| Abstract: | Previous research has found that groups using dialectical inquiry (DI) or devil's advocacy (DA) make better strategic decisions than groups using a consensus (C) approach. This paper explains those findings by using new data to show that the DI and DA approaches make better use of the capabilities of individual group members. Specifically, the DI and DA groups yielded significantly higher quality recommendations and assumptions than the average of the individuals in the respective groups, whereas the C groups did not. Moreover, the recommendations and assumptions of the DI groups and the recommendations of the DA groups significantly exceeded those of the best individual in the respective groups. There were no significant differences for the C groups. |
