Which is a more prpductive method of perfoming a group task; allowing all group members to share in the decision making, duties and responsibilities, or appointing one member to make decisions, delegate dutites and take responsibilities? The speaker's opinion is that tha first method is always the best one. In may view, however, each of these alternatives is visable in certain circumstances, as illustratied by two vey different examples.
A jury in a criminal tril is good example of a group in which shared decision making, duties, and responsibility is the most apropriate and effective way to get the job done. Each member of the july is on equal footing with others. While one peson is appointed to head the july, his or her unciton is to act as facillitator, not as leader. To place ultimate authority and responsibility on the facilitator would essentially be to ppoint a judge, and to thereby defeat the very purpose of the july system.
By way of contrast,a trauma unit in a hospital is a case in which one individual should assume responsibility, delegate duties and make decision. In trauma units, split-second decisions are inherently part of the daily routine, and it is generally easier for one person to make a quick decision than for a team to agree on how to proceed. One could argue that since dicisions in trauma units are typically life-and-death ones, leaving these decisions to one person is too risky, However, this argument ignore the crucial point that only the most experienced individuals should inexperienced group members can jeopardize a patient's very life.
In conclusion, I agree that in some situations the best wy to accomplish a task in through teamwork-sharing decision resoponsibility , duties and dicision making. However, in other situations, especially those where quick decisions are necessary or where individual experience is cutial, the most effective means is for one individual to serve as leader and assume ultimate responsibility for completing the job.