Structured Decision Making in Public Organizations

The nominal group technique (NGT) and other structured group decision-making techniques are increasingly used for public planning, budget setting, and policy making. An abundance of case studies report successful applications of the techniques, but NGT's assumptions about group processes and about politics should be more thoroughly questioned. This research investigates the claims made for the nominal group technique about participation and commitment. An example of the use of NGT illustrates some of the issues to be raised here. An Example After months of frustration with apparently directionless and stalemated meetings, members of the local board of a regional transportation commission contacted the public management center at a nearby university for assistance. Several public administration faculty associated with the center sought to pinpoint the board's problems with in-depth interviews of board members and staff. The interviews revealed conflicts over a wide range of substantive and procedural issues facing the board. Some actors saw the source of their problems in poor administration, while others blamed the divergent political interests of the board members, who were also elected officials from various local jurisdictions. At the board's request, a conference in a retreat setting was organized to set priorities for policy objectives and to design concrete plans for action. Support for the conference was not unanimous, however,