Delphi vs. Nominal Group Technique: A Deeper Look at Group Decision-Making

 

Delphi vs. Nominal Group Technique: A Deeper Look at Group Decision-Making

Posted by Williams Agbedo FutureSec Visionary Blog

⸻

Exploring Group Innovation Through Structured Methods

Innovation is rarely a solo mission. Most groundbreaking ideas are sparked, refined, and realized in collaborative settings. But collaboration needs structure—especially when decisions affect strategy, policy, or performance. That’s where structured group decision-making techniques like the Delphi method and the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) come into play. These tools help teams make smarter decisions, avoid groupthink, and adapt to different working styles and personalities.

⸻

Understanding the Delphi Technique

The Delphi technique is a systematic way of gathering opinions from experts—often remotely—over multiple rounds. What makes Delphi powerful is the anonymity and iteration it offers. Participants provide input through surveys, then receive feedback summaries, revise their responses, and continue until consensus begins to form. The facilitator plays a key role, guiding the process without injecting bias (Vernon, 2009).

A major misconception is that participants must remain strangers to preserve objectivity. However, research shows that consensus can still be achieved without complicity, even when panelists know one another—if the study is well-facilitated, transparent, and includes a carefully selected group (Ogbeifun et al., 2017). Delphi excels in expert-driven fields and with participants who prefer reflection and asynchronous thinking over face-to-face confrontation.

⸻

What Makes the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) Different?

Now, flip the coin. The Nominal Group Technique (NGT) involves structured, in-person brainstorming. It starts with individual idea generation, then moves to a round-robin share-out, followed by group discussion, and ends with private ranking or voting. Unlike traditional meetings, NGT gives each person a voice while minimizing power dynamics and dominant personalities (Van de Ven & Delbecq, 1971).

NGT is best when teams need fast, clear outcomes from diverse members—especially when time is tight or when collaborative energy is key. It works well for extroverts or mixed personality teams where body language, facial expressions, and in-person synergy matter.

⸻

Similarities and Differences That Matter

Feature	Delphi Technique	Nominal Group Technique (NGT)
Communication Style	Remote, anonymous, iterative	In-person, real-time, structured
Ideal For	Analytical, reflective participants	Energetic, interactive teams
Role of Facilitator	Manages surveys, ensures neutrality	Moderates discussion and voting
Speed of Decision	Slower but deeper consensus	Faster, practical consensus
Flexibility with Tools	Online platforms, email, surveys	Polling tools, whiteboards, live voting

⸻

Why Personality and Context Matter

The personality mix of your team matters. Introverts and technical thinkers may gravitate toward the Delphi method because it allows time to analyze without pressure. Extroverts, or teams tackling design, community, or HR decisions, may find NGT more effective thanks to its dynamic, engaging format.

It’s also about context. Remote teams benefit from Delphi. On-site workshops thrive on NGT. Either way, having a skilled facilitator makes or breaks the process.

⸻

Final Thoughts

Both methods offer real value—just in different ways. The Delphi technique gives experts time and space to think critically and reach a consensus without influence or ego taking over. NGT, on the other hand, sparks live engagement and lets teams align quickly with structured input. Choosing the right method means considering your team’s personality, the problem at hand, and how you want to guide the discussion.

⸻

References

• Ogbeifun, E., Mbohwa, C., & Pretorius, J.-H. C. (2017). Achieving consensus devoid of complicity: Adopting the Delphi technique. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66(6), 766–779.                                                                                                          https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-08-2015-0112
• Van de Ven, A. H., & Delbecq, A. L. (1971). Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision-making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 14(2), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/255307                                    https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/255307?journalCode=amj
• Vernon, W. (2009). The Delphi technique: A review. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 16(2), 69–76.                                                              Doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.2.38892                                                                                  https://research-ebsco-com.coloradotech.idm.oclc.org/c/jvebsb/viewer/pdf/ypxundaluj?route=details