National Group Technique the Nominal Group Technique

National Group Technique

The Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is a very helpful and practical process for a sports facility due to the fact that a facilitator is always on hand to mediate discussions -- especially those discussions which become arguments. When a university intercollegiate facility, for example, is using NGT and a decision must be made, the NGT strategy is to allow every person in the group that has any part in the presentation of activities to participate equitably in the process. This paper delves into the advantages to the group -- and to the public that will utilize the facility -- of a sports facility organization implementing the NGT.

The Seven Steps to Solving Difficult Problems -- Making Sound Decisions

Step ONE: A group by definition will always have a variety of personalities within its structure, and those varied personalities can be (and should be) the source of strength when it comes to decision-making. However, when the decision to be made is vital and yet potentially contentious, and there is friction among group members, the facilitator gets the discussions started by stating the question to be addressed. Before moving to the next step the group must accept that the question as laid out by the facilitator is the salient question in this meeting. The question must be written on a board or otherwise displayed so members of the group can see it and refer back to it during the dialogue.

Marketing Professor David W. Stewart contributes to the overview of NGT in his publication Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Stewart explains that "…each member of the group is interviewed as an individual," and if there are group members that are not in attendance at that time -- but are online and participating from a distance in a video presentation -- the facilitator shares "…summaries of the responses and ideas" of those in house with all other members that may not be there in person (Stewart, 2006, p. 153).

Step TWO: the group members work by themselves for about five minutes; they are to write down their ideas and thoughts -- as many as come to them -- and wait for the facilitator to say that time is up. This gives group members private time to prepare their points-of-view without having to verbalize thoughts that may not yet be complete and thoroughly thought out. The question being addressed could be, "How to assure there are as many sports for females as there are for males, given that today male sports opportunities are dominant on campus."

Step THREE: Now it is time for the individuals in the group to -- one by one -- provide ideas. The facilitator writes down the ideas on a board in front of the room as each group member shares their best suggestion for a solution to the previously presented problem or issue. The facilitator is not asking for any responses to the suggestions at this point, just ideas and suggestions for solutions.

Step FOUR: At this point the facilitator goes through each of the suggestions. The group is not yet allowed to editorially comment on each suggestion; at this point clarity of the myriad ideas and solution suggestions is paramount. One very cogent suggestion from a male member of the group is this: "We should have co-coordinators instead of one activity coordinator; one should be a man and the other a woman. They will as a team reach out to females on campus and see if there is interest in adding an intramural sport." The facilitator reads this over and scans the room to see if all faces reflect clarity with this point.

Step FIVE: With the list of ideas for solutions clearly visible to all, the facilitator asks each group member to write down what they consider the top five or six ideas they saw on the board. They are to write them down and rank them in order of their value to the group and hand in the written suggestions. This, according to the book Interviews in Qualitative Research (King, et al., 2010, p. 65) helps to avoid "the influence of group opinion." Strong personalities with lengthy experience might dominate the discussion if this writing down of suggestions was abandoned and an open forum was launched. King explains that if there is some conflict that already exists within the group, this makes it a level playing field and moreover, the facilitator has now achieved independent responses from a myriad of personalities and every one of those responses has equal value. (This might be a good time to give the group a break.)

Step SIX: After the facilitator has counted up the lists of votes for the best ideas, he or she invites the group back to the room. The top five suggestions for how to make the intramural program more balanced in terms of gender are written on the board for all to see. A discussion for clarity is conducted and every member of the group is allowed to ask a question or make a comment about any of the top five on the board.