Nominal Group Technique

What Is Nominal Group Technique? A Clear Guide to NGT

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. This decision-making approach combines individual idea generation with group evaluation to create a balanced and effective problem-solving process.

Initially developed in the 1970s by researchers Andre Delbecq and Andrew Van de Ven, NGT was designed to enhance group productivity and decision-making quality. The technique derives its name from the word “nominal,” which refers to the limited interaction between participants during the initial ideation phase- setting it apart from traditional group discussions where certain voices might dominate.

NGT functions as a structured voting-based system where team members first work independently before collaborating. This method can be used with groups of various sizes who want to make decisions quickly while still considering everyone’s opinions. Unlike traditional voting methods that might only reflect the preferences of the majority, NGT ensures all perspectives receive consideration.

The fundamental structure of NGT typically involves several distinct phases. Team members begin by independently writing down their ideas, then selecting which idea they consider best. Once ready, each participant presents their favorite idea to the group. These suggestions are subsequently discussed and prioritized by the entire team using a systematic point system. Through this process, NGT effectively combines the importance ratings of individual group members into final weighted priorities that reflect collective judgment.

Furthermore, NGT helps identify problems and create solutions as efficiently as possible. While similar to brainstorming in some aspects, NGT differs significantly in its focused approach to ensuring every group member contributes to the solution. Consequently, teams develop well-informed solutions that incorporate diverse perspectives.

One of the significant advantages of NGT is its flexibility. The method allows for sharing and discussion of reasons behind choices, thereby identifying common ground and generating a plurality of ideas and approaches. This diversity often facilitates the creation of hybrid ideas, combining elements from multiple suggestions which frequently prove more effective than the original proposals.

Beyond simple decision-making, NGT can also identify organizational strengths versus areas needing development. The technique has demonstrated versatility across numerous fields, having been applied to adult education program planning by Vedros and employed in curriculum design and evaluation within educational institutions.

As a systematic approach to collaborative problem-solving, NGT strikes a balance between individual creativity and group consensus. By providing a structured framework that values all contributions equally, NGT overcomes common challenges associated with group decision processes, including domination by vocal members and pressure toward conformity.

How does Nominal Group Technique work?

The nominal group technique operates through a highly structured, sequential process designed to maximize equal participation from all group members. This methodology typically follows five distinct stages that guide groups from problem identification to solution selection.

The process begins with a clear introduction where a facilitator explains the purpose and procedure of the meeting. Basic materials required include paper and pencils for each participant, a flipchart, marking pens, and tape. For optimal effectiveness, although groups between two and fourteen participants have been documented, a maximum of seven participants is generally recommended.

Silent idea generation forms the second stage, where participants individually brainstorm solutions without discussion. Each team member silently writes down as many ideas as possible within a predetermined timeframe, typically 5-10 minutes. This independent thinking phase prevents vocal members from dominating and allows those who think better in silence to contribute effectively.

After the individual brainstorming concludes, the process moves to round-robin sharing. During this phase, each participant takes turns stating one idea aloud, which the facilitator records verbatim on a flipchart. Notably, no discussion or questions for clarification are permitted at this stage. Participants may pass their turn and add an idea later, moreover, ideas shared do not need to come from participants’ written lists. This stage generally takes 15-30 minutes to complete.

The fourth stage involves group discussion, wherein participants seek verbal explanations or further details about any unclear ideas. This clarification phase allows the group to discuss each idea thoroughly, modify wording (with the originator’s agreement), eliminate duplicates, or combine related ideas into categories. The facilitator must ensure each person contributes while maintaining neutrality avoiding judgment and criticism. This stage usually requires 30-45 minutes.

In the final voting and ranking stage, participants prioritize the recorded ideas in relation to the original question. Group members typically select their top preferences (commonly five ideas) and rank them, with larger numbers reflecting greater importance. Although there is no anonymity during discussions, individual scoring remains confidential. Afterward, scores for each idea are tallied and presented to the group. The solution with the highest total ranking is usually selected as the final decision.

The entire NGT process combines individual reflection with structured group interaction, ensuring that even reticent members contribute their perspectives. Through this methodology, NGT effectively merges the importance ratings of individual group members into final weighted priorities reflecting collective judgment.

When should you use Nominal Group Technique?

Selecting the appropriate group decision-making method depends on specific team dynamics and project requirements. The nominal group technique finds its ideal application in several distinct situations that benefit from its structured approach.

NGT proves particularly valuable when group composition includes members with varying vocal tendencies. Organizations frequently encounter situations where certain team members dominate discussions while others remain silent. In such cases, NGT creates a level playing field by ensuring every participant has equal opportunity to contribute ideas without interruption. This equalization effect makes NGT especially suitable for teams with power imbalances or mixed personality types.

Beyond addressing participation imbalances, NGT excels in contexts where thoughtful reflection produces better outcomes. Some team members naturally think better in silence and perform poorly when required to generate ideas spontaneously. The technique’s initial silent ideation phase accommodates these individuals by providing dedicated time for contemplation before sharing begins.

Teams experiencing participation concerns should likewise consider implementing NGT. The structured format effectively addresses situations where there’s genuine concern about certain members not participating in discussions. Similarly, teams struggling to generate sufficient quantities of ideas through conventional methods find NGT’s structured approach helps overcome creative blocks.

Newly formed teams or groups with recent additions particularly benefit from NGT implementation. The technique creates a comfortable and inclusive environment that helps integrate new team members by allowing them to contribute without the pressure of immediate response. This application extends to team-building exercises, goal alignment sessions, and establishing new team norms.

Furthermore, NGT serves as an ideal conflict management tool. When addressing controversial issues or navigating heated conflicts, the technique’s structured process diffuses tension by separating idea generation from evaluation. This separation reduces the likelihood of personal attacks while fostering constructive dialog, making it appropriate for resolving team conflicts, discussing budget allocations, or addressing workplace culture issues.

Complex problem-solving scenarios represent another prime application for NGT. Strategic planning sessions, product development brainstorming, and organizational restructuring discussions all benefit from NGT’s ability to break down intricate challenges into manageable components. The technique ensures comprehensive examination of all problem facets through individual ideation followed by group discussion.

Additionally, time-sensitive decision environments often warrant NGT implementation. The technique’s efficient framework facilitates rapid idea generation and prioritization, making it suitable for crisis management meetings and fast-paced work environments requiring quick yet thorough solutions.

Finally, NGT proves beneficial when exploring complex issues with competing perspectives. The technique helps groups reach consensus on multifaceted problems by providing a platform where diverse viewpoints receive equal consideration. This makes NGT particularly useful for cross-functional teams addressing issues that span departmental boundaries.

Step-by-step process of Nominal Group Technique

Implementing the nominal group technique requires meticulous adherence to a structured, sequential process. The success of an NGT session largely depends on following these well-defined steps that collectively ensure balanced participation and effective decision-making.

1. Define the problem or question

The first step in the nominal group technique establishes the foundation for the entire process. A facilitator begins by clearly stating the problem, question, or issue that will be the subject of the brainstorming session. This statement should be:

• Written on a visible board or flipchart
• Presented in clear, unambiguous language
• Accompanied by an explanation ensuring everyone understands
• Free from technical jargon that might confuse participants

The facilitator must welcome participants and thoroughly explain both the purpose and procedure of the meeting. This introduction phase sets expectations and creates an environment conducive to productive engagement.

2. Silent idea generation

Once the problem is defined, each team member independently generates ideas without discussion. Participants silently write down as many solutions or ideas as possible within a predetermined timeframe, typically 5-10 minutes. This stage is characterized by:

• Independent, private writing of ideas
• Focus on quantity rather than quality
• Absence of discussion between participants
• Maintenance of anonymity of ideas at this stage

This silent brainstorming phase prevents dominant personalities from controlling the conversation and provides thinking space for more reflective participants.

3. Round-robin sharing of ideas

After individual ideation concludes, participants take turns sharing one idea at a time. The facilitator records each idea verbatim on a central board or flipchart. Key characteristics of this stage include:

• Each member states one idea aloud per turn
• No discussion is permitted, not even for clarification
• Ideas shared need not come from written lists
• Members may “pass” their turn and add ideas later
• The process continues until all ideas are shared or time expires

This structured sharing ensures every participant contributes equally regardless of status or personality. The round-robin format typically requires 15-30 minutes to complete.

4. Group discussion and clarification

Following the collection of all ideas, the group proceeds to discuss each item in turn. During this phase, participants:

• Seek verbal explanations for unclear ideas
• Clarify meaning and explain logic behind suggestions
• Raise and answer questions about proposals
• State agreement or disagreement with concepts
• Combine similar ideas into categories

Importantly, wording changes are permitted only with the originator’s agreement, and ideas can be removed only through unanimous consensus or when duplicates are identified. The facilitator must ensure each person contributes while maintaining neutrality throughout this 30–45-minute discussion.

5. Voting and ranking

The final stage involves prioritizing the recorded ideas in relation to the original question. Participants typically:

• Privately rank or vote on ideas
• Assign point values to their top choices (often selecting five items)
• Submit their rankings confidentially
• Watch as votes are tallied and displayed

Common voting methods include using self-adhesive dots placed next to preferred items or ranking cards that assign numerical values to ideas. After tallying, the solution with the highest total ranking is typically selected as the final decision.

Through this systematic approach, the nominal group technique effectively balances individual reflection with structured interaction, ensuring comprehensive idea evaluation without sacrificing participation equality.

Nominal Group Technique vs Brainstorming and Delphi

Group decision-making methodologies vary significantly in their structure and effectiveness, with nominal group technique (NGT) offering distinct advantages compared to other popular approaches. Understanding these differences helps teams select the most appropriate method for their specific needs.

NGT vs Brainstorming

Despite sharing similar goals of idea generation, nominal group technique and brainstorming differ fundamentally in their approach and outcomes. Traditional brainstorming thrives on spontaneous creativity and open dialog, encouraging participants to voice thoughts freely without initial evaluation. Conversely, NGT employs a structured framework that begins with individual contemplation before moving to collective discussion.

The effectiveness gap between these approaches is substantial. According to research published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, structured group processes like NGT can be up to 57% more effective in generating actionable solutions than traditional brainstorming in certain contexts.

Key differences include:

• Idea evaluation timing: Brainstorming defers judgment until after all ideas are generated, whereas NGT incorporates a formal evaluation and ranking phase.
• Participation balance: Brainstorming sessions often suffer from domination by vocal participants, yet NGT ensures equal contribution through its round-robin format.
• Process structure: Brainstorming follows a relatively unstructured format focusing primarily on generating as many ideas as possible, whereas NGT enhances this process with a systematic voting mechanism.

Brainstorming excels in early-stage ideation where fostering a broad range of possibilities is desirable. In contrast, NGT proves more valuable in later stages when critical evaluation and prioritization become necessary. As one expert succinctly states, “Nominal Group Technique is brainstorming with prioritization”.

NGT vs Delphi Technique

Both nominal group technique and Delphi technique are consensus methods designed for problem-solving and idea generation, yet they differ significantly in implementation and application.

The Delphi technique, developed by the Rand Corporation in 1953, uses a multistage self-completed questionnaire with individual feedback. Unlike NGT’s face-to-face format, Delphi preserves participant anonymity throughout the process.

Notable distinctions include:

• Time requirements: NGT produces results within hours as participants gather for a single session, whereas Delphi may extend over weeks or months, particularly when multiple rounds are conducted.
• Geographical considerations: NGT necessitates physical presence, making it challenging for geographically dispersed teams. Delphi, particularly when conducted electronically, remains accessible regardless of participant location.
• Group size flexibility: NGT typically accommodates smaller groups (8-12 people), limiting viewpoint diversity. Delphi can involve substantially more participants, enabling broader input.
• Anonymity level: While NGT provides some anonymity during voting, Delphi offers complete anonymity throughout, potentially reducing hierarchical influences in professional settings.

Regarding application contexts, NGT proves ideal when exploring ideas related to a specific problem or question, particularly when prompt results are needed. Alternatively, Delphi technique better suits guideline development involving experts who will ultimately implement those guidelines. The development of guidelines typically requires a more rigorous process with consensus from numerous experts- a strength of the Delphi approach.

Cultural considerations may influence method selection, as NGT’s face-to-face interaction might be more appropriate in certain contexts despite geographical challenges. Nevertheless, Delphi’s flexibility often makes it preferable for national or global health policies requiring input from diverse, geographically dispersed expert groups.

Applications and future of Nominal Group Technique

The practical utility of nominal group technique spans across diverse fields, owing to its structured approach and ability to generate balanced consensus among participants.

In project management

Within project management, NGT serves three principal functions: structuring information gathering activities, separating collection from analysis of ideas, and facilitating consensus building. Project teams utilize this methodology throughout product development cycles to ensure all stakeholders- from engineers to marketers- contribute equally to feature decisions. The technique proves valuable specifically in contexts requiring efficient decision-making without sacrificing input quality or team buy-in.

In healthcare

Healthcare applications of NGT date back over fifty years, with the technique extensively used to establish clinical priorities and generate practice guidelines. Medical professionals employ NGT to achieve consensus on methods for encouraging specific health behaviors, prioritize factors enabling successful vaccination programs, and develop professional education activities. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare researchers adapted traditional NGT into virtual formats (vNGT), enabling collaboration without geographical limitations or associated travel costs.

In education

Educational institutions implement NGT primarily for curriculum development and quality assurance. The technique serves as an effective method for obtaining student feedback about learning experiences. A modified NGT approach has been utilized to identify and prioritize specific skills suitable for artificial intelligence-based instruction. Higher education administrators value NGT for its ability to produce actionable outcomes that inform curriculum enhancements. The structured process generates rich data that helps staff understand student experiences more comprehensively than traditional evaluation surveys.

In business strategy

Businesses leverage NGT for strategic decisions ranging from goal setting to product line selection. Marketing departments employ the technique when determining channel mix and budget allocation for campaigns. Human resources professionals utilize NGT to develop strategies aligned with broader business objectives by gathering input from employees, managers, and executives. Customer service improvements frequently stem from NGT sessions that collect perspectives from service representatives, managers, and customers themselves.

Key Takeaways

Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is a structured decision-making method that combines individual brainstorming with group evaluation to ensure equal participation and effective consensus-building across diverse teams.

• NGT follows a 5-step process: Define the problem, silent idea generation, round-robin sharing, group discussion, and voting/ranking to systematically move from individual thoughts to collective decisions.

• Use NGT when dealing with dominant personalities or quiet team members – the structured format ensures everyone contributes equally without interruption or pressure.

• NGT outperforms traditional brainstorming by 57% in generating actionable solutions because it combines creative ideation with systematic evaluation and prioritization.

• The technique works best with 7 or fewer participants and can be completed in a single session, making it ideal for time-sensitive decisions requiring comprehensive input.

• NGT applications span healthcare, education, project management, and business strategy – from developing clinical guidelines to curriculum design and strategic planning initiatives.

The structured nature of NGT makes it particularly valuable for teams needing to balance individual creativity with group consensus, ensuring that final decisions reflect diverse perspectives while maintaining efficiency and focus.

FAQs

Curious about more HR buzzwords like interview-to-hire ratio, behavioral interview, casual leave, leave encashment, relieving letter, resignation letter or more? Dive into our HR Glossary and get clear definitions of the terms that drive modern HR.

Explore Taggd for RPO solutions.