This article unveils a new research methodology for the study of group decision making in organizations—the group dynamics q-sort (GDQ). The GDQ is a 100-item instrument designed to study group process across a wide variety of situations and using a wide variety of data sources. It combines the descriptive richness of the qualitative approach with the rigor of a quantitative approach by creating a common data language to describe process across groups, observers, and time. This article introduces the GDQ in the following five sections: (a) the development of the group dynamics q-sort, (b) comparisons of the GDQ with other traditional research methods (i.e., questionnaires, case studies, experiments, and behavioral process coding), (c) the mechanics of employing the GDQ, (d) a demonstration of the method for studying dynamic group processes over time, and (e) summary and other potential applications of the method.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adizes, I.
(1988). Corporate lifecycles: How and why corporations grow and die and what to do about it. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
2.
Alberts, K. S. (1999). Diagnosing decision-making groups: A validity and reliability check of the self-administered group dynamics q-sort. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University.
3.
Bales, R. F.
(1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4.
Bales, R. F.
(1958). Task roles and social roles in problem solving groups. In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 437-446). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
5.
Bem, D. J.
, & Funder, D. C. (1978). Predicting more of the people more of the time: Assessing the personality of the situations. Psychological Review, 85, 485-501.
6.
Block, J.
(1978). The q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.
7.
Cohen, B.
, & Greenfield, J. (1997). Ben & Jerry’s double dip: Lead with your values and make money, too. New York: Simon & Schuster.
8.
Etzioni, A.
(1993). The spirit of community. New York: Crown.
9.
Fiske, S. T.
, & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
10.
George, A. L.
(1972). The case for multiple advocacy in making foreign policy. American Political Science Review, 66, 751-785.
11.
Gersick, C. J.
(1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9-41.
12.
Gordon, M. M.
(1985). The Iacocca management technique. New York: Dodd, Mead.
13.
Guzzo, R. A.
, Wagner, D. B., Maguire, E., Herr, B., & Hawley, C. (1986). Implicit theories and the evaluation of group process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 279-295.
14.
Hackman, J. R.
(1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
Hackman, J. R.
(1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
Ingrassia, P.
, & White, J. B. (1994). Comeback. New York: Simon & Schuster.
17.
Janis, I. L.
(1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
18.
Janis, I. L.
(1982). Victims of groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
19.
Janis, I. L.
(1985). Sources of error in strategic decision making. In J. M. Pennings (Ed.), Organizational strategy and change (pp. 157-197). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
20.
Janis, I. L.
(1989). Crucial decisions: Leadership in policy-making and management. New York: Free Press.
21.
Janis, I. L.
, & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice and commitment. New York: Free Press.
22.
Janis, I. L.
, & Mann, L. (1992). Cognitive complexity in international decision making. In P. Suedfeld & P. E. Tetlock (Eds.), Psychology and social policy (pp. 33-50). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
23.
Kimberly, J. R.
, & Miles, R. H. (1980). The organizational life cycle: New perspectives for organizational theory and research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24.
Levin, D. P.
(1995). Behind the wheel at Chrysler. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.
25.
McGregor, D.
(1966). Leadership and motivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
Moreland, R. L.
, & Levine, J. M. (1982). Socialization in small groups: Temporal changes in individual-group relations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 137-192). New York: Academic Press.
27.
Moritz, M.
, & Seaman, B. (1981). Going for broke: The Chrysler story. New York: Anchor.
28.
Ouchi, W.
(1982). Theory Z: How American business can meet the Japanese challenge. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
29.
Peterson, R. S.
(1997). A directive leadership style in group decision making is both virtue and vice: Evidence from elite and experimental groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1107-1121.
30.
Peterson, R. S.
, Owens, P. D., & Martorana, P. V. (in press). Cause or effect? An investigation of the relationship between top management team group dynamics and organizational performance. In M. A. Neale, E. A. Mannix, & R. Wageman (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Vol. 2. Context. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
31.
Peterson, R. S.
, Owens, P. D., Tetlock, P. E., Fan, E., & Martorana, P. (1998). Group dynamics in top management teams: Groupthink, vigilance and alternative models of organizational failure and success. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 272-305.
32.
Pfeffer, J.
, & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control or organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
33.
Snyder, J.
(1985). Richness, rogor, and relevance in the study of Soviet foreign policy. International Security,9,3-3.
34.
Staw, B. M.
(1975). Attributions of the “causes” of performance: A general alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 414-432.
35.
Stephenson, W.
(1953). The study of behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
Sutton, R. I.
, & Hargadon, A. (1996). Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 685-718.
37.
Tetlock, P. E.
, Peterson, R. S., McGuire, C., Chang, S., & Feld, P. (1992). Assessing political group dynamics: A test of the groupthink model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 403-425.
38.
Verba, S.
(1967). Some dilemmas in comparative research. World Politics, 20, 111-127.
39.
Weingart, L.
(1997). How did they do that? The ways and means of studying group process. In B. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 19, pp. 189-239). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
40.
Yin, R. K.
(1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
