Delphi Technique

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 252
  • Published : March 5, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
VIVA COLLEGE OF ARTS, COMMERCE & SCIENCE

SUB: PRODUCTION AND QUALITY MANAGEMENT

S.Y.B.M.S.

DIV: A

SUBMITTED TO: PROF. AARTI SHARMA GROUP MEMBERS

NAME| ROLL.NO|
AMIT GAWAD | 35|
CHINTAN JOSHI| 49|
AMBADAS MUNGAL| 85|
JIGNESH KAWA| 57|
PRATIK JADHAV| 46|

INDEX

SR. NO.| PARTICULARS|
1.| The Delphi Technique — What Is It?|
2.| History|
3.| Key characteristics|
4.| Role of the facilitator|
5.| Use in forecasting|
6.| Acceptance|
7.| Delphi applications not aiming at consensus|
8.| Delphi vs. prediction markets|
9.| The Delphi Technique|
10.| Disrupting the Delphi|
11.| From the representative Republic to a Participatory Democracy| 12.| Prioritization Process Using Delphi Technique|
13.| Delphi Method|

The Delphi Technique — What Is It?
The Delphi Technique was originally conceived as a way to obtain the opinion of experts without necessarily bringing them together face to face. In recent times, however, it has taken on an all new meaning and purpose. In Educating for the New World Order by B. Eakman, the reader finds reference upon reference for the need to preserve the illusion that there is "…lay, or community, participation (in the decision-making process), while lay citizens were, in fact, being squeezed out." The Delphi Technique is the method being used to squeeze citizens out of the process, effecting a left-wing take over of the schools. A specialized use of this technique was developed for teachers, the "Alinsky Method" The setting or group is, however, immaterial; the point is that people in groups tend to share a certain knowledge base and display certain identifiable characteristics (known as group dynamics). This allows for a special application of a basic technique. The change agent or facilitator goes through the motions of acting as an organizer, getting each person in the target group to elicit expression of their concerns about a program, project, or policy in question. The facilitator listens attentively, forms "task forces," "urges everyone to make lists," and so on. While s/he is doing this, the facilitator learns something about each member of the target group. S/He identifies the "leaders," the "loud mouths," as well as those who frequently turn sides during the argument — the "weak or noncommittal". Suddenly, the amiable facilitator becomes "devil's advocate." S/He dons his professional agitator hat. Using the "divide and conquer" technique, s/he manipulates one group opinion against the other. This is accomplished by manipulating those who are out of step to appear "ridiculous, unknowledgeable, inarticulate, or dogmatic." S/He wants certain members of the group to become angry, thereby forcing tensions to accelerate. The facilitator is well trained in psychological manipulation. S/He is able to predict the reactions of each group member. Individuals in opposition to the policy or program will be shut out of the group. The method works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and any community group. The "targets" rarely, if ever, know that they are being manipulated. Or, if they suspect this is happening, do not know how to end the process. The desired result is for group polarization, and for the facilitator to become accepted as a member of the group and group process. S/He will then throw the desired idea on the table and ask for opinions during discussion. Very soon his/her associates from the divided group begin to adopt the idea as if it were their own, and pressure the entire group to accept the proposition. This technique is a very unethical method of achieving consensus on a controversial topic in group settings. It requires well-trained professionals who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one...
tracking img