The Minnesota GDSS Research Project: Group Support Systems, Group Processes, and Outcomes

The Minnesota GDSS Research Project is a 20-year program of interdisciplinary research that has generated more than 80 articles, chapters, dissertations, and proceedings publications and has influenced other researchers who developed their own niches. Grounded in Adaptive Structuration Theory, which emerged and evolved as the research unfolded, the project studied the impact of technology characteristics (level of support, restrictiveness) and other support (training, heuristics, facilitation) on group processes and outcomes for a range of tasks (problem definition, decision making, planning). The project entailed a complex tapestry of a series of laboratory experiments and two major field studies. The basic theoretical framework, experimental strategy and design, field study design, and results are summarized, along with a discussion of the significance and implications of the project for contemporary theory and practice

A multi-agent system to support location based group decision making in mobile teams

This paper describes an agent-based approach for developing a location-based asynchronous group decision-support system for mobile teams. The approach maximises the use of reusable service components (GSCmas — generic service component for multi-agent systems) as the main interaction mechanism between agents to allow flexible support of a new group-decision process. The paper describes the architecture of a GSCmas and provides details of how the GSCmas is integrated within a decision support system. Finally a system (mPower) based on the proposed approach is introduced and applied to a location-based group decision problem

TOWARDS ENHANCED E-COLLABORATION IN ACADEMIA A HOLISTIC MODEL FOR DEVELOPMENT OF E-COLLABORATION SOFTWARE

Henriksson, Aron. Neculau, Andrei. 2008. Towards Enhanced E-collaboration in Academia. A Holistic Model for Development E-collaboration Software. The Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. Information and Communication Technology.E-collaboration is an inherently complex activity that encompasses many factors that supplement the pivotal technical elements. This paper investigates the various aspects of e-collaboration from an academic viewpoint, and reiterates the call for a holistic approach towards e-collaboration research and development. Moreover, the use of collaboration tools by IT students is surveyed, which substantiates the belief that e-collaboration needs to be further promoted in academia. We present a conceptual model that hopefully can provide some guidance for further research on e-collaboration and development of e-collaboration suites.E-collaboration, Academia, Requirements, Boundaries, Holistic

A Look Toward the Future: Decision Support Systems Research is Alive and Well

This commentary examines the historical importance of decision support to the information systems (IS) field from the viewpoint of four researchers whose work spans the several decades of decision support systems (DSS) research. Given this unique “generational” vantage point, we present the changes in and impact of DSS research as well as future considerations for decision support in the IS field. We argue that the DSS area has remained vital as technology has evolved and our understanding of decision-making processes has deepened. DSS work over the last several years has contributed both breadth and depth to decision-making research; the challenge now is to make sense of it all by placing it in an understandable context and by applying our analysis to the relevant issues looming in the future. One major outcome of this commentary is the identification of future trends in DSS research and what the users of these new DSS outlets can learn from the past. Trends include the increasing impact of social and mobile computing on DSS research, as well as knowledge management DSS and negotiation support systems that shift the focus to delivering more customer-centric and marketplace support

Communications Design for Co-Op: A Group Decision Support System

Decision Support Systems (DSSs), computer-based systems intended to assist managers in preparing and analyzing decisions, have been single-user systems for most of the past decade. Only recently has DSS research begun to study the implications of the fact that most complex managerial decisions involve multiple decision makers and analysts. A number of tools for facilitating group decisions have been proposed under the label Group Decision Support Systems (GDSSs). One of the most important functions of a GDSS is to provide problem-oriented services for communication among decision makers. On the basis of an analysis of the communication requirements in various group decision settings, this paper presents an architecture for defining and enforcing dynamic application-level protocols that organize decision group interaction. The architecture has been implemented on a network of personal computers in Co-oP, a GDSS for cooperative group decision making based on interactive, multiple-criteria decision methods

A network-based interactive group decision support system.

by Tso Tze Kwong.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1990.Bibliography: leaves [121]-[123].AcknowledgmentsAbstract --- p.A-1Table of Figures --- p.F-1Chapter Chapter 1. --- Group Factors and Their ImpactsChapter 1.1 --- Introduction --- p.1-1Chapter 1.2 --- Why Group --- p.1-3Chapter 1.2.1 --- Effectiveness --- p.1-3Chapter 1.2.2 --- Efficiency --- p.1-4Chapter 1.2.3 --- Knowledge --- p.1-4Chapter 1.2.4 --- Social Bias Reduction --- p.1-5Chapter 1.2.5 --- Commitment --- p.1-5Chapter 1.2.6 --- Communications --- p.1-5Chapter 1.3 --- Quality of Decision --- p.1-6Chapter 1.4 --- Risk Taking --- p.1-8Chapter 1.5 --- Social Factors --- p.1-8Chapter 1.6 --- Problems on Groups --- p.1-9Chapter Chapter 2. --- Group Decision Support SystemsChapter 2.1 --- Introduction --- p.2-1Chapter 2.2 --- Group Decision MakingChapter 2.2.1 --- Definition of Decision-making Group --- p.2-2Chapter 2.2.2 --- An Information-Exchange View --- p.2-2Chapter 2.2.3 --- Group Interaction --- p.2-3Chapter 2.2.4 --- Group Decision Making Process --- p.2-4Chapter 2.2.5 --- Group Decision Making Process Model TC-l --- p.2-7Chapter 2.3 --- Group Decision Support System --- p.2-9Chapter 2.3.1 --- Current Research Trend --- p.2-9Chapter 2.3.2 --- Definition of GDSSs --- p.2-10Chapter 2.3.3 --- Comparisons of Major Features of GDSSs in Practice --- p.2-13Chapter 2.3.4 --- The GDSS Software ModelsChapter 2.3.4.1 --- The Software Components --- p.2-19Chapter 2.3.4.2 --- Mapping Group Decision Making Concepts into GDSS Model --- p.2-23Chapter Chapter 3. --- The GDSS DesignChapter 3.1 --- Introduction --- p.3-1Chapter 3.2 --- System Overall Objectives --- p.3-2Chapter 3.3 --- The Assumptions --- p.3-2Chapter 3.4 --- System ScopeChapter 3.4.1 --- Design Scope --- p.3-3Chapter 3.5 --- ObjectivesChapter 3.5.1 --- User's Perspective --- p.3-4Chapter 3.5.2 --- System's Perspective --- p.3-5Chapter 3.5.3 --- Decision Support Perspective --- p.3-7Chapter 3.6 --- The Conceptual Design of Our GDSS --- p.3-8Chapter 3.6.1 --- The Information Exchange Subsystem --- p.3-8Chapter 3.6.2 --- The Decision Making Subsystem --- p.3-10Chapter 3.6.3 --- The Communications Framework of The System --- p.3-12Chapter 3.7 --- The Physical Design of The SystemChapter 3.7.1 --- The Network Structure --- p.3-14Chapter 3.7.2 --- The Communications Flow --- p.3-16Chapter 3.7.3 --- The Overall System StructureChapter 3.7.3.1 --- The Setup Module Its Functions and Components --- p.3-17Chapter 3.7.3.2 --- The Monitor Module Its Functions and Logic --- p.3-19Chapter 3.7.3.3 --- The Private Module Its Functions and Logic --- p.3-22Chapter 3.7.3.4 --- The Common Module Its Functions and Logic --- p.3-24Chapter 3.7.4 --- The System Overall Control Logic --- p.3-26Chapter 3.8 --- Aids in Group Decision MakingChapter 3.8.1 --- The Nominal Group Technique --- p.3-29Chapter 3.8.2 --- Decision Tree --- p.3-30Chapter 3.8.3 --- Multi-Attribute Utility Technique (MAU) --- p.3-32Chapter 3.8.4 --- Adjusted Multi-Attribute Utility Model --- p.3-35Chapter 3.8.5 --- Compromise RulesChapter a. --- Simple Majority --- p.3-38Chapter b. --- Borda Rule --- p.3-39Chapter c. --- Weighting --- p.3-40Chapter 3.9 --- The Information-Exchange Phase --- p.3-41Chapter 3.10 --- The Decision Making PhaseChapter I --- Factors to Consider --- p.3-41Chapter II --- The Solution of FinalizingChapter Chapter 4. --- The Implementation of GDSSChapter 4.1 --- Introduction --- p.4-1Chapter 4.2 --- The Mechanism of Exchanging Information --- p.4-1Chapter 4.3 --- The Implementation of NGT --- p.4-2Chapter 4.4 --- The Forming of The Decision Structure --- p.4-3Chapter 4.5 --- The Finalizing of Node Details --- p.4-9Chapter 4.6 --- Methods in Evaluating A Final Choice --- p.4-12Chapter Chapter 5. --- A Practical ApplicationChapter 5.1 --- Introduction --- p.5-1Chapter 5.2 --- Background --- p.5-1Chapter 5.3 --- Objective --- p.5-2Chapter 5.4 --- Decision Analysis Rationale --- p.5-3Chapter 5.5 --- The Decision Tree --- p.5-4Chapter 5.6 --- Decision Making Process --- p.5-8Chapter 5.7 --- The Feedback on Use of The System --- p.5-10Chapter Chapter 6. --- ConclusionChapter 6.1 --- Introduction --- p.6-1Chapter 6.2 --- System Feedback --- p.6-2Chapter 6.3 --- The Practical Means of The System --- p.6-5Chapter 6.4 --- The Limitation of The System --- p.6-6Chapter 6.5 --- The Future Perspective of The System --- p.6-6References --- p.ref-

AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OFTHE EFFECT OF A GROUP DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM ON NORMATME INFLUENCE IN SMALL GROUPS

This research represents an attempt to determine the impact of a group decision support system (GDSS) on the ability of groups to influence the judgments of individual group members. The power of groups to influence individuals has been well documented in the social psychological literature. For organizations interested in promoting innovation and creative problem solving in group settings, this tendency can be quite troubling. In the past, researchers have looked at how certain types of GDSSs might lessen these types of group pressures in the generation of creative ideas. This research may be viewed as an extension of this work to the choice phase of decision making. In an experimental setting forty-eight subjects were combined on an individual basis with groups of confederates to test the normative influence of the groups on the choices made by the individuals. Three different communication modality configurations were employed to test the effect which this had on the influence of the group. Whereas negative group effects in the idea-generating phase may lead to good ideas not being considered, group effects in the choice stage can to lead poor decisions being adopted, perhaps with even more unfortunate results. Obviously, both of these effects represent serious threats to the effectiveness of decision-making groups; consequently, both represent areas for potential contribution of improved versions of GDSSs

The effectiveness of a facilitated group decision support system (decision conferencing): A UK/US field study.

The increasingly complex and turbulent business environments of these days frequently require greater specialised knowledge pertaining to the issues, which are usually beyond that of any individual. Therefore, group meetings are becoming more complex, more frequent, and more important. As part of the transition into this new environment together with recent advancements in computers, telecommunications and management science techniques, organisational researchers have made serious efforts to use advanced technologies to improve group meetings. An example of such attempts is the development of a Group Decision Support System (GDSS), an application of information technology to support the work of groups. One common example of GDSSs is the Decision Conferencing (DC), which combines the use of decision analytic softwares to incorporate the differing perspectives of the participants with group facilitation techniques. This thesis systematically reviews the existing case, field, and laboratory decision room type GDSS studies. It, then, explores the plausible factors for the inconsistent findings across studies. Main objective of the thesis, however, is to investigate the effectiveness of a DC in aiding group work with regard to decision processes, overall user attitudes, and decision quality, and to identify variables associated with differences in perceived effectiveness. Three theories were employed to build a conceptual framework with criteria by which to describe and evaluate the effectiveness of decision making in GDSS settings: Competing Values Approach, Stratified Systems Theory, and Human Information Processing Model. It was shown that these three approaches share common theoretical assumptions. Then, quantitative data were collected through a mailed questionnaire of participants in 22 conferences, hosted by the Decision Conferences Inc. in the U.S.A., Decision Analysis Unit at London School of Economics, and International Computers Ltd. in the U.K. Overall, a DC was perceived better than a conventional meeting for all of the evaluation criteria. The effectiveness of a DC, however, was perceived differently according to various factors: participants' levels in the executive hierarchy, differences in the culture and style of the organisation, task differences in terms of the degree of threat, group size, variety of facilitators, and careers of the participants. Of greater interest is the finding that independent of the numerous variables above, a DC was perceived highly effective in terms of user attitudes, improved decision quality, adaptable process, goal-centred process, and efficiency of decision; and relatively less effective with regard to implementation, and accountability of decision