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.     

‘Joined-Up’ Policy-Making: Group Decision and Negotiation Practice

Creating public value is problematic in a world of austerity. Joint private and public, and public-public, projects are now an established way of creating public value. Establishing joint goals within a context of different ‘own goals’ is important and difficult. A particular issue facing many organisations in seeking to negotiate joint goals in a collaborative project is that of getting all the key managers from both organisations together over enough of a sequence of meetings for agreements to be meaningful and owned by those who will deliver the project. The development of such goals can be significantly enhanced by (1) using a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) and (2) using a powerful conceptualisation of a goals framework comprising: a goals system; ‘core goals’; ‘meta-goals’; ‘negative’ goals; and ‘above and beyond’ goals. In the case of negotiating joint goals the use of a GDSS has increased productivity to such an extent that powerful negotiated agreements can be achieved with all key managers in the room in as little as one meeting. The combination of high productivity, anonymity, and the structuring of the data has also facilitated the uncovering of ‘negative goals’, and the development of ‘meta-goals’ and ‘above and beyond’ goals. This paper uses three real cases to illustrate the significance of a Group Support System’s contribution and to illustrate the different types of goals. In doing so the paper suggests that facilitating such outcomes requires a carefully designed strategic conversation necessarily supported by a GDSS to enable group decision and negotiation in practice. Two of the cases are from public-public collaboration in the health field, and the other from a private-public setting.     

Aggregation and Disaggregation of Preferences for Collective Decision-Making

Group decisions are of longstanding interest to researchers from a wide spectrum of disciplines. Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) can play a vital role in situations where multiple persons are involved, each having their own private perceptions of the context and the decision problem to be tackled. In such an environment the conflict between the members of the planning group is not an unusual situation. Multiple criteria decision aid (MCDA) methods may be a useful tool in coping with such interpersonal conflicts where the aim is to achieve consensus between the group members. This paper combines two well-known multicriteria methods, based on the notion of aggregation of preferences, in order to construct a consensus seeking methodology for collective decision-making.     

Constructionist Theory to Explain Effects of GDSS

This paper analyses communication between actors as a major theoretical element in understanding the link between GDSS (Group Decision Support System) and the construction of shared meaning. The concept of shared meaning is discussed by using two schools of thought: Constructionism versus Constructivism. The schools differ in their approach to processes of communication and conversational techniques. Constructionist theory focuses on the necessity to activate process of intersubjectivity between individuals to reach shared meaning while constructivist theory focuses on process of negotiation. Arguments are given in this paper in favor of the Constructionist approach for dealing with the high complexity of the organizational issues involved in GDSS. The two theoretical approaches were operationalized under two different paradigms of communication: Intersubjective (Constructionist) versus Negotiative (Constructivist) and were compared in an experimental set-up. Better results were found for a GDSS based on the Constructionist paradigm.     

Contrasting Single User and Networked Group Decision Support Systems for Strategy Making

The use of computers to support group work – as a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) – on strategy making has grown over the last decade. Some GDSS's have a facilitator managing the computer with the group viewing a public screen displaying the debate, problem definition, and agreements of the group as it negotiates strategies. Others involve members of the group in the direct input of data that forms part of the problem definition – data that is then used by the group employing electronic voting and other organizing devices. This paper discusses a real case relating to an organization seeking to reach important agreements about its strategy. The case involved the top management team and over 50 senior managers. The organization used a facilitator driven GDSS for some of this work, and a networked system for other parts. Some of the meetings were video taped, some were observed through one-way mirrors, and all of the participants were interviewed about their reactions to the different systems. This paper reports on some of the significant contrasts between the two approaches.     

GDSS research: An overview and historical analysis

Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) is a relatively new area of Information Systems research, but some patterns have begun to emerge in the focus of this research and in the approaches to conducting it. This article represents a substantial review of a large body of GDSS literature and an analysis of that literature according to a specific classification scheme. The dimensions of the classification scheme include the age of the research publication, the general research approach, the philosophy underlying the data collection, the type of GDSS support, whether the research is longitudinal, and the primary focus of the research, as well as a few demographic variables such as author and source. The results of the literature analysis lead to recommendations to GDSS researchers by the authors of a need for greater use of the available research approaches and other data analysis philosophies, a greater emphasis on field work, more longitudinal research, and some changes in the focus of the research.     

An Experimental Analysis of Face to Face versus Computer Mediated Communication Channels

Experimental research on Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) has generally focused on democratic groups whose members typically share the same objectives. In organizations, however, there are many situations where groups have a leader who has the power to override the group's recommendation, the objective of the leader may not be the same as the objective of each member, and not everyone may have the same information. This paper reports the results of an experiment in which the groups, having a designated leader, worked on a mixed-motive task. Within this context, we analyze group decision outcomes and processes for groups that use a face-to-face channel of cormnunication and those that utilize computer mediated communication. We compare performance of the leader and members with respect to an objective measure of performance, the efficient frontier. The results indicate that for this task groups using face-to-face channel outperform groups using computer mediated communication.     

Student Ethical Perceptions and Ethical Action Propensities: An Analysis of Situation Familiarity

Recently McCuddy and Peery (1996) have suggested that business students may not respond the same way to unfamiliar business ethical dilemmas as they would to more familiar academic ethical dilemmas. The purpose of this study was to present the same students with both unfamiliar business dilemmas as well as possibly more familiar academic dilemmas in order to examine this issue.Findings of the study revealed that students did not exhibit different perceptions of the unethical actions performed in the academic and accounting/business ethical vignettes. However, the students indicated that both they and their peers would be more likely to act unethically to resolve the dilemmas in the accounting/business cases than in the academic cases. This finding is troubling in that it suggests that students either feel less compelled to act ethically in business, or that they perceive that ethical standards in the business world are generally low when compared to their current educational environment. In addition, the students in the study maintained the same halo effect (i.e., the difference between an individual's perception of their likelihood of performing an unethical action compared to their perception of their peers' likelihood to perform the same unethical action) across the two types of ethical dilemma.     

A framework for thinking about Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)

Strategic problem solving in organizations is a social process that disturbs established social relationships. Maintaining a negotiated social order is crucial to political feasibility and to emotional commitment from the participants in relation to a solution package. However, Group Decision Support Systems that attend overly to managing social order risk group think through bounded vision. This may be avoided if emotional commitment is also encouraged through participants experiencing the problem situation from multiple perspectives and in relation to alternative solution strategies. Commitment depends upon both means/ends rationality and procedural rationality. This acknowledges the balance in providing support to a group with respect to the negotiation of social order, with the more traditional group decision support for socially negotiating order out of the problem situation. This article argues that effective Group Decision Support Systems must attend to both aspects of creating order. OR modelling methods and the support that can be provided by modern micro-computers offer a new way forward—models can be toys that a group can play with together, enabling them to create knowledge as well as use it.     

Group Consensus: The Impact of Multiple Dialogues

The research results on group consensus have been ambiguous within the field of Group Support Systems (GSSs). Some research studies have shown that groups using multiple communication channels produce more ideas, and more unique ideas than groups using a single communication channel. In addition, a second set of research findings have shown that groups using GSSs report group members hold less consensus with the group's decision. This research studies more closely how these two characteristics; communication channel and consensus, interact. Specifically, can less consensus be a function of the choice of channels used in problem solving. The results show that groups using a single communication channel generate more actual consensus than groups using multiple communication channels. Furthermore, the single channel discussions provide more integrative comments and these integrative comments may help explain the difference in consensus. These results suggest that those striving for consensus from group members should consider production methods used to create the information that is to be used in the decision.     

Influence of Computer-Based Meeting Support on Process and Outcomes for a Divisional Coordinating Group

This research examines the introduction of computer-based group decision support systems (GDSS) to members of a division level coordinating group. Participants performed authentic problem formulation tasks which varied naturally in degree of structuredness, in two non-GDSS meetings then were provided GDSS for four additional meetings. It was proposed that the introduction of the GDSS and task structuredness would influence (1) group process in terms of the amount of divergent and convergent thinking communicated during meetings and (2) perceived outcomes regarding quality, satisfaction, understanding, confidence, and commitment to group positions. Results suggest that GDSS use affected both the total amount and pattern of group communication but not perceived outcomes. Structuredness of the task affected perceived outcomes but neither amount nor patterns of communication. Additional qualitative data regarding perceived of costs and benefits in using GDSS provide richer explanation for study findings and suggest further lines of inquiry.     

Participants' perceptions on the role of facilitators using Group Decision Support Systems

The impact of facilitation upon group meetings has been a topic of research and debate for over 40 years. However, with the emergence and increasing usage of Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS), the role of facilitators is once more being addressed. Facilitators aim to substantially increase the effectiveness of group working, making meetings more productive and efficient through the management of both content and process. However, while the benefit that facilitators can bring is acknowledged, developing the necessary skills and techniques is more problematic. There are few manuals for would-be faciliators to draw upon, and much of their ability is acquired through experience. This article therefore attempts to increase the knowledge available and to provide facilitators with some practical suggestions. The research focuses on a series of interviews with group members (participants) who had used a particular GDSS—Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA)—for organizational decision making. From the analysis of the interviews, a number of reoccurring issues were identified which are presented as a set of learning points. These cover not only the workshop/meeting itself, but also the pre-workshop and post-workshop stages. The article also reflects on the impact which these identified learning points have on design and future GDSS development.     

Distributed group support: The effects of voting Tools on group perceptions of media richness

Decision groups distributed both temporally and geographically encounter a multitude of coordination problems. This experiment used a set of GDSS Tools called List and Vote, and alternative interaction management procedures, as mechanisms for coordinating distributed groups using a computer conferencing system and for structuring group processes. The study examined media richness using a modification of the adjective-pairs developed by Zmud, Lind, and Young (1990). The Tools significantly improved subjective perceptions of media richness. The attempted manipulation of the presence or absence of sequential procedures for the most part was not effective in creating significant differences in group perception of media richness.     

Re-evaluating the Realist Conception of War as a Business Metaphor

The state of war is a popular metaphor employed by many business writers seeking to explain the imperatives of strategic decision-making. It is a metaphor which draws on a realist characterisation of war as a Hobbesian state of nature devoid of a moral dimension. However, the work of Walzer (1977) has demonstrated that rules of war, established over generations and across cultural divides, play a significant role in the conduct of warfare. Through identifying and analysing rules of war in parallel with ethical dilemmas in business life, such as whistleblowing, it is possible to develop a more sophisticated understanding of the war metaphor in place of simplified, state of nature realism. This alternative version of the war metaphor is a useful means of introducing students to Aristotlean virtues as well as challenging their preconceptions about the nature of business activity.     

MRO:专注的力量

专注于某一件事情,哪怕它很“小”,努力把它做到无可挑剔,总会有不寻常的收获风起云涌、竞争激烈的软件行业不乏规模庞大、应用覆盖面广泛的软件巨头。同时,拥有某项关键技术、满足用户特定需求并紧紧抓住市场脉搏的软件提供商,也牢牢把持着某些特定领域,并且具有不可小觑的增长能力。在企业资产管理(EAM)市场上,有一支队伍37年来一直在全球范围业绩卓著,在软件公司并购、分拆、甚至“昙花一现”的纷繁中信念不改,这就是在资产密集型企业内知名度极高的MRO软件公司。自1998年起,MRO软件就始终在全球知名IT评估机构GartnerGroup每半年…     

Artificial Neural Systems as a Research Paradigm for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems

Artificial neural systems (ANSs) have received interest recently because of their ability to accurately forecast and classify data. Group decision support systems (GDSSs) also have received much interest for their support of group communication and decision making. This paper explores the potential of the ANS as a methodology for modeling the many complex, interrelated research variables involved in the field of GDSS. As an illustration, multilinear regression, an ANS with backpropagation, and an ANS with a genetic algorithm were developed to classify 133 subjects into verbal or GDSS groups based on their responses to a questionnaire. The ANSs with backpropagation and the genetic algorithm achieved higher classification accuracies (81.8 and 90.9%, respectively) than was achieved with multilinear regression (75.8%). Therefore, an ANS may more accurately model the many interrelationships occurring with GDSS group behavior.     

Software to support business teams

Organizations are increasingly using the business team concept to gain competitive advantage. Collaboration support software is gaining acceptance as a viable tool among both researchers and practitioners, and an opportunity exists to investigate the specific needs of teams: users working in longitudinal time frames on a variety of tasks. In this article, team software requirements are first derived from a theoretical perspective: office automation and task literature are used to identify a set of domain-independent individual tasks. Group process literature is then used to develop a set of collaborative tasks composed of these individual task components. These individual and collaborative tasks are aggregated with team task and communication support requirements to develop requirements for an integrated software environment that effectively supports business teams. Design considerations for a comprehensive team support system are outlined, a prototype implementation is described, and project contributions and key future research considerations are summarized.     

Cooperation support through the use of group decision systems

This article considers the development of the group decision support system (GDSS) field both from organizational and technological perspectives. The growing importance of teamwork, lateral coordination, and activities integration inside modern business organizations is emphasized. Technological and knowledge specialization, quick transformation of business environments, reduction of response time, and so on, are some of the reasons that can explain the renewed relevance of teamwork. Also, the development of information technology (IT) is analyzed in relation to the role it is assuming in supporting group activities. Research in the GDSS field is then introduced. A proposal concerning the identification of three different phases in GDSS studies is developed, ranging from decision rooms to distributed systems. Each phase shows distinctive research topics and application fields, together with different organizational goals. Results of these developments are the growth of potential application areas of GDSS tools. These theoretical considerations, together with empirical experiences coming from the study of a real manufacturing environment (an IBM plant where group cooperation plays a fundamental role for production efficiency), constitute the basis for a research GDSS prototype (GROUPS). Prototype features are designed to support executives in facing production‐planning problems through an improvement in communications and in knowledge representation.     

Consumer protection in the EEC after ratification of the single act

The paper analyses those aspects of the Single European Act which have an impact on consumer policy in the EEC. Consumer protection is only indirectly referred to by the Act, whereas environmental policy, and thereby also health aspects, are expressly addressed.Consumers have little to gain but much to lose by a strict application of the integration concept of the Act which is an expression of the intention to create a single market before 1992. It is not clear how EEC and Member State measures are to be co-ordinated.Unfortunately, implementation of EEC consumer and environmental policies has not been improved through the Act. In the future, implementation policy should concern not only the creation of a Common Market forproducers, but should be extended to include common standards of protection for Europeanconsumers.

---

Verbraucherpolitik in der EG nach der Ratifizierung der Einheitlichen Europäischen Akte

Zusammenfassung Die Stellungnahme der European Consumer Law Group, eines Zusammenschlusses europäischer juristischer Praktiker und Forscher auf dem Gebiet des Verbraucherrechts, beschäftigt sich mit den Auswirkungen der Einheitlichen Europäischen Akte auf die Verbraucherpolitik in der EG. Es überwiegt eine skeptische Einstellung, weil die Akte die Verbraucherpolitik nur indirekt erwähnt und vor allem bezweckt, einen einheitlichen Binnenmarkt bis 1992 zu schaffen. Positiv ist die ausdrückliche Verankerung der Umweltpolitik als neuer Politikbereich der EG zu vermerken, die über Gesundheitsaspekte auf den Verbraucherschutz zurückwirkt. Die Implementation des EG-Verbraucherrechts ist allerdings auch durch die Akte nicht verbessert worden. Gefordert wird insgesamt eine neue Einstellung zur EG-Integration: der Begriff des Gemeinsamen Markets muß um gemeinsame Schutzstandards für alle europäischen Verbraucher ergänzt werden.

---

---

The European Law Group (ECLG) is a group of lawyers and law scholars in the EEC, concerned with legal aspects of consumer protection. Correspondence regarding the paper should be directed to: Professor Norbert Reich, Centre for European Legal Policy, Universitätsallee GW1, D-2800 Bremen 33, Federal Republic of Germany.