Skip to main content

Think Tank Methods - Delphi vs. Nominal Group Technique

The Delphi technique is a problem-solving technique characterized by systematic forecasting involving a well structurally defined interactivity between a group of professionals or experts on a subject in question. The Delphi technique typically follows through a posting of questionnaires having generally open-ended questions to the panel and seeking individual responses which would be further analyzed, compiled, and ranked upon agreement from each participant (Brady, 2015; Hohmann, 2018). This method is often comprised of a minimum of two rounds with high involvement of expert interactions and contributions through question answering and rationale provision to support specific answers (Ameyaw, 2016; Brady, 2015). The benefit of the sequence of rounds is to accommodate for inevitable revisions and possible changes as the discussions evolve through different rounds. Thus, with the Delphi method, there is a gathering of a consensus and choice on a predetermined topic without necessarily needing the participants to meet face-to-face.

The second approach group decision-making method that would be examined in this discussion post is the Nominal group technique which constitutes an integral part of teaming skillsets, collaboration, and interpersonal communication. The nominal group approach provides enhancements during brainstorming through the voting process leveraged in the ranking of ideas based on usefulness then followed by prioritization through subsequent techniques (McMillan et al., 2016; Urquhart-Secord, 2016). Though the nominal group technique might be considered an approach to brainstorming, it is important to note that there is a vivid difference between these especially as the nominal group technique applies ranking of ideas which thus takes the brainstorming to another level. This is accomplished by having every participant providing their contributions to the idea generation as part of the brainstorming process, followed by a nomination process entailing the ranking of ideas based on well-established rationale (McMillan et al., 2016; Urquhart-Secord, 2016). 

The Delphi technique and the nominal group technique are both similar in that they represent two decisions making techniques that involve participation, contribution, and collaboration amongst groups. It is expedient to mention that these group problems solving mechanisms involve the process of identifying problem existence, generating a solution to the problem, and making a decision to resolve the identified problem.

Contrasting these two approaches the Delphi and nominal group Technique is as summarized below. The Delphi technique ensures participating individuals remain anonymous to each other without any possibility of being acquainted with one another. On the other hand, the nominal group technique ensures participating individuals interact in a manner that permits becoming acquainted with each other. This is due to the fact that the participants in the Delphi are generally physically distant from one another without the possibility of face-to-face meetings whereas nominal group technique participants generally have a round table face-to-face conversation and participation (Brady, 2015; Hohmann, 2018).

Also, the Delphi technique permits the documenting and compiling of every opinion from each group member and then revising the opinions and supporting rationale by the entire group. This implies with the Delphi approach that prior to reaching a consensus, the documented and compiled ideas are reviewed by the whole group till the meeting of a consensus (Brady, 2015; Hohmann, 2018). On the other hand, the nominal group technique permits the documenting and presentation of each group member's ideas to the entire group by the member.

 References

Ameyaw, E. E., Hu, Y., Shan, M., Chan, A. P., & Le, Y. (2016). Application of Delphi method in construction engineering and management research: a quantitative perspective. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 22(8), 991-1000.

Brady, S. R. (2015). Utilizing and adapting the Delphi method for use in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(5), 1609406915621381.

Hohmann, E., Cote, M. P., & Brand, J. C. (2018). Research pearls: expert consensus-based evidence using the Delphi method. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, 34(12), 3278-3282.

McMillan, S. S., King, M., & Tully, M. P. (2016). How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. International journal of clinical pharmacy, 38(3), 655-662.

Urquhart-Secord, R., Craig, J. C., Hemmelgarn, B., Tam-Tham, H., Manns, B., Howell, M., ... & Tong, A. (2016). Patient and caregiver priorities for outcomes in hemodialysis: an international nominal group technique study. American Journal of Kidney Diseases, 68(3), 444-454.

Word Count: 694

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Innovative Competitor and Market Landscape Changes

                 The evaluated print book market share for Amazon has risen up to above half of the market share with and Barnes & Noble’s just having one-fifth of the entire market share. The dominance of Amazon, in this market space has been consistent for over 14 years with Barnes & Nobles still hanging in there with a massive gap between the two. It is important to mention that after Barnes and Nobles did close 90 out of the 720 locations with the period of seven years, which also, resulted in locations becoming lacking of any bookstore, it appears prepared to call it quits (Pandey, 2018; Majed et al., 2018). Branes and Nobles existed way long even before Amazon made its footprint in the market in 1996, but now, amazon has grown its business and customer base presenting itself as a leader in the book retailing space review (Matousek, 2018; Pandey, 2018). Amazon strives in making the experience book purchasing customers have a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Serendipity - Error - Exaptation - Inventions

Serendipity describes an unexpected or coincidental finding that proves to be beneficial and helpful outcome. An example of serendipity is the invention of the microwave ovens by the engineer and inventor Percy Spencer while working at the  Raytheon Corporation as an engineer. It is expedient to mention that the engineer – Percy Spenser attempting to develop a radar-related research project with a new vacuum tube when he realized the melting of the candy bar within his pocket. He did tested it with popcorn (Krueger, 2010). Spencer had the realization of a melting candy bar inside his pocket during his experimentation. He then decided to have the popcorn placed inside the machine and the popping of the corn immediately open up a new innovative and revolutionary device (Bih, 2003; Zhang, 2017). Error inventions are generally discoveries or innovations that came to the limelight through an unintentional action. These often come as a result of a researcher or scientist making a huge mi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Scenario Planning versus Traditional Forecasting

Scenario planning in its simplest terms is art of assuming the future and then making assumptions on the possible outcome of the assumed future. In other words, scenario planning entails the precise identification of a set of undetermined actualities or things that would have been actually experience with the expectation of their possible occurrence in the future of a business. Thus, businesses implement scenario planning for the enablement of decision-makers with the capabilities and platform of identifying a variation or scope of probable effect and the estimated magnitude, response evaluation and management of the different possibilities (Amer, 2013; Ali & Luther, 2020). It is expedient to mention that the application of this integrated approach to uncertainty management cuts across different industries in the estimation of  cashflow, business performance, and risk mitigation strategy development. An example is making presumptions on the future events that might impactfully ...
Post a Comment
Read more