How can you challenge assumptions in group decision-making?

If you ask questions that people can't answer, it makes them question their own assumptions. Often people don't want to hear criticism directly from you. But they are more open to criticism that stems from their own responses to questions.

First, who determines the “right answer“ when determining the basis for an assumption? Then, who is the one that is determining that the assumption is an actual assumption and not a correct or valid point?!? Lastly, who sets the parameters of basing the results of the answers?!? So many times, in discussions, rises voices that place and assert their authority based on title, posture or position amongst those at the table and not necessarily as a valid voice in the conversation.

-Explicar claramente el objetivo y la categoría de la decisión. -Conformar un grupo peque?o pero diverso de responsables de la toma de decisiones. -Crear un espacio de debate seguro. -Comunicar claramente la decisión final.

Asking question should be the first and foremost thing to be done. It can help and support with clarity and understanding the challenges better. Keeping everyone informed and encourage creative areas and opinions. Structure it better is definitely going to brainstorm and run things better.

While embracing AI's transformative capabilities, I've always anchored my beliefs in the invaluable human touch. Feedback, a critical human interaction, acts as the cornerstone to robust group decision-making. Drawing parallels from AI's iterative learning, seeking feedback iteratively can recalibrate our assumptions, much like refining an algorithm. In a world hyper-focused on efficiency, pausing for feedback might seem counter-intuitive. Yet, is it not the "error" messages that often guide us to the most optimal solutions? Let's not just chase validation but earnestly seek those "error messages" from diverse voices. Feedback isn't just a step in the process; it's the process itself.

Seeking feedback is one of the harder things to do, second only to giving feedback. It is very hard to completely avoid groupthink, confirmation bias, and the assortment of decision making traps that can arise in a group setting. Seeking feedback is one way to help check the group and keep confirmation bias at bay. I would recommend seeking feedback from someone who is not already a decision maker in your group, as that may just perpetuate ongoing bias. Instead, seek someone who can provide objective feedback, isn't afraid to say no and constantly asks, "why?"

A group must not be afraid of the conflicting views and internal assumptions of its members. In many settings, people are afraid to voice their opinion, lest they be seen as a dissenter. This can quickly lead to groupthink mentality, not born out of malicious intent, but ironically from the trust that was built through the experiences the group has had together. A possible solution to avoid conflict and prevent complacency is to ensure group members know they can always present an alternative. It is important that all group members are supportive and encouraging of each others perspectives in order to implement a more holistic group dynamic.

Challenging assumptions in group decision-making is vital for innovation. Creating a culture of open-mindedness, addressing cognitive biases, and incorporating diverse perspectives through surveys and data-driven approaches enhance decision quality. I once used a survey to challenge market assumptions, leading to a more nuanced understanding and improved decisions. Encouraging input via various channels and continuously testing hypotheses ensures decisions are evidence-based, turning pitfalls into growth opportunities.

If you know you are going into a group decision making situation, it's best to set it up for success from the start so that when assumptions are challenged, it's expected and not see as conflict (as much). Group decision making governance needs to be discussed ahead of discussing the problem at hand such as roles, responsibilities, how the decision will be made (vote, consensus, etc.), who has veto power, agreement on requirements. Also, the group needs to agree to how they will BE with each other in the decision making process including how they will challenge assumptions. Doing this work in advance sets the stage for a more successful group decision making process.