Chapter 8


>>This chapter provided both theoretical  and practical information about small group problem solving. The  chapter is designed to get us to think about what should happen for a  group to solve problems effectively, and what they can do to help ensure  that what should happen does happen. The focus of this chapter is to  recognize that individual actions and group norms contribute to  effective and ineffective decisions. Ultimately, systematic procedures  that reinforce good individual behaviors and positive group norms will  produce better decisions.

>>With that said, think about what we  learned throughout this chapter and apply it to the following case  study. With this case study, please justify your choices and think about  the difficulties you might encounter if you were to make this  discussion with a group of advisors.  Provide rationale for your choice  as well as breaking down the potential benefits as well as problems of  solving this on your own versus solving it in a group. 

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now

“The Mayor’s Public Relations Dilemma”

The mayor of a large Midwestern city  appoints all members of city commissions, which must then be approved by  the city council. A few months after being appointed, one appointee was  charged and subsequently convicted of having taken a bribe to vote for  giving a very lucrative contract to a particular bidder. Now the mayor  is running for reelection. The mayor’s opponent has used the case of the  bribe‑taking commissioner to accuse the mayor of having run a corrupt  administration. What action seems most appropriate to winning  re­election?

  1. Place the blame on the city council for approving the appointment.
  2. Ignore the charge, but do point out that the mayor has appointed many commissioners who have been accused of no wrongdoing.
  3. Publicly declare that the mayor thought the appointee was honorable.
  4. Do nothing; to respond will only give more credence to a rather unsubstantiated charge.
  5. Point out that the mayor started the investigation that led to conviction of the corrupt commissioner.
  6. Or what?


Applied Sciences homework help