Decision Making in Construction: Individual vs Group

In the dynamic field of construction project management, the decision-making process is a critical component that can significantly impact the outcome of a project. The debate between individual and group decision-making is not just about choosing one over the other; it’s about understanding the trade-offs between efficiency and quality, and the level of team engagement in the decisions made.

The Spectrum of Decision-Making

Leadership in construction project management involves navigating a spectrum that ranges from individual decision-making to full consensus. The choice of method depends on several factors, including the urgency of the situation, the complexity of the decision, and the potential impact on the project.

During crises or incidents, swift and decisive action is required, and strong individual decision-making becomes necessary. Conversely, when the quality of the decision is paramount and there is sufficient time, striving for consensus is ideal.

When a safety incident occurs, we require leaders to act unilaterally and swiftly. Conversely, during tender time, when the methodology of a key and consequential activity is being decided upon, group discussion and decision making will lead to a better decision.

Group Decision-Making: A Path to Quality and Engagement

Group decision making is more time-consuming (especially if trying to reach consensus). However, it provides several advantages, including;

1. Improved Creativity: With more minds at work, groups have the potential to be more creative, often leading to more effective and innovative decisions2.

2. Diverse Perspectives: Group decision-making brings together individuals with different backgrounds, experiences, and expertise, leading to a wider range of ideas and solutions1.

3. Greater Buy-in: When team members contribute to the decision-making process, they are more likely to support and commit to the decisions made, leading to better implementation and execution1.

4. More Complete Information: Groups can aggregate the resources and knowledge of several individuals, providing more input and heterogeneity to the decision process3.

5. Higher Quality Outcomes: A group will almost always outperform even the best individual, as the collective effort tends to lead to more informed and well-rounded decisions3.

6. Increased Acceptance of Solutions: Involvement in the decision-making process can lead to increased acceptance of solutions among team members, as they feel their voices have been heard and considered3.

7. Enhanced Problem-Solving: Groups may generate more ideas than an individual working alone, which can lead to more effective problem-solving strategies2.

8. Positive Team Dynamics: Engaging in group decision-making can create more understanding and positivity within the team, as members work together towards a common goal1.

9. Encouraging Ownership: Sharing the responsibility for decisions ensures that team members feel a sense of ownership, which is crucial for successful implementation5.

Challenges in Group Decision-Making

However, achieving consensus in construction is often impractical due to significant time pressures. Leaders must then aim for at least consultation, ensuring that team members feel heard and valued, which enhances their commitment to the project.

Yet, group decision-making is not without its challenges. Leaders must be vigilant of potential obstacles such as:

• Lack of Group Maturity: Underdeveloped group dynamics can impede effective decision-making.

• Dominant Response: The risk of over-reliance on the opinions of the most vocal or assertive members.

• Social Loafing and Free Riding: These behaviours can lead to unequal effort distribution and reliance on others’ contributions.

• Groupthink: A desire for harmony that may result in irrational or dysfunctional decisions.

• Conflicting Goals and Egocentrism: These can create stalemates or lead to decisions that favor individual interests over the group’s needs.

• Homogeneity: A lack of diversity can limit creativity and robust decision-making.

• Production Blocking: Sequential idea sharing can restrict the flow of contributions.

• Inappropriate Size: Groups that are too large or too small can affect the quality of interaction and decision-making.

Optimizing Group Size for Effective Decision-Making

Research suggests that the optimal group size for decision-making varies, but smaller groups tend to be more effective. The Harvard Business Review recommends around seven members for important decisions, while other studies suggest that five may be the optimal number to manage complex social interactions.

Key factors that influence the effectiveness of group decision-making include diversity, social sensitivity, leadership style, group cohesion, and the decision-making process itself.

Key Mitigation Strategies for Managers

Keep the Group Small: Especially for important decisions, maintaining a smaller group is beneficial. Larger groups can lead to complexities and hinder effective communication. Smaller teams allow for more focused discussions and quicker decision-making1.

1. Bring a Diverse Group Together: Diversity in expertise, backgrounds, and perspectives enriches decision-making. Different viewpoints can lead to more robust solutions and prevent groupthink. Aim for a mix of skills and experiences1.

2. Appoint a Devil’s Advocate: Designate someone to challenge prevailing assumptions or viewpoints. The devil’s advocate role encourages critical thinking and helps uncover potential blind spots or risks1.

3. Collect Opinions Independently: Before group discussions, gather individual opinions. This prevents premature convergence and allows for a broader range of ideas. Independent input reduces the influence of dominant voices1.

4. Provide a Safe Space to Speak Up: Encourage open dialogue by creating an environment where team members feel comfortable expressing dissenting opinions. Psychological safety fosters honest discussions and prevents groupthink1.

5. Don’t Over-Rely on Experts: While expertise is valuable, relying solely on experts can limit creativity and overlook alternative solutions. Balance expert input with diverse perspectives from the entire group1.

6. Share Collective Responsibility for the Outcome: Ensure that everyone feels accountable for the decision. When team members share ownership, they are more likely to actively participate and commit to the chosen course of action1

Conclusion: Balancing Time, Quality, and Team Engagement

In conclusion, the spectrum of decision-making in construction project management is a balance between time, quality, and team engagement. Leaders must carefully assess each situation to determine the most appropriate approach, whether it’s individual decisiveness or collaborative consensus. By understanding and addressing the challenges inherent in group decision-making, leaders can foster an environment where high-quality decisions are made efficiently and with the full support of the team.

Key Take-Aways

• Leaders should always aim for group consensus in decision making, while understanding that often time pressures will not make this possible. In which case consultation prior to decision making should be sought

• Individual decision making is necessary in times of crisis or significant time pressure such as during the pandemic.

• Leaders must structure groups and decision-making processes to avoid the common pitfalls of group decision making including:

  • Group immaturity

  • Dominant members

  • Social Loafing and Free Riding

  • Groupthink

  • Conflicting Goals and Egocentrism

  • Lack of diversity

  • Production Blocking

  • Inappropriate Size