Is it possible for too many cooks to ruin the broth? Group decision making is now an established fact of modern life in organizations. It has been said that some directors spend up to 80% of their time in committee meetings. However, it is important to consider the strengths and weaknesses of using groups to make organizational decisions. The advantages are numerous: it can increase the pool of knowledge and information available to make good decisions; as well as group members are more likely to enjoy peer acceptance while working together. There are also problems associated with using groups. One downside is that sometimes groups can waste time socializing before getting down to business. This can be a huge cost driver for organizations. There are many pros and cons to using groups to make decisions, neither the group nor the individuals are always superior. Whether a group can do better than an individual depends on several important factors. Successful groups tend to be composed of diverse members with complementary skills, who can contribute to their group's product freely and openly. In summary, whether groups make better decisions than individuals depends on the nature of the task performed and the skills of the people involved. Most problems faced by organizations require a great deal of creative thinking. Research has shown that unstructured and creative tasks can be performed better by an individual rather than a group. (George and Jones, 2012, pp. 122-123). In summary, groups perform worse than individuals when working on creative tasks. Sometimes, a single member may feel inhibited by the presence of others. Another factor we need to look at is communication, through sharing and actively trying to involve all members in the voting process. I would not speak first or allow anyone on the executive team to move the meeting by speaking first. I would not be able to track the size of the group, due to the nature of this organization. Robbins and Judge say I might encourage one of the team members to play an impartial role, challenging the group's comfort level and offering a different perspective. We may encourage some of the younger members of the fraternity to run for office, so that the executive team member can mentor them in their new position. This seems like a win-win situation for the organization as a whole. P. 293. Reference: Robbins, S and Judge, T (2013). Organizational behavior. New Jersey® Pearson Education, Inc. George, Jennifer M. and Jones, Gareth R. (2012). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall