An ESD Computer Culture for Intercultural Problem Solving and Negotiation

Intercultural problem solving and negotiation involves interaction of two or more cultures. These processes may be formally modeled using the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework implemented by appropriate computer group support systems (GSS). The ESD/GSS combination provides an ESD computer culture for intercultural problem solving and negotiation in a same place/same time or telework mode. With this, players in a multicultural group can be computer supported in generating and formally representing an evolving common culture (a situational culture) with regard to the specific problem at hand - an intercultural evolving group problem representation and solution. At the same time, the ESD computer culture provides an operational cybernetic/self-organization framework for the empirical study of cultural emergence in a multicultural group. This paper uses and develops work by Shakun (1996b).     

Consciousness, Spirituality and Right Decision/Negotiation in Purposeful Complex Adaptive Systems

Both cybernetic and self-organizing, purposeful complex adaptive systems (PCAS) express purpose by solving problems defined by choosing and delivering values to participants as operational goals through decision making. Individuals, groups, organizations, and economies are PCAS. Here we focus on indviduals and groups. Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) is a universal (culture independent) general problem solving, formal modeling/design framework for PCAS that can be computer implemented in same time/same place or telework modes. Formally, in ESD sets of elements and their relations modeling a PCAS evolve through cybernetics/self organization. Spirituality and the concept of right decision/negotiation in PCAS are discussed in relation to consciousness. Rightness comes from spirituality, i.e., consciousness experiencing oneness. Oneness is integrally bound with love; hence the term oneness/love. Through right decision/negotiation PCAS try to realize their ultimate purpose to live Two (the relative, the process of all there is) as One (the absolute, all there is). Oneness/love, connectedness to One, promotes problem solving and negotiation - expressed formally in the ESD problem representation - that is at the same time right. Simply put, right problem solving requires oneness/love and delivers oneness/love. Computer and receiver modes of consciousness are discussed in relation to oneness/love and its absence experienced as separateness/fear. Ways to transit from the latter to the former are considered. P.L. Yu's Habitual Domain (HD) framework is introduced and discussed in relation to ESD. Evolutionary heuristics for evolution of an ESD right problem representation through cybernetics/self-organization are presented based on combined HD and ESD concepts. Then operational procedures for defining and validating a right problem for an individual or group and associated right decision/negotiation outcome are considered. Thus, the work contributes to procedural rationality - how decisions should be or are made - in purposeful complex adaptive systems. The paper suggests that for humans to live fully (awake) is to live in our love-based spirituality, in the moment, consciousness experiencing oneness/love at the edge of chaos, challenged in our purpose to live Two as One by spiritual or right decision/negotiation through cybernetics/self-organization, i.e., problem solving under oneness. Artificial agents in PCAS may participate in right decision/negotiation. They may in principle have consciousness but the nature of the subjective experience is unclear.     

Negotiation processes,Evolutionary Systems Design,and NEGOTIATOR

A negotiation accord is often the result of an intense, laborious, and evolutionary negotiation process. During this process, disputing parties are confronted with goal, judgment, and outcome conflict. This article demonstrates the utility of a conflict resolution framework—Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD)—by using a Negotiation Support System. ESD seeks to guide negotiators to move their individual goals and judgments in such a way as to enhance the chance of achieving a common solution. As illustrated by the use of NEGOTIATOR, a multiattribute utility negotiation support system, we argue that computer mediation can prove to be an effective means to implement the ESD framework.     

Connectedness Problem Solving and Negotiation

Difficult polarizing problems/conflicts are pervasive in the United States and the world. Welcome to spiritual rationality/connectedness problem solving and negotiation involving spirituality and rationality, and emphasizing connectedness in problem solving. In particular, we develop CPSN-ESD—Connectedness Problem Solving and Negotiation (CPSN) through Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD)—discussing spiritual rationality/connectedness and highlighting connectedness with One and with each other as values, among others, in problem solving. In CPSN-ESD, CPSN is effected through ESD, a game-theory based, general formal systems- spirituality modeling/design framework for individual and multiagent (group) problem solving and negotiation implemented by computer technology. Problem solving is represented by an evolving problem system of purposes and their relations from the lowest-level action to the highest purpose, ultimate common ground—spirituality, connectedness with One (or a surrogate, as discussed). For an agent, an evolved problem system satisfying spiritual rationality identifies right action (a solution) producing spirituality, connectedness with One (or a surrogate). A negotiation agreement requires multiagent agreement on the action to be taken. Agents may be natural or artificial. The paper focuses mostly on human agents with ideas being applicable to other natural and artificial (computer) agents with lesser (or greater) capabilities than humans according to their built-in capabilities. Present-to-future CSPN-ESD work includes furthering support of human agents; designing spiritual agents; designing multiagent systems for connectedness capitalism; developing connectedness democracy; further research and applications on intercultural and international negotiation; work on the world connected.     

Unbounded Rationality

The paper discusses bounded and unbounded rationality in purposeful complex adaptive systems (PCAS) modeled by the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework. Due to Herbert Simon, bounded rationality is the rationality of cognition. Unbounded rationality is the generalized rationality of connectedness represented mathematically, of spirituality, and of right decision/negotiation. Operational procedures for defining/solving and validating a problem in group decision and negotiation under unbounded rationality are discussed. With human PCAS as a focus, the paper more generally considers rationality in multiagent systems with natural and/or artificial agents.     

A Multi-Agent Coalition Formation Method Based on Preference Models

Coordination is one of the fundamental research issues in distributed artificial intelligence and multi-agent systems. Current multi-agent coalition formation methods present two major problems. First, some of these methods can be applied only to cooperative multi-agent systems; second, the algorithms proposed may fail in the formation of the coalitions. This article proposes two methods for problems of agent coalition formation in cooperative and non-cooperative multi-agent systems. These methods are based on agent preference models and on preference aggregation using the Choquet integral. Our first method based on the evolutionary system design (ESD) methodology proposed by M. Shakun is required for competitive multi-agent systems, whereas our second method is powerful for cooperative multi-agent systems where the agents can exchange their information.     

Technology support for cooperative work: A framework for studying introduction and assimilation in organizations

This article draws on published research on the nature of the innovation process and exploratory field research in 10 companies to develop a framework for research on organizations’ introduction and assimilation of computer‐supported cooperative work technologies. The research reported in this article, part of a much larger study of the general process of innovation in organizations, focuses specifically on the transfer and assimilation of new technology innovations.

Technologies to support group process, communication, and coordination in face‐to‐face group meetings [electronic meeting support systems (EMSS)] were chosen to illustrate the use of the research framework. The article focuses on the transfer of these technologies from R“D units to target organizational units and the alignment of group, technology, and task during assimilation by end‐user groups. Research propositions are developed and discussed. Future articles will present the findings from current research that utilizes the frameworks presented in this article to study the introduction, transfer, and assimilation of EMSS in organizations.     

Right Problem Solving: Doing the Right Thing Right

This paper discusses right problem solving to define/solve a right problem for doing the right thing right. In so doing, the paper operationally considers purposeful complex adaptive systems (PCAS), Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD), group/negotiation support systems, consciousness, connectedness, spirituality, rationality, problems, and right rationality in theory and practice. System agents may be natural (human) and/or artificial.     

Evolution of group performance over time: A repeated measures study of GDSS effects

Many studies in the group decision support system (GDSS) literature have reported on the behavior and performance of ad hoc groups meeting for the first, and, in fact, the only time. Such one‐time studies of groups may not represent their longer term behavior and performance accurately. Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST) conceives of technology use as a social practice that emerges over time. AST suggests that meeting outcomes reflect the extent to which structures offered by the technology (such as GDSS tool sequences, meeting agenda, etc.) are faithfully appropriated by the group. Such faithful appropriation, however, takes time. This article explicitly recognizes the relevance of this appropriation process and reports on a lab study that examined the impact of computer support on group performance over time. In general, results showed that the performance of computer‐supported groups improved over time, whereas the performance of non‐computer‐supported groups stayed the same or declined. The number of alternatives generated by computer‐supported groups increased considerably as they became more proficient in incorporating the technology into group processes. However, the quality of decisions made by computer‐supported groups began to increase slightly, only during the last session. Both these findings suggest that AST is, in fact, a viable theory for studying group behavior and performance over time. Results from this study also point out the need for conducting more longitudinal studies of group processes in the future.     

Cognitive Load in Collaboration: Convergence

Collaboration is inherent to complex participatory multi-actor and multi-agent social technical systems. Supporting collaborative problem solving is challenging, especially with the increased amount of data and information available for decision makers; they often experience information overload. Therefore, one of the key steps in problem solving is convergence; after considering many alternatives, the group converges their focus to a few for decision making. One of the key production factors in collaborative problem solving, and thus convergence is cognitive effort. Understanding cognitive load involved in convergence tasks is therefore important to the design of collaboration support. Convergence is a complex collaborative task, which is much less studied than the often preceding, divergence or brainstorming task. On the basis of an overview of convergence techniques and literature on convergence this paper presents a framework for the assessment of cognitive load during collaboration processes, and strategies to deal with cognitive load in convergence. Evaluation of the framework with experts and with participants in a convergence process provides the grounds for reflection on the use and implications of the framework.     

Issue Networks, Value Structures and the Formulation of Accounting Standards: An Exercise in Theory Building

This study is an exercise in theory building. It begins from the premise that current theory with respect to the setting of accounting standards is inadequate. We advance current theory by incorporating new ideas from sociology (issues network theory, see Heclo (1978, In: King A (ed) The New American Political System. American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, pp 87–124) and social psychology (values structure ideas drawn from Shakun (1988, Evolutionary system design: policy making under complexity and group decision support systems. Holden-Day, Inc., Oakland, CA). In doing so, we extend previous theorizing on the accounting standard setting process (e.g., triocracy theory). Issue network theory holds that groups with intellectual, ideological and economic interests have interests in, and may exert efforts to influence, policy adoption. It is a natural outgrowth of, and important extension to, triocracy theory. We draw on Shakun’s (1988, Evolutionary system design: policy making under complexity and group decision support systems. Holden-Day, Inc., Oakland, CA) Evolutionary Systems Design theory to elucidate a theory of motivation. We argue that complex motivational structures influence the behaviors of the parties to the accounting standard setting process. As part of this effort, we categorize the guiding terminal values, instrumental values and operational goals that guide participant behaviors. We draw on previous literature to document parts of the model.     

Building consensus in strategic decision making: System dynamics as a group support system

System dynamics was originally founded as a method for modeling and simulating the behavior of industrial systems. In recent years it is increasingly employed as a Group Support System for strategic decision-making groups. The model is constructed in direct interaction with a management team, and the procedure is generally referred to as group model-building. The model can be conceptual (qualitative) or a full-blown (quantitative) computer simulation model. In this article, a case is described in which a qualitative system dynamics model was built to support strategic decision making in a Dutch government agency.Since people from different departments held strongly opposite viewpoints on the strategy, the agency had discussed its strategic problem for more than a year, but was obviously not able to reach consensus. The application of group model-building was successful in integrating opposite points of view, as well as in fostering consensus and creating commitment.The purpose of the article is twofold: first, to illustrate the process of group model-building with system dynamics; second, to evaluate why it was successful. Evaluation results reveal the importance of both systemic thinking through model-building and the role of the facilitator in catalyzing the strategic decision-making process.     

Multi-bilateral Multi-issue E-negotiation in E-commerce with a Tit-for-Tat Computer Agent

We discuss multi-bilateral multi-issue electronic negotiation (e-negotiation) in the context of an e-commerce marketplace system in which multiple players – buyers and sellers – conduct bilateral (pair-wise) multi-attribute negotiations followed optionally by an auction. Negotiators both make and request specific concessions. The concept of a tit-for-tat concession strategy is developed and implemented by a computer agent. The work is related to the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework for formal modeling/design of Purposeful Complex Adaptive Systems (PCAS).     

Constructing conceptual models for knowledge capture and delivery systems

Appropriate conceptualization of the nature of entities and relationships in a problem domain is a key prerequisite to the successful design of computerized decision aids for business, especially those developed for more than one idiosyncratic user. The need for a reliable conceptual model is particularly acute in the design of decision support systems that must function in problem‐solving situations with no existing theoretical framework or where theory and practice differ considerably.

This paper presents an interative procedure for developing a reliable conceptual model by testing the “fit”; of successive revisions of the model against a collection of “think‐aloud”; verbal problem‐solving protocols of people with experience in the domain. The model is revised each time until it is verifiably and consistently accurate. Such a procedure, it is argued, is more objective and reliable than intuition or traditional knowledge engineering and requires considerably less experimental data collection and analysis than more elaborate empirical model development procedures.

The feasibility of this procedure is illustrated by using it to construct a conceptual model for a computer‐based system that seeks to capture knowledge used during project planning and deliver it for use during project control.     

A Multi-Agent View of Strategic Planning Using Group Support Systems and Artificial Intelligence

The strategic planning process is dynamic and complex. Including a Group Support System (GSS) in the problem-solving process can improve the content quality of the strategic plan by allowing increased participation by more members of the organization. However, it can also add to the complexity of the problem by increasing the quantity of textual information that can result from group activity. Added complexity increases cognitive overload and frustrations of those participants negotiating the contents of the strategic plan. This article takes a multi-agent view of the strategic planning process. It considers group participants as multiple agents concerned with the content quality of the strategic plan. The facilitator agent is responsible for guiding groups in the strategic plan construction process as well as for solving process problems such as cognitive overload. We introduce an AI Concept Categorizer agent, a software tool that supports the facilitator in addressing the process problem of cognitive overload associated with convergent group activities by synthesizing group textual output into conceptual clusters. The implementation of this tool reduces frustrations which groups encounter in the process of classifying textual output and provides more time for discussion of the concepts themselves. Because of the large amount of convergent activity necessary for strategic planning, the addition of the AI Concept Categorizer to the strategic planning process should increase the quality of the strategic plan and the buy-in of the participants in the strategic planning process.     

A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems

As the development and use of automated systems for collaborative work grows, the need for a better understanding of these systems becomes more important. Our focus is on one type of system, a Group Support System (GSS) and, in particular, on one important aspect of a GSS—anonymity. A conceptual framework for the study of anonymity in a GSS is presented, which describes the general classes of variables and their relationships. These variables include the factors that influence anonymity in a GSS, types of anonymity, and the effects of anonymity on a message sender, receiver, group process, and outcome. Each of these variables is discussed with working propositions presented for important group process and outcome measures. The objectives of this article are to highlight the importance and complexity of anonymity, to act as a guide for empirical investigations of anonymity, and to influence future GSS development and use.     

Differences between workstations and keypad group support systems: Implications for keypad GSS facilitators

Organizations are successfully using group support systems (GSS) to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction in organizational meetings. Meeting success relies on making an appropriate match between group, taks, and technology. This responsibility often falls to the meeting facilitator. This article draws upon GSS and facilitation literature to develop a framework for the discussion of effective facilitation in workstation and keypad meeting environments. The article identifies differences between the systems and how they impact upon the behavior of the meeting facilitators and their choice of technology. Compensatory actions are proposed for keypad facilitators to address the lack of key workstation features. Keypad strengths are also identified to show the opportunities available to facilitators to maximize the benefits of using these GSS. Further, it is proposed that different types of GSS are not mutually exclusive and should be seen as complementary components of a suite of GSS tools designed to support organizational goals.