any task structure. You can easily convert them into tasks in any list within your workspace.

ClickUp also provides AI tools and decision-making templates to fast-track your decision-making process without compromising the quality of decisions.

Finally, when a decision is executed, take the time to debrief and decompress. Review project progress, analyze processes , and discuss drawbacks, unsolved problems, and decisions that pan out as planned.

But don’t forget to celebrate the things that went well. Acknowledge the efforts and wins of your team and build a workplace culture that rewards achievement.

Team decision-making is like assembling a jigsaw puzzle. Everyone adds their unique piece, and the whole becomes so much greater than the sum of its parts. Collaborative solutions for teams can work wonders because they unlock fresh ideas, creative problem-solving, and a strong sense of solidarity and teamwork. 

But sometimes, differing opinions can cause a little bump in the road. ClickUp’s all-in-one project management solution helps you overcome those bumps so you and your team can combine forces and reach your goals far more efficiently. 

Try ClickUp today to foster collaborative decision-making and improve group dynamics in your organization. 

1. Why should teams be involved in the decision-making process?

Teams bring diverse perspectives and ideas, leading to better decisions overall. Team-led decision-making also shows that you trust your employees, which leads to increased commitment and loyalty.

2. What are the different models of team decision-making?

Consensus decision-making, the Delphi technique, and autocratic decision-making are some of the most common models of team decision-making. 

3. How can software tools like ClickUp enhance the team decision-making process?

ClickUp helps you streamline communication, organize and prioritize tasks, and facilitate team collaboration through features like whiteboards and mind maps. It helps improve efficiency and collaboration in decision-making. 

Questions? Comments? Visit our Help Center for support.

Receive the latest WriteClick Newsletter updates.

Thanks for subscribing to our blog!

Please enter a valid email

• Free training & 24-hour support
• Serious about security & privacy
• 99.99% uptime the last 12 months

Outside USA: +1‑607‑330‑3200

Better Decision-Making

Event overview, what you'll learn.

• Why some people are easier to make decisions with than others
• Strategies to employ when encountering problem-solving difficulties with others
• Different approaches to decision-making

• Certificates Authored

Cheryl Strauss Einhorn is the founder and CEO of Decisive, a decision sciences company using her AREA Method decision-making system for individuals, companies, and nonprofits to solve complex problems. Decisive offers digital tools and in-person training, workshops, coaching, and consulting. Ms. Strauss Einhorn also teaches as an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School and Cornell Tech. She has won several journalism awards for her investigative stories about international political, business, and economic topics. She’s authored two books on complex problem solving: “Problem Solved,” for personal and professional decisions; and “Investing In Financial Research” about business, financial, and investment decisions. Ms. Strauss Einhorn is writing a new book about different decision-making approaches entitled “How You Decide.”

• Complex Decision-Making

View Keynote by completing the form below.

Add to Calendar 1:00 PM - 2:00 PM EDT

How to Improve Problem-Solving on a Team: Tips for Success

Have you ever been on a team where solving problems seemed impossible? Maybe it felt like everyone was talking at once, or no one was listening to each other's ideas. It's frustrating when you know there's a solution out there, but your team just can't seem to find it.

The good news is that there are ways to improve your team's problem-solving skills. By following a few tips and strategies, you can help your team work together more effectively and find solutions to even the toughest challenges.

In this article, we'll explore some of the best ways to improve problem-solving on a team and increase your chances of success. Whether you're working on a project at school or tackling a complex business problem, these tips will help you get the results you need.

Team problem-solving is critical to success in the workplace. When we work in teams, we bring together different perspectives, expertise, and experience that help to generate innovative solutions to complex problems. However, achieving effective problem-solving in a team setting is often easier said than done. In this article, we will explore how you can improve problem-solving on a team to achieve success.

Understanding the Importance of Team Problem-Solving

Effective problem-solving in a team setting can yield numerous benefits. The collective knowledge and experience of a team can lead to more creative and innovative solutions that may not be possible through individual efforts. Additionally, team problem-solving can help to build stronger relationships and foster better teamwork, as team members learn to work collaboratively and communicate openly with one another.

Team problem-solving is an essential skill in the workplace, as it can help organizations to overcome challenges and achieve their goals. When teams work together to solve problems, they can come up with solutions that are more effective and efficient than those developed by individuals working alone. This can lead to increased productivity, improved performance, and better outcomes for the organization as a whole.

The Benefits of Effective Problem-Solving in a Team

Here are some of the key advantages of effective problem-solving in a team:

• Greater innovation and creativity: When team members collaborate to solve problems, they can draw on a wider range of perspectives and ideas, leading to more innovative solutions.
• Faster decision-making: Teams can make decisions more quickly than individuals, as they can divide tasks and responsibilities among team members.
• Improved communication and collaboration: Team problem-solving requires open communication and collaboration, which can help to build stronger relationships and trust among team members.
• Stronger relationships and trust among team members: When team members work together to solve problems, they develop a deeper understanding of each other's strengths and weaknesses, leading to stronger relationships and greater trust.

Effective team problem-solving requires a range of skills, including active listening, critical thinking, and effective communication. Team members must be willing to listen to each other's ideas and perspectives, ask questions, and provide constructive feedback. They must also be able to work collaboratively, dividing tasks and responsibilities in a way that allows each team member to contribute their unique skills and expertise.

Challenges Faced by Teams During Problem-Solving

Despite the benefits of team problem-solving, there are several challenges that teams may face during the process. These challenges include:

• Lack of trust or open communication among team members: When team members do not trust each other or are not willing to communicate openly, it can be difficult to work collaboratively to solve problems.
• Differing perspectives and approaches to problem-solving: Team members may have different ideas about how to approach a problem, leading to disagreements and conflicts.
• Ineffective leadership or unclear goals and objectives: Without clear leadership and goals, teams may struggle to stay focused and work effectively together.
• Difficulty managing conflicts or disagreements within the team: When conflicts arise, it can be challenging to manage them effectively and find a resolution that satisfies all team members.

Despite these challenges, effective team problem-solving is an essential skill for any organization. By working together to overcome challenges and find innovative solutions, teams can achieve their goals and drive success for the organization as a whole.

Building a Strong Foundation for Team Problem-Solving

Effective problem-solving as a team requires a strong foundation that is built on clear goals and objectives, open communication and trust, and a culture of collaboration and inclusivity. When teams work together towards a common goal, they can achieve more than any individual can on their own. In this article, we will explore some tips for building a strong foundation for team problem-solving.

Establishing Clear Goals and Objectives

When working as a team, it is important to have a clear understanding of the problem at hand and the desired outcome. This involves defining the problem, identifying the objectives, and understanding the constraints and resources available. Establishing clear goals and objectives will help the team focus their efforts and work towards a common goal.

For example, if the team is working on a software development project, the problem might be to improve the user experience of an existing product. The objectives might be to identify pain points in the current user experience, design and implement new features that address these pain points, and test the new features to ensure they meet user needs.

By establishing clear goals and objectives, the team can work together more efficiently and effectively. This helps to ensure that everyone is on the same page and working towards the same end goal.

Encouraging Open Communication and Trust

Open communication and trust are essential components of effective problem-solving in a team setting. Team members should be encouraged to share their thoughts, ideas, and concerns openly and honestly. This helps to build trust among team members and fosters a culture of collaboration and inclusivity.

When team members feel comfortable sharing their ideas and concerns, they are more likely to contribute to the problem-solving process. This can lead to better solutions and more creative ideas. Additionally, when team members trust each other, they are more likely to work together effectively and support each other through challenges.

Fostering a Culture of Collaboration and Inclusivity

Team problem-solving should be a collaborative process that encourages participation and inclusivity. This means ensuring that everyone on the team has the opportunity to contribute their unique skills, experiences, and perspectives. Building a culture of collaboration and inclusivity will enhance the problem-solving process and foster better teamwork among team members.

For example, if the team is working on a marketing campaign, team members with different backgrounds and skill sets might contribute in different ways. A graphic designer might contribute by creating visuals for the campaign, while a copywriter might contribute by writing the copy. By fostering a culture of collaboration and inclusivity, the team can leverage everyone's unique strengths and perspectives to create a more effective campaign.

In conclusion, building a strong foundation for team problem-solving requires clear goals and objectives, open communication and trust, and a culture of collaboration and inclusivity. When teams work together towards a common goal, they can achieve great things. By following these tips, your team can establish a strong foundation for effective problem-solving.

Implementing Effective Problem-Solving Techniques

Once your team has established a strong foundation for problem-solving, it is time to implement effective techniques to solve the problem at hand. Here are some techniques that can help:

Brainstorming and Idea Generation

Brainstorming is a popular technique for generating ideas and solutions in a team setting. It involves gathering as many ideas as possible, without criticism or judgment. This allows team members to think creatively and freely, which can lead to innovative solutions.

During a brainstorming session, it is important to encourage all team members to participate and share their ideas. One way to do this is to set a time limit for the session and to assign a facilitator who can guide the discussion and keep the conversation focused. It is also important to record all ideas and to review them later to identify the most promising solutions.

The Six Thinking Hats Method

The Six Thinking Hats method is a structured approach to problem-solving that involves looking at a problem from different perspectives. It involves assigning different roles to each team member, who will then approach the problem from a specific point of view. This process can help to generate a wider range of ideas and perspectives.

The six roles in the Six Thinking Hats method are:

• The white hat, which focuses on facts and information
• The red hat, which focuses on emotions and feelings
• The black hat, which focuses on risks and potential problems
• The yellow hat, which focuses on benefits and opportunities
• The green hat, which focuses on creativity and new ideas
• The blue hat, which focuses on the big picture and the overall process

By assigning each team member a different role, the Six Thinking Hats method encourages them to approach the problem from a fresh perspective and to consider all aspects of the problem.

The 5 Whys Technique

The 5 Whys technique is a simple but effective problem-solving technique that involves asking "why" five times in succession to get to the root cause of a problem. By identifying the underlying cause of a problem, teams can develop more effective solutions.

For example, if the problem is a product defect, the team might ask:

• Why did the product fail?
• Why was the component not working properly?
• Why was the component not manufactured correctly?
• Why was the manufacturing process not monitored closely?
• Why was the manufacturing process not designed to catch this type of error?

By identifying the root cause of the problem, the team can develop solutions that address the underlying issue, rather than just treating the symptoms.

SWOT Analysis

SWOT analysis is a strategic planning tool that can be useful in problem-solving. It involves identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to a problem. This analysis can help teams to identify potential solutions and develop an action plan.

To conduct a SWOT analysis, the team should:

• Identify the strengths of the current situation
• Identify the weaknesses of the current situation
• Identify the opportunities that could be pursued
• Identify the threats that could hinder progress

By considering all of these factors, the team can develop a comprehensive understanding of the problem and its potential solutions.

Enhancing Team Dynamics for Better Problem-Solving

Effective problem-solving is not just about techniques and strategies—it also involves enhancing team dynamics to foster better communication, collaboration, and understanding. Here are some ways to improve team dynamics:

Identifying and Leveraging Individual Strengths

Teams are made up of individuals with unique strengths and skills. By identifying these strengths, teams can leverage them to achieve better problem-solving outcomes. Team members should be encouraged to share their skills and expertise, and their contributions should be recognized and appreciated.

Promoting Active Listening and Empathy

Active listening and empathy are essential components of effective problem-solving in a team setting. Team members should be encouraged to listen actively to one another, seek to understand each other's perspectives, and show empathy towards each other's feelings and concerns.

Managing Conflicts and Disagreements Constructively

Conflicts and disagreements are inevitable in a team setting. However, it is important to manage these conflicts constructively to avoid damaging team dynamics. Teams should establish clear guidelines for conflict resolution and ensure that disagreements are addressed respectfully and openly.

The Bottom Line

Effective problem-solving in a team setting requires a combination of strong teamwork, effective communication, and innovative problem-solving techniques. By following the tips and strategies outlined in this article, you can improve problem-solving on your team and achieve success.

About the author

Founder & Chief Icebreaker

I started Icebreaker Spot because I truly believe that strong connections are the foundation of successful teams. I wanted to create a platform that would make it easy for people to find and share icebreakers and team building activities, empowering them to build trust, foster collaboration, and ultimately, achieve greatness together.

• Business Essentials
• Leadership & Management
• Credential of Leadership, Impact, and Management in Business (CLIMB)
• Entrepreneurship & Innovation
• Digital Transformation
• Finance & Accounting
• Business in Society
• For Organizations
• Support Portal
• Media Coverage
• Founding Donors
• Leadership Team

• Harvard Business School →
• HBS Online →
• Business Insights →

Business Insights

Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.

• Career Development
• Communication
• Decision-Making
• Earning Your MBA
• Negotiation
• News & Events
• Productivity
• Staff Spotlight
• Student Profiles
• Work-Life Balance
• AI Essentials for Business
• Alternative Investments
• Business Analytics
• Business Strategy
• Business and Climate Change
• Design Thinking and Innovation
• Digital Marketing Strategy
• Disruptive Strategy
• Economics for Managers
• Entrepreneurship Essentials
• Financial Accounting
• Global Business
• Launching Tech Ventures
• Leadership Principles
• Leadership, Ethics, and Corporate Accountability
• Leading Change and Organizational Renewal
• Leading with Finance
• Management Essentials
• Negotiation Mastery
• Organizational Leadership
• Power and Influence for Positive Impact
• Strategy Execution
• Sustainable Business Strategy
• Sustainable Investing
• Winning with Digital Platforms

Why Managers Should Involve Their Team in the Decision-Making Process

• 05 Mar 2020

Decision-making is a critical component of every manager’s day-to-day. Whether reshuffling the department’s budget, delegating tasks , or implementing a new strategy , the daily choices managers make have a direct impact on their organization’s success.

But that decision-making process isn’t always easy. In a survey by management consulting firm McKinsey , only 28 percent of executives touted the quality of their company’s strategic decisions, while 60 percent reported that bad decisions are about as frequent as good ones.

The Role of a Team in Decision-Making

One way to increase your likelihood of success is to include your team in the process. Research shows that diversity leads to better decision-making. By bringing people into the conversation with different disciplinary and cultural backgrounds, you can enhance creativity and gain a fresh perspective on the task or problem at hand.

“Map out the technical, political, and cultural underpinnings of the decision that needs to be made and then build your group accordingly,” says Harvard Business School Professor Len Schlesinger, who’s featured in the online course Management Essentials . “You’re looking for a broad array of experience. You want some newcomers who are going to provide a different point of view, as well as people who have profound knowledge and deep experience with the problem.”

Some managers might shy away from integrating their team into the process to avoid additional complexity or a potential clash of opinions. Yet the ideas that could come out of that dialogue are often far more valuable and critical to business success. Here’s a closer look at how successful team decision-making can benefit your organization.

Access your free e-book today.

Benefits of Team Decision-Making

1. overcoming consensus.

Managers often defer to consensus, or the majority of opinion, to avoid conflict and foster group harmony. But Schlesinger argues that it’s not always the right choice.

“Consensus is likely to lead to a lower evaluation of the problem and a less creative solution,” Schlesinger says. “You need to be willing to engineer in conflict, which is often perceived as uncomfortable, but is essential to uncovering some of the hidden assumptions and data that leads people to make less-informed decisions.”

Schlesinger suggests one approach of establishing a process of devil’s advocacy and encouraging individuals to poke holes in arguments and problem framing. As a result, your team will likely conduct a more in-depth critical evaluation, which could lead to a greater number of alternative solutions.

“Managers often get to convergence too quickly, which is one of the most negative byproducts of the consensus-oriented model and why it’s only appropriate for the most simplistic decisions,” Schlesinger says. “Unless you’re intentional about trying to overcome consensus, you’re going to be stuck with it and then get a group together who’s going to manifest a decision-making process that’s essentially no better than what you would come up with by yourself.”

As a team leader, it’s critical to encourage diverse thoughts and opinions around the table to discover more innovative solutions.

2. Increasing Employee Engagement

By involving your team members in the decision-making process, you show that you trust and value their opinion, which is a key element of building employee engagement .

According to analytics and advisory firm Gallup , highly engaged employees produce substantially better outcomes, are more likely to stay at their organization, and experience less burn-out. They can’t reach that level, though, unless they feel invested in their work, are given opportunities to develop their strengths, and understand how their role contributes to the company’s overall success.

Every decision you’re asked to make is a moment for you to empower others on your team by leveraging their strengths, experiences, and expertise.

3. Enabling Collaboration and Communication

According to a Queens University of Charlotte study , nearly 75 percent of employers rate teamwork and collaboration as “very important,” yet 39 percent of employees say their organization doesn't collaborate enough. In a separate study , 86 percent of respondents attributed workplace failures to a lack of collaboration or ineffective communication.

By involving others in the decision-making process, you create an opportunity for colleagues to share ideas, learn from each other, and work toward a common goal. In turn, you foster collaboration and help break down organizational silos. You might even surface overlapping initiatives within the company, which could save the organization resources and employees from duplicating work.

Related : 7 Skills You Need to Effectively Manage Teams

4. Surfacing Your Own Blind Spots

Self-awareness is a vital management skill , and has proven to be what sets high performers apart in the workplace. It’s a core tenet of emotional intelligence and describes your ability to understand your strengths, weaknesses, and managerial tendencies.

While you might think you know your blind spots, research suggests otherwise. According to organizational psychologist Tasha Eurich , 95 percent of people think they’re self-aware, but only 10 to 15 percent actually are. Meaning, if you’re making every decision by yourself, there’s likely cultural, informational, or technical data you’re missing.

Involving your team in the decision-making process can help surface your blind spots and enable you to cultivate self-awareness in the process.

5. Getting Buy-In from the People Who Need to Implement

The people you include in the decision-making process should be those who need to implement the agreed-upon solution.

“Getting to the ‘right answer’ without anybody who is supporting it or having to execute it is just a recipe for failure,” Schlesinger says.

If, upfront, you assembled a team with an array of skills, experience levels, and backgrounds, established clear goals, and explored all viable solutions, you should reach a stage where you’re ready to not only make a decision but execute.

“In the general manager’s job, the quality of the decision is only one part of the equation,” Schlesinger says. “All of this is oriented toward trying to make sure that once a decision is made, you have the right groupings and support to implement.”

Related : 5 Tips to Becoming a Better Manager

Should You Always Involve Your Team in Decision-Making?

Managers might fear they’ll slow work down if they involve their team in every decision. When faced with the choice of involving your colleagues or going solo, you must determine whether there’s absolute clarity and enough widespread, shared data that the decision is on the cusp of obvious. Yet, even then, Schlesinger recommends bringing the issue to a group in a short meeting or touch base since these decisions likely affect every aspect of the organization.

“Even the most obvious of decisions analytically still have enormous consequences from an implementation perspective,” Schlesinger says. “I encourage people, for decisions that have reasonably significant organizational consequences, to recognize that the decision-making group has both analytical and executional responsibilities. Even if the analysis is obvious, the execution generally is not.”

What Are the Different Types of Decision-Making?

There are several important decisions leaders must make on a daily basis to maintain their organization’s success. As a manager, it’s important to find ways to involve your team in this critical decision-making process in some capacity, whether strategic, tactical, or operational.

• Strategic decision-making : Decisions that have a significant or long-term impact on the organization, such as department restructuring or acquiring a new client. Being transparent about bigger-picture decisions and long-term organizational goals is one way to show your team they have a say in the company’s future.
• Tactical decision-making: Topics of discussion that focus on the immediate steps your organization needs to take to achieve long-term goals, like hiring a new team member or intern. Since these are smaller actions that likely affect the team’s daily routine, their input is invaluable.
• Operational decision-making: Decisions that involve the team's high-volume, daily operational tasks. Team involvement is crucial because it encourages valuable ideas and possible solutions to make systems or processes run smoothly. Teams are likely to perform well when they’re involved in the day-to-day efficiency of the organization.

Improving the Decision-Making Process

Involving your team in the decision-making process can benefit your entire organization. The quality of the decisions made will improve because you’ll have the right mix of skills and expertise at the table, but you’ll also have the people in place who are prepared, and in sync on what, to implement.

Are you interested in further developing your managerial skills? Explore our eight-week online Management Essentials course , and discover how you can gain the tools and strategies to excel in decision-making, implementation, organizational learning, and change management.

This post was updated on June 6, 2022. It was originally published on March 5, 2020.

About the Author

Decision-Making

Why team members should be involved in decision-making, how to increase team member commitment..

Posted July 23, 2022 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

• What Is a Career
• Find a career counselor near me
• Team decision-making increases the quality of decisions, leading to a well-thought-out course of action.
• Involving team members in decision-making increases their satisfaction and commitment to the decision.
• The team decision-making process can help communicate direction and clear up any misunderstandings team member may have.

Decades of research have clearly shown that involving team members in important work-related decisions has many benefits. From the organization’s perspective, allowing team members a voice in the decision-making process leads to greater commitment to the chosen course of action. Not all members may be in agreement on the correct course, but allowing them to air their opinions and perspectives can increase team member satisfaction.

But that’s not all. If decisions are complex, allowing team members to share their perspectives and ideas can increase the critical evaluation needed for high-quality decisions.

From the team member’s perspective, having a voice in decision-making not only increases member satisfaction and acceptance of the decision but also communicates that they are valuable members of the team and organization. Moreover, such meaningful conversations about workplace topics can provide important information about the direction of the organization, and employees can “see the future” and be more committed to sticking with the organization. It also allows leaders to see where there may be some misunderstandings or confusion on the part of team members and allows the opportunity to clarify what’s going on. The end result, hopefully, is alignment between where the organization’s leaders and its members are going and how they think about conditions moving forward.

Here are some tips for leaders to facilitate team decision-making.

• Ask Provocative Questions. This helps the leader understand what team members currently know, can help clarify any misunderstandings, and can lead to important contributions from team members based on their “on-the-ground” experiences.
• Consider the Best Decision-Making Strategy. Instead of traditional, top-down decisions, think about how final decisions should be made. How “democratic” do you want or need to be? Do you want the majority of team members to be in agreement? A near consensus – where everyone agrees? Or, will a simple majority backing the decision be enough? Consider when, why, and how you might veto a decision backed by a majority of team members.
• Realize That Team Decision-Making Is a Valuable Communication Opportunity. All too often, leaders in organizations “under-communicate.” There are many reasons for this. Sometimes a leader may believe team members already know what’s going on (when, in actuality, they don’t fully understand). Some leaders may only give out information on a “need-to-know basis.” In some instances, it may simply be an oversight. In any case, it’s best for leaders to err on the side of over-communicating. Make sure to keep team members informed about what’s happening and why. And, don’t be concerned about repeating yourself. It not only reinforces team members’ knowledge, and it demonstrates your commitment and concern.

Kerr, Norbert L., and R. Scott Tindale. "Group performance and decision-making." Annual review of psychology 55, no. 1 (2004): 623-655.

Riggio, R. E. & Johnson, S.K. (2022). Introduction to industrial/organizational psychology. (8th ed.). Routledge.

Ronald E. Riggio, Ph.D. , is the Henry R. Kravis Professor of Leadership and Organizational Psychology at Claremont McKenna College.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Empowering Teams: The Key to Effective Decision-Making

Ironically, in a world where individualism is often celebrated, the power of teams in decision-making is often overlooked. However, research suggests that empowering teams is indeed the key to effective decision-making. This article aims to explore the importance of clarity in decision-making, the establishment of boundaries and guidelines, the building of trust and empowerment within teams, effective communication and collaboration, and continuous learning and improvement. By understanding and implementing these factors, organizations can harness the potential of empowered teams to drive innovation and success.

Table of Contents

Key Takeaways

• Clear involvement in decision-making is crucial for leaders.
• Trust and empowerment lead to increased engagement and motivation.
• Effective communication and collaboration enhance team performance and alignment.
• Emphasize the importance of continuous learning and improvement.

Importance of Clarity in Decision-making

The importance of clarity in decision-making is highlighted as leaders seek to address concerns about chaos and lack of direction when autonomy is given, necessitating the establishment of guardrails to ensure alignment and control. Clarity in decision-making is crucial for effective leadership, as it enables leaders to make informed choices and communicate them clearly to their teams. Without clarity, decisions may be misunderstood or misinterpreted, leading to confusion and lack of direction. Decision-making boundaries play a key role in establishing clarity by defining the scope and limits of decision-making authority. By clearly defining the decisions that require leader involvement and providing guidelines for decision-making and resource allocation, leaders can ensure that decisions are made within the appropriate boundaries. This not only helps in maintaining alignment and control but also fosters a sense of trust and confidence among team members.

Establishing Boundaries and Guidelines

Establishing boundaries and guidelines is essential for ensuring clarity and direction in decision-making processes. By setting clear boundaries and guidelines, organizations can provide a framework for decision-making that promotes alignment and control. This helps leaders and teams navigate through complex and ambiguous situations, minimizing the risk of chaos and lack of direction.

To establish effective boundaries and guidelines, organizations should consider the following:

Clearly define the decisions that require leader involvement: By identifying the key decisions that require leader input, organizations can ensure that important matters are addressed by those with the expertise and authority to make informed choices.

Provide guidelines for decision-making and resource allocation: Clear guidelines can help teams make informed decisions within established parameters, ensuring consistency and alignment with organizational goals.

Establish a framework to mitigate risks associated with autonomy: Organizations should develop a risk management framework that allows teams to operate autonomously while also providing safeguards to prevent potential negative outcomes.

Building Trust and Empowering Teams

Building trust and fostering a culture of accountability are crucial elements for organizations looking to create an environment of autonomy and collaboration. Trust is a fundamental aspect of empowering teams and promoting autonomy. When teams are trusted to make decisions and have the authority to do so, it fosters a sense of ownership and accountability within the team. This trust also encourages innovation and creativity as team members feel empowered to take risks and explore new ideas. Furthermore, promoting autonomy within a framework of trust allows teams to adapt and respond to challenges more effectively, leading to increased engagement and motivation. By creating a culture of trust and accountability, organizations can harness the full potential of their teams and foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

Communication and Collaboration

Communication and collaboration play integral roles in facilitating effective knowledge-sharing and coordination among autonomous teams. To enhance collaboration and foster transparency, the following strategies can be implemented:

Establishing Clear Communication Channels: Providing open and transparent communication channels allows team members to share ideas, information, and feedback easily. This promotes a sense of inclusiveness and collaboration within the team.

Encouraging Knowledge-Sharing: Creating a culture of knowledge-sharing among team members promotes learning and innovation. Encourage team members to share their expertise, best practices, and lessons learned to benefit the entire team.

Regularly Updating Team Members: Keeping team members informed about organizational goals and objectives ensures alignment and coordination. Regular updates on progress, challenges, and achievements foster transparency and promote a shared understanding of the team’s direction.

Continuous Learning and Improvement

Continuous learning and improvement are essential components of a successful autonomous team, as they drive innovation and contribute to long-term success. In order to foster continuous learning, teams should embrace failure analysis as a means of gaining valuable insights and improving their performance. Failure analysis involves systematically examining and understanding the root causes of failures or shortcomings in order to identify areas for improvement. By analyzing failures, teams can learn from their mistakes, identify potential risks, and develop strategies to mitigate them. This process also encourages a culture of experimentation and adaptability, where teams are not afraid to take smart risks and learn from their experiences. By continuously learning and improving, autonomous teams are better equipped to innovate, overcome challenges, and achieve long-term success.

The Role of Autonomy in Decision-making

The role of autonomy in decision-making is a critical factor in empowering individuals and fostering a sense of ownership and accountability within teams. Autonomy allows team members to have the freedom to make decisions and take actions without constant supervision or approval from leaders. This encourages creativity, innovation, and problem-solving skills among team members. The benefits of autonomy include:

Increased motivation and engagement: When individuals have the freedom to make decisions and take ownership of their work, they feel more motivated and engaged. This leads to higher productivity and job satisfaction.

Improved problem-solving and decision-making skills: Autonomy allows individuals to develop their problem-solving and decision-making skills. They learn to analyze situations, consider various options, and make informed choices.

Enhanced sense of responsibility and accountability: When individuals have autonomy, they feel a greater sense of responsibility for their work and outcomes. They are more likely to take ownership of their actions and strive for excellence.

Strategies for Effective Decision-making

One approach to enhance the decision-making process involves implementing structured frameworks and guidelines that facilitate clarity and alignment. Strategies for effective decision-making encompass various techniques and methods aimed at improving the quality and efficiency of the decision-making process. These strategies typically involve establishing clear and specific objectives, conducting thorough research and analysis, considering multiple perspectives, and evaluating potential risks and benefits. Additionally, creating a collaborative and inclusive decision-making environment, promoting open communication and information sharing, and fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement are essential strategies to enhance the decision-making process. By implementing these strategies, organizations can improve their ability to make informed and effective decisions, leading to better outcomes and increased success in achieving their goals.

Enhancing Team Performance Through Empowerment

Enhancing team performance through empowerment is essential for enhancing productivity and fostering innovation.

Increased Autonomy: Empowering teams by granting them decision-making authority and autonomy enables them to take ownership of their work. This autonomy allows team members to make quick and informed decisions, leading to enhanced productivity and innovation.

Cultivating Creativity: Empowered teams are more likely to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions to challenges. By fostering a culture that encourages creativity and risk-taking, teams can explore new ideas and approaches, leading to increased innovation and improved performance.

Collaboration and Support: Empowered teams are more likely to collaborate and support each other, creating a positive and productive work environment. When team members feel empowered, they are more likely to share knowledge, offer assistance, and work together towards common goals, resulting in enhanced productivity and innovation.

Balancing Autonomy and Accountability

Balancing autonomy and accountability requires careful consideration of the appropriate level of decision-making authority and the establishment of clear guidelines and responsibilities. This process is essential to address the challenges in empowerment. When granting autonomy to teams, leaders must strike a balance between providing freedom and maintaining accountability. Clear boundaries and guidelines should be established to define the scope of decision-making and ensure alignment with organizational objectives. Additionally, leaders must foster a culture of trust and provide teams with the necessary resources and authority to make decisions. Effective communication and collaboration are also crucial in empowering teams, as they facilitate knowledge-sharing and enhance team performance. Continuous learning and improvement should be emphasized to encourage innovation and adaptability. By addressing these challenges, organizations can successfully balance autonomy and accountability in decision-making processes.

Creating a Culture of Empowerment

Creating a culture of empowerment within an organization involves establishing a supportive environment that encourages autonomy, accountability, and continuous growth. To foster innovation and promote autonomy, organizations should consider the following:

Encouraging creativity and innovation: Organizations can create a culture of empowerment by providing employees with the autonomy to explore new ideas and take risks. This can be achieved by fostering an environment that values and rewards innovation, encouraging employees to think outside the box, and providing resources and support for experimentation.

Promoting autonomy and decision-making authority: Empowering employees involves giving them the authority to make decisions and take ownership of their work. Organizations can promote autonomy by clearly defining decision-making boundaries and guidelines, providing training and support to enhance decision-making skills, and trusting employees to make informed choices.

Creating a supportive and inclusive environment: A culture of empowerment requires creating an environment where employees feel valued, respected, and supported. This can be achieved by promoting open communication, actively listening to employee feedback and ideas, providing opportunities for growth and development, and recognizing and rewarding achievements.

The Impact of Empowered Teams on Organizational Success

The impact of empowered teams on organizational success can be observed through increased employee engagement, improved problem-solving capabilities, and enhanced overall performance. Empowering teams fosters a collaborative environment that allows for the effective utilization of team dynamics. By giving teams the authority to make decisions, organizations benefit from the diverse perspectives and expertise of team members. Shared decision-making enables teams to consider multiple viewpoints, leading to better problem-solving outcomes. Moreover, empowered teams exhibit higher levels of engagement as they feel a sense of ownership and responsibility for their work. This increased engagement translates into higher productivity and performance levels. Overall, organizations that embrace empowerment and shared decision-making create an environment that encourages innovation, creativity, and accountability, leading to improved organizational success.

Overcoming Challenges in Empowering Teams

Team dynamics: Empowering teams can be challenging due to the complex dynamics that exist within a team. Conflicts and power struggles may arise, hindering the decision-making process. It is crucial to address these dynamics and establish a culture of collaboration and respect.

Resistance to change: Empowering teams requires a shift in the traditional hierarchical structure. Some team members may resist this change due to fear of losing control or uncertainty about their roles. Leaders need to communicate the benefits of empowerment and provide support to alleviate these concerns.

Lack of trust: Trust is a fundamental element in empowering teams. Without trust, team members may hesitate to make decisions or take risks. Building trust requires open communication, transparency, and consistent demonstration of support and accountability.

Measuring the Effectiveness of Empowerment

Measuring the effectiveness of empowerment can be achieved through the implementation of performance metrics and evaluation tools. Metrics and assessment provide a quantitative and qualitative framework to assess the impact of empowerment initiatives. These metrics can include indicators such as employee satisfaction, productivity, innovation, and customer satisfaction. By tracking these metrics over time, organizations can identify the impact of empowerment on various aspects of their operations. Additionally, assessment tools can be used to gather feedback and insights from employees to understand their perception of empowerment and identify areas for improvement. However, measuring empowerment effectiveness is not without challenges. Addressing barriers effectively, such as resistance to change, lack of trust, and inadequate resources, is crucial to ensure accurate measurement and meaningful analysis. By overcoming these challenges, organizations can gain a comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness of their empowerment initiatives.

Case Studies: Successful Examples of Empowered Teams

Successful examples of empowered teams can provide valuable insights into the benefits and outcomes of implementing autonomy and trust within organizations. These case studies highlight the positive impact of empowering teams and showcase the challenges that can arise in the process.

Increased productivity: Empowered teams have been shown to significantly enhance productivity by leveraging their decision-making authority and autonomy. This increased productivity can lead to improved efficiency and effectiveness in achieving organizational goals.

Enhanced creativity and innovation: Empowering teams fosters a culture of creativity and innovation. By giving team members the freedom to explore new ideas and approaches, organizations can tap into their diverse perspectives and skills, leading to the development of novel solutions and improved problem-solving capabilities.

Improved employee satisfaction and retention: Empowered teams create a sense of ownership and accountability among team members, leading to higher job satisfaction and increased employee retention. When individuals are trusted with decision-making authority and provided with opportunities for growth and development, they are more likely to feel valued and motivated to contribute to the organization’s success.

While successful case studies demonstrate the numerous benefits of empowered teams, organizations must also be aware of the challenges that can arise, such as ensuring clear communication, managing conflicts, and maintaining alignment with organizational goals.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are some common challenges that leaders face when giving autonomy to teams.

Leadership challenges related to team autonomy include fear of chaos and lack of direction, questions about decision-making and resource allocation, and the need for guardrails to create alignment and control.

How Can Leaders Ensure That Decision-Making and Resource Allocation Align With Organizational Goals?

Leaders can ensure alignment between decision-making and resource allocation by establishing clear boundaries and guidelines. This includes defining leader involvement, providing decision-making guidelines and resource allocation frameworks, and mitigating risks associated with autonomy.

What Strategies Can Be Implemented to Foster Open and Transparent Communication Within Autonomous Teams?

Strategies to foster open and transparent communication within autonomous teams include establishing clear communication channels, encouraging collaboration and knowledge-sharing, regularly updating team members on goals and objectives, and promoting a culture of open communication.

How Can Teams Be Encouraged to Embrace Continuous Learning and Improvement?

Encouraging teams to embrace continuous learning and improvement involves fostering a culture that values a continuous improvement mindset. This can be achieved by promoting a learning culture, providing opportunities for skill development, and encouraging experimentation and adaptability.

Are There Any Specific Metrics or Indicators That Can Be Used to Measure the Effectiveness of Team Empowerment?

Team performance can be measured to assess the effectiveness of team empowerment. Metrics such as productivity, quality of outcomes, customer satisfaction, and employee engagement can provide insights into the impact of empowerment on overall team performance.

Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University

Organizations Leadership Oct 1, 2010

Better decisions through diversity, heterogeneity can boost group performance..

Katherine W. Phillips

Katie A. Liljenquist

Margaret A. Neale

Expanding diversity in the workplace is often seen as a good way to inject fresh ideas into an otherwise stagnant environment, and incorporating new perspectives can help members tackle problems from a number of different angles. But only a few have looked into exactly why or how this is so.

New research finds that socially different group members do more than simply introduce new viewpoints or approaches. In the study, diverse groups outperformed more homogeneous groups not because of an influx of new ideas, but because diversity triggered more careful information processing that is absent in homogeneous groups.

The mere presence of diversity in a group creates awkwardness, and the need to diffuse this tension leads to better group problem solving, says Katherine Phillips, an associate professor of management and organizations at the Kellogg School of Management. She and her coauthors, Katie A. Liljenquist, an assistant professor at Brigham Young University, and Margaret A. Neale, a professor at Stanford University, demonstrate that while homogenous groups feel more confident in their performance and group interactions, it is the diverse groups that are more successful in completing their tasks.

Diversity in the Workplace Can Produce New Ideas

Though people often feel more comfortable with others like themselves, homogeneity can hamper the exchange of different ideas and stifle the intellectual workout that stems from disagreements. “Generally speaking, people would prefer to spend time with others who agree with them rather than disagree with them,” Phillips explains. But this unbridled affirmation does not always produce the best results. “When you think about diversity, it often comes with more cognitive processing and more exchange of information and more perceptions of conflict,” Phillips says. In diverse settings, people tend to view conversations as a potential source of conflict that can breed negative emotions, and it is these emotions that can blind people to diversity’s upsides: new ideas can emerge, individuals can learn from one another, and they may discover the solution to a problem in the process. “It’s kind of surprising how difficult it is for people to actually see the benefit of the conversations they are having in a diverse setting,” observes Phillips.

“Generally speaking, people would prefer to spend time with others who agree with them rather than disagree with them.”

Phillips says the study is one of the first to look beyond the newcomer’s impact on a group and to focus instead on how the newcomer shifts alliances, thereby enlivening group interaction. “A lot of the research on newcomers has really specifically focused on the effect of newcomers as a source of new information,” Phillips says. “We know though that not all new ideas come from newcomers. Sometimes new ideas are sitting in the group already, just waiting for the right moment to come up.”

In their study, the researchers focus on whether the newcomer to the group agreed or disagreed with established group members, or “oldtimers” as Phillips refers to them. Sometimes a newcomer’s perspective aligned with one held by one or more of the current oldtimers (these agreeing oldtimers were called allies). By identifying allies, Phillips and her colleagues could determine if the benefits of having a newcomer only occurred when they brought in a new idea.

In the experiment, participants from fraternities and sororities were divided into fifty same-gender four-person groups. Each group performed the same task: read a set of interviews conducted by a detective investigating a murder. Participants decided on the most likely suspect individually before entering the groups to discuss his or her decision. In each four-person group, three individuals were always members of the same fraternity or sorority (the oldtimers) and the fourth individual (the newcomer) was either from that same fraternity or sorority (an “in-group”) or from a different one (an “out-group”).

After completing an unrelated task, the oldtimers were brought together and were given twenty minutes to come to a consensus on the most likely murder suspect. Five minutes into the discussion, a newcomer joined the group. Their task remained the same, but now they had to take the newcomer’s views into consideration. After the discussions were finished, each member rated their confidence in the group’s decision on the murder suspect, their feelings on how effective the group discussion went, how each person felt they fit into the group, and who they believed really committed the murder.

The Out-group Advantage

Unsurprisingly, oldtimers felt more comfortable with newcomers who belonged to their sorority or fraternity. But the biggest discovery was the sheer advantage an out-group newcomer gave a group—and this advantage was even more pronounced when the newcomer did not bring in a new idea. Diverse groups with out-group newcomers guessed the correct murder suspect with far greater frequency, while in-group newcomers hindered the groups’ accuracy (Figure 1). And though out-group newcomers increased group accuracy and performance, these groups reported much lower confidence in their decisions.

“When these diverse groups perform well, they don’t recognize their improved performance,” Phillips points out. “When people have visceral feelings and emotions,” she says, “it’s really hard to explain them away as “good” when they are feeling really bad.” Regardless of the outcome, a diverse group’s members will typically feel less confident about their progress largely due to the lack of homogeneity.

Homogeneous groups, on the other hand, were more confident in their decisions, even though they were more often wrong in their conclusions. In non-diverse groups, Phillips says, “often times the disagreements are just squelched so people don’t really talk about the issue. They come out of these groups really confident that everybody agreed when in fact not everybody agreed. There were new ideas and different opinions that never got discussed in the group.”

Phillips believes understanding the relationship between oldtimers who ally themselves with both in-group and out-group newcomers is important, because these relationships allow for disagreements to occur as well as newcomers’ opinions to be heard. “It is important to remember that these group members did not know each other for very long before identifying strongly with the group,” she says.

“When a newcomer comes in, it interrupts the group. It changes the flow of the process and makes people stop and pay attention to the person,” Phillips says. Whether they stop and pay attention to the newcomer is up to the group. But if they do, the pain will probably be worth the gain.

Member of the Department of Management & Organizations faculty until 2011

About the Writer Bunkhuon Chhun is a freelance science and legal writer based in Longmont, Colorado.

Phillips, Katherine W., Katie A. Liljenquist and Margaret A. Neale. 2009. Is the pain worth the gain? The advantages and liabilities of agreeing with socially distinct newcomers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35: 336-350.

Read the original

We’ll send you one email a week with content you actually want to read, curated by the Insight team.

Using groups for decision-making: the key risks and challenges for leaders and how to deal with them

Published by mike owen on 2022-01-17 2022-01-17.

Human brains are quite inefficient cognitive machines. All of us regularly fail to see things accurately around us, we make poor assumptions, we misremember facts, we give in to cognitive biases, and we often make decisions based on emotional whims, rather than thinking rationally. In short, as individuals, we get things wrong, a lot of the time!

So, do groups fare better? Are two (or more) heads usually better than one at problem-solving and decision-making?

It might perhaps seem obvious that groups, by pooling information and experience of a number of people and engaging in constructive argument, will naturally tend to do better. Equally, it’s easy to appreciate how a group can help to mitigate against common individual biases and weaknesses (e.g. inaccurate rating of one’s abilities, over reliance on one’s own experience, and preferring options that favour one’s own interests).

Well, actually, groups can be better than individuals – but not always. In fact, groups come with many of their own issues and problems and, in many circumstances, can actually perform worse than individuals. Such problems are not widely understood by leaders, not least because many of the biases and processes behind them operate subconsiously.

So, leaders need to be aware, firstly, of some of the key problems groups can face and, secondly, be familiar with a range of measures they can take to try and address those problems.

Problems that leaders can face with groups

Here’s a summary of some of those problems that frequently affect groups:

i) Amplifying of indvidual biases : Whilst groups can sometimes usefully moderate certain individual biases (including, research has indicated, individuals over-stressing their own experience or beliefs, prioritising more memorable or recent facts, and ‘anchoring’ biases), conversely, risk of other biases can increase in groups – especially excessive optimism/overconfidence, belief in planning, commitment to a course of action that is already failing, and stereotyping..

ii) Group polarisation : In groups – especially closely-knit groups – deliberating together usually reduces variance and most members come into accord with one another and also tend to become much more confident of their collective judgment (whether it is actually correct or not). Unfortunately, this coming together of minds can often go further and members’ initial views or preferences become more extreme and more strongly felt (due to the social reinforcement effect of members seeing others sharing the same views as theirs). This makes the whole group become more obstinate, defensive and closed-minded – particularly vis-a-vis goup ‘outsiders’ who hold contrary views.

iii) Lack of diversity : Where members of a group are very similar in background, circumstances, opinions or beliefs, this can certainly increase group cohesion. However, a lack of diversity in such respects can easily hinder independent thinking by group members, limit the variety of experiences and opinions heard, and thwart wide-ranging discussion.

iv) ‘ Cascading ‘: This refers to the tendency sometimes in groups for members to follow (herd-like!) the statements and actions of those who speak or act first. Often this is because the members following judge that they have inferior knowledge, information or skill regarding the subject in question and/or simply don’t wish to spend energy or time thinking about the issue themselves.

v) Groupthink : This quite well-known term refers to when group members tend towards uniformity in their views because they do not want to upset the cohesiveness of the group or risk personally losing the liking or approval of other group members.

Other problems leaders can face with groups

vi) ‘ Happy-talk ‘: This occurs when the group leader focuses on maintaining a positive and enjoyable atmosphere in the group and discourages critical questioning, negative thinking, or challenging of ideas. This leads group members to avoid being fully honest or open and referring to any bad news or issues. The group becomes complacent and dysfunctional. Instead, the leader ideally needs, alongside being cheerful and positive, to show some degree of (moderate) anxiety and even doubt or scepticism in order to help stimulate constructive debate.

vii) Domineerig, confident or expert individuals : Where a group contains members who have a dominating personality or style, or they simply appear more self-confident in their views, then such individuals may well sway the opinions of several other members. The risk is that wider discussion and the group moves too quickly to accept the view of the confident individual, whose opinion may not actually be fully correct or the most suitable course of action.

viii) Leader’s ‘halo-effect’: Similarly, this is where group members follow the views of the leader because of his/her authority or status or, simply, perceived strength of personality. Often some group members will ‘over-perceive’ attractive qualities in the group’s leader (for example, the leader’s jokes seem funnier, or their perspective seems wiser), which casues them to go along with his/her views without much thinking of their own.

ix) Shared information bias (also known as ‘hidden-profile effect’): this well-proven problem refers to the tendency in groups for members to focus on information that is alreay known to and shared by all group members and the hesitancy sometimes of members to reveal/share information that is only known to them individually (or to a minority of members). This risk of limited disclosure can often seriously undermine the quality of group discussion.

x) Competing goals & social loafing: As humans have different goals and interests, it is natural that some members in a group may prioritise what suits them personally rather than making a good group decision. Ensuring that the group does not damage a member’s personal status or reputation is an example of a common concern. Another example is the concern sometimes of a group member to lessen personal accountability by limiting participation in the group and sinmply going along with whatever the majority views ends us as (a behaviour known as social-loading or free-riding).

How to improve the effectiveness of groups

In theory, it is easy to think how a group should be able to be more efficient than individuals – by pooling information and experience and letting the ‘give and take’ of deliberation arrive at an overall judgment or solution of the whole group which is better than any individual member’s judgment. It is also easy to think how the quality of the overall viewpoint would be especially good if the group contains some individuals who are particularly well-informed or experienced about the issue at-hand and/or the group includes members who have a useful variety of relevant skills.

But, unfortunately, because of the potential impact of the above range of problems, groups are far from being more effective decision-makers than individuals. Principally this is due to the distorting influence of the ‘social dynamics’ between group members (i.e. how they behave to each other inside the group) and, secondly, the typically limited disclosure and aggregating of information held by group members.

So, what are some useful measures leaders can take to try and reduce the effect of the above problems? Here are some specific actions I would recommend:

i) Collect information and opinions from individuals before the group meets: To ensure the collective knowledge of a group is properly accessed and to counter bias and groupthink, try gathering input from group members individually and anonymously before they meet together. Then circulate a shared document asking for everyone to comment on ideas or suggestions received, again independently and anonymously, without assigning any of the comments to particular team members.

ii) Split up the group decision-making process into two (or three) stages : Too often groups close down discussion and make a decision before they have generated enough ideas. So, try relying less on just one meeting. An effective approach can be to first hold a group meeting aimed at generating ideas and perspectives – where a focus on divergent, creative thinking is particularly useful – and then a second meeting to focus on crtiically assessing ideas and reaching a solution, where a more convergent thinking focus is appropriate. The other advantage of this split approach is that you can include some individuals in each group who are known to have a stronger affinity with the focused thinking approach needed.

iii) Use a diverse group rather than a homogenous group (most of the time): Groups whose members vary in their characteristics and have different points of view usually more effectively counter biases. But not always – context matters. When the task or decision is relatively complex or needs innovative thinking, then a diverse group will especially tend to do best. However, if the issue is relatively straighforward or needs quite structured or controlled thinking, then a homogenous group will tend to do better.

iv) Use a small group when you need to make an important decision : Research shows that groups with seven or more members are likely to make more biased decisions. By keeping your group to between three and five or six people – a size that people more naturally gravitate toward when interacting – you’ll be able to reduce the effects of bias but still benefit from multiple perspectives.

v) Ensure a safe, respectful and open atmosphere in the group : The group leader has a vital role to play in ensuring that all group members feel they can speak up without fear of retribution (what is sometimes called ‘psychological safety ‘). His/her manner and facilitative approach must be encouraging, fair and positive. Discussion and comment should be centered around issues (rather than personalise any issues) and the leader should avoid giving his/her opinions on a topic until everyone else has spoken. If the leader is not a good faciltitator, engage an external, professional facilitator, which then allows the regular group leader to focus on contributing to the discussions. Also, of course, a friendly, open tone to a group meeting will be achieved more easily if all (or most) of the group members (not just the leader or facilitator) have been selected partly because they have good empathy and social-sensitivity skills.

vi) Appoint a team member to be ‘devil’s advocate’ : Give one of the team the deliberate role and right to ask questions and challenge colleagues’ thinking during the discussion and decision-making process. For larger groups of seven or more members, perhaps appoint two such advocates, so that a sole dissenter is not isolated by the rest of the group.

vii) Assign specific roles to group members : To help achieve a more complete and rigorous discussion and assessment of the problem at hand, allocate to each group member a specific angle or area of concern to focus their thinking and comments around. For example, for a group discussion about assessing a potential new product, assigned roles could include the company’s marketing team, current customers, the main competitor, the company’s finance director, and the company’s production or technical director.

viii) Plan some structure to group discussions in advance : In a group meeting discussion will be so much more efficient and fruitful if the leader (or facilitator) thinks carefully in advance about what range of issues needs to be considered and defines a suitable outline framework (semi-structure) for running the meeting, including a rough time plan and set of specific questions or decisions that need to be addressed for each part of the meeting. Without some degree of structure, deliberation risks becoming unfocussed and there is more room for the behavioural dynamics of a group to skew or distort how matters are considered (e.g. domineering members influencing quieter members).

ix) I n discussions, particularly discourage bias at the start and when v iews/ votes are needed at the end: At the opening of a discussion session, it’s a good idea if the leader proactively reminds the whole group of the general risk of bias and asks for members actually to suggest any particular biases they think may apply in the upcoming discussion. And when the time comes for each individual to indicate their final view on a topic, ideally try and let each person reveal their position at the same time, independently and confidentially: in a virtual discussion, this may be quite easy because group members can use their online ‘vote’ button and/or use the private ‘chat’ facility to indicate their judgment to the group leader/facilitator.

x) Align incentives to ensure group members are motivated to work together well: Check that individuals in the group don’t have personal goals, incentives or other rewards in their jobs that are in conflict with the group’s overall aims – for example, a board director who is on a bonus scheme based on sales growth whilst another director’s bonus is based on profitability. Where incentives are not in harmony, they should be adjusted.

Consulting experts and others ‘outside’ the group

Beyond the above list of measures for improving group deliberations, there is also the opportunity sometimes for groups to consider consulting or involving other people outside the group, to access wider advice or opinion.

People who have a relevant expertise are an obvious choice. However, care should be taken. Turning to an expert for some specific piece of information or provision of a specific skill for application today can certainly serve a group well, but research shows that if you want to use an expert rather to give advice or predictions about the future, then experts frequently prove much less competent than you might expect.

Often this is simply because their knowledge and skill are founded on what they have learned or seen in the past and the unpredictability of the future does not, of course, mean that the future will be necessarily like the past! Also, research actually suggests that the better known an expert is, often the poorer his/her predictions are: this is because they are more concerned typically to protect their ‘status’ – which is based on past knowledge and beliefs – rather than being open to seeing things afresh. Sadly, though, users of experts are often ‘taken in’ by experts’ fame or apparent high level of confidence, which can bely their true competence.

So, avoid blind trust in expert opinion! Consult an expert, yes, but don’t actually make them part of your decision-making group itself, as they are very likely to sway others’ views too easily. Better still, if possible, seek the views of several experts rather than depending on just one. The average answer from a group of experts will always statistically have an advantage over individual experts.

Beyond consulting some experts, you might want to canvass the views of a still larger number of people – the so-called ‘wisdom of the crowd’. You may wish to do this principally becuase constitutional or ‘political’ factors in your organisation expect wider involvement of colleagues in decision-making, or you may think simply that consulting more peope beyond just a ‘core’ group will tend to yield a better informed, better quality decision overall. In such circumstances, of course, it is again the ‘average’ (i.e. middle or most common) viewpoint or opinion found from across everyone that will be taken to be the final decision.

But, actually, it would be a big mistake to believe that the best approach with group decision-making is always to ask a larger number of people and to take the average answer. Research indicates that this approach is likely to work only under particular circumstances: those in which many or most people are more likely than not to be right – because, crucially, they have a good level of relevant knowledge and they are not materially biased or prejudiced in some way about the issue at-hand (e.g. favouring older theories) or in their general cognitive ways (e.g. a tendency toward unrealistic optimism).

Additionally, the views of everyone should be collected separately and independently with no chance of any individual knowing any other’s viewpoint or judgment (thus avoiding any risks of social influencing in the process). And another ideal feature of large groups for decision-making is that they should have a good level of diversity (in terms of group members’ characteristics, circumstances, beliefs etc), especially if the problem or issue is complex, novel or challenging.

In truth, these conditions are usually difficult to achieve or are rarely followed to a signficant degree (for example, a potentially successful scenario could be a marketing director asking his marketing team whether to hire a certain job candidate, but it might be unreasistic to expect each team member to give their assessment of the candidate privately/anonymously). It is simply unrealistic to expect that all individuals in a large group will be free of any prejudices or biases themselves, that they all will have good/relevant knowledge, and there will be no communication or influencing between indviduals at all. Sadly, though, this leads to the fact that, if and when a large number of people is consulted on an issue, then the likely result is that the average position or judgment taken will be wrong (or at least ‘sub-optimal’).

Given this reality, therefore, in most cases, it is normally better for leaders to avoid seeking widespread views from larger numbers of people. Instead, t he most effective thing to do will usually be for leaders to focus their efforts on relying on a smaller group of suitably well-qualified individuals and doing as much as possible to ensure robust and effective deliberation by that group.

In overall terms, groups can be very suitable and effective for supporting decision-making and problem-solving in organisations, offering many potential benefits over individuals working alone. However, groups do come with many potential risks and problems of their own, as explored above. So, leaders need to be familiar with some of the measures suggested above how to mitigate those challenges – with group composition and deliberation process being key areas to look at.

Related Posts

Decision making & problem solving, 10 ‘bias-busting’ questions to ask your team before you decide on their strategic review, big idea, or major proposal.

Most leaders today are aware how ‘cognitive biases’ (e.g. ignoring some new evidence because it contradicts an existing belief you hold) can distort organisational decision-making. The difficulty is that biases are mostly unconscious things and Read more…

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

9 Meeting the Challenge of Effective Groups & Teams Membership

Sarah A. Bush & Jason Headrick

INTRODUCTION

When you are assigned to a new team or group in one of your classes, what is the first emotion you feel? For many, this can bring excitement to work with peers and to approach a challenge, project, or assignment creatively. For others, however, the mention of group work brings anxiety and dread. Your reaction is most likely due to previous experiences that you have had working or competing in a team-based environment. Understanding more about the dynamics of teams and the best way to collaborate with others can help you be more successful when working in these environments.

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to…

• distinguish a group from a team.
• identify the importance of teams in organizations and change processes.
• explain synergy, cohesion, and collaboration on teams.
• provide examples of things you can do personally to work more effectively and efficiently on teams.
• analyze the benefits and barriers to working in teams.
• assess strategies for creating synergy, cohesion, and collaboration on teams ready to engage in your community or workplace.

KEYWORDS: Teams, problem-solving, groups, synergy, cohesion, collaboration

Working in a group or a team can bring about innovation, creativity, a celebration of diversity, and advancements in problem-solving, critical thinking, and building trust. Understanding how to work effectively in groups and teams allows you to engage directly with the ideas behind leadership, which will help prepare you for the workforce. Additionally, teams are increasingly becoming the path to change, as interdisciplinary solutions are required to solve real-world problems impacting our organizations and communities locally and globally.

  Organizations use many types of teams to address challenges and create new projects and workgroups. The notion of working in groups and teams prepares individuals to work interdependently with others to accomplish a task or goal. Interdependent work closely relates to the definition of leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse, 2019, p. 5). Rather than focusing on influencing others, productive team members focus on how all individuals take on leadership roles and contribute via collaboration. Those who engage in collaborative processes do so to solve problems and make decisions with the input of individuals from multiple perspectives. This diversity leads to synergy; however, there are many obstacles to overcome to achieve synergy and reap the benefits of working collaboratively. Learning more about teams and strategies for collaboration can lead to more effective and efficient teams.

Welcome to the Team!

Research on group processes dates back to the early 1900s (Weingart, 2012); the 1940s marked the beginning of group approaches at the forefront of leadership research (Northouse, 2019). As humans, we gravitate towards work that involves others. We work in groups and teams for various reasons, including dividing tasks to be more efficient, learning from others, and creating solutions from different perspectives; however, individuals, organizations, and scholars have mixed views related to teams (Franz, 2012). Working with a group requires a lot of work, time, and decision-making. It can be hard to get teams to work collaboratively, embrace diversity, overcome conflict, and achieve synergy. This chapter will uncover the benefits and barriers to working in teams and provide strategies to help you personally and professionally increase collaboration in teams.

  The Difference Between Groups and Teams

Let’s start by defining groups and teams. Many people use the two terms interchangeably, but there are some key differences. Forsyth (2014) defines a group as “two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships” (p. 4). Based on this definition, a group can range from two individuals to many people who are connected based on a shared interest or affiliation (Forsyth, 2014). For instance, a group may march for a cause they believe in, such as women’s rights, and be connected by social affiliation to their shared cause. Groups might also be members of an organization, such as a club or Greek organization.

A team is a group that has structure, a focused task, a shared goal, and a relatively high level of “groupness” (Franz, 2012). Katzenbach and Smith (1993) proposed the following definition: “a team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose [and] set of performance goals” (p. 112). Therefore, every team is a group, but every group is not a team. See Table 1 for Katzenbach and Smith’s (2005) take on differentiating working groups from teams. Consider the preceding example of the group marching for women’s rights. Every individual involved with the march may have some level of “groupness” based on their shared and vested interest; however, the planning committee for the march implemented their individual talents towards a shared common purpose of planning the march and performance goals and mutual accountability to one another based on the march’s success. Similarly, the executive board or a subcommittee of a Greek chapter tends to function as a team.

Differentiating teams from groups is essential to understanding potential processes and outputs, but it is also necessary to explore the age-old question—“are two heads better than one?” The true answer to this is complex—it depends. Research shows that teams who can overcome adversity and other barriers can successfully achieve synergy as individuals and in team environments (Forsyth, 2014; Franz, 2012; Northouse, 2019). When teams can achieve synergy, organizations reap the benefits (Franz, 2012; West, 2004). This reason alone is why many organizations invest both financial and time-based resources in team-based training for their employees. Synergy occurs when the team is something more significant than the sum of its parts. A team’s effectiveness and synergy can play a positive role in their quality of work. Effective teams can lead to the following outcomes (Parker, 1990; West, 2004; Yost & Tucker, 2000):

• Increased productivity and task performance
• More effective use of resources
• Better decision-making and problem-solving
• Better quality products and services
• Improved organizational learning
• Higher employee engagement
• Enhanced member interpersonal skills and compatibility
• Heightened use of emotional intelligence (EI) and practical application of empathy, social skills, motivation, and the ability to resolve differences
• Greater creativity and innovation

Breakdown of Models and Theories

Many theories and models provide insight into how groups and teams work and what makes them effective. In leadership research, team development has been a primary area of study (Fisher, 1970; Hurt & Trombley, 2007; Lewin, 1947; McClure, 2005; McGrath, 1991; Morgan, et al., 1993; Poole, 1981, 1983; Tuckman, 1965; Tuckman & Jensen, 1977; Wheelan, 2009). This chapter will briefly overview the historical models, reveal how they have adapted over time, and guide current application-based models. To fully describe group dynamics and development, we will highlight Tuckman and Jensen’s (1977) Stages of Group Development Model and Fisher’s (1970) Small Group Development Model.

  Stages of Group Development Model  

Tuckman’s (1965) Stages of Group Development Model had four initial phases: forming, storming, norming, and performing (see Figure 1). In the forming stage, a group establishes, and the members begin to become familiar with other members, their leaders, their environment, and the preexisting standards in the group (Tuckman, 1965). During storming, conflict arises around interpersonal issues, and the group struggles with adversity, but the norming stage brings group cohesiveness (Tuckman, 1965). Finally, a group’s new-found structure and “groupness” becomes a problem-solving tool, and the group enters the performing stage (Tuckman, 1965). This model demonstrates the formation of group structure and group problem-solving performance. Tuckman and Jensen (1977) revisited the model after researching the life cycles of groups and added a fifth stage, adjourning. During the adjourning phase, the group completes their task and disperses (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977).

Figure 1 |  Stages of Team Development (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977)

  Small Group Development Model

Fisher’s (1970) Small Group Development Model focuses more explicitly on a group’s actions during a decision-making process. This model, similar to Tuckman’s (1965) and Tuckman & Jensen’s (1977) models, contributes to group processing. The model deals mainly with communication and interactions and includes four phases: orientation, conflict, emergence, and reinforcement (see Figure 2).

Orientation: During the orientation phase, group members spend time getting to know each other, and a bit of tension may be present due to individuals being uncomfortable communicating with each other (Fisher, 1970). When we meet with a group or team members for the first time, it is important to focus time on introductions, getting to know one another, and discussing the group’s goals. Establishing some of the norms and standards for the group/team can start the time together more positively. Deciding how the group will communicate (e.g., exchanging phone numbers and email addresses) is essential during the orientation period.

  Conflict: The conflict phase occurs from tension in the group when individuals debate and discuss possible solutions to the problems at hand (Fisher, 1970). Notably, conflict can benefit all members in discussing rules or norms the group or team will have when future conflict occurs. These expectations help establish the group’s footing and prepare them for future decision-making and conflict. This chapter provides strategies to move through and process conflict.

  Emergence: As the individuals become more comfortable with each other and a defined group structure is formed, the emergence phase occurs (Fisher, 1970). The emergence phase helps groups and teams set work patterns that increase performance and help achieve goals. Consider this stage like a butterfly coming out of its cocoon – when it emerges, it’s ready to flutter around and get to work. When a group or team develops, it shows that the efforts to reach synergy have happened, and the group or team begins working together effectively. For this to happen, the group or team may need to reevaluate the roles and duties of all involved and make adjustments so the best work is moving forward. A commitment to making adjustments means that individuals will put the group’s greater good ahead of their personal needs and decisions.

  Reinforcement: Finally, through reinforcement, all individuals reach a consensus to support the decision made through both verbal and nonverbal transmissions (Fisher, 1970). This stage means that the group or team is willing to help and stand behind the assignment, work, and decisions made through working together.

Each phase of Fisher’s model is essential for groups to consider as they navigate their work. By using the stages as a blueprint, the groups and teams can address conflict and be effective in their decision-making and other team responsibilities.

  The Barriers We Face

Over the years, models have continued to develop on group processes, and many still involve stages; however, newer models are more flexible in the progression of the phases, recognizing the issues with the prescribed straight-forward team and group processes (McGrath, 1991; Morgan et al., 1993; Poole, 1983; Wheelan, 2009). In these models, teams can backtrack through phases or skip stages. These models recognize changing social relationships involved in a team and how dynamic teams are in a state of continual evolution.

Lencioni (2002) created a model that considers barriers teams must overcome, identifying how they can cause a chain reaction contributing to other obstacles. Lencioni’s (2002) Five Dysfunctions of a Team Model identifies these barriers as primary issues when working in a team. In this model, the dysfunctions are interrelated and build upon one another (see Figure 3).

  Figure 3 |  Lencioni’s (2002) Five Dysfunctions of a Team Pyramid

The presence of a dysfunction sparks a chain reaction of events causing other dysfunctions to occur. So, even the existence of just one dysfunction will often be detrimental to teamwork (Lencioni, 2002).

Absence of trust: The first dysfunction, lack of trust, is based upon vulnerability (Lencioni, 2002). Lencioni (2002) described group trust as “the confidence among team members that their peers’ intentions are good and that there is no reason to be protective or careful around the group” (p. 196). Hence, team members must be vulnerable with each other in acknowledging their shortcomings, making mistakes without judgment, and requesting aid from others (Lencioni, 2002). A team that shares mutual trust understands each member’s distinctive attributes and how those attributes add value to the group. As the model’s foundation, a team that lacks trust will make teamwork nearly impossible (Lencioni, 2002).

Fear of conflict: Without trust, a team will not debate when problem-solving (Lencioni, 2002), which leads to the second dysfunction, fear of conflict. Although we often think of conflict negatively, any strong relationship must undergo conflict to succeed (Lencioni, 2002); however, productive conflict is understood to be healthy debate or arguments over concepts and ideas. It avoids “personality-focused, mean-spirited attacks” (Lencioni, 2002, p. 202).

Lack of commitment: Individuals in a group need to feel heard before committing to a decision, whether it was their idea or not (Lencioni, 2002). The third dysfunction, lack of commitment, relates to team members not supporting or feeling confident in decisions made by the team (Lencioni, 2002). Buy-in from all members allows teams to stand behind decisions, whether there is a great deal of risk involved or not (Lencioni, 2002). All team members must fully support decisions and understand their role in a productive team.

  Avoidance of accountability: The fourth dysfunction, avoidance of responsibility, occurs when team members are unwilling to approach their peers about their performance or behaviors, harming the overall team (Lencioni, 2002). At times, the fear of conflict causes individuals with strong relationships to ignore the poor performance of other team members (Lencioni, 2002). Lencioni (2002) stated that ignoring negative behaviors leads to resentment. When peers do not hold each other accountable, group structure lacks, and some form of structure is vital for a team (Lencioni, 2002).

  Inattention to details: Suppose team structure breaks and all individuals are not contributing. In that case, team members focus on their own needs and personal goals instead of the overall team goals (Lencioni, 2002). The fifth dysfunction, inattention to details, occurs when team members focus their attention on “something other than the collective goals of the group” (Lencioni, 2002, p. 216).

Teams must have overarching goals in which all members invest. Members of a successful team must trust each other, engage in conflict, commit to group decisions, hold their peers accountable, and achieve results (Lencioni, 2002).

  Barriers to Achieving Synergy

Teams often have so many barriers to overcome that they struggle with productivity, efficiency, problem-solving, organizational learning, and creativity. Team success is rare (Coutu & Beschloss, 2009). This lack of success is due to an inability to overcome barriers and dysfunctions, as described through Lencioni’s (2002) model. These dysfunctions provide an overview of obstacles for teams to achieve synergy and perform, but several other difficulties related to communication, interpersonal matters, problem-solving, and cohesion also plague teams (Franz, 2012). The first step to overcoming these barriers is to identify the overarching problem. For instance, if your team is having communication issues and information is withheld from the group, you can start by examining if the issue is a communication issue or an issue related to trust. Poor communication can result in deteriorating trust, and a lack of trust can result in poor communication. Understanding the basis for the barrier and conflict helps you know which issue to approach first.

  Cohesion & Collaboration

The intended outcome for most teams is to achieve synergy, which requires collaboration. A team cannot be greater than the sum of its parts without true collaboration. Collaboration is a process that involves a group working to solve a problem or make a decision that requires shared goals and the sharing of responsibility, authority, and accountability (Franz, 2012; Higher Education Research Institute, 1996; Komives & Wagner, 2017; Liedtka, 1996; Schrage, 1990). The key to understanding collaboration is that the process and outcomes are all shared. It is more than delegating tasks and working separately towards a common purpose. Collaboration includes the following:

• Human relationships and how people relate to each other
• A process for developing common goals and purpose
• Shared responsibility, authority, and accountability in achieving goals
• Creating synergy by utilizing multiple perspectives and strengths of team members (Komives & Wagner, 2017)

This process can be challenging to achieve as these teams need to overcome the five dysfunctions, have high levels of communication, and must dedicate time to increasing cohesion.

Cohesion from both a task and social aspect is essential to engage in collaborative processes (Franz, 2012). Cohesion is grounded in the attraction of members to the group and the group’s work. Cohesion can be threatened by the size of a group, individuals’ interest in the tasks, tasks being completed individually rather than shared, and the diversity of experiences and personalities. To increase cohesion, teams should establish a group identity, emphasize teamwork, recognize and reward contributions, and respect all group members (Franz, 2012). Cohesion involves both personal and team-level efforts.

  Strategies for Increasing Collaboration, Cohesion, and Synergy

At this point, you may be asking – “So what can I do to increase the likelihood of success for a team?” As mentioned prior, your team can dedicate time to developing relationships and increasing trust. For example, you should spend time at the beginning of meetings to get to know one another’s interests, backgrounds, experiences, etc. Success also includes discussing each person’s interest in the project or work, which helps determine what personal goals exist even before discussing shared goals. Be open to learning and listening to others. It’s also essential to share ownership for the process and fully be invested in the group’s decisions whether there is success or room for improvement. Those who are great team members celebrate the team’s successes and other individuals and take responsibility for failures, even when they weren’t involved (Komives & Wagner, 2017). Teams that fail should fail together, and teams that succeed should share in accomplishments.

You can also be seen as trustworthy by being dependable, helping other team members, sharing your views, and encouraging others to do the same (Komives & Wagner, 2017). Building trust allows groups to focus on the process of collaboration. Collaboration often starts with creating a shared group identity and then developing shared goals and purpose. Through this process, communication is critical and should be a focus at all times. Diversity is also important and requires that members form groups with people who have different perspectives that engage in dialogue and express their views openly without fear of judgment. Work with your team to set team rules to promote respect. When groups uphold these strategies, cohesion increases, and teams can achieve collaboration and synergy (Franz, 2012; Komives & Wagner, 2017). Use your knowledge, experience, and skills to make yourself a better group member and to help bring out the best in others.

QUESTIONS FOR JOURNALING OR DISCUSSION

• When have your experiences with teams been positive? How have other experiences been negative? What content from this chapter helped you understand what you might have done differently during that negative team experience?
• What is the role of the individual in a group or team?
• How does a solid team foundation help address conflict or other challenges a group or team faces?
• Which model of teamwork effectiveness do you think you are likely to use in the future? How can you help others get on board with those steps or strategies?
• Reflect on the necessary skills you develop through your involvement with a group or team. Why are these skills needed for the future? How can you use them to build your leadership capacity?

No Good Path Activity—A Case Study on Collaborating to Provide Solutions

  Chestnut Lake State College is a medium-sized university with about 13,000 students located in Ramberville, a town with approximately 45,000 people. This quaint city is known for its walkability, history, and friendliness. Additionally, it is one of the best places to raise a family. Historically, Chestnut Lake State College has maintained a good relationship with Ramberville. The residents enjoy attending sporting events and interacting with students.

Five years ago, Chestnut Lake State College set a goal to increase the student population by 5,000 over the next ten years. As the student population is growing, student housing is expanding. Previously, nightlife and student housing had all been located on the south side of the campus, directly connecting to the campus. New and attractive student housing options are being built on the north side of campus, behind several residential housing blocks. Over the last year, residents in this area have made noise complaints about students walking through their neighborhoods late at night. These noise complaints occur because the most direct path from nightlife to the new student housing options is through several local areas. Recently, reports of vandalism and stolen items from lawns have also been made.

The relationship between Ramberville and Chestnut Lake State College is quickly deteriorating as the university and town leadership fail to respond to the complaints. The local police have been attempting to patrol the area more frequently but always seem to get called away to respond to other calls at this time. Ramberville cannot afford to increase its staffing based on the city’s current budget. A bus system drops the students off downtown but makes the last run at 11:30 pm. Additionally, cabs and rideshare services are hard to come by in the local area. Typically, walking is the fastest way to get home. The university also sponsors a safe-walk system, but it does not extend to these new housing areas.

The university must respond with some proposed actions and initiatives to maintain its relationship with Ramberville. They’ve decided to create a joint task force with the local community to develop potential solutions. Work through the prompts below and be ready to discuss your answers.

• How can the university create a diverse team of community and student leaders? Who should serve on the team? Why?
• How will team diversity help achieve synergy?
• How can you go about setting up the team process to achieve synergy?
• How can the leader of the team overcome the five dysfunctions?
• Create a plan of action for developing a solution to the current issue.

“Hidden Agendas” Activity

Instructions:

Place individuals in teams of 6-7. Give them the common task of building a wall (using LEGO® blocks, note cards, etc.). The wall should be four blocks high and six blocks wide. Then hand out cards with specific goals for each participant. This card represents their personal hidden agenda. The participants should never reveal what is on their card or show their card to another individual. Let the team members work through the activity and do their best to solve the group assignment while satisfying their hidden agenda; however, it should be clear that their personal agenda is always more important than the team agenda.

You can conduct the activity in two ways. The first is to make the activity solvable and provide enough time for them to develop the solution. The second is to make the solution impossible and stop the activity after a set time. The aim of both is to discuss how a lack of commitment to a shared goal and hidden personal agendas can get in the way of collaboration.

Some examples of hidden agenda tasks using colored bricks or blocks as building materials:

• Ensure there are three red bricks on each row
• Ensure no red brick touches a yellow one
• Ensure a blue brick touches a yellow brick on each row
• Ensure every row contains two yellow bricks
• Ensure there is a vertical line of touching white bricks, one block wide, from top to bottom
• Ensure every row has at least one double-block brick
• Ensure that all green bricks are at the end of the row

Reflection:

Reflect by discussing how hidden agendas impact overall group work. Below are some prompts to help start your reflections.

• What was the cause of most of the issues?
• How do hidden agendas impact group work?
• Provide an example of a time you worked with individuals with hidden agendas.
• How do hidden agendas impact trust?
• How could you work through hidden agendas?
• o Discuss how teams move to the norming phase by working through hidden agendas and creating team-focused goals.
• Did you experience or observe any other team-based components in this activity?

Reflection Questions

• What was the best experience you’ve ever had working on a team? What made the group so enjoyable?
• In this experience, how did your team progress through Tuckman and Jensen’s (1977) Stages of Group Development Model or Fisher’s (1970) Small Group Development Model?
• How did your team build cohesion and collaborate?
• Did your team achieve synergy? How do you know?
• What was the worst experience you’ve ever had working on a team? What made the group so challenging?
• What dysfunctions from Lencioni’s (2002) Five Dysfunctions were present?
• How could you, as an individual, increase cohesion and collaboration on your team?
• What strategies could your team have used to increase cohesion and collaboration?

Suggested Videos

Stages of group development as told through the Fellowship of the Ring: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysWWGf8VsOg&t=11s

Stages of group development: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8gryfMB2P4

Five Dysfunctions of a Team: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHpB1EBufFo&t=12s

Forgetting the pecking order at work: https://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_heffernan_forget_the_pecking_order_at_work

Coutu, D., & Beschloss, M. (2009). Why teams don’t work. Harvard Business Review, 87 (5), 98–105. https://hbr.org/2009/05/why-teams-dont-work

Fisher, B. A. (1970). Decision emergence: Phases in group decision-making. Speech Monographs, 37 (1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637757009375649

Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group dynamics. Wadsworth.

Franz, T. M. (2012). Group dynamics and team interventions: Understanding and improving team performance. Wiley-Blackwell.

Higher Education Research Institute. (1996). A Social Change Model of Leadership Development (Version III). UCLA. https://www.heri.ucla.edu/PDFs/pubs/ASocialChangeModelofLeadershipDevelopment.pdf

Hurt, A. C., & Trombley, S. M. (2007). The punctuated-Tuckman: Towards a new group development model. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504567.pdf

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high-performance organization. Harvard Business School.

Katzenbach, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (2005). The discipline of teams . Harvard Business Review , 83 (7/8), 162–171. https://hbr.org/1993/03/the-discipline-of-teams-2

Komives, S. R., & Wagner, W. (Eds.). (2017). Leadership for a better world: Understanding the Social Change Model of Leadership Development (2nd ed.) . Jossey-Bass.

Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team. Jossey-Bass.

Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science, social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1 (2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872674700100201

Liedtka, J. M. (1996). Collaborating across lines of business for competitive advantage. Academy of Management Perspectives, 10 (2), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1996.9606161550

McClure, B. A. (2005). Putting a new spin on groups: The science of chaos (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410611932

McGrath, J. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small-Group Research, 22 (2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496491222001

Morgan, B. B., Salas, E., & Glickman A. (1993). An analysis of team evolution and maturation. The Journal of General Psychology, 120 (3), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1993.9711148

Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed) . Sage.

Parker, G. M. (1990). Team players and teamwork. Jossey-Bass.

Poole, M. S. (1981). Decision development in small groups I: A comparison of two models. Communications Monographs, 48 (1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758109376044

Poole, M. S. (1983). Decision development in small groups II: A study of multiple sequences in decision making. Communication Monographs, 50 (3), 206–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758309390165

Schrage, M. (1990). Shared minds: The new technologies of collaboration. Random House.

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63 (6), 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100

Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Groups and Organization Management, 2 (4), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/105960117700200404

Weingart, L. R. (2012). Studying dynamics within groups . In M. A. Neale & E. A. Mannix (Eds.), Looking back, moving forward: A review of group and team-based research (pp. 1–25), Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1534-0856(2012)0000015004

West, M. A. (2004). Effective teamwork: Practical lessons from organizational research. Wiley-Blackwell.

Wheelan, S. A. (2009). Group size, group development, and group productivity. Small-Group Research, 40 (2), 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408328703

Yost, C. A., & Tucker, M. L. (2000). Are effective teams more emotionally intelligent? Confirming the importance of effective communication in teams. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 42 (2), 101.

Developing Human Potential Copyright © 2023 by Gina S. Matkin, Jason Headrick, Hannah M. Sunderman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

22 Working in Diverse Teams

Learning Objectives

• Describe how diversity can enhance decision-making and problem-solving
• Identify challenges and best practices for working with multicultural teams
• Discuss divergent cultural characteristics and list several examples of such characteristics in the culture(s) you identify with

Decision-making and problem-solving can be much more dynamic and successful when performed in a diverse team environment. The multiple diverse perspectives can enhance both the understanding of the problem and the quality of the solution. Yet, working in diverse teams can be challenging given different identities, cultures, beliefs, and experiences. In this chapter, we will discuss the effects of team diversity on group decision-making and problem-solving, identify best practices and challenges for working in and with multicultural teams, and dig deeper into divergent cultural characteristics that teams may need to navigate.

Does Team Diversity Enhance Decision Making and Problem Solving?

In the Harvard Business Review article “Why Diverse Teams are Smarter,” David Rock and Heidi Grant (2016) support the idea that increasing workplace diversity is a good business decision. A 2015 McKinsey report on 366 public companies found that those in the top quartile for ethnic and racial diversity in management were 35% more likely to have financial returns above their industry mean, and those in the top quartile for gender diversity were 15% more likely to have returns above the industry mean. Similarly, in a global analysis conducted by Credit Suisse, organizations with at least one female board member yielded a higher return on equity and higher net income growth than those that did not have any women on the board.

Additional research on diversity has shown that diverse teams are better at decision-making and problem-solving because they tend to focus more on facts, per the Rock and Grant article. A study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology showed that people from diverse backgrounds “might actually alter the behavior of a group’s social majority in ways that lead to improved and more accurate group thinking.” It turned out that in the study, the diverse panels raised more facts related to the case than homogeneous panels and made fewer factual errors while discussing available evidence. Another study noted in the article showed that diverse teams are “more likely to constantly reexamine facts and remain objective. They may also encourage greater scrutiny of each member’s actions, keeping their joint cognitive resources sharp and vigilant. By breaking up workforce homogeneity, you can allow your employees to become more aware of their own potential biases—entrenched ways of thinking that can otherwise blind them to key information and even lead them to make errors in decision-making processes.” In other words, when people are among homogeneous and like-minded (non-diverse) teammates, the team is susceptible to groupthink and may be reticent to think about opposing viewpoints since all team members are in alignment. In a more diverse team with a variety of backgrounds and experiences, the opposing viewpoints are more likely to come out and the team members feel obligated to research and address the questions that have been raised. Again, this enables a richer discussion and a more in-depth fact-finding and exploration of opposing ideas and viewpoints in order to solve problems.

Diversity in teams also leads to greater innovation. A Boston Consulting Group article entitled “The Mix that Matters: Innovation through Diversity” explains a study in which they sought to understand the relationship between diversity in managers (all management levels) and innovation (Lorenzo et al., 2017). The key findings of this study show that:

• The positive relationship between management diversity and innovation is statistically significant—and thus companies with higher levels of diversity derive more revenue from new products and services.
• The innovation boost isn’t limited to a single type of diversity. The presence of managers who are either female or are from other countries, industries, or companies can cause an increase in innovation.
• Management diversity seems to have a particularly positive effect on innovation at complex companies—those that have multiple product lines or that operate in multiple industry segments.
• To reach its potential, gender diversity needs to go beyond tokenism. In the study, innovation performance only increased significantly when the workforce included more than 20% women in management positions. Having a high percentage of female employees doesn’t increase innovation if only a small number of women are managers.
• At companies with diverse management teams, openness to contributions from lower-level workers and an environment in which employees feel free to speak their minds are crucial for fostering innovation.

When you consider the impact that diverse teams have on decision-making and problem-solving—through the discussion and incorporation of new perspectives, ideas, and data—it is no wonder that the BCG study shows greater innovation. Team leaders need to reflect upon these findings during the early stages of team selection so that they can reap the benefits of having diverse voices and backgrounds.

Challenges and Best Practices for Working with Multicultural Teams

As globalization has increased over the last decades, workplaces have felt the impact of working within multicultural teams. The earlier section on team diversity outlined some of the highlights and benefits of working on diverse teams, and a multicultural group certainly qualifies as diverse. However, there are some key practices that are recommended to those who are leading multicultural teams so that they can parlay the diversity into an advantage and not be derailed by it.

People may assume that communication is the key factor that can derail multicultural teams, as participants may have different languages and communication styles. In the Harvard Business Review article “Managing Multicultural Teams,” Brett et al. (2006) outline four key cultural differences that can cause destructive conflicts in a team. The first difference is direct versus indirect communication, also known as high-context vs. low-context communication . Some cultures are very direct and explicit in their communication, while others are more indirect and ask questions rather than pointing our problems. This difference can cause conflict because, at the extreme, the direct style may be considered offensive by some, while the indirect style may be perceived as unproductive and passive-aggressive in team interactions.

The second difference that multicultural teams may face is trouble with accents and fluency. When team members don’t speak the same language, there may be one language that dominates the group interaction—and those who don’t speak it may feel left out. The speakers of the primary language may feel that those members don’t contribute as much or are less competent. The next challenge is when there are differing attitudes toward hierarchy. Some cultures are very respectful of the hierarchy and will treat team members based on that hierarchy. Other cultures are more egalitarian and don’t observe hierarchical differences to the same degree. This may lead to clashes if some people feel that they are being disrespected and not treated according to their status. The final difference that may challenge multicultural teams is conflicting decision-making norms. Different cultures make decisions differently, and some will apply a great deal of analysis and preparation beforehand. Those cultures that make decisions more quickly (and need just enough information to make a decision) may be frustrated with the slow response and relatively longer thought process.

These cultural differences are good examples of how everyday team activities (decision-making, communication, interaction among team members) may become points of contention for a multicultural team if there isn’t adequate understanding of everyone’s culture. The authors propose that there are several potential interventions to try if these conflicts arise. One simple intervention is adaptation , which is working with or around differences. This is best used when team members are willing to acknowledge the cultural differences and learn how to work with them. The next intervention technique is structural intervention , or reorganizing to reduce friction on the team. This technique is best used if there are unproductive subgroups or cliques within the team that need to be moved around. Managerial intervention is the technique of making decisions by management and without team involvement. This technique is one that should be used sparingly, as it essentially shows that the team needs guidance and can’t move forward without management getting involved. Finally, exit is an intervention of last resort, and is the voluntary or involuntary removal of a team member. If the differences and challenges have proven to be so great that an individual on the team can no longer work with the team productively, then it may be necessary to remove the team member in question.

Developing Cultural Intelligence

There are some people who seem to be innately aware of and able to work with cultural differences on teams and in their organizations. These individuals might be said to have cultural intelligence . Cultural intelligence  is a competency and a skill that enables individuals to function effectively in cross-cultural environments. It develops as people become more aware of the influence of culture and more capable of adapting their behavior to the norms of other cultures. In the IESE Insight article entitled “Cultural Competence: Why It Matters and How You Can Acquire It,” Lee and Liao (2015) assert that “multicultural leaders may relate better to team members from different cultures and resolve conflicts more easily. Their multiple talents can also be put to good use in international negotiations.” Multicultural leaders don’t have a lot of “baggage” from any one culture, and so are sometimes perceived as being culturally neutral. They are very good at handling diversity, which gives them a great advantage in their relationships with teammates.

In order to help people become better team members in a world that is increasingly multicultural, there are a few best practices that the authors recommend for honing cross-cultural skills. The first is to “broaden your mind”—expand your own cultural channels (travel, movies, books) and surround yourself with people from other cultures. This helps to raise your own awareness of the cultural differences and norms that you may encounter. Another best practice is to “develop your cross-cultural skills through practice” and experiential learning. You may have the opportunity to work or travel abroad—but if you don’t, then getting to know some of your company’s cross-cultural colleagues or foreign visitors will help you to practice your skills. Serving on a cross-cultural project team and taking the time to get to know and bond with your global colleagues is an excellent way to develop skills.

Once you have a sense of the different cultures and have started to work on developing your cross-cultural skills, another good practice is to “boost your cultural metacognition” and monitor your own behavior in multicultural situations. When you are in a situation in which you are interacting with multicultural individuals, you should test yourself and be aware of how you act and feel. Observe both your positive and negative interactions with people, and learn from them. Developing “ cognitive complexity ” is the final best practice for boosting multicultural skills. This is the most advanced, and it requires being able to view situations from more than one cultural framework. In order to see things from another perspective, you need to have a strong sense of emotional intelligence, empathy, and sympathy, and be willing to engage in honest communications.

In the Harvard Business Review article “Cultural Intelligence,” Earley and Mosakowski (2004) describe three sources of cultural intelligence that teams should consider if they are serious about becoming more adept in their cross-cultural skills and understanding. These sources, very simply, are head, body, and heart . One first learns about the beliefs, customs, and taboos of foreign cultures via the head . Training programs are based on providing this type of overview information—which is helpful, but obviously isn’t experiential. This is the cognitive component of cultural intelligence. The second source, the body , involves more commitment and experimentation with the new culture. It is this physical component (demeanor, eye contact, posture, accent) that shows a deeper level of understanding of the new culture and its physical manifestations. The final source, the heart , deals with a person’s own confidence in their ability to adapt to and deal well with cultures outside of their own. Heart really speaks to one’s own level of emotional commitment and motivation to understand the new culture.

The authors have created a quick assessment to diagnose cultural intelligence, based on these cognitive, physical, and emotional/motivational measures (i.e., head, body, heart). Please refer to the table below for a short diagnostic that allows you to assess your cultural intelligence.

Cultural intelligence is an extension of emotional intelligence. An individual must have a level of awareness and understanding of the new culture so that he or she can adapt to the style, pace, language, nonverbal communication, etc. and work together successfully with the new culture. A multicultural team can only find success if its members take the time to understand each other and ensure that everyone feels included. Multiculturalism and cultural intelligence are traits that are taking on increasing importance in the business world today. By following best practices and avoiding the challenges and pitfalls that can derail a multicultural team, a team can find great success and personal fulfillment well beyond the boundaries of the project or work engagement.

Digging in Deeper: Divergent Cultural Dimensions

Let’s dig in deeper by examining several points of divergence across cultures and consider how these dimensions might play out in organizations and in groups or teams.

Low-Power versus High-Power Distance

How comfortable are you with critiquing your boss’s decisions? If you are from a low-power distance culture, your answer might be “no problem.” In low-power distance cultures , according to Dutch researcher Geert Hofstede, people relate to one another more as equals and less as a reflection of dominant or subordinate roles, regardless of their actual formal roles as employee and manager, for example.

In a high-power distance culture , you would probably be much less likely to challenge the decision, to provide an alternative, or to give input. If you are working with people from a high-power distance culture, you may need to take extra care to elicit feedback and involve them in the discussion because their cultural framework may preclude their participation. They may have learned that less powerful people must accept decisions without comment, even if they have a concern or know there is a significant problem. Unless you are sensitive to cultural orientation and power distance, you may lose valuable information.

Individualistic versus Collectivist Cultures

People in individualistic cultures  value individual freedom and personal independence, and cultures always have stories to reflect their values. You may recall the story of Superman, or John McLean in the Diehard series, and note how one person overcomes all obstacles. Through personal ingenuity, in spite of challenges, one person rises successfully to conquer or vanquish those obstacles. Sometimes there is an assist, as in basketball or football, where another person lends a hand, but still the story repeats itself again and again, reflecting the cultural viewpoint.

When Hofstede explored the concepts of individualism and collectivism across diverse cultures (Hofstede, 1982, 2001, 2005), he found that in individualistic cultures like the United States, people perceived their world primarily from their own viewpoint. They perceived themselves as empowered individuals, capable of making their own decisions, and able to make an impact on their own lives.

Cultural viewpoint is not an either/or dichotomy, but rather a continuum or range. You may belong to some communities that express individualistic cultural values, while others place the focus on a collective viewpoint. Collectivist cultures  (Hofstede, 1982), including many in Asia and South America, focus on the needs of the nation, community, family, or group of workers. Ownership and private property is one way to examine this difference. In some cultures, property is almost exclusively private, while others tend toward community ownership. The collectively owned resource returns benefits to the community. Water, for example, has long been viewed as a community resource, much like air, but that has been changing as business and organizations have purchased water rights and gained control over resources. Public lands, such as parks, are often considered public, and individual exploitation of them is restricted. Copper, a metal with a variety of industrial applications, is collectively owned in Chile, with profits deposited in the general government fund. While public and private initiatives exist, the cultural viewpoint is our topic. How does someone raised in a culture that emphasizes the community interact with someone raised in a primarily individualistic culture? How could tensions be expressed and how might interactions be influenced by this point of divergence?

Masculine versus Feminine Orientation

There was a time when many cultures and religions valued a female figurehead, and with the rise of Western cultures we have observed a shift toward a masculine ideal. Each carries with it a set of cultural expectations and norms for gender behavior and gender roles across life, including business.

Hofstede describes the masculine-feminine dichotomy not in terms of whether men or women hold the power in a given culture, but rather the extent to which that culture values certain traits that may be considered masculine or feminine . Thus, “the assertive pole has been called ‘masculine’ and the modest, caring pole ‘feminine.’ The women in feminine countries have the same modest, caring values as the men; in the masculine countries they are somewhat assertive and competitive, but not as much as the men, so that these countries show a gap between men’s values and women’s values” (Hofstede, 2009).

We can observe this difference in where people gather, how they interact, and how they dress. We can see it during business negotiations, where it may make an important difference in the success of the organizations involved. Cultural expectations precede the interaction, so someone who doesn’t match those expectations may experience tension. Business in the United States has a masculine orientation—assertiveness and competition are highly valued. In other cultures, such as Sweden, business values are more attuned to modesty (lack of self-promotion) and taking care of society’s weaker members. This range of difference is one aspect of intercultural communication that requires significant attention when the business communicator enters a new environment.

Uncertainty-Accepting Cultures versus Uncertainty-Rejecting Cultures

When we meet each other for the first time, we often use what we have previously learned to understand our current context. We also do this to reduce our uncertainty. Some cultures, such as the United States and Britain, are highly tolerant of uncertainty , while others go to great lengths to reduce the element of surprise. Cultures in the Arab world, for example, are high in uncertainty avoidance ; they tend to be resistant to change and reluctant to take risks. Whereas a U.S. business negotiator might enthusiastically agree to try a new procedure, the Egyptian counterpart would likely refuse to get involved until all the details are worked out.

Short-Term versus Long-Term Orientation

Do you want your reward right now or can you dedicate yourself to a long-term goal? You may work in a culture whose people value immediate results and grow impatient when those results do not materialize. Geert Hofstede discusses this relationship of time orientation to a culture as a “time horizon,” and it underscores the perspective of the individual within a cultural context. Many countries in Asia, influenced by the teachings of Confucius, value a long-term orientation, whereas other countries, including the United States, have a more short-term approach to life and results. Native American cultures are known for holding a long-term orientation, as illustrated by the proverb attributed to the Iroquois that decisions require contemplation of their impact seven generations removed.

If you work within a culture that has a short-term orientation ,  you may need to place greater emphasis on reciprocation of greetings, gifts, and rewards. For example, if you send a thank-you note the morning after being treated to a business dinner, your host will appreciate your promptness. While there may be a respect for tradition, there is also an emphasis on personal representation and honor, a reflection of identity and integrity. Personal stability and consistency are also valued in a short-term oriented culture, contributing to an overall sense of predictability and familiarity.

Long-term orientation  is often marked by persistence, thrift and frugality, and an order to relationships based on age and status. A sense of shame for the family and community is also observed across generations. What an individual does reflects on the family and is carried by immediate and extended family members.

Time Orientation

Edward T. Hall and Mildred Reed Hall (1987) state that monochronic time-oriented cultures consider one thing at a time, whereas polychronic time-oriented cultures schedule many things at one time, and time is considered in a more fluid sense. In monochromatic time , time is thought of as very linear, interruptions are to be avoided, and everything has its own specific time. Even the multitasker from a monochromatic culture will, for example, recognize the value of work first before play or personal time. The United States, Germany, and Switzerland are often noted as countries that value a monochromatic time orientation.

Polychromatic time  looks a little more complicated, with business and family mixing with dinner and dancing. Greece, Italy, Chile, and Saudi Arabia are countries where one can observe this perception of time; business meetings may be scheduled at a fixed time, but when they actually begin may be another story. Also note that the dinner invitation for 8 p.m. may in reality be more like 9 p.m. If you were to show up on time, you might be the first person to arrive and find that the hosts are not quite ready to receive you.

When in doubt, always ask before the event; many people from polychromatic cultures will be used to foreigner’s tendency to be punctual, even compulsive, about respecting established times for events. The skilled business communicator is aware of this difference and takes steps to anticipate it. The value of time in different cultures is expressed in many ways, and your understanding can help you communicate more effectively.

Review & Reflection Questions

• Why are diverse teams better at decision-making and problem-solving?
• What are some of the challenges that multicultural teams face?
• How might you further cultivate your own cultural intelligence?
• What are some potential points of divergence between cultures?
• Brett, J., Behfar, K., Kern, M. (2006, November). Managing multicultural teams. Harvard Business Review . https://hbr.org/2006/11/managing-multicultural-teams
• Dodd, C. (1998). Dynamics of intercultural communication (5th ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
• Earley, P.C., & Mosakowski, E. (2004, October). Cultural intelligence. Harvard Business Review . https://hbr.org/2004/10/cultural-intelligence
• Hall, M. R., & Hall, E. T. (1987). Hidden differences: Doing business with the Japanese . New York, NY: Doubleday.
• Hofstede, G. (1982). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Hofstede, G. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
• Lee, Y-T., & Liao, Y. (2015). Cultural competence: Why it matters and how you can acquire it. IESE Insight . https://www.ieseinsight.com/doc.aspx?id=1733&ar=20
• Lorenzo, R., Yoigt, N., Schetelig, K., Zawadzki, A., Welpe, I., & Brosi, P. (2017). The mix that matters: Innovation through diversity. Boston Consulting Group. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2017/people-organization-leadership-talent-innovation-through-diversity-mix-that-matters.aspx
• Rock, D., & Grant, H. (2016, November 4). Why diverse teams are smarter . Harvard Business Review . https://hbr.org/2016/11/why-diverse-teams-are-smarter

Author & Attribution

This remix comes from Dr. Jasmine Linabary at Emporia State University. This chapter is also available in her book:  Small Group Communication: Forming and Sustaining Teams.

The sections “How Does Team Diversity Enhance Decision Making and Problem Solving?” and “Challenges and Best Practices for Working with Multicultural Teams” are adapted from Black, J.S., & Bright, D.S. (2019). Organizational behavior. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/organizational-behavior/ . Access the full chapter for free here . The content is available under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 license .

The section “Digging in Deeper: Divergent Cultural Dimensions” is adapted from “ Divergent Cultural Characteristics ” in Business Communication for Success from the University of Minnesota. The book was adapted from a work produced and distributed under a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-SA) by a publisher who has requested that they and the original author not receive attribution. This work is made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license .

A set of negative group-level processes, including illusions of invulnerability, self-censorship, and pressures to conform, that occur when highly cohesive groups seek concurrence when making a decision.

a culture that emphasize nonverbal communication and indirect communication styles

a culture that emphasizes verbal expression and direct communication styles

a competency and a skill that enables individuals to function effectively in cross-cultural environments

cultures in which people relate to one another more as equals and less as a reflection of dominant or subordinate roles, regardless of their actual formal roles

culture tends to accept power differences, encourage hierarchy, and show respect for rank and authority

cultures that place greater importance on individual freedom and personal independence

cultures that place more value on the needs and goals of the group, family, community or nation

cultures that tend to value assertiveness, and concentrate on material achievements and wealth-building

cultures that tend to value nurturing, care and emotion, and are concerned with the quality of life

cultures with a high tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk-taking. The unknown is more openly accepted, and rules and regulations tend to be more lax

cultures with a low tolerance for uncertainty, ambiguity, and risk-taking. The unknown is minimized through strict rules and regulations

focus on the near future, involves delivering short-term success or gratification and places a stronger emphasis on the present than the future

cultures that focus on the future and delaying short-term success or gratification in order to achieve long-term success

an orientation to time is considered highly linear, where interruptions are to be avoided, and everything has its own specific time

an orientation to time where multiple things can be done at once and time is viewed more fluidly

Working in Diverse Teams Copyright © 2021 by Cameron W. Piercy, Ph.D. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

More From Forbes

5 steps leaders can take to make better decisions.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

5 people discussing strategy as a team and making decisions on how to move forward.

If you’re plagued by indecisiveness and often doubt every decision you must make as a leader, you’re certainly not alone.

Leaders often fear making tough decisions because they are acutely aware of the potential consequences and the impact on their team and organization. This reluctance can stem from a fear of failure, the possibility of making the wrong choice, and anxiety over how others will perceive their decisions. Additionally, the weight of the responsibility and the desire to maintain harmony can make leaders hesitant to make decisions that may lead to conflict or dissatisfaction among team members.

In a global survey of 14,250 people in January 2023, Oracle and economist Seth Stephens-Davidowitz found that 85% of business leaders have suffered from decision distress – regretting, feeling guilty about, or questioning a decision they made in the past year. Not only that, but 70% of those leaders would prefer “to have a robot make their decisions.”

However, according to the Cloverpop 2023 Decision IQ Benchmark Survey , the quality of a company’s decision-making is its most valuable asset. Do leaders really want to leave their most valuable asset up to robots?

Getting to a decision point isn’t always easy. Often, these situations involve significant change, intense pressure, or even balancing opposing opinions – all of which can make figuring out what decision to make much harder.

So, what steps can you take to improve your decision-making?

1. Know You Must Make The Decision

Best high-yield savings accounts of 2024, best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

For many leaders, the biggest obstacle to decision-making is ignoring that a decision must be made and that the responsibility to make it rests with you. Ignoring a problem or delaying a decision, hoping it will resolve itself, is a common but flawed approach. Problems rarely disappear independently; in fact, they often escalate if not addressed promptly.

So, the first critical step is acknowledging the existence of an issue and understanding that it requires your action.

· Develop your awareness and observation skills to recognize moments when timely decisions are necessary

· Cultivate a mindset that embraces responsibility and accountability for your decision-making

· Prioritize timely actions to prevent minor issues from growing into significant challenges

2. Embrace Data-Driven Decision Making

To make effective, solid decisions, leaders shouldn’t rely solely on their “gut” as the foundation for making an important decision. Decisions made after reviewing solid data are more likely to lead to successful outcomes.

As a leader, you must combine your experience with the information presented to you and then analyze it to find the best solution.

· Collect and analyze relevant data

· Use analytical tools and software (for example: Alterx , Google Data Studio , Microsoft Power BI ) to interpret data patterns

· Combine quantitative data with qualitative insights for a more comprehensive view

Gathering information is essential–it helps ensure more objective decisions and reduces bias.

3. Promote A Collaborative Environment

Leaders often make the best decisions when they gather information from diverse perspectives. By seeking input from various stakeholders, leaders can uncover blind spots and consider a broader range of solutions.

· Cultivate an inclusive culture, so team members feel safe sharing their opinions

· Encourage open dialogue and active listening during discussions

· Ask exploratory questions to gather as much information as possible

· Leverage the collective intelligence of your team to explore various solutions

Collaboration enhances decision quality and cultivates a sense of ownership and commitment among team members.

4. Develop Your Critical Thinking Skills

Critical thinking is essential as it equips you with the skill set to analyze situations thoroughly and objectively. It helps you identify critical issues, evaluate alternatives, and make decisions based on sound reasoning.

· Be curious and ask probing questions to challenge your assumptions and examine alternatives

· Engage in regular reflective practices, such as journaling or debriefing after significant decisions

· Attend workshops or training sessions focused on enhancing critical thinking abilities

· Practice genuinely listening to team members to gather valuable insights

5. Be Decisive, But Flexible

Effective leaders know when to make decisions quickly and when to adjust their strategies based on new information. This essential flexibility ensures adaptability in dynamic environments. Balancing these two qualities helps leaders navigate uncertainties and drive their teams forward.

· Set clear priorities so you can identify which decisions can and must be made swiftly and which can afford more time for consideration

· Develop contingency plans so you can quickly pivot if circumstances change

· Review the results from the decisions made and be open to adjusting your approach based on what you learn

Decisiveness is vital in leadership because it keeps projects moving forward and demonstrates confidence to your team. Ultimately, the responsibility of decision-making rests with the leader. Since it is a pivotal asset that significantly influences an organization’s performance, leaders must develop strong decision-making skills and confidence in their ability to make the right decisions.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Diverse Teams Feel Less Comfortable — and That’s Why They Perform Better

• David Rock,
• Heidi Grant,
• Jacqui Grey

Homogenous groups aren’t as effective as they seem.

In numerous studies , diversity — both inherent (e.g., race, gender) and acquired (experience, cultural background) — is associated with business success. For example, a 2009 analysis of 506 companies found that firms with more racial or gender diversity had more sales revenue, more customers, and greater profits. A 2016 analysis of more than 20,000 firms in 91 countries found that companies with more female executives were more profitable. In a 2011 study management teams exhibiting a wider range of educational and work backgrounds produced more-innovative products. These are mere correlations, but laboratory experiments have also shown the direct effect of diversity on team performance. In a 2006 study of mock juries, for example, when black people were added to the jury, white jurors processed the case facts more carefully and deliberated more effectively.

• DR David Rock is a cofounder of the NeuroLeadership Institute and author of  Your Brain at Work .
• Heidi Grant is a social psychologist who researches, writes, and speaks about the science of motivation. Her books include Reinforcements: How to Get People to Help You , Nine Things Successful People Do Differently , and No One Understands You and What to Do About It . She is EY US Director of Learning R&D.
• Jacqui Grey is the Managing Director, Europe for the NeuroLeadership Institute. She is known for her work on innovative leadership programs and board-level executive mentoring for FTSE 100 companies and the author of Executive Advantage – Resilient Leadership for 21st Century Organisations . Jacqui has been a guest lecturer at Cranfield, IE Business School, and LBS, among others.

Partner Center