Dennis H. Nagao

An assessment of the potential utility of "scientific jury selection": A "thought experiment" approach

Abstract The efficacy of “scientific jury selection” (the use of social science methodology to aid the jury selection process) has been a subject of considerable contention. Unfortunately, such issues are difficult to address empirically, especially at the level of jury rather than juror decisions. One means of addressing some of these questions is through the use of “thought experiments” or computer simulations that are based not on intuition or conventional wisdom alone but guided by relevant empirical data. This paper reports the outcomes of simulations that explore jury verdict consequences from the use of scientific jury selection to (a) obtain changes in venue, (b) select jurors, and (c) accomplish both of the preceding. The results indicated that the potential effects of scientific jury selection are strongest when the techniques are successful in bringing about changes of venue or more representative jury panels. Somewhat weaker, albeit still consequential, effects were observed in those instances where scientific jury selection techniques are used to select particular jurors. The psychological and legal implications of these results, and the thought experiment approach in general, are discussed.

Student and Faculty Attitudes Concerning the Use of Group Projects

The use of groups for in-class exercises and long-term projects in Organizational Behavior courses is quite common. However, little is known about student reactions to the use of groups in the classroom, and how these reactions might differ from instructors’ assumptions about group projects. Our own use of group projects has usually been based on the assumption that the interaction process inherent in such projects provided student learning opportunities that could not be experienced within the context of a lecture (e.g., learning from other students, managing group process, conflict resolution, etc.). Judging from our informal discussions with colleagues, the assumption that group projects provide a useful microcosm within which organizational behavior principles can be realistically experienced

Comparing the Structure of Individual and Small Group Perceptions

The study reported examines the general assumption that perceptions of stimuli by individuals acting alone match those of interacting groups. This assumption contradicts arguments that groups effectively restructure the organization of the perception of stimuli. These two views were compared in a multidimensional scaling analysis of the structure in group and individual perceptions of crimes. Individuals and four-person groups made paired comparisons of the similarity of 12 crimes. Perceptual judgments by individuals and interacting groups were in general quite similar, providing little support for the cognitive restructuring hypothesis. The results were discussed in terms of pooling and consensus processes that occur during group information processing.

Enterprise alignment and inertia risks during transformation

Enterprise transformations pose inertia and alignment risks at the enterprise, organization, business unit, and individual team levels. Transformation differs from internal change in that the risks escalate significantly given the complex interrelationships between diverse stakeholders across the enterprise and related organizations (e.g., functional units, partners, suppliers, customers, etc.). In this chapter, we review and blend multiple frameworks to provide a more structured approach to understanding and managing large-scale enterprise transformation, focusing on the inertia and alignment challenges in complex socio-technical systems. We illustrate the use and utility of the approach by applying the concepts to a global manufacturer undergoing a disruptive business transformation.