Group Problem Solving

  The first step in the group problem solving is problem identification. Here the group must clarify what it wants to do or what it is being asked to do. A good way to start is to ask this question: What exactly is the problem before the group? Too frequently, groups overlook this step. When this happens, each group member can have a different idea of what constitutes the problem and assume that other group members have the same problem in mind. For example, suppose a student group is seeking a solution to the lack of food services on the north campus. All of the food outlets are at least a mile away from this part of campus. So what precisely is the problem? Is it that students, faculty, and staff do not have access to food for lunch and dinner? To be sure, the group members canvass students to examine the problem from their point of view. This helps them be certain that they are on track before going ahead with the rest of the project. Before going on to the next step, each group member should be able to state the problem clearly and succinctly.
  The second step is problem analysis. Here group members gather information, data, and even opinions to help them understand the history and causes of the problem. Group members need to decide how serious or widespread the problem is. Considering solutions that will resolve a problem for a few isolated people is quite different from considering solutions that will resolve a problem that affects many. Continuing with the previous example, the group surveys students for the type of food service they might prefer. Their next step is to contact the food services department on campus to discuss the types of services they could make available on north campus. With both sets of information, the group can compare the foods that are easily accessible from food services with the foods students want. And, although the general focus is on problems, group members also need to think about any hidden issues. One hidden issue—and the real reasonfood is not available on this part of campus—is that custodial staff is limited on this part of campus, meaning that there are not enough custodians to keep the food areas up to health department standards of sanitation.
  The third step involves identifying the minimal criteria for the solution. In the food problem, the primary criterion is money. How much are students willing to spend for the convenience of eating near their classes? How much money can food services allot in their budget to establish food service on the north campus? How much money will be required for extra custodial help? In discussing these issues, the group finds other criteria that need to be considered. For example, where will these new food services be located? Who will give permission to install food outlets in classroom buildings? Because space is so tight, the only place that can reasonably hold a food outlet is the theatre department’s ticket office. But the group does not pursue the issue of what will happen to the ticket office if it is moved to accommodate food outlets. The more criteria group members can think of for evaluating solutions, the more complete and the more useful their decisions will be.
  In the fourth step, group members generate solutions. As you might guess, it is difficult to keep from doing this throughout the discussion generated in the first three steps. But groups that generate solutions too quickly can come to premature conclusions without fully investigating all potential solutions. For example, the group studying the problem of food on the north campus fails to generate other solutions such as independent food cart vendors, which do not require permanent space. It is a good idea to allow at least two meetings for idea generation. That way, group members have the opportunity to think about the problem individually before coming back to the group.
  The fifth step is evaluating solutions and selecting one as best. If the group has followed the standard agenda, this step will be relatively easy because the group has access to all needed information. Using the criteria generated in the third step, the group should evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of each solution generated in the fourth step. What about our campus food group? Unfortunately, they get stuck early on in the process. That is, they become so focused on moving the ticket office and installing a fast food outlet that they have no other options to evaluate at this stage. As a result, they force themselves into recommending a solution that will not be approved.

  The sixth step of the standard agenda is solution implementation. But followthrough can be a weak area for groups. Sometimes the charge of the group does not include implementation, so group members get little practice in this area. Other times the group has used all of its energy in making a decision and has little left over for implementing the decision. Using these six steps maximizes group effectiveness in decision making because it provides equal opportunity to all proposals, no matter who makes them. Highly cohesive groups benefit from using the group problem solving procedure because members of such groups can feel inhibited about criticizing an idea or proposal before the group.