GD Tips

1. Initiation Techniques

2. Body of the group discussion

3. Summarization/ Conclusion

Initiation Techniques

 Initiating a GD is a high profit-high loss strategy.

When you initiate a GD, you not only grab the opportunity to speak, you also
grab the attention of the examiner and your fellow candidates.

If you can make a favourable first impression with your content and
communication skills after you initiate a GD, it will help you sail through the
discussion.

But if you initiate a GD and stammer/ stutter/ quote wrong facts and figures,
the damage might be irreparable.

If you initiate a GD impeccably but don't speak much after that, it gives the
impression that you started the GD for the sake of starting it or getting those
initial kitty of points earmarked for an initiator!

When you start a GD, you are responsible for putting it into the right
perspective or framework. So initiate one only if you have in-depth
knowledge about the topic at hand.

Body of the group discussion

 Different techniques to initiate a GD and make a good first

impression:

i. Quotes
ii. Definition
iii. Question
iv. Shock statement
v. Facts, figures and statistics
vi. Short story
vii. General statement

i. Quotes

Quotes are an effective way of initiating a GD.

If the topic of a GD is: Should the Censor Board be abolished?, you could
start with a quote like, 'Hidden apples are always sweet'.

For a GD topic like, Customer is King, you could quote Sam (Wall-mart)
Walton's famous saying, 'There is only one boss: the customer. And he can
fire everybody in the company -- from the chairman on down, simply by
spending his money somewhere else.'

ii. Definition

Start a GD by defining the topic or an important term in the topic.

For example, if the topic of the GD is Advertising is a Diplomatic Way of

Telling a Lie, why not start the GD by defining advertising as, 'Any paid form
of non-personal presentation and promotion of ideas, goods or services
through mass media like newspapers, magazines, television or radio by an
identified sponsor'?

For a topic like The Malthusian Economic Prophecy is no longer relevant, you
could start by explaining the definition of the Malthusian Economic Prophecy.

iii. Question

Asking a question is an impact way of starting a GD.

It does not signify asking a question to any of the candidates in a GD so as to

hamper the flow. It implies asking a question, and answering it yourself.

Any question that might hamper the flow of a GD or insult a participant or

play devil's advocate must be discouraged.

Questions that promote a flow of ideas are always appreciated.

For a topic like, Should India go to war with Pakistan, you could start by
asking, 'What does war bring to the people of a nation? We have had four
clashes with Pakistan. The pertinent question is: what have we achieved?'

iv. Shock statement

Initiating a GD with a shocking statement is the best way to grab immediate

attention and put forth your point.

If a GD topic is, The Impact of Population on the Indian Economy, you could
start with, 'At the centre of the Indian capital stands a population clock that
ticks away relentlessly. It tracks 33 births a minute, 2,000 an hour, 48,000 a
day. Which calculates to about 12 million every year. That is roughly the size
of Australia. As a current political slogan puts it, 'Nothing's impossible when 1
billion Indians work together'.'
 v. Facts, figures and statistics

If you decide to initiate your GD with facts, figure and statistics, make sure
to quote them accurately.

Approximation is allowed in macro level figures, but micro level figures need
to be correct and accurate.

For example, you can say, approximately 70 per cent of the Indian
population stays in rural areas (macro figures, approximation allowed).

But you cannot say 30 states of India instead of 28 (micro figures, no

approximations).

Stating wrong facts works to your disadvantage.

For a GD topic like, China, a Rising Tiger, you could start with, 'In 1983,
when China was still in its initial stages of reform and opening up, China's
real use of Foreign Direct Investment only stood at $636 million. China
actually utilized $60 billion of FID in 2004, which is almost 100 times that of
its 1983 statistics."

vi. Short story

Use a short story in a GD topic like, Attitude is Everything.

This can be initiated with, 'A child once asked a balloon vendor, who was
selling helium gas-filled balloons, whether a blue-colored balloon will go as
high in the sky as a green-colored balloon. The balloon vendor told the child,
it is not the color of the balloon but what is inside it that makes it go high.'

vii. General statement

Use a general statement to put the GD in proper perspective.

For example, if the topic is, Should Sonia Gandhi be the prime minister of
India?, you could start by saying, 'Before jumping to conclusions like, 'Yes,
Sonia Gandhi should be', or 'No, Sonia Gandhi should not be', let's first find
out the qualities one needs to be a a good prime minister of India. Then we
can compare these qualities with those that Mrs. Gandhi possesses. This will
help us reach the conclusion in a more objective and effective manner.'

Summarization/ Conclusion

 Most GD do not really have conclusions. A conclusion is where the whole

group decides in favor or against the topic.
  But every GD is summarized. You can summaries what the group has
discussed in the GD in a nutshell.

Keep the following points in mind while summarizing a discussion:

 

1. Avoid raising new points.

2. Avoid stating only your viewpoint.

3. Avoid dwelling only on one aspect of the GD.

4. Keep it brief and concise.

5. It must incorporate all the important points that came out during the GD.

6. If the examiner asks you to summaries a GD, it means the GD has come to
an end.

7. Do not add anything once the GD has been summarized.

Tips to crack a GD Group Discussion

1. GD is not an elimination procedure:
Most of the students think GD as an elimination round where the evaluator finds scope to eliminate the candidates.
This is a very wrong perception. GD is more of an evaluation process than an elimination round. In a group
discussion round, the evaluator evaluates the candidates on certain skills like communication, assertiveness,
patience to listen, etc. The evaluator mainly wants to see how well you can communicate, but make sure that
whatever you are saying makes sense.
2. Make good points
In case of GD, after you get to hear the topic on which all the candidate’s need to discuss, try to think the topic from
different perspectives like economic, political, social, technological, legal, etc. By doing this, you will get a number of
good points to speak on. Don’t hurry in making the points.
3. Understand the topic first and then speak
until and unless you are very confident about the topic, don’t be the one to start. If you do not understand what the
topic is all about, then hear what the others are saying. From there, you can make out what the topic is all about and
then plan out your points and presentation.

4. Get into the discussion

while being the first one to speak has its own share of risks; it is not advisable to remain quite for a long time. After
you have gathered enough points you can get into the discussion. To get yourself noticed, you can start by agreeing
or disagreeing to a particular candidate’s points and then begin speaking on your points. At the same time, doesn’t be
the last one to speak as this might make a negative impression on the judging panel. It is always advisable to be the
second or the third speaker.
5. Leadership quality
In case of GD, try to highlight your leadership quality but don’t portray a bossy attitude. Try to motivate others to
speak so that it brings out your abilities as a leader before the interview panel.
Keep visiting the Blog for more updates!!!!!

Sample Mock GD – I
Candidates are divided in groups of 8 to 10 and each group is tested by a panel of Judges. Usually topics of general
interest are given by the panel to the group and the group is asked to proceed with discussion. Every candidate is
supposed to express his opinion and views on the topic given. The time for discussion is approximately 20 minutes.
During the discussion, the panel of Judges quietly observes the performance and behavior of the candidates and
makes his own assessment.
Mock GroupDiscussion :
Most topics are taken from the current political or economic scene so if one has just kept abreast of current affairs,
then he will be able to make a mark. We give below a group discussion on a common topic and give some typical
responses of students. We then analyze the discussion so that readers can develop their own strategy for
themselves.
JUDGE : Good morning. You can choose any topic you like or take a slip from that box. You are given one minute to
think to start with the discussion. The observers will not interfere in your discussion. If no conclusion is reached, we
may ask each of you to speak for a minute on the topic at the end of the discussion. The topic on the slip is
“Multinationals: Bane or Boon”. I suggest you should start the discussion.
Mr A : This is a good topic. I am against multinationals. We have Coke and Pepsi. Do we need them? We can
manufacture our own soft drinks. Multinationals destroy the local industry and sell non-essential products.
Mr B : I agree with you. What is the fun of having Coke and Pepsi? We have our own Campa Cola.
Mr C : I think water is good enough.
Mr D : We are not here to discuss soft drinks. The topic given to us is a much larger one. First, let us define
multinational companies. They are merely large companies which operate in a number of countries. There could be
some Indian multinationals also. So there is nothing wrong with them. The point is whether they have a good or bad
impact on the host countries. We have to discuss their business practices and find out whether they are desirable or
not.
Mr E : That is a very good introduction to the topic. Multinational companies do serve an important function that they
bring new products and technologies in countries which do not have them. And it is not just Coke and Pepsi. They set
up power plants and build roads and bridges, which really help in the development of host countries.
Mr F : But are they all that good? We have seen that they destroy local industry. In India they just took over existing
companies. They came in areas of low technology. Moreover, we have to see why they come at all. They come for
earning profits and often remit more money abroad than they bring in.
Mr A : I agree with you. I am against multinationals. We can produce everything ourselves. We should be swadeshi in
our approach. Why do we need multinational companies?
Mr E : We may not need multinational companies but then it also means that our companies should not do business
abroad. Can we live in an isolated world? The fact is that we are moving towards becoming a global village. The
world is interconnected. Then we have also seen that foreign companies bring in business practices that we are
impressed with. Look at foreign banks. They are so efficient and friendly that the nationalized banks look pathetic in
comparison. I think we can learn a lot from multinationals if we keep our eyes and mind open.
Mr B : Take a look at McDonald’s. They are providing quality meals at affordable prices. One does not have to wait at
their restaurants.
Mr C : How do you account for the fact that they take out more than they put in and thus lead to impoverishing the
country?
Mr D : The fact is that every poor country needs foreign investment. Poor countries often lack resources of their own.
That is why they have to invite foreign companies in. There is nothing wrong in this because then products like cars,
air conditioners and so on can be made in poor countries. Often multinationals source products from different
countries which helps boost their export earnings.
Mr E : We have been talking about Coke and Pepsi. It is well known that Pepsi is in the foods business also and has
helped farmers in Punjab by setting up modern farms to grow potatoes and tomatoes. Modern practices have helped
the people in that area.
Mr A : I still feel that multinationals are harmful for the country.
Mr D : Well, there could be negative things associated with such companies. They may not be very good in their
practices. But can we do without them? I think the best way is to invite them but also impose some controls so that
they follow the laws of the country and do not indulge in unfair practices.
Mr E : I think laws are applicable to everyone. Very often officials in poor countries take bribes. The fault lies not with
the company which gives a bribe but the person who actually demands one. Why blame the companies for our own
ills?
Mr A : What about the money they take out?
Mr D : We have had a good discussion and I think it is time to sum up. Multinationals may have good points and
some bad ones too, but competition is never harmful for anyone. We cannot live in a protected economy any longer.
We have been protected for many years and the results are there for everyone to see. Rather than be close about
multinationals, let us invite them in selected areas so that we get foreign investment in areas which we are lacking.
Laws can be strictly enforced that companies operate within limits and do not start meddling in political affairs.
Analysis : Though Mr A started the discussion, he could not make any good points. Later, he could not give any
points about why multinationals are bad. It is also a bad strategy to say at the outset whether you are for or against
the topic. Remember, it is not a debate but a discussion. The first step should always be to introduce the topic without
taking sides. See the way in which the discussion is proceeding and give arguments for or against. The observer is
not interested in your beliefs but in what you are saying. The participation of Mr B and C is below average. A
candidate must make 3-4 interventions. Their arguments are also not well thought out and add nothing to the
argument. It is important to say relevant things which make an impact rather than speak for the sake of speaking. The
arguments of Mr D and E are better. They seem to be aware of the role of multinational companies. Mr E’s approach
is better as he intervenes a number of times. He has also taken initiative in the beginning and brought order to the
group. If selection has to be made from the above six candidates, the obvious choice would be Mr E and thereafter,
Mr D.