What kind of phases do groups experience

in there decision-making?

When dealing with decision making in a group, there are three main phases that the group goes through when coming up with a final decision. In order, these phases include enactment, selection, and retention. There is also a decision-making environment which is established for these phases to be put into motion. Based on Karl Weick’s writings, the basis for a decision having to be made is the idea of equivocality, when two or more interpretations are present in a situation (Cheney, 61).   This can also be considered a state of confusion, with too many outcomes or not enough answers (link).  Weick also states that we contribute more to developing our own decision making environments than we think (61).

            Once this main requirement has been established, the group moves on to the enactment process in which they are actively producing information and deciding which is relevant for the situation. In other words, this is the brainstorming process along with the narrowing down of ideas.  According to Laura Levelle’s interpretation of enactment, “This involves action, which is the key to enactment. The only way to fail is to not act at all (link).”  Also in a review of Weick’s writings, Daniel Robichaud states, “Enactment… provides the raw material for the creation of meaning by producing inputs for organizational processes. As raw data, actions are then organized so as to form cause maps which attribute meaning to experience, and which are retained and mobilized in future action.”  Overall, once in the environment enactment sets the stage for a decision to be made.

The next phase of group decision making is called the selection phase.  It is during this selection phase that the group uses two tools for making their decision, rules and cycles.  These rules as Levelle states are basic ideas about what has worked in the past.  However, with the ambiguity of many situations there needs to be more.  This is where the cycles come in.  When working out a decision in a group to cycle through the information from the enactment phase in cycles removes equivocality; the more disagreements that there are in the group, the more cycles are needed to remove that equivocality and actually make a decision. 

Weick’s final phase of decision making is one that occurs after the actual decision is made.  This phase is called retention and is just what it says.  It is the process of retaining all the information that was acquired during the previous two phases, so that, in future decision making situations they can move more quickly because they know how to react when certain disagreements arise.  If an organization knows that one member tends to shoot down ever possibility but his own, they can tailor their arguments in a different fashion so as to avoid as much equivocality as possible.  Retention is basically just the simple development of a database for future efficiency.  This is best illustrated by a quote Weick used for his “Sensemaking in Organizations” which he took from Jerome Bruner. 

            ""The cost of close looks is generally too high under the conditions of speed, risk,     and limited capacity imposed upon organisms by their environment or their           constitutions. The ability to use minimal cues quickly in categorizing the events of        the environment is what gives the organism its lead time in adjusting to events.             Pause and close inspection inevitably cut down on this precious interval for    adjustment.""

            Karl Weick’s model provides us a simple look into how exactly an organization goes about coming up with decisions.  The simplicity of the three main phases can be broken down into more intervals, but the main concept is easier to understand in this way.  In speaking about Weick’s model in general, Charles Bantz states, “The multi-level applicability of the model allows us to use it to study any level of organizing depending on our interests.  The model thus provides power and flexibility for analysis. (link)”

References

Cheney, George, Christensen, Lars Thoger, Zorn, Theodore E. Jr., Ganesh, Shiv. (2004).       Organizational Communication in an Age of Globalization: Issues, Reflections,           Practices. Long Grove: Waveland.

Robichaud, Daniel. (1999). Textualization and Organizing: Illustrations from a Public           Discussion Process. Communication Review, 3, 1-2.

Bantz, Charles R., Smith, David H. (1977). A Critique and Experimental Test of Weick’s         Model of Organizing.  Communication Monographs, 44, 171-185.

Weick, Karl E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. New York: Sage Publications.