In organizational decision making, the dominance by a power figure in a group
discussion is frequently an inhibiting force that hinders a group from effective
performance and from reaching effective decisions. This problem provides an
impetus for searching for methods to mitigate the disruptive effects of power
inequalities. This study proposes a new method: assignment of a majority rule.
Specifically, this study suggests that assignment of a majority rule in some
unequal-power groups has a greater potential for reducing power inequalities
than a unanimity rule or no assigned decision rule.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blau, P.M., & Scott, W.R.Formal organizations: A comparative approachSan Francisco : Chandler, 1962.
2.
Caudill, W.A.The psychiatric hospital as a small societyCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958 .
3.
Cochran, W.G., & Cox, G.M.Experimental designNew York: John Wiley, 1957.
4.
Collins, B.E., & Guetzkow, H.A social psychology of group processes for decision-makingNew York: John Wiley, 1964.
5.
Davis, J.H.Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemesPsychological Review, 1973, 80, 97-125.
Falk, G.A challenge to the superiority of unanimity rule over majority rule in problem solving groups Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Midwest Division of the Academy of Management , 1979, 163-178.
8.
Falk, G., & Hoffman, L.R.A valence analysis of the impact of decision rules in unequal power groups In L.R. Hoffman, The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model.New York: Praeger, 1979.
9.
Fisher, A.B.Small group decison making: Communication and the group processNew York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.
10.
French, J.R.P., Jr. , & Snyder, R.Leadership and later personal power In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan , 1959.
11.
Gerard, H.B.Some effects of status rule clarity, and group goal clarity upon the individual's relations to group processJournal of Personality , 1957, 23 , 473-488.
12.
Hall, J., & Watson, W.H.The effects of a normative intervention on group decision making performanceHuman Relations, 1970, 23, 299-317.
13.
Hoffman, L.R.Conditions for creative problem solvingThe Journal of Psychology, 1961, 52, 429-444.
14.
Hoffman, L.R.Group problem solving In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychologv (Vol. 2). New York: Academic Press, 1965.
15.
Hoffman, L.R.The beginnings of a hierarchical model of group problem solving In L.R. Hoffman, The group problem solving process: Studies of a valence model.New York: Praeger, 1979.
16.
Hoffman, L.R., & Maier, N.R.F.Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem-solving groups : Concept, method, and resultsJournal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 1964, 69 , 264-271.
17.
Hoffman, L.R., & Maier, N.R.F.Valence in the adoption of solutions by problem-solving groups: II. Quality and acceptance as goals of leaders and membersJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967 , 6, 176-182.
18.
Hurwitz, J.I., Zander, A.F., & Hymovitch, B.Some effects of power on the relations among group members In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory.Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, 1953.
19.
Komorita, S.S., Sheposh, J.P. & Braver, S.L.Power, the use of power, and cooperative choice in a two person gameJournal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1968, 8, 134-142.
20.
Larson, C.U.Attention span and the leaderPaper presented at the Central States Speech Association, St. Louis, Missouri, 1969.
21.
Maier, N.R.F.Principles of human relations: Applications to managementNew York: John Wiley, 1952.
22.
Maier, N.R.F.Assets and liabilities in group problem solving: The need for an integrative functionPsychological Review, 1967 , 74, 239-249.
23.
Maier, N.R.F., & Hoffman, L.R.Quality of first and second solutions in group problem solving processJournal of Applied Psychology, 1960, 44, 278-283.
24.
Maier, N.R.F., & Solem, A.R.The contribution of a discussion leader to the quality of group thinking: The effective use of minority opinionsHuman Relations , 1952, 5 , 277-288.
25.
Maier, J.R.F., & Zerfoss, L.R.MRP: A technique for training groups of supervisors and its potential use in social researchHuman Relations , 1952, 5, 177-186.
26.
Morris, C.G., & Hackman, R.J.Behavioral correlates of perceived leadershipJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1969 , 13, 350-361.
27.
Osborn, A.F.Applied imaginationNew York: Charles Scribner's, 1953.
28.
Riecken, H.W.Effects of talkativeness on ability to influence group solutions of problemsSociometry, 1958, 21, 309-321.
29.
Smith, W.P.Power structure and authoritarianism in the use of power in the triadJournal of Personality, 1967 , 35, 64-90.
30.
Solem, A.R.An evaluation of two attitudinal approaches to delegationJournal of Applied Psychology, 1958 , 42, 36-39.
31.
Torrance, E.P.Some consequences of power differences on decision making in permanent and temporary three man groups. Research Studies , 1954, 22, 130-140.
32.
Also in A.P. Hare, B.F. Borgatta, & R.F. Bales (Eds.), Small groups.New York: Knopf, 1955 .
33.
Van de Ven, A., & Delbecq, A.L.Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision making effectivenessAcademy of Management Journal , 1971, 14, 203-212.
34.
Watson, D., & Bromberg, B.Power, communication and position satisfaction in task oriented groupsJournal of Personality and Social Psychology , 1965 , 2, 859-864.
35.
Zander, A., Cohen, A.R., & Stotland, E.Role relations in the mental-health professionsAnn Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, 1957.
