Participatory Decision Making

>>>back to methods overview

>>>basic editing tutorial

'Nominal Group Technique' - About

The NGT supports collaborative thinking for group members who are less vocal then others or there is a need that all participants actively participate. It can also highlight differences of opinion, that otherwise might be not become apparent.

The method can be applied on site with paper and pen collecting the contributions on a flip chart and stickers for voting. On-line, one can make use of a digital tool such as mural.co or padlet. It is important to structure the time well and to appoint a facilitator for timing, clarifying, categorising and prioritising the contributions. The group should not be too big, because otherwise the participants may lose their interest and focus. An on site session can last a bit longer than an online. The maximum time also depends on the commitment and interest of the participants for the issues addressed.

Nominal group technique (NGT) is a structured method for group brainstorming that encourages contributions from everyone and facilitates quick agreement on the relative importance of issues, problems, or solutions. Team members begin by writing down their ideas, then selecting which idea they feel is best. Once team members are ready, everyone presents their favorite idea, and the suggestions are then discussed and prioritized by the entire group using a point system.

NGT combines the importance ratings of individual group members into the final weighted priorities of the group. It supports collaborative thinking for group members who are less vocal then others or there is a need that all participants actively participate. It can also highlight differences of opinion, that otherwise might be not become apparent.

The method can be applied on site with paper and pen collecting the contributions on a flip chart and stickers for voting. On-line, one can make use of a digital tool such as mural.co or padlet. It is important to structure the time well and to appoint a facilitator for timing, clarifying, categorising and prioritising the contributions. The group should not be too big, because otherwise the participants may lose their interest and focus. An on site session can last a bit longer than an online. The maximum time also depends on the commitment and interest of the participants for the issues addressed.

An example of the nominal group technique within a study setting is given by Chevalier and Buckles.

Steps for a student group to explore mapping challenges Invite students to think of an event/situation that illustrated a meaningful challenge they had/have to face and writes this on a card (possible details on the back). Students form groups around similar challenge cards. Those who do not know which group to join, explain what their cards are about, and can be ‘adopted’ by a group. Each group prepares a skit to represent the key challenge that matters most to them. Listening to the presentation, students note down what they find the most important after all: the one they first thought of or one they heard. After the presentations the facilitator invites all to join the group that addresses the challenge they consider most important. Newly formed groups prepare a pitch on why their challenge should matter greatly to everyone and how they could respond to it. After the presentation, the facilitator describes recent findings from a refereed journal on the challenges faced by this type of stakeholders. Asks the group to compare and discuss. All ends with a brief discussion on have the methods of action inquiry differ from the conventional approach and tools they used before. (PAR, Theory and Methods, Chevalier and Buckles, 2020, p 119)

What are the goals of this method?

• explain what makes this method relevant for participatory contexts
• What are typical questions this method is able to answer?
• Which types of knowledge does it generate? Or: what are typical results and/or outcomes?

In which situations can this method be applied?

• Give a few examples of typical settings/processes in which this method suits well
• Who is typically involved?

How does this method work in practice?

General steps for NGT

Working a group in a collaborative way might consist of the following steps:

1. State the problem, question, or issue that is the subject of the brainstorming and ensure that everyone understands.
2. Each team member silently thinks of solutions or ideas that come to mind when considering the problem and writes down as many as possible in a set period of time (5 to 10 minutes).
3. Each member states aloud one idea. The facilitator records it on the flipchart.
4. No discussion is allowed, not even questions for clarification.
5. Ideas given do not need to be from the team members' written lists. Indeed, as time goes on, many ideas will not be found on their original lists.
6. A member may "pass" his or her turn and may then add an idea on a subsequent turn.
7. Continue around the group until all members pass or until an agreed-upon length of time.
8. Discuss each idea in turn. Wording may be changed only when the idea’s originator agrees. Ideas may be stricken from the list only by unanimous agreement or when there are duplicates. Discussion may clarify meaning, explain logic or analysis, raise and answer questions, or state agreement or disagreement. With the help of the facilitator the group may also combine ideas into categories.
9. Prioritize the recorded ideas in relation to the original question using multivoting or list reduction. Typically, the solution with the highest total ranking is selected as the final decision. Other variations include estimating the amount of work required to implement each solution by assigning it a point value; the higher the point value, the more work involved.

• How much time is needed for each step?
• Which materials/rooms/technical equipment is needed?
• What are the tasks of the facilitators?
• What should be avoided?

Examples of typical results

• If you have already applied the method in the past or have access to results from other processes, please show a few examples of how the method works and of its results

What are typical next steps after applying this method?

• Give an outlook of how to follow-up: How should the results be processed and used in the further process?

Any limitations and typical pitfalls?

• Reflect a bit on what the methods can not do and what the process designer should be aware of, which additional activities are needed
• Any ethical concerns as we are working with people? Add a few reflections

Worksheets and Materials

• If you have or know any practical worksheets or templates, please add them here for download
• If these come from other websites, please link directly to those and add the authors you are referring to here

Further readings, links and references

• Add scientific articles, weblinks and other relevant resources

Back to the Top

---