Abstract

When group cohesion is essential, groups must have efficient strategies in place for consensus decision-making. Recent theoretical work suggests that shared decision-making is often the most efficient way for dealing with both information uncertainty and individual variation in preferences. However, some animal and most human groups make collective decisions through particular individuals, leaders, that have a disproportionate influence on group decision-making. To address this discrepancy between theory and data, we study a simple, but general, model that explicitly focuses on the dynamics of consensus building in groups composed by individuals who are heterogeneous in preferences, certain personality traits (agreeability and persuasiveness), reputation, and social networks. We show that within-group heterogeneity can significantly delay democratic consensus building as well as give rise to the emergence of informal leaders, i.e. individuals with a disproportionately large impact on group decisions. Our results thus imply strong benefits of leadership particularly when groups experience time pressure and significant conflict of interest between members (due to various between-individual differences). Overall, our models shed light on why leadership and decision-making hierarchies are widespread, especially in human groups.

Highlights

  • Question is why so many empirical studies report unshared and dictatorial decision-making, while the models predominantly predict shared decisions

  • Our paper addresses the theoretical gap identified above using a simple, but general, model that explicitly focuses on the time it takes to reach a consensus in groups composed by individuals who are heterogeneous in personality traits, reputation, and social networks

  • While most of the earlier research focused on symmetric models with identical individuals, more recent work has allowed for heterogeneity of individuals with respect to their personality traits and social networks[26,27,28,31,32,33]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Question is why so many empirical studies report unshared and dictatorial decision-making, while the models predominantly predict shared decisions. Our paper addresses the theoretical gap identified above using a simple, but general, model that explicitly focuses on the time it takes to reach a consensus in groups composed by individuals who are heterogeneous in personality traits, reputation, and social networks.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.