Individual Experiential Reflection on Leadership and Decision Making

This report presents an individual experiential reflection on decision-making within the context of a group project focused on annotated bibliographies. The author analyzes two scenarios, exploring the decision-making processes related to resource selection and the creation of the annotated bibliography itself. The report examines the application of rational decision-making models and evaluates the effectiveness of leadership styles, highlighting the impact of leader-centered approaches versus collaborative methods. The author reflects on the importance of communication, planning, and participative leadership. The analysis covers the division of roles based on specialization and the handling of disputes, offering recommendations for improved group dynamics, including effective communication, participative leadership, and negotiation techniques. The conclusion emphasizes the benefits of collaborative decision-making and provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of the group's approach.

Running head: INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 1
Individual Experiential Reflection
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 2
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Decision Making In Scenario One...................................................................................................3
Description of the events for Scenario 1......................................................................................3
Analysis of Decision Making in Scenario 1.................................................................................4
Recommendation......................................................................................................................5
Decision Making for Scenario Two.................................................................................................5
Description of the Events for Case 2...........................................................................................5
Analysis of Decision Making in Scenario 2.................................................................................6
Recommendation..........................................................................................................................7
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................7
References........................................................................................................................................8

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 3
Individual Experiential Reflection
Introduction
The decision-making process is crucial in a group project. Bouyssou and Pirlot (2013)
elaborate that it is the techniques and steps that are used to decide on the scope of work, division
of tasks and the settling of disputes. The leadership style is also significant in the decision
making. A great decision-making process is one that involves the members, considers rationality
and has a participative leadership approach (Kaner, 2014). This paper examines the decision-
making process of a group by analyzing the decision-making process of the annotated
bibliography group assignment.
Decision Making In Scenario One
Description of the events for Scenario 1
The first and most important decision in the group assignment was deciding on the
resource to be used. This included the books, journals, and articles. In the case of the resources
to be used, the group needed to decide the books and articles that are relevant to the assignment
we were doing on decision making in uncertainty and annotated bibliographies. We also needed
to determine where to acquire that resource and what was fit. This was to be carried out
immediately after examining the assignment requirement and the articles that we were to conduct
annotated bibliographies. The selection of the resource was to be done through following steps:
planning for the search, narrowing the search to only relevant resources and then examining what
has been found. The whole group was to be involved in selecting the books and the journal to be
used in the assignment. This task was essential to support the claims that we were going to

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 4
indicate in the annotated bibliographies. The group leader was the one to decide on assigning the
roles of selecting the resources. The group was to work together where each member contributes
in choosing the books and journal so that the actual assignment can commence immediately. Any
dispute in concerning the resource and who to do it was to be settled with a consensus where the
majority opinion ruled.
Analysis of Decision Making in Scenario 1
Based on the rational decision-making model, the group decision making process of
selecting the references to use in conducting the assignment is effective. Shepherd and Rudd
(2014) explain that the model indicates that in rationality, the decision is made based on facts,
practicality and, the pros and cons of every choice. This ensures timely decision making and the
best options. Similarly, the group intended to search and pick the resources, after planning,
dividing them based on relevance and evaluating them. Nevertheless, the group leadership skill
was poor. The leader decided on assigning roles solely. Tannenbaum and Massarik (2013)
suggest that a good leader is one that involves member in the decision and distributes power. As
for the operation of the group it good has it collaborative. However, the method of resolving
disputes is irrational. It is not all time that the majority opinion is right.
The decision-making process of selecting the resource taught me multiple things. The
first is that the decision-making process should be by done all the members of the group.
Therefore, the act of letting the leader make all decision is something I will not adopt in any
group work. Kaner (2013) agrees that members are not supportive of the decision made without
their consultation and thus they may work to see it fail. Furthermore, the members of the group
will not be motivated to do the task effectively. I have also learned about the importance of
having a plan in the decision making. This is something the group used, and I would utilize

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 5
again. This is because it eases the process of making choices and it saves time since people know
precisely what to do.
Recommendation
I believe that the group would have been more efficient if it adopted effective
communication where all member’ information is shared among the members and the leader and
feedback provided. Hopfe and Hensen (2013) assert that this would promote more cooperation
and encourage the leader to consider the members’ suggestions in decision making. I also
recommend a participative leadership style where the team is involved in making all decision.
This is to eliminate the weakness of the group of being leader-centered. I would as well
recommend the adoption of the win-win technique in addressing conflict. Serrat (2017)
illustrates that it focuses on both the majority and minority opinion and consequently, promotes
fairness and good choices.
Decision Making for Scenario Two
Description of the Events for Case 2
The other decision the group had to make is how to conduct the annotated bibliography.
In this matter, the group needs to decide on the purpose of the journals, the type of journals, the
method used in the journal, the approaches of the paper; research or not research paper. The
group also needed to examine the relationship between the two journals, the strengths, and
weaknesses. Finally, the members had to decide on the key points of the article to indicate their
findings. The tasks mentioned above needed to be done after examine the articles provided and
reading the resources selected. The members that selected related resources conducted the
annotated bibliography section that related to the books or journals they picked. For instance, if
two members chose resources that examined the strengths and weaknesses of the articles, they

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 6
covered that part. However, the final compilation was to be done by whole the group.
Examining the purpose, method, approach, strengths weaknesses and the relationship between
the articles were necessary tasks to show if the article were valid and relevant resources to be
used to examine a particular topic. They also demonstrated that we understood the articles. The
decision on the roles of members was made by the leader. The group leader also settled any
dispute in the group. The group worked in collaboration where each sub-group consulted the
other in various issues. They also worked together on the problems that affected all the members.
Analysis of Decision Making in Scenario 2
The group has effectively decided on the scope of work. It has decided on the work
based on the requirement of the assignment. It has also been based on the general objectives and
goals of conducting an annotated bibliography. Annotated bibliography objectives are to show
the reliability and relevance of the book or journal about the topic it is covering. In addition to
the assignment requirement, the group considered the resources available when deciding the
work to be done. Similarly, in an effective scope of work of the project, the manager determines
the objectives, goals, resources, tasks, and schedule of the project (Aranda-Jan & Loukanova,
2014). Distribution of roles has likewise been done effectively, they have been divided based on
specialization. The individual who selected a source is more conversant with the subject matter
than a new person. Shepherd and Rudd (2014) point out that in decision making, roles should be
made based on the specialization of the field.
However, the leadership style used in the decision making of settling disputes and
assigning roles is ineffective. The leader makes all the critical decision. This is something I
would not do in any group decision-making process. Members opinion is significant since they
are the individual who will execute the tasks and therefore, involve them promote efficiency due

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 7
to understanding. Additionally, I would not settle disagreement without consulting the team.
Snyder and Diesing (2013) agree that this is because the members will not feel the conflict was
resolved and instead, it may escalate the conflict. However, I would use the specialization
technique in the division of the task since it promotes efficiency. Experts in particular area work
faster and appropriately
Recommendation
I recommend a decision-making process that includes all the participant of the group. In
deciding an important matter that affects everybody, the member should contribute their opinion
which is then evaluated rationally and adopted. I also recommend the negotiation technique of
settling the dispute where the disagreeing parties are engaged in relationship building exercises
to resolve their disputes. It also involves the adoption of the compromising technique where the
team does not agree on a particular thing. My final recommendation is changes in the leadership
style to one that engages and concentrates on the members.
Conclusion
A collaborative decision-making process is the best. The group adopted a leader focused
decision-making process, and it caused problems in the completion of the assignment. However,
the cooperation of the members proved to ease the work and promote efficiency. Also, the
approach of assigning roles and decided on the scope of work was effective. In the first scenario,
the scope of work was determined rationally as planning and evolution were involved. Situation
two also applied rationality; it considered the objectives of the assignment, the requirements and
the resources available. Additionally, the roles were divided based on specialization.

INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENTIAL REFLECTION 8
References
Aranda-Jan, C. B., Mohutsiwa-Dibe, N., & Loukanova, S. (2014). Systematic review on what
works, what does not work and why of implementation of mobile health (mHealth)
projects in Africa. BMC public health, 14(1), 188.
Bouyssou, D., Dubois, D., Prade, H., & Pirlot, M. (Eds.). (2013). Decision making process:
Concepts and methods. John Wiley & Sons.
Hopfe, C. J., Augenbroe, G. L., & Hensen, J. L. (2013). Multi-criteria decision making under
uncertainty in building performance assessment. Building and environment, 69, 81-90.
Kaner, S. (2014). Facilitator's guide to participatory decision-making. John Wiley & Sons.
Serrat, O. (2017). Understanding and developing emotional intelligence. In Knowledge
Solutions (pp. 329-339). Springer, Singapore.
Shepherd, N. G., & Rudd, J. M. (2014). The influence of context on the strategic decision‐
making process: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management
Reviews, 16(3), 340-364.
Snyder, G. H., & Diesing, P. (2015). Conflict among nations: Bargaining, decision making, and
system structure in international crises. Princeton University Press.
Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I., & Massarik, F. (2013). Leadership and Organization (RLE:
Organizations): A Behavioural Science Approach. Routledge.