Working with decisions in groups
Decisions should, not the least in a rescue service context, be
linked to a specific individual. It is a specific person in command
who makes a decision, which can be determined through some
form of delegation order. But the task of arriving at a decision,
i.e. producing the supporting information for a decision, can be
conducted in a group. An example of such a group can be a staff,
but it can also be another type of group, such as a BA firefigh-
ting group. Groups that are temporarily assembled for a specific
purpose normally work somewhat differently than established
groups. In established groups, experience of working together
leads to the individuals having shared mental models for how
they work, which enables them to anticipate one another’s beha-
viour and needs in an entirely different way than when groups are
temporarily assembled. For groups to be effective, it is important
that the participants train together and that one strives to keep
the groups intact. For a municipal structure for providing rescue
services to be effective, it is thus important that units regularly
train together.
Orasanu et al. (1992b) summarise a number of research works
concerning the problems that can arise and the pitfalls one can
encounter in conjunction with work with producing information
for decisions in a group which can lead to decisions turning out
wrong. The supporting information for decisions cannot address
all significant aspects. The group does not take consideration to,
consciously or unconsciously, all factors that can be of importan-
ce. One pitfall is that which is referred to as group pressure. The
group refrains from its rational evaluation ability and its rational
ability to product good information for decisions in order to main-
tain solidarity. Group pressure can, for example, be due to hostili-
ties or competition between one or more group members, lack of
cooperative ability, lack of knowledge, insufficient motivation or
tensions between higher and lower member status in the group.
Insufficient rationality can then become a way for the group to
suppress these reasons and the group’s solidarity becomes more
important than the results of the group’s work.
In a group, individuals often tend to take more extreme posi-
tions than they would have taken individually. The more extreme
the individual’s position is from the beginning, the more extreme
it will be in a group. The group can also fail in sharing objectives
and values, so that an incorrect consensus of sorts arises in which