Compensating effects of GSS on group performance

A GSS often fails to aid in providing group consensus and user satisfaction. To understand the reasons behind this lack of impact, we investigated the issue from an influence-process perspective. The independent variables manipulated were support (GSS vs. face-to-face) and task type (intellective vs. preference). The dependent variables measured were three process variables (informational influence, normative influence, and influence distribution) and three outcome variables (group consensus, decision satisfaction, and decision process satisfaction). The findings suggest that the lack of impact of GSS on decision-making groups may be due to their compensating effects. With the preference task, the use of GSS led to a more even influence distribution; this should improve group decision outcomes. But the use of GSS was also found to attenuate normative influence; this should negatively affect group decision outcomes. For an intellective task, the use of GSS resulted in an uneven distribution of influence; this should negatively affect group decision outcomes. But the use of GSS also amplified informational influence; this should enhance group decision outcomes. Collectively, such compensating effects of a GSS may explain why a lack of GSS impact on group decision outcomes has been observed in many studies.     

The influence of group decision support systems on contribution and commitment levels in multicultural and culturally homogeneous decision-making groups

Research concerning cultural diversity reports that the cultural composition of a group differentially affects group member contribution and commitment levels. In multicultural groups, the majority culture may dominate the decision-making process and ethnic minorities can be perceived to have a lower status due to their position within the social hierarchy. However, research also suggests that group decision making may be structured to promote a more equitable group process. Studies on group decision support systems (GDSS) cite improvements in group processing via the structure and anonymity that can be offered by the technology. This paper presents the results of a pilot study which compared the effects of group decision making, both with and without GDSS technology, on multicultural and homogeneous groups. Findings revealed that both multicultural and homogeneous groups had significantly higher levels of perceived contribution in the GDSS environment. However, there were no significant differences in terms of perceived contribution, commitment, or personal influence between groups in either environment. None the less, all groups achieved a higher number of brainstormed ideas in the GDSS environment. In addition, multicultural groups achieved a statistically higher number of ideas in the GDSS environment in comparison with homogenous groups in the GDSS environment.     

The effects of a group decision support system on culturally diverse and culturally homogeneous group decision making

Considerable research has been conducted over the last decade on the effects of using Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) in group decision making. Studies have examined the influence of GDSS on such variables as group task, size, quality of decision, and satisfaction with the process. However, only a few studies have focused on the use of GDSS and its interaction with group composition. This study compared the effects of group decision making, both with and without GDSS technology, on culturally diverse and homogeneous groups. Group performance was measured by the number of non-redundant, realistic ideas and the quality of solution produced in response to posed problems. The GDSS used in the study was Vision Quest. Groups using it, regardless of cultural make up, developed a significantly higher number of non-redundant, realistic ideas than groups that did not. Furthermore, among groups using the GDSS, culturally diverse groups produced a significantly higher number of non-redundant, realistic ideas than homogeneous groups that used the GDSS. Implications for diversity management and group support research are suggested.     

A comparison of synchronous and virtual legislative session groups faced with an idea generation task

An experiment was conducted with groups of about eight people in face-to-face and geographically-distributed electronic meeting environments. While similar studies have focused on the behavior of group members working together in a single room or working individually in different rooms (a nominal group), this research looks at a hybrid environment in which part of a group is working in one room and another part is working simultaneously in a different room that is linked via a local area network, both parts forming a virtual group. Experimental results showed that such groups generated significantly more unique, quality comments than did face-to-face groups, and that participants were significantly more satisfied with that type of meeting. These and other results indicate that groups may be able to meet effectively when distributed geographically.     

Analytic hierarchy process: It can work for group decision support systems

Most group problems are complex and unstructured and are difficult to find solutions, GDSS, systems for group decision making support, have more concentrated on the development of technological factor such as communication support, electronic meeting support, etc. And there have been relatively few researches about group problem modeling and group decision-aid. We cannot guarantee the value of GDSS just with the support in technological basis. The AHP has been suggested as an group problem modeling tool. In this paper authors applied AHP in real world group problems, investigated its value. and suggested the elements of GDSS software.     

Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the performance of synchronous global virtual teams

Virtual teams cut across organizational cultures, national cultures, and functional areas, thereby increasing group heterogeneity, which may result in increased conflict among team members and less effective performance of the team. Our study explored the relationships that might exist among the heterogeneity of the virtual teams, their collaborative conflict management style, and their performance outcomes. The paper reports the findings of a laboratory experiment in which homogeneous and heterogeneous virtual teams, consisting of subjects from the USA and India, worked independently on a decision task involving the adoption of a computer use fee by an online university. Team members, used a web-based group decision support system (GDSS) that allowed them the opportunity to discuss task options, critique suggestions, and vote on the result. The data analyses suggested that collaborative conflict management style positively impacted satisfaction with the decision making process, perceived decision quality, and perceived participation of the virtual teams. There was weak evidence that links a group’s heterogeneity to its collaborative conflict management styles.     

A new perspective on de-individuation via computer-mediated communication

Research examining de-individuation via computer-mediated communication (CMC) suggests that group pressure is more pronounced in CMC-using groups than in groups meeting face to face, because CMC strips away non-verbal cues and makes individuals feel more similar to the others in their group. Similarly, electronic voting research suggests that group influence is more pronounced via group support systems when the opinions of others are communicated in real time. However, recent research involving complete anonymity suggests that group influence is mitigated via anonymous CMC because of a lack of awareness of others. Thus, we propose that increased group influence is facilitated when others’ opinions are communicated, and is heightened with the common identity created through the use of nominal labels. This paper reports the results of a laboratory experiment involving groups making an organization decision via a text-based chat room. The results show that a simple electronic voting interface element increased the amount of group influence on individual members, and led to decreased participation and higher dispensability.     

群体决策支持系统中的管理和协调Agent及其应用研究

本文概要的介绍了目前网络环境下智能Agent技术在群体决策支持系统(GDSS)中的运用,并给出了一个应用于GDSS的Agent的具体实例,即在GDSS中使用管理和协调Agent来代替传统的群体协助人管理决策过程,协调各群体成员的通信交流,使GDSS更加独立化和智能化。     

基于EJB的开放式群体决策支持系统的分析与实现

群体决策支持系统结合了通信、计算机和决策技术来支持群体会议中的问题产生和解决。该文讨论了在群体研讨时,可以根据不同的情况来选择研讨的工具和环境的群决策系统。系统使用EJB技术来开发开放式群决策系统。主要集中在整个过程中程序复用问题的解决上。     

A Korean group decision support system

A Group Decision Support System (GDSS) can be used to improve communication in many languages. Heretofore, the vast majority of research with these systems has been conducted on American groups using English. Here, we demonstrate how groups of Korean students used a GDSS developed at the University of Mississippi to exchange comments in Korean and English anonymously and simultaneously. The study found no significant differences between the English and Korean systems in terms of self-assessed ratings of evaluation apprehension, production blocking, and process satisfaction. Participants rated both systems favourably, supporting our hypothesis that Korean groups can benefit from the use of a GDSS.     

A view of group decision making process and bivoting approach

Many characteristics of Group Decision Making (GDM) are different from those of individual decision. The literature dealing with the stages of GDM is rather scant. This paper presents a view about the stages of group decision processes, characterizing GDM as a dynamic process. We discuss particularly the aggregation stage of preferences and reports a bivoting approach' used in practising group decision support systems (GDSS). Finally, a concrete example is given to illustrate each stage of group decision process and tile 'bivoting approach' in consensus reaching stage.     

A comparison of computer conferences with face-to-face meetings for small group business decisions

This study reports on the evaluation of four meeting techniques for decision-making by small groups. Two face-to-face and two computer conferencing techniques were evaluated by small groups solving business cases. Particular groups varied widely in their satisfaction with different meeting techniques, but there was no significant difference in the quality of the group decisions.     

GDSS中判断矩阵的两种集结方法

群体决策支持系统（GDSS）将通信技术、计算机技术和决策理论结合在一起,促进具有不同知识结构、不同经验、共同责任的群体在决策过程中对半结构化和非结构化问题进行求争。由于GDSS的理论研究尚不成熟,因而GDSS不能很好地解决定性决策问题。在GDSS中引入群体层次分析法（AHP）不仅能提高GDSS的定性决策能力,而且能促进对GDSS中决策思维方式的研究。文中定义了具有实际意义的矩阵“加法”、“乘法”“指数”运算,指出这些运算的性质;给出了判断矩阵“加法”凸组合及Hadamard“乘法”凸组合的概念,并证明了在群体AHP中判断矩阵的“加法”凸组合及Hadamard“乘法”凸组合不仅能消除主观因素的影响,而且还能保持和改善判断矩阵的一致性。从而得到了GDSS中判断矩阵的两种有效的集结方法。     

Using different communication media in requirements negotiation

Contrary to traditional wisdom, the authors found that, when it comes to requirements negotiations, groups meeting face-to-face perform no better than those using video conferencing and computer support. Furthermore, their study identified a particular distributed group configuration that significantly improved performance and was more conducive to negotiations than face-to-face meetings     

When online meets offline: A field investigation of modality switching

In order to explore the differing theoretical predictions of the cues-filtered-out perspective, SIDE model, and hyperpersonal model for online-to-offline relationships outside of the laboratory, a longitudinal survey study was conducted. Participants from a large online message board community who met up with an online acquaintance face-to-face completed surveys regarding their relationship with that individual before and after meeting their acquaintance face to face. Results indicated that the amount of communication with the online acquaintance was related to greater relation development whereas connection to the group was only related to greater individual closeness not satisfaction or predicted outcome value. In general the face-to-face meeting resulted in improved closeness, satisfaction, and predicted outcome value. An exploration for curvilinear effects as predicted by the hyperpersonal model revealed that predicted outcome value at time 1 had a curvilinear effect on closeness at time 2.     

Group decision support systems

Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) has been a rapidly emerging field of the 1980's. Whereas conventional Decision Support Systems (DSS) help individual decision makers, GDSS are designed to help groups of senior management and professional groups reach concensus. The paper focuses on one type of GDSS, a decision room in which computers and communications are used by participants during their deliberations. The paper introduces the concepts of private work, public screen, and chauffeur. It then discusses how software and hardware are used in current GDSS. Practical experience has mostly been in laboratory setting. The paper describes existing facilities and reports on the experimental evidence thus far. Special attention is given to the potentials of using gaming and the opportunity for research replication. Although it is not yet possible to prove that GDSS will be viable in the long-term, some potential directions of change can be anticipated if GDSS proves successful.     

A model of group satisfaction in computer-mediated communication and face-to-face meetings

This study attempts to present a model of member satisfaction with group decision process. Three variables: ease of use (EOU) of the communication medium; participation; and decision confidence (DC), were explored as determinants of member satisfaction. The study offers an explanation of the effects of these variables on group process satisfaction in two communication media: a nearly synchronous text-based computermediated communication (CMC) and traditional face-to-face communication (FTF). Results indicate that these variables were good predictors of member satisfaction. Regression and correlation analyses help to validate the model for the two communication media using the ordering of the predictor variables and the strength of the relationship. Results confirm that ease of use showed the most contribution to satisfaction and that ease of use is lower in CMC than in FTF. The findings also confirm the effect of communication medium on member satisfaction.     

Group judgment processes and outcomes in video-conferencing versus face-to-face groups

Two hundred and eighty-two participants formed 94 groups of size three and completed an estimation task by interacting either face-to-face or via a video-conferencing system. Results showed significant differences across conditions with regard to the confidence attached by groups to their decisions, the degree to which groups were able to improve upon the best individually arrived at decision, and the self-reported enjoyment of group members. Compared to face-to-face groups, video-conferencing groups showed lower levels of confidence in their decisions, especially if they were instructed to discuss their beliefs and assumptions underlying their estimates and not the estimates themselves. However, this lower level of confidence was more appropriate than that of the face-to-face groups. Groups interacting face-to-face were more likely to improve upon the best individual solution, and, on average, improved to a greater degree. Further, video-conferencing groups reported modifying more of their beliefs during discussion. However, there were no significant differences between the two interaction media on the following outcome dimensions: accuracy; overconfidence; commitment to the group decision; size of credible intervals; improvement over average initial individual estimates; and the number of beliefs discussed or learned. Implications for the design and application of advanced systems for decision-making support and research are discussed.     

Unusual business or business as usual: An investigation of meeting support requirements in multilateral diplomacy

The concept of supporting meetings at the same time and at the same place with computers raises the problem of how salient features of group behaviors are understood in meetings. In this paper we critically examine some aspects of meeting behaviors. We point out that the idea of small, cohesive business teams is not necessarily a valid starting point in thinking of all meeting support. In particular, beliefs that relate to user aspects, group features such as composition, structure and protocols, and task characteristics such as nature, importance, and goals in meetings may need deliberation in many group decision support systems (GDSS) interventions. To demonstrate the credibility of our analysis we investigate meeting behaviors typical in multilateral diplomacy and show that few, if any, of the widely held beliefs of meeting behaviors are valid in this context. Moreover, such behaviors are not uncommon or peculiar only to diplomatic arenas. Similar behaviors can be identified in any meeting environment where participants do not share the same social worlds, have conflicting values and interests, do not follow the same social habits and meeting protocols, act through a “representative” mandate, are changeable, and do not agree on issues at stake in the meeting process. Our analysis points out, however, that developing meeting support for such ‘fuzzy’ environments is not needless or unrealistic. The support functionality of a fuzzy GDSS must be simple and focus on central aspects of the meeting process (issues) which in our case revolves around text management and display. Moreover, sufficient attention must be paid to the physical meeting environment that must reflect the social structures and protocols.     

Recruitment and selection processes through an effective GDSS

This study proposes a group decision support system (GDSS), with multiple criteria to assist in recruitment and selection (R&S) processes of human resources. A two-phase decision-making procedure is first suggested; various techniques involving multiple criteria and group participation are then defined corresponding to each step in the procedure. A wide scope of personnel characteristics is evaluated, and the concept of consensus is enhanced. The procedure recommended herein is expected to be more effective than traditional approaches. In addition, the procedure is implemented on a network-based PC system with web interfaces to support the R&S activities. In the final stage, key personnel at a human resources department of a chemical company in southern Taiwan authenticated the feasibility of the illustrated example.