A framework for interactive multiple criteria group decision support

An interactive framework is developed for multiple criteria group decision support. Decision makers are asked to specify aspiration and reservation levels to establish a preferred range for the value of each objective for each decision maker. Group and individual solutions are generated as a function of these levels. Decision makers are asked to react to current solutions by revising their aspiration and reservation levels and additional solutions are generated. The framework is both simpler and more flexible than previous approaches.     

A multiobjective decision support system for multiresource forest management

A multiobjective and/or multiperson decision support system for analyzing multiresource forest management problems is developed in this paper. The procedure includes formulating the problem in a multiobjective and group decision making framework, and solving it using two solution techniques which consist of a distance-based compromise programming (CP) and a cooperative game theoretic approach of the Nash equilibrium type. The problem consists of five forest resources management objective functions to be maximized. Solving the problem using the two solution techniques enables determining a satisfactory compromise solution of the five forest resource management objectives. Sensitivity analysis of the two techniques shows compromise programming to be more sensitive to changes in the weight and the p-parameter of the technique while the cooperative game theoretic approach is relatively robust with respect to changes in the worst utility set.     

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.     

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.     

An object-oriented architecture for group decision support systems

An object-oriented GDSS can produce a rich environment for easily accessing software tools or applications running under a Graphical User Interface and can provide communication among meeting participants. This requires definition of (1) objects to manage the meeting and participant sessions, (2) applications that can run under these sessions, and (3) data storage and data communications capability that handle both private and shared data. This article suggests that a GDSS system can operate under three layers of software: an application-layer, a GDSS environment, and an operating system environment. It defines the structure and behavior of the GDSS environment layer in terms of (1) objects and messages used to communicate among these objects and (2) a message passing protocol between the GDSS environment and the other two layers. These specifications result in an architecture that is sufficiently modular to enable addition of various GDSS software. This article also discusses a prototype implementation of the architecture that is developed in Smalltalk and runs under Microsoft's Windows 3.0.     

Applying Multiattribute-Based Group Decision Making Techniques in Complex Equipment Selection Tasks

A practicing industrial engineer, even an experienced decision maker, needs help in the sense that there is a necessity to use more logical or analytical decision support tools, especially when dealing with control and instrumentation projects which are often worth millions of dollars. In this article we propose an algorithm which can support the process of group decision making relating to industrial automation, especially involving the selection of control and instrumentation equipment. The aim of this article is to look only at the algorithm's application and how it is applied. To this end, two test cases are used as examples: (1) selecting a local area network for installation in an academic environment; and (2) selecting an integrated control system for a real-world pulp and paper mill. Obtained results show that the algorithm leads to a satisfactory solution. A software form of the algorithm is being programmed for use as a decision support tool.     

Facilitating computer-supported meetings: A cumulative analysis in a multiple-criteria task environment

There have been many instances of the ineffective applications of new information technology. This article describes a program of enhancing the effectiveness of a new technology, Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS), through a series of studies which resulted in improvements in the technology itself as well as in how the technology is supported. Our approach emphasizes human facilitation and facilitative features embedded in the GDSS software.     

Cognitive hurdles in the use of decision support systems to enhance problem understanding

Computer-assisted decision support systems have been widely promoted as a means of enhancing problem understanding in crisis and noncrisis decision making. Clinical observation of actual applications of a particular category of software for interactive decisions (CONAN, DECISIONMAKER) have identified cognitive hurdles in the use of such systems. These hurdles not only pose a challenge to the development of such normative interventions in the decision process, but also an opportunity for furthering the shift to a new psychologically informed paradigm for decision making.     

Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water Resources Management

In this paper we describe a framework for multicriteria modeling and support of multi-stakeholder decision processes. We report on its testing in the development of a new water level management policy for a regulated lake-river system in Finland. In the framework the stakeholders are involved in the decision process from the problem structuring stage to the group consensus seeking stage followed by a stage of seeking public acceptance for the policy. The framework aims at creating an evolutionary learning process. In this paper we also focus on the use of a new interactive method for finding and identifying Pareto-optimal alternatives. Role playing experiments with students are used to test the practical applicability of a negotiation support procedure called the method of improving directions. We also describe the preference programming approach for the aggregation of the stakeholder opinions in the final evaluation of alternatives and consensus seeking.     

Challenging Group Support Systems Research: The Case for Strategic Decision Making

Strategic decision making (SDM) often occurs in groups that can benefit from the use of group support systems (GSS). However, no comprehensive review of this logical intersection has been made. We explore this intersection by viewing GSS research through the lens of SDM. First, SDM is broadly characterized and a model of GSS-mediated SDM is produced. Second, we review empirical GSS research linking these findings to the characteristics of SDM. We conclude that GSS research has not produced sufficient knowledge about group history, heterogeneity, member experience, task type, time pressure, technology or tool effects, and decision consensus for a favorable evaluation of SDM in GSS groups. SDM in GSS groups challenges researchers to study the effects of group processes such as those just mentioned in a context that involves ongoing and established groups, political activity, and a multiplicity of tasks.     

Perspectives on representation and analysis of negotiation: Towards cognitive support systems

The rapid expansion of Decision and Negotiation Support Systems has been built mainly on decision-theoretic approaches. This has resulted in the decision maker being viewed through the lens of the problem. In this article, the focus is on the decision maker's view of the problem. Three levels of problem articulation are described. Special emphasis is placed on the needs level and the implications it carries for the cognitive and instrumental levels. The three levels of articulation, the organizational model of making decision in social settings, and the three basic approaches to decision making form the basis for computer support focused on understanding and change rather than preferences and outcomes. We argue that in the dynamic, interactive context characteristic of negotiations, a cognitive support system based on restructurable modeling provides a richer basis for support.     

Distributed group support systems: Social dynamics and design dilemmas

A “distributed group support system”; includes decision support tools and structures embedded within a computer‐mediated communication system rather than installed in a “decision room.”; It should support groups who are distributed in space but not time ("synchronous”; groups), as well as “asynchronous”; groups whose members participate at different times. Pilot studies conducted in preparation for a series of controlled experiments are reviewed in order to identify some of the problems of implementing such a system. Many of the means used by groups meeting in the same place at the same time to coordinate their activities are missing. Embedding decision support tools within a different communications medium and environment changes the way they “work.”; Speculations are presented about software tools and structuring or facilitation procedures that might replace the “missing”; coordination channels.     

Decision making and decision aiding: Defining the process,it representations,and support

We present a formalized account of decision making as a multistep process that involves several classes of participating entities. The purpose of this article is to lay the foundations for a conceptual framework in which decision support systems can be placed. A series of increasingly formal representations of the decision problem are developed, from a mental model conceived by the decision maker to a knowledge base that may be used in a decision support system. The reformulations of the decision problem lead us to contemplate different forms of support: for mental models, for formal models (this includes supporting measurement and representation), for solution, and for communication.     

The Impact of Role Training in a User-Driven Group Support System Environment

We tested the proposition that training groups to use roles would improve performance in a user-driven, GSS-supported meeting. Two methods of role training, fixed and rotated roles, were compared against a control procedure in which no formal role training was provided. In a repeated measures experiment, half of the groups completed four generate-creative tasks, while the remaining groups completed three generate-creative tasks followed by one choice-intellective task. Both role training methods were successful in reducing the time spent by groups orienting themselves to the technology, particularly in the choice-intellective task context; however, decision quality or quantity did not improve with role training.     

Using and Influence Level of Information to Explain the Non-consensus Process Loss

Much of the Group Support System (GSS) literature comparing GSS groups with manual groups has produced contrarian results. One of the more confusing is that GSS groups have a higher level of non-consensus than manual groups. Lack of consensus in GSS groups is considered to be a negative aspect of GSS. This paper argues that low levels of consensus are not necessarily harmful and should be expected given the assumptions about GSSs. This study uses an alternate measure to compare face-to-face groups with GSS groups; an influence level of information. Experimental results using an influence level of information show no difference between face-to-face group members and GSS group members. We discuss these implications, as well as additional directions for further consensus research.     

Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a Two-phase Integrated Decision Approach for Large Nominal Groups

When decision makers who comprise a large nominal group face an unstructured decision problem and no simultaneous interactive communications are available, problem identification and consensus building are difficult, if not impossible. Few tools are available to assist decision makers in this situation. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has typically been used to evaluate a set of alternatives after a decision problem has been structured as a hierarchy with various levels of criteria above the alternatives. With a group of decision makers, AHP has been used to evaluate those alternatives either by consensus building or by combining judgments or priorities using the geometric mean to aggregate their preferences. In this paper, we extend the use of AHP to a situation involving a large nominal group of dispersed decision makers where the entire hierarchy is not defined at the outset. In particular, we use the AHP as an integrative approach to identify the priorities of the various criteria and then use those priorities to screen and consolidate a large set of potential alternatives. This results in considering a reduced set of alternatives that will be affected by the more important criteria. The consolidated set of alternatives is evaluated by each individual in the group using AHP, combined using the geometric mean, and the results are synthesized to obtain the overall priorities of the alternatives. The approach is demonstrated and evaluated in a case study to select an alunmi anniversary gift to the U.S. Coast Guard Academy with a large nominal group of decision-makers dispersed throughout the United States.     

A Spreadsheet Module for Consistent Consensus Building in AHP-Group Decision Making

This paper presents a spreadsheet module developed with Microsoft Excel and Visual Basic to search for consensus when dealing with AHP in group decision making. On the basis of the theoretical results included in the paper Moreno-Jiménez et al. (2003), this spreadsheet module allows us to construct, in a local context (one criterion), the Consistent Consensus Matrix (CCM) corresponding to the core of consistency associated with the actors involved in the decision making process. By means of simulation techniques, this module provides, for each of the different values of the inconsistency thresholds considered, the preference structures derived from the interval incomplete matrix (CCM) that represents the groups core of consistency. This information will be used to establish consensus paths between the actors involved in the resolution process, one of the most important goals in distributed and participatory decision making.This paper has received partial financial support from the Research Project of the University of Zaragoza (2002): Herramientas decisionales para el constructivismo cognitivo (ref. 228-056). A previous version of this paper has been presented at the Group Decision and Negotiation session of the EURO-INFORMS Congress in Istanbul, 2003.