GDSS – Group Decision Support Systems

Definitions/Lingo

• Decision Support Systems (DSS) are interactive computer-based systems intended to help decision makers utilize data to identify and solve problems and make decisions.

– Ie:

• checklists/heuristics

• mathematical models

Group Decision Support Systems

• a DSS whose design, structure, and usage reflect the way in which people cooperate to make a particular decision or type of decision

• an interactive, computer-based system which facilitates the solution of unstructured problems by a set of decision makers working together as a group

• consisting of a set of software, hardware, language components, and procedures that support a group of people engaged in a decision-related meeting

What is a Group ?

• refers to two or more (usually up to about twenty-five) individuals whose mission is to perform some task and who act as one unit

• can be permanent or temporary

• in one location or in several locations

• can meet concurrently or at different time

Benefits of Groups

• better than individuals at understanding problems

• people are accountable for decisions that they participate in

• better at catching errors

• has more information (knowledge) than any one member

– more alternatives ==> better solutions

Benefits of Groups

• synergy may be produced

• working in group may stimulate the participants and the process (cross-fertilization)

• committed to the implementation

Group:

• Collection of individuals in which behavior and/or performance of one member is influenced by behavior and/or performance of other members. (Gibson, 1991)

Problems with Groups

• “groupthink” -- social pressures to conform

– people begin to think alike and new ideas are not tolerated

• time-consuming, slow process

• problems in coordination/poor planning

• group dynamics – free-riders

– fear to speak

– domination

Problems with Groups

• compromised solutions of poor quality

• nonproductive time

– socializing

– getting ready

– waiting for people

• tendency to repeat what already was said

• cost (time, money, energy)

Problems with Groups

• make riskier decisions than they should/more

extreme (one way or the other)

• incomplete or inappropriate use of

information

• inappropriate representation in the group

• size

New work arrangements

Virtual offices

–Telework / Telecommuting

–Hotdesking / Hoteling

–Home workers

–Mobile work

Virtual groups

–Virtual fixed teams

–Virtual mobile teams

–Virtual communities

Developments in work settings

• Many modern organisations are “networking organisations”. – Many problems/tasks require people with different skills and experiences

– Workforces are more distributed, and organizations are becoming more “virtual”

– Much work is done in groups

– Groups often work inefficient

• Dispersed cooperation is possible, but to make such teams effective, knowledge is needed about: – the functioning of groups in general,

– virtual groups, and

– the possibilities of ICT support

Virtual teams

So: Virtual teams have advantages But: Virtual teams have also problems:

– Interpersonal communication is more difficult : No non-verbal signals; no unplanned encounters; no context awareness

– And therefore : Difficulty in all kinds of group processes: collaboration, coordination, developing trust, exchanging knowledge

– ICT tools have to match with the type of group and its task; And they have to be supportive for the group processes

Global virtual teams

GVT’s have even more problems:

• Time zone differences

• Language differences \ Cultural differences

Research suggests:

In individualistic cultures (EU, USA) people prefer direct expression of opinions; In virtual groups they prefer synchronous communication, through telephone, video and chat.

In collectivist cultures (Asia, Africa) people are sensitive to non-verbal signals and group relations. In virtual groups people prefer asynchronous communication, to be able to express themselves more carefully: e-mail

Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)

• Group Support Systems (GSS)

• Electronic Meeting Systems

• Collaborative Computing

• Evolved as information technology researchers recognized that technology could be developed for supporting meeting activities

– Idea generation

– Consensus building

– Anonymous ranking

– Voting, etc.

Definitions/Lingo

• Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) - An interactive, computer-based system that facilitates solution of unstructured problems by a set of decision-makers working together as a group. It aids groups, especially groups of managers, in analyzing problem situations and in performing group decision making tasks.

• Group Support Systems has come to mean computer software and hardware used to support group functions and processes.

Definitions/Lingo

• CSCW is an acronym for Computer Supported Cooperative Work. It is the scientific discipline that motivates and validates groupware design. CSCW is technology independent which means technology is not the major driving force behind the discipline. Instead, CSCW is socially dependent. It looks at the way people interact and collaborate with each other, and attempts to develop guidelines for developing technology to assist in the communication process.

• Groupware is the hardware and software which supports and augments group work. Groupware applications are not meant to replace people in an interactive situation.

Decision Making

in Groups Some fundamentals of group decision

making

1. Groups

2. The Nature of Group Decision Making

a) Meetings are a joint activity

b) The outcome of the meeting depends on its

participants.

c) The outcome of the meeting depends on the

composition of the groups

d) The outcome of the meeting depends on the

decision-making process

e) Differences in opinion are settled either by the

leader or negotiation or arbitration

Potential Benefits of Working in a Group

Groups are better than individuals at understanding problems.

People are accountable for decisions in which they participate.

Groups are better than individuals at catching errors.

A group has more information (knowledge) than any one member. Groups

can combine that knowledge and create new knowledge. As a result, there

are more alternatives for problem solving, and better solutions can be

derived.

Synergy during problem solving may be produced.

Working in a group may stimulate the participants and the process.

Group members will have their egos embedded in the decision, so they will

be committed to the solution.

Risk propensity is balanced. Groups moderate high-risk takers and

encourage conservatives.

Potential Dysfunctions of Group Process (Process Losses)

Social pressures of conformity that may result in "groupthink" (where

people begin to think alike, and where new ideas are not tolerated)

Time-consuming, slow process (only one group member can speak at a

time)

Lack of coordination of the work done by the group and poor planning of

meetings

Inappropriate influence (e.g., domination of time, topic, or opinion by one

or few individuals; fear of speaking)

Tendency of group members to rely on others to do most of the work

Tendency toward compromised solutions of poor quality

Incomplete task analysis

Nonproductive time (socializing, getting ready, waiting for people)

Tendency to repeat what already was said

Large cost of making decisions (many hours of participation, travel

expenses, etc.)

Tendency of groups to make riskier decisions than they should

Incomplete or inappropriate use of information

Inappropriate representation in the group

Similarities Between GDSS and DSS

• Both use models, data and user-friendly software

• Both are interactive with “what-if” capabilities

• Both use internal and external data

• Both allow the decision maker to take an active role

• Both have flexible systems

• Both have graphical output

Why Use GDSS? • High level managers can spend 80% of their time

making decisions in groups. Applied correctly, GDSS can reduce this time, arriving at a better decision faster.

• GDSS provides the hardware, software, databases and procedures for effective decision making.

Quality Team Roles and Responsibilities

Decision Support Needs

Members:

Identify problems

Generate and evaluate ideas

Develop and implement

solutions

Access to group problem-

solving techniques

Methods for encouraging

open participation by all

members

Leader:

Plans meetings

Coordinates team activities

Monitors and reports team

progress

Efficient use of team

meeting time (for example,

agenda management)

Documentation of team

decision-making processes

and outputs

Facilitator:

Promotes use of problem-

solving techniques

Encourages consensus

building

Serves as a liaison between

team and quality steering

committee

The Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

(Delbec and Van de Ven)

• NGT Sequence of activities

1. Silent generation of ideas in writing

2. Round-robin listing of ideas on a chart

3. Serial discussion of ideas

4. Silent listing and ranking of priorities

5. Discussion of priorities

6. Silent re-ranking and rating of priorities

• Procedure is superior to conventional discussion groups in terms of generating higher quality, greater quantity, and improved distribution of information on fact-finding tasks

• NGT success depends on

– Facilitator quality

– Participants’ Training

• NGT does not solve several process losses

– Fearing to speak

– Poor planning

– Poor meeting organization

– Compromises

– Lack of appropriate analysis

The Delphi Method

• (RAND Corporation)

• Goal - To eliminate undesirable effects of interaction among group members

• Experts do not meet face-to-face

Delphi Method Steps

1. Each expert provide an individually written assignment or opinion

2. Delphi coordinator edits, clarifies and summarizes the raw data

3. Provide anonymous feedback to all experts

4. Second round of issues or questions

5. Etc. Get more specific in each iteration, leading to consensus or deadlock

Delphi Method Benefits

• Anonymity

• Multiple Opinions

• Group Communication

• Plus, Avoids

– Dominant Behavior

– Groupthink

– Stubbornness

Delphi Method Limitations

• Slow

• Expensive

• Usually limited to one issue at a time

Time/Place Framework

• Time

– synchronous

– asynchronous

• Place

– same place

– different place

Time/Place Framework

• Same Time/Same Place

– decision room

• Same Time/Different Place

– telephone conferencing, video conferencing

• Different Time/Same Place

– project/team rooms, shared offices

• Different Time/Different Place

– email, workflow management systems

Important Characteristics of a GDSS

• Specially Designed IS

• Goal of Supporting Groups of Decision Makers

• Easy to Learn and Use

• May be designed for one type of problem or for many organizational decisions

• Designed to encourage group activities

• Attempts to minimize process losses

Characteristics of GDSS

• Special Design

• Ease of use

• Specific and general support

• Suppressing negative group behavior

• Supporting positive group behavior

Typical GDSS Meeting Characteristics

• Organizational commitment/support

• Trained facilitators or may be user driven

• User training

• Anonymity

• Appropriate tasks

• Dedicated decision rooms

GDSS Time/Place Environment

Same-Time

Same-Place (Most widely used GDSS-

computers with projectors, voting

tools)

Same-Time

Different-Place (team room, tools, audio

conferencing, screen sharing, chat)

Different-Time

Same-Place (audio/video conferencing,

document sharing)

Different-Time

Different-Place (voice mail, email, bulletin boards)

Advantages of GDSS • Anonymity – drive out fear leading to better decisions

from a diverse hierarchy of decision makers

• Parallel Communication – eliminate monopolizing providing increased participation, better decisions

• Automated record keeping – no need to take notes, they’re automatically recorded

• Ability for virtual meetings – only need hardware, software and people connected

• Portability - Can be set up to be portable… laptop

• Global Potential - People can be connected across the world

• No need for a computer guru – although some basic experience is a must

Disadvantages of GDSS • Cost –infrastructure costs to provide the hardware and

software/room/network connectivity can be very expensive

• Security – especially true when companies rent the facilities for GDSS; also, the facilitator may be a lower-level employee who may leak information to peers

• Technical Failure – power loss, loss of connectivity, relies heavily on bandwidth and LAN/WAN infrastructure – properly setup system should minimize this risk

• Keyboarding Skills – reduced participation may result due to frustration

• Training – learning curve is present for users, varies by situation

• Perception of messages – lack of verbal communication could lead to misinterpretation

Typical GDSS Process 1) Group Leader (and Facilitator?) select software, develop

agenda

2) Participants meet (in decision room/Internet) and are given a task.

3) Participants generate ideas – brainstorm anonymously

4) Facilitator organize ideas into categories (different for user-driven software)

5) Discussion and prioritization – may involve ranking by some criteria and/or rating to the facilitators scale

6) Repeat Steps 3, 4, 5 as necessary

7) Reach decision

8) Recommend providing feedback on decision and results to all involved

GDSS: Part of GSS or

Electronic Meeting Systems

(EMS)

“An information technology (IT)-based environment that

supports group meetings, which may be distributed

geographically and temporally. The IT environment

includes, but is not limited to, distributed facilities,

computer hardware and software, audio and video

technology, procedures, methodologies, facilitation,

and applicable group data. Group tasks include, but are

not limited to, communication, planning, idea

generation, problem solving, issue discussion,

negotiation, conflict resolution, system analysis and

design, and collaborative group activities such as

document preparation and sharing (p. 593, Dennis et al.,

1988).

GDSS Settings

• Single Location

• Multiple Locations

• Common Group Activities

– Information Retrieval

– Information Sharing

– Information Use

Three Levels of GDSS Support

• Based on DeSanctis and Gallupe

– Level 1: Process Support

– Level 2: Decision-making Support

– Level 3: Rules of order

Level 1: Process Support

• support the basic communication process between participants – electronic messaging

– network linking the PCs

– public screen

– anonymous input of votes and ideas

– solicitation of ideas or votes

– summary and display of ideas and opinions

– format for an agenda

Level 2: Decision-Making Support

• decision modeling and group decision techniques aimed at reducing uncertainty and ‘noise’ that occur in the group decision process

• adds capabilities for modeling and decision analysis – planning and financial models

– decision trees

– probability assessment models

– resource allocation models

Level 3: Rules of Order

• characterized by machine-induced group communication patterns

• control the pattern, timing, or content of information exchange

• special software containing rules of order is added

– rules determining the sequence of speaking, the appropriate response, or voting rules

GDSS Technology

• GDSS Technology Options

1. Special-purpose electronic meeting facility

(decision room)

2. General purpose computer lab

3. Web (Internet) / Intranet or LAN-based

software for any place / any time

• Components

– Hardware

– Software

– People

– Procedures

GDSS Hardware

1. Single PC

2. PCs and Keypads

3. Decision Room

4. Distributed GDSS

GDSS Software

• Modules to support the individual, the

group, the process and specific tasks

• Typical Group Features

– Numerical / graphical summarization of ideas,

and votes

– Programs calculating weights for alternatives;

anonymous idea recording; selection of a

group leader; progressive rounds of voting; or

elimination of redundant input

– Text and data transmission among the group

members, between the group members and the

facilitator, and between the members and a

central data / document repository.

People

• Group Members

• Facilitator (Chauffeur)

• Procedures (that enable ease of

operation and effective use of the

technology)

The Decision

(Electronic Meeting) Room

• 12 to 30 networked personal computers

• Usually recessed

• Server PC

• Large-screen projection system

• Breakout rooms

• Need a Trained Facilitator for Success

Cool Rooms

Source: Ventana Corp., Tuscon, AZ, http://www.ventana.com

US Air Force

Cool Rooms

IBM Corp.

Source: Ventana Corp., Tuscon, AZ, http://www.ventana.com

Cool Rooms

Murraysville School District Bus

Source: Ventana Corp., Tuscon, AZ, http://www.ventana.com

Why Few Organizations

Use Decision Rooms

– High Cost

– Need for a Trained Facilitator

– Software Support for Conflict Issues,

NOT Cooperative Tasks

– Infrequent Use

– Different Place / Different Time Needs

– May Need More Than One

GDSS Software

• Comprehensive GDSS Software

– .GroupSystems for Windows (Ventana Corp.)

– .VisionQuest (Collaborative Technologies

Corp.)

– .TeamFocus (IBM Corp.)

– .SAMM (University of Minnesota)

– .Lotus Domino / Notes (Lotus Development

Corp.)

– .Netscape Communicator (Netscape

Communications Corp.)

• Emerging Web-Based GDSS

– .TCBWorks (The University of Georgia)

– (http://tcbworks.cba.uga.edu:8080)

Advanced Tools 1. Alternative Analysis

2. Survey

3. Activity Modeler

Other Resources

• People

• Whiteboard

• Handouts

• Opinion Meter

Individual Resources

• Briefcase (Commonly Used

Applications)

• Personal Log

• Event Monitor

Internet-Based GDSS

• Many new GDSS are Web-based

– e.g., TCBWorks (October 10, 1995)

• Sample of Web-based GDSS

– TCBWorks

– Lotus Domino/Notes

– Netscape Communicator

– BrainWeb

– InterAction: A Web-based Collaboration Tool

• End of 1996, over 75 Web-based

groupware systems

– See Groupware Central

• More developments on Web-based GDSS

coming

(More) Complete List of Web-based GDSS Software

A representative sample of Web-based GDSS software is on the Book Web page

(http://www.prenhall.com/) They include:

TCBWorks: Webware for Teams (from Alan Dennis at The University of

Georgia, Athens, GA; http://tcbworks.cba.uga.edu:8080)

Lotus Domino/Notes (from Lotus Development Corp., Cambridge, MA;

http://www.lotus.com)

Netscape Communicator (from Netscape Communications Corp.,

Mountain View, CA; http://www.netscape.com/)

CONSENSUS @nyWARE (from Group Decision Support Systems, Inc.,

Washington, DC; http://www.softbicycle.com/)

Beacon Interactive Systems (from Beacon Interactive Systems,

Cambridge, MA; http://www.beaconis.com/)

Webthing (from Nick Kew; http://potox.com/~webthing)

Sound IDEAS (from New Star Technologies, Inc., Chesterfield, MO;

http://www.newstartech.com)

BrainWeb (from the faculty of Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and

Management at Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands;

http://www.sepa.tudelft.nl/~gdr/brainweb/bw0.html)

Electronic Meeting Space: College Town (a virtual meeting space from the

Association for Computing Machinery: ACM)

BSCW: Basic Support for Cooperative Work on the World-Wide-Web

(from the Institute for Applied Information Technology, German

National Research Centre for Information Technology,

Richard.Bentley@gmd.de).

InterAction: A Web-based Collaboration Tool (from J. Valacich and L.

Jessup, University of Indiana; http://www.indiana.edu/~iudis/).

Format of a GDSS Meeting

• Idea Generation/Electronic Brainstorming – what are the problems with MSU parking ?

• Idea Organization – organized the ideas into a list of key issues

• Voting/Ranking – which are most important ?

• Idea Generation – who can do the tasks ?

The GDSS

Meeting Process

1. Group leader meets with facilitator to

– Plan the meeting

– Select the software tools

– Develop an agenda

2. Participants are gathered in the decision room and the

leader poses a question or problem to the group.

3. Participants type their ideas or comments

4. Facilitator searches for common themes, topics, and

ideas and organizes them into rough categories (key

ideas)

5. Leader starts a discussion and participants prioritize

the ideas

6. Top 5 to 10 topics are routed to idea generation software,

after discussion

7. Repeat the process

The Goal of GDSS and Its Technology Levels

• Goal - to improve the productivity and effectiveness of decision-making meetings, either

– by speeding up the decision-making process or

– by improving the quality of the resulting decisions

– by removing the problems of group

Benefits of GDSS

• supports parallel generation of ideas

• supports larger groups

• rapid and easy access to external information

• parallel computer discussion

• anonymous input

• automatic documentation of the group meetings

Examples of GDSS taken directly from http://cicero.com

1) “One example of implementation of GDSS is at IBM. They, as well as many other corporations, initiated GDSS to

improve group meetings. A specific case involved a plant manager not being able to identify the cause of problems

with shop floor control. After having a meeting for two hours with plant personnel all that resulted were arguments and

bad feelings.

So after meeting with the company's GDSS facilitator, the manager decided to have ten plant employees, himself, and

two junior analysts participate in a GDSS program. They would use electronic brainstorming and voting to resolve the

shop floor control problem.

The manager and the facilitator decided the topic would be "What are the key issues in improving shop floor control?"

After brainstorming for 35 minutes and compiling 645 lines of suggestions, ideas and comments on how to improve

shop floor control, the manager found that he had gotten useful information about the issue for the first time.

A list was compiled of the comments and then the members of the group ranked them in order of importance. The

results were displayed and a discussion occurred for ten minutes. The manager thanked the participants and was given

a printout of all the discussion and results of the group vote (Aiken 3).”

2) “Another example is Hewlett-Packard. Their human-factors engineers work at locations all over the world. And they

meet in person only once a year. The rest of the time, they have frequent, ongoing meetings to discuss professional and

company issues. But they have these discussions through an electronic conference and final decision making is done

with the aid of GDSS (Sproull 121).”

Constructing a GDSS and the

Determinants of Its Success

• Constructing a GDSS

1. Construct (or Rent) a Decision Room

2. Acquire Software

3. Develop Procedures

4. Train a Facilitator

5. Put It All Together

• Can

– Use Someone Else's Facility

– Rent One

– Use a Dual Purpose Computer Lab

Determinants of GDSS

Success for a Decision

Room Setting

• Same Time/Same Place Meetings

• Trained Facilitator

• Support

• Participants’ Training

More on Critical Success

Factors for GDSS

1. Design

a) Enhance the structuredness of

unstructured decisions

b) Anonymity

c) Organizational involvement

d) Ergonomic considerations

2. Implementation

a) Extensive and proper user training

b) Support of top management

c) Qualified facilitator.

d) Execute trial runs

3. Management

a) Reliable system

b) Incrementally improve system

c) GDSS staff keeps up with technology

User involvement and participants’

behavior are also important factors

Building Decision Rooms Using Off-the-

Shelf Software

GDSS Research Challenges

• Differences in effectiveness between

field studies and lab experiments

• Multi-methodological research

programs to understand key GDSS

issues

• Understand the effects that these

differences have on the process and

outcomes of group meetings

• Use this understanding to interpret

and apply the conclusions of

experiments to organizations’ GDSS

use

Research Models

1. GDSS Variables

2. GDSS Research Topics

Research Issues in GDSS

I. GDSS DESIGN

Human factors design (e.g., spatial arrangement, public screens,

informal communications channels)

Database design

User interface design

Interface with DSS

Design methodologies

II. APPROPRIATENESS OF GDSS

When should a GDSS be used and when should it not be used?

When is a GDSS preferred to a DSS?

Selecting the right GDSS design

III. GDSS SUCCESS FACTORS

Measures of success (e.g., reduction in group conflict, degree of

consensus, group norms)

Effects of hardware, software, user motivation, and top management

support on GDSS's success

IV. IMPACT OF GDSS

Communication patterns

Confidence in decision

Costs

Level of consensus

User satisfaction

V. MANAGING THE GDSS

Responsibility for GDSS in organization

Planning requirements for GDSS

Training, maintenance, and other support needed

Source: Based on G. DeSanctis and R. B. Gallupe, "Information System

Support for Group Decision Making," Unnumbered working paper,

Department of Management Science, University of Minnesota (undated).

Additional Topics

(Dickson [1991])

1. Tradeoffs of advanced features versus simplicity

2. Interface studies

3. Supporting groups with difficulties

4. Research on anytime/anyplace configurations

5. GDSS benefit identification

6. Level of support required

7. Embedded knowledge bases (Intelligent GDSS)

8. Training issues

9. Individuals’ characteristics

Research Direction

Categories

1. What groups do

2. Effects of GDSS on group work

3. Effects of GDSS on organizations

4. Effects of hardware on GDSS

performance

5. Effects of software on GDSS

performance

6. Cultural effects of GDSS

7. Training people to use GDSS

8. Cost-benefit analysis for GDSS

9. Critical success factors for implementation

in industry

10. Robustness of research results

11. Innovative uses of GDSS

12. Theoretical foundations of GDSS

13. Barriers to research

14. Research methodologies

15. Anytime / anyplace meetings

16. Other ideas and research topics.

Six Major GSS Scenarios

for Research

1. Anytime / Anyplace

2. Orchestrated Workflow

3. Virtual Team Rooms

4. Culture Bridging

5. Just-In-Time Learning

6. Window to Anywhere

Research Sampler

• Er and Ng [1995]: Value of anonymity,

group dynamics, organizational settings,

social contexts and behavioral aspects

• Valacich and Schwenk [1995]: Value of a

devil’s advocacy (a cognitive conflict

technique) enhanced decision making

performance

• Bryson et al. [1994]: Value of special voting

approaches

• Anson et al.[1995]: Human facilitation

impacts

• Miranda and Bostrom [1997]: Impacts of process and

content meeting facilitation across traditional and GDSS

environments on meeting processes and outcomes

• Lim et al. [1994]: Effect of lack of leadership in a GDSS

meeting

• Yellen et al. [1995]: Impact of individuals’ characteristics on

GDSS outcome

• Dennis et al. [1996]: Effects of time and task decomposition

on electronic brainstorming to produce more and more

creative ideas

• Dennis et al. [1997]: Effects of multiple dialogues versus

single dialogues for electronic brainstorming to reduce

cognitive inertia

• Chidambaram [1996]: Individuals using GDSS technology

over time tend to feel more cohesive as a group than

groups not

– Groups whose members are dispersed and possibly

communicate in different times

– Intranets, the Internet and Web-based GDSS

Best Uses Of GDSS

• Complex decision making

• For Large Groups – a meeting of 2 or 3 people does not justify GDSS investment

Academia Research In GDSS

• 1998 - GDSS and incentive structure (1)

– Group-based incentives resulted in more participation than individual-based incentives

– Group based incentives found to result in superior performance in GDSS-supported decision-making groups

Academia Research In GDSS

• 1998 - Examining the conflicting results of GDSS research (2) – Organizations in the global business environment are much

more interested in groupware systems that include group activities not necessarily in the same place or at the same time.

– It is becoming more important to coordinate conflicts and collaborate in work with others in the distributed environment… amplifying the need for GDSS in geographically separated group.

– Unlike facilitator-driven GDSS, user-driven GDSS users show less satisfaction with the initial use of the system.

– Regardless of the different technical design configurations, softwares and tasks, GDSS was consistently shown to have a positive effect on the decision making process.

Academia Research In GDSS • 1996 - The effects of a group decision support

system on culturally diverse and culturally homogeneous group decision making (3) – GDSS may offer a conducive environment for improving group

decision making in both culturally homogeneous and diverse groups. Groups that used GDSS produced significantly higher number of non-redundant, realistic ideas than groups that did not use a GDSS.

– Culturally diverse groups significantly outperformed homogeneous groups on number of ideas generated.

– This study suggests that there is reason to believe that, if carefully managed, the benefits of a culturally diverse workforce can heavily outweigh the disadvantages.

Paradigm Shift?

• Early computers were used primarily for computations such as plotting the paths of missiles. As businesses began to adopt computer technology, the use of computers shifted to more for data storage and retrieval rather computational. Recently, computers have been extensively used for communication. For example Email and the advent of the internet has created exponential growth in the use of the computer in the last part of the decade. We seem to be in the primary stages of a paradigm shift, where the background of culture and tradition which guides the way people use computers is changing.

Future Implications of GDSS

• Integrating into existing corporate framework

– GDSS brings changes which must be managed

• GDSS will incorporate Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems – the software will “learn” and help the users make better decisions

• Decreasing cost will allow more organizations to use GDSS

• Increasing implementation of GDSS with the customer

– Customer voice their needs in non-threatening environment

Future Implications of GDSS

• GDSS may play a large role in the future of the virtual companies

• GDSS can help the virtual companies do business in the global business environment

• GDSS can help promote a culturally diverse work environment

• Telework seems to make a lot of sense using GDSS

Choosing The Right GDSS

• Consider the following;

– Decision Task Type

– Group Size

– Location of members of the group

Available Software

• TeamWave Software - Workplace Screen Shots – Cool Demo

• Group Systems offers a collection of software tools to support group activities such as brainstorming, information gathering, idea organization, voting, preference aggregation, and consensus building. In addition to these tools, there are supplementary resources which aid the project teams in the course of the GDSS session. Two of these resources are 1) Opinion Meter, which helps you gauge group opinion on an informal basis; and 2) Handouts, which allow the group leader to post files on other relevant information to support the team.

Summary

• Many benefits to work groups, but many process losses

• Delphi method and the Nominal Group Technique (NGT)

• Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS), Group Support

Systems (GSS), electronic meeting systems (EMS),

computer-supported cooperative work, collaborative

computing, groupware, etc. - various computer support

for groups

• GDSS attempts to reduce process losses and increase

process gains

• GDSS over the Internet and Intranets, anytime/anyplace

• Group DSS over a LAN in a decision room environment

• Idea generation, idea organization,

stakeholder identification, topic

commentator, voting, policy formulation,

enterprise analysis and negotiation

support system

• NSS can aid in resolving conflicts in groups

• GDSS can fail

• GDSS research is very diverse

• Web-based group-ware for

anytime/anyplace collaboration

• The Internet and Intranets - major role in distributed GDSS

What is Groupware?

A Software specifically designed

• To support group working

• With cooperative requirement in mind

Groupware is not

• Just tools for communication

• Synonymous with CSCW (Computer-Supported Cooperative Work)

What is “Groupware?”

• Tools (hardware, software, processes) that support person-to-person collaboration

• This can include e-mail, bulletin boards, conferencing systems, decision support systems, video and workflow systems, etc…

• Some common groupware acronyms: – Group Support Systems (GSS)

– Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)

– Electronic Meeting Systems (EMS)

– Bulletin Board Systems (BBS)

– Group Collaboration Systems (GCS)

– Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) systems

Groupware system

Classification of Groupware

Groupware can be classified by

• when and where the participants are working

• the function it performs for cooperative work

The Time/Space Matrix

Classify groupware by:

• when the participants are working – at the same time or not

• where the participants are working – at the same place or not

Common names for axes:

• time: synchronous/asynchronous

• place: co-located/remote

The Time/Space Matrix

Co-located

Remote

Synchronous

Face to face communication

Telephone

Asynchronous

Post-it Notes

Letter

The Time/Space Matrix

Co-located

Remote

Synchronous

Meeting rooms Video Conference,

Video-wall etc

Asynchronous

Argumentation tools

Email & Electronic conference

Shared work surfaces, editors etc

Co-authoring systems & calendars

Three types of interaction

All collaboration technology always implies: • 1. Human - computer interaction

• 2. Human - database interaction: (information seeking)

• Internets

• Intra-net

• Group networks

• 3. Mediated interpersonal interaction (communication)

A Simple Classification of Groupware (adapted from Johansen, 1991)

Time

Location

Same Different

Same

Different

GDSS;

Support for

FtF Meetings,

Email,

Bulletin board,

Comp. Conf

Teleconferencing,

Instant Msg

Chat, Whiteboard,

Video

Email,

Bulletin board,

Comp. Conf

Web based CS

Classification by Function

P P

Understanding

Dir. Communication

A

Control & Feedback

What interactions does a tool support?

• Computer-mediated communication:

Direct communication between participants

• Meeting & decision support systems:

Common understanding

• Shared application & artifacts:

Control & feedback with shared work objects

Classification by Function

Disproportionate effort

• Who puts in the effort is not who gets the benefit

• Example: Shared diary: – Effort: secretaries & subordinates, enter data

– Benefit: for managers, easy to arrange meetings

– Results: falls into disuse

• Solution: – Coerce use !

– Design in symmetry

Free rider problem

Even if no bias still problem – Possible to get benefit without doing work

– If everyone does it, system falls into disuse

• Example: – Electronic conferences: can read but never

contribute

• Solutions: – Strict protocols (e.g. round robin)

– Increase visibility – rely on social pressure

Critical mass

• Early telephone system: – Few subscribers – none to ring

– Lots of subscribers – never stops ringing !

• Electronics communications similar: – Benefit proportional to number of subscribers

– Early users have negative cost/benefits

– Need critical mass to give net benefits

• How to get started? – Look for cliques to form core user base

– Design to benefit an initial small user base

Organizational Issues

Groupware effects organizational structures

• Communication structures reflect line management – often physical location also

• Email – cross-organisational communication – Disenfranchises lower management disaffected staff and

‘sabotage’

• Technology can be used to change management style and power structures – But need to know that is what we are doing.

Invisible worker

• Telecommunications improvements allow: – Neighborhood work centers

– Home based Tele-working

• Many ecological & economic benefits – Reduce family commitments but:

– ‘Management by presence’ doesn't work

– Presence increases perceived worth – problems for promotion

• Barriers to Tele-working are managerial/social not technological