Super Delphi Method

According to Sherden (1998), in Delphi method, a group of experts are asked to make a various prediction while the Delphi team collects all the responses. After determining the most common predictions, the team sends back the compilations to the experts for reactions, who then can modify their answers for the answer. Such multiple rounds are conducted until some consensus prediction is reached. Since Delphi method involves a group of the expert, it is to certain extent subject to the group dynamics.
According to Maier (1967), groups can be great assets, because of the greater sum total of knowledge and information, greater number of approaches to a problem, increased acceptance through participation, and better comprehension of the decision. However, the liabilities may include social pressure, influence of a vocal minority, individual domination, conflicting secondary goals, and groupthink (Maier, 1967)
The greatest liability associated with groupthink is the psychological need for the individuals to promote cohesion within the group, which suppresses dissent (Janis, 1971). Examples of this situation include the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Challenger disaster(Janis, 1971). Groupthink which occurs in everyday situations is labeled by Harvey (1974) as “The Abilene Paradox”. The author recounts a story of how a family ended up taking an unpleasant trip to Abilene, when no one really wanted to go. The family members went along because they assumed that others wanted to go. Thus, in order to gain the benefit of group work, we should be mindful of the problem of group think(Harvey, 1974).
Likewise, cultural factors could augment or reduce the liability. For example, Adler (2002) divided group formation into three stages: (1) entry, (2) work and (3) action. In the diversity of workforce, during the work stage, the environment highly encourages the individual to exchange ideas, promote self-expression and divergent thinking. Thus, during this stage, the group is likely to create synergy. However, it should be noted diversity of workforce may hinder group identity and cohesion.
In short, group efficiency is a two blade sword, for it could promote divergence of ideas in heterogeneous group or cause stagnation because of the welter of random inputs.
We could improve the group dynamics by constructing effective group meeting, establishing superordinate goal and maintaining social conformity.
1. Effective Group Meeting
Coch and French (1948) designed an actual industrial experiment to determine why workers resist changes to the way they perform their jobs. The researchers tried to formulate an effective intervention program to reduce such resistance. Despite wage and work incentives, the high rate of turnover and absenteeism persisted. The researchers began to examine other motivational factors. The findings showed the effectiveness of group meetings in which management communicates the need for changes and stimulates group participation. In other words, management can remove resistance to change by instituting an effective group meeting system(Coch & French, 1948).
2. Superordinate Goals
Sherif (1966) conducted an investigation on intergroup relations wherein the researchers divided a group of 11-12 year old boys into two subgroups and studied them in three stages. In the first stage, the boys lived together in their subgroups. Soon, the boys developed a spirit of comradeship. In stage 2, the researchers created a competition between the two subgroups. As it was predicted, the two subgroups became very antagonistic. In the final stage, the researchers created superordinate goals, whereby attainment of the goals required corroboration of the two subgroups. As a result of the introduction of the superordinate goals, the two subgroups began to develop rapport(Sherif, 1966).
3. Social conformity:
Another way effective group meetings can remove resistance to change is by promoting group cohesiveness. Group members are thereby committed to accomplishing team goals, and share a feeling of group pride. According to the theory of social conformity, in a group, a member is more likely to behave like the others.
In summary, we use (1) effective group meeting, (2) superordinate goal and (3) social conformity to improve the Delphi process.