A multidimensional framework for group decision support system research and design

Groups are a fundamental and essential part of organizational decision making. A group decision support system (GDSS) attempts to use computer and communications technology to help a group make better decisions. In this paper, previous GDSS research is extended to develop a better framework for future GDSS research and design. Six situational factors are identified; group size, member proximity, task type, group environment, and group development stage; so that a given group decision making situation can be accurately described. To standardize the features across different GDSS, six different levels of GDSS features are also identified. The paper then presents a multidimensional framework for conducting future GDSS research, and argues that future GDSS research needs to identify the appropriate GDSS features for the appropriate group decision situation. It is also suggested that researchers take a long-term, holistic approach while analyzing the results of using a GDSS

Helping people help themselves - toward a theory of autonomy-compatible help

If development is seen basically as autonomous self-development, then there is a subtle paradox in the whole notion of development assistance: How can an outside party ("helper") assist those undertaking autonomous activities (the"doers") without overriding, or undercutting their autonomy? This conundrum is the challenge facing a theory of autonomy-compatible development assistance - that is, helping theory. Starting from a simple model of non-distortionary aid, the author explores several themes of a broader helping theory, and shows how these themes arise in the work of"gurus"in different fields - John Dewey in pedagogy and social philosophy, Douglas McGregor in management theory, Carl Rogers in psychotherapy, Soren Kierkegaard in spiritual counseling, Saul Alinsky in community organizing, Paulo Freire in community education, and Albert Hirschman, and E.F. Schumacher in economic development. That such diverse thinkers in such different fields, arrive at very similar conclusions, increases confidence in the common principles. The points of commonality are summarized as follows: 1) Help must start from the present situation of the doers. 2) Helpers must see the situation through the eyes of the doers. 3) Help cannot be imposed on the doers, as that directly violates their autonomy. 4) Nor can doers receive help as a benevolent gift, as that increases dependency. 5) Doers must be in the driver seat. One major application of helping theory is to the problems of knowledge-based development assistance. The standard approach is that the helper, a knowledge-based development agency, has the"answers", and disseminates them to the doers. This corresponds to the standard teacher-centered pedagogy. The alternative under helping theory is the learner-centered approach. The teacher plays the role of midwife, catalyst, and facilitator, building learning capacity in the learner-doers, so that they can learn from any source, including their own experience. Development assistance is further complicated by the local, or tacit nature of much relevant knowledge. A knowledge-based development agency might function better, not simply as a source of knowledge, but as a broker connecting those who face problems with those in similar situations, who have learned to address the problems. Changing to the approach of helping theory, entails changing the helping agency itself, transforming it into an organization that fosters learning internally, as well as externally - as in a university, where professors engage in learning, and foster learning in students, but the organization does not adopt official views on the complex questions of the day. This means fostering competition in the marketplace of ideas within the organization, and taking a more Socratic stance with clients, who will then have to take responsibility for, and have ownership of their decisions.Economic Theory&Research,Decentralization,Health Economics&Finance,Development Economics&Aid Effectiveness,Labor Policies,Health Monitoring&Evaluation,Educational Sciences,Economic Theory&Research,Health Economics&Finance,Development Economics&Aid Effectiveness

Improving the Analysis of Foreign Affairs: Evaluating Structured Analytic Techniques

Research suggests that foreign affairs analysis is weak—even the best analysts are accurate less than 35 percent of the time (Tetlock 2005). To compensate for analytic weaknesses, some have called for the use of structured analytic techniques, that is, formalized judgement-driven methods. This imperative was enshrined in the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (2004), which mandates that analysts use these techniques. This research investigates how the techniques have been applied in the U.S. intelligence community (IC) while making a modest attempt to evaluate 12 core techniques. The investigation of how the techniques are applied is based on semi-structured interviews with 5 intelligence experts and a survey of 80 analysts at an IC agency, along with follow-up interviews with 15 analysts. Interestingly, 1 in 3 analysts reported never using the techniques. Two factors were related to the use of the techniques: analytic training (p=0.001, Cramer's V=0.41) and the perception of their value (p=.049, Cramér's V= 0.23). There was not a statistically significant relation between the time pressure under which analysts work and their use of the techniques (p=0.74). Questions about the effectiveness of the techniques were answered in part by employing a “systematic review,” a novel methodology for synthesizing a large body of research. A random sample of more than 2,000 studies, suggests that there is moderate to strong evidence affirming the efficacy of using three techniques: Analysis of Competing Hypotheses, Brainstorming, and Devil’s Advocacy. There were three main findings: face-to-face collaboration decreases creativity, evidence weighting appears to be more important than seeking disconfirming evidence, and conflict tends to improve the quality of analysis. This research also employed an experiment with 21 graduate intelligence studies students, which confirmed the first two findings of the systematic review. The findings of the dissertation represent a contribution to “evidence-based intelligence analysis,” the systematic effort to develop a robust evidence-base linking the use of specific analytic techniques to the improvement of analysis in foreign affairs. Future research might build on the evidence-base presented here to improve intelligence analysis, one of the most important areas of judgment in foreign affairs

Digital Government Systems: Tackling The Legacy Problem Through A Game-Based Approach To Business Requirements Analysis

Government agency reliance on legacy systems is problematic: they are costly to maintain, difficult to integrate with and they hinder innovation. However, the replacement of legacy systems is not a straightforward endeavor, and it often results in technology substitution that is not accompanied by business process change. The focus of this dissertation is on the phenomenon of legacy system replication wherein the requirements for applications replacing outdated technologies mimic legacy features and reflect status quo operational processes that have been historically shaped by the legacy system itself. This problem is referred to throughout the dissertation as the “legacy problem.” The dissertation investigates its roots and proposes an approach to overcome it. Specifically, a mixed method research approach is taken, including a survey of public sector practitioners to explore the extent of the legacy problem, and a series of semi-structured interviews with government information technology and management professionals to delve into the dynamics of legacy system replacement projects. Findings indicate that the legacy problem often stems from a lack of critical analysis of business requirements and the desire to minimize the risks associated with organizational change, which often result in missed opportunities for digital government innovation. As a consequence, the dissertation proposes a candidate approach to deal with the legacy problem in the development of a requirements game (RE-PROVO) which supports requirements discussions structured around the themes of legacy (or heritage) preservation and innovation. The game is evaluated by local government practitioners through several iterations and their feedback is analysed to gauge the potential utility of the approach. The results indicate that with a streamlined user interface and accentuated game elements RE-PROVO can be a valuable and effective tool for requirements analysis in legacy system replacement projects

Design and evaluation of a list gathering tool in a web-based collaborative environment

This research focuses on how to build a list structure to combine individual items of information into some sort of structure that converts the individual items of information into a structure of knowledge relative to the problem. Software was designed to provide relationships among and comparisons of the contributions in a list structure, so that individual members of a group process will be able to understand the contributions of information made by the group as a whole. A List Gathering Tool was designed and implemented, which is one component in a Web-based Social Decision Support System (SDSS) Toolkit. Then, a two-by-two factorial design (list tool support vs. no list tool support, and voting tool support vs. no voting tool support, respectively) controlled experiment and several field studies were carried out to assess the effects of this List Gathering Tool in a group problem solving process. Overall, the evaluation results are encouraging. The utilization of the List Gathering Tool or the SDSS Toolkit does tend to improve the ability to discover valid alternatives. An additional set of field trials illustrated how the SDSS Toolkit can be utilized in a collaborative learning environment to improve teaching and students\u27 learning experience. This system will also work for very practical applications in large group settings

Investigation into the feasibilty of providing intelligent support for computer mediation decision making groups

This thesis investigated the claim that the adaptation to the keyboard interface of a computer-mediated (CM) decision making group leads to differences in the style of communication when compared to that of a face-to-face (FTF) group. More importantly it examined the possibility that changes in satisfaction with the process and the decision outcome are determined not by the mode of communication, but rather the style of communication the decision makers employed in response to the keyboard interface. The decision processes of CM and FTF groups were examined using a simulated panel of enquiry presented via computer databases and containing inconsistent and incomplete shared information that could only be resolved through collaboration between the group members. An analysis of the communication styles employed in real-time CM and FTF groups (Experiment 1) revealed a tendency of CM discussions to exhibit a preference for a normative style of communication exchanging a proportionally high number of value statements and indications of preference, and for. FTF groups to rely proportionally more heavily upon factual and inferential statements. A paradigm for enabling intervention into the decision making process through the monitoring and coding of all group communication was developed (Chapter 2) which permitted the real-time analysis of the differences in communication style and aimed to reduce the differences in communication style. Using this paradigm and the norms for communication of the two forms of group (CM and FTF) established in Experiment 1, a series of studies examining the communication process were undertaken. Experiment 2 explored the possibility of intervening into the communication process using e-mail based support messages that conveyed the discrepancies between a CM groups communication style and the style a group might be expected to employ where it communicating FTF. Two configurations of support messages that each attempted to shape the communication style of CM decision panels to resemble those of FTF panels were considered. It was found that alerting users to their communication style and instructing them to increase or decrease certain styles of communication enabled them to more closely resemble the communication process and satisfaction levels of FTF groups. Experiment 3 considered the possibility that the presence of a monitoring system, rather than the content of the support messages provided, was the key issue in securing changes in the communication style of CM groups. Having established that it was indeed the content of the support messages that enabled CM groups to operate as if communicating FTF, attention turned to effects of the support. By easing the interpretation of the feedback through two configurations of visual feedback, Experiment 4 attempted to increase decision makers adherence to the content of the support messages. This study suggested that visual feedback alone was not sufficient to elicit the desired changes in communication style and that the text-based communication was required. Moreover, Experiment 4 considered the impact of support messages themselves, considering whether the support acted as continual assistance to the users or whether it merely trained the users to communicate in the desired way Conclusions from this study were slightly inconclusive, however, given that changes in communication styles had been achieved a further analysis of the content of the messages was undertaken. This final analysis (Chapter 7) revealed effects of confirmation bias within the communication and intervention steps that can on occasionally overcame such biases. The possibilities for the development of real-time intervention into these processes are considered and the findings interpreted in the light of existing theories of CM communication and recent developments in computer-based communication

A study on the effects of dialectical inquiry, devil's advocacy and consensus-based decision making approaches on the group conflict variables.

Past researches have looked at the study of group conflict in Group Support System (GSS) environment via the employment of various decision approaches - Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy, and Consensus-based approach. These studies have been conducted to evaluate outcomes such as the performance outcome quality, process and solution satisfaction and attraction to group. However, no prior study has looked at the process level variables such as the level and management strategies of conflict, nor the productivity of the conflict resulting from the use of these approaches. The effect of national culture (Singapore v United States of American) on the above variables have also be incorporated in prior research. This research project used an experiment consisting of 17 groups of 6 members each to compare the consensus-based (C) approach against dialectical inquiry (Dl) and devil's advocacy (DA) approaches to decision making in a GSS environment. The variables investigated in this study are the types and amount of conflicts, conflict management strategies, and conflict productivity. DI and DA approaches are expected to generate the highest level of issue-based and interpersonal conflict respectively. In terms of conflict management strategies, DI group is expected to have the greatest tendency to adopt integrative strategy; DA and C groups are expected to have the greatest tendency to adopt distributive strategy and strategy approach respectively. Conflicts generated under the DI approach is perceived by many groups to be the most productive in decision making. The results in this study indicated that DA groups actually generate the highest level of issue-based conflict. On the other hand, there is no significant difference between the three decision making approaches in terms ofinterpersonal conflict generated. DI and DA groups have similar tendency to adopt the integrative strategy to conflict management, while C groups have the greatest tendency to adopt the avoidance strategy. As for the distributive strategy, DA groups demonstrated the greatest tendency to adopt it. The results also indicated that the highest level of conflict productivity is perceived in groups using the DI approach to decision making. Task types have apparently no effect on the three decision making approaches in terms of the variables being investigated in this research.ACCOUNTANC

Collaborative problem solving and program development model

A model to enhance collaborative problem solving and program development is presented. The collaborative model is a detailed cognitive model that takes into consideration the cognitive and social activities that occur during collaborative problem solving and program development. The cognitive activities required for collaborative problem solving and program development are identified and integrated into a six-stage model. An extensive literature review in the associated fields is presented to show the need for the model described in this dissertation. In addition, a comprehensive study of tools to support collaboration during problem solving and program development was also performed as well as a critique of these tools. A detailed statistical experiment to study the effect of this model on subjects, collaboratively solving a software problem was designed and executed. The experiment included testing the collaborative problem solving and program development model with and without assistance from groupware tools. The subject teams each constructed a software design and this design was evaluated based on, research hypotheses. This experiment produced results indicating the positive effect the Collaborative Model has on problem understanding and the quality of solution planning during collaborative problem solving and program development efforts