A group decision support system for idea generation and issue analysis in organization planning

ABSTRACT

The increasing reliance on group decision-making in today's complex business environments and advances in microcomputer, telecommunications and graphic presentation technology have combined to create a growing interest in the design of group decision support systems (GDSS). Planning is an important group decision-making activity within organizations. Effective planning depends on the generation and analysis of innovative ideas. For this reason, the idea generation and management process has been chosen as the domain for the study of the design and implementation of a GDSS to support complex, unstructured group decision processes within organizations.The MIS Planning and Decision Laboratory has been constructed to provide a research facility for the study of the planning and decision process while top executives from a variety of organizations use the laboratory to conduct actual planning sessions for their organization. This paper presents the design of a system to support the idea generation and analysis process in organization planning. Results of research conducted in the MIS Planning and Decision Laboratory on the use of the Electronic Brainstorming system with over 100 planners from a variety of organizations are presented and discussed.The findings of the research indicate that computer brainstorming stimulates task oriented behavior, decreases group interactions and equalizes participation. Information presentation, network speed and typing skills of the upper level managers were identified as possible inhibitors of the idea generation process that must be considered in the design of the system and the methodology for its use. Planners using the GDSS reported high levels of satisfaction with the process and outcome of the planning sessions. They rated the computer as an important tool for idea generation and the computer brainstorming process as "Much Better" than manual brainstorming.

REFERENCES

• 1: Bouchard, Thomas J. (1969). Personality, problem-solving, procedure and performance in small groups. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 52(2):138.
• 2: Bouchard, Thomas J. (1972). Training, motivation and personality as determinants of the effectiveness of brainstorming groups and individuals. Journal of Applied Psychology. 56(4):324.
• 3: Bouchard, T.J., Drauden, G. and Barsaloux, J. (1974). A comparison of individual, subgroup and total group methods of problem-solving. Journal of Applied Psychology. 59 (2):226.
• 4: Carroll, J.M. (1983). Presentation and form in user-interface architecture. Byte. December.
• 5: Carroll, J. M. and Thomas, J. C. (1982). Metaphor and the cognitive representation of computing systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-12: 107.
• 6: Comadena, M.E. (1984). Brainstorming groups, ambiguity, tolerance, communication apprehension, task attraction and individual productivity. Small Group Behavior. 15(2):251.
• 7: Delbecq, Andre L. and Van de Ven, A.H. (1970). Nominal group techniques for involving clients and resource experts.
• 8: DeSanctis, G. and Gallupe, B. (1985) Group decision support systems: A new frontier. Data Base. Winter.
• 9: Diesing, Paul. (1971). Patterns of Discovery in the Social Sciences. NY: Aldine Publishing Company.
• 10: Dillon, P.C., Graham, W.K. and Aidells, A. (1972). Brainstorming on a "hot" problem: Effects of training and practice on individual and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 56(6): 487.
• 11: Elam, J., Henderson, J. Konsynski, B. and Keen, P. (1984). A vision for decision support systems. Unpublished Manuscript.
• 12: Foley, J.D. and Wallace, F.L. (1974). The art of natural graphic man-machine conversation. IEEE Proceedings, 250.
• 13: Gerrity, T.P. (1971). The design of man-machine decision systems: An application to portfolio management. Sloan Management Review. 12(2):59.
• 14: Geschka, H. (1978). Introduction and use of idea-generating methods. Research Management. 21(3).
• 15: Glover, J.A. (1979) and Chambers, T. (1978). The creative production of the group: Effects of small group structure. Small Group Behavior. 9(3): 387.
• 16: Gorry, G.A. and Scott Morton, J.S. (1971). A framework for management information systems. Sloan Management Review. 13(1):55.
• 17: Gray, P. (1981). The SMU decision room project. DSS-81 Transactions.
• 18: Harari, O. and Graham, W.K. (1975). Tasks and task consequences as factors in individual and group brainstorming. Journal of Social Psychology. 95:61.
• 19: Hedberg, B. (1970). On Man-Computer Interaction in Organizational Decision-Making. Gothenburg: Business Administration Studies.
• 20: Starr Roxanne Hiltz , Murray Turoff, The evolution of user behavior in a computerized conferencing system, Communications of the ACM, v.24 n.11, p.739-751, Nov. 1981 [doi>10.1145/358790.358794]
• 21: Huber, G.P. (2980). Managerial Decision-making. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Co.
• 22: Huber, G. P. (1982). Group decision support systems as aids in the use of structured group management techniques. DSS-82 Transactions.
• 23: Huber, G.P. (1984). Issues in the design of group decision support systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, September.
• 24: Jablin, F.M. (1981) Cultivating imagination: Factors that enhance and inhibit creativity in brainstorming groups. Human Communications Research. 43:327.
• 25: Jablin, F.M. and Sussman, L. (1978). An exploration of communication and productivity in real brainstorming groups. Human Communications Research. 4(4):329.
• 26: Jablin F. M. et.al., (1977). Potential inhibitory effects of group participation on brainstorming performance. Central States Speech Journal. 28:113.
• 27: Gallupe, R.B. (1986). Experimental Research into Group Decision Support Systems: Practical Issues and Problems. Proceedings of the Nineteenth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 1986.
• 28: Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of Behavioral Research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
• 29: S Kiesler, The hidden messages in computer networks, Harvard Business Review, v.64 n.1, p.46-60, JANURAY-FEBRUARY 1986
• 30: Kraemer, K.L. and King, J.L., (1984). Computer-based systems for group decision support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Management Annual Conference. 1984.
• 31: Krueger, G.P. (1976). Teleconferencing in Three Communication Modes as a Function of the Number of Conferees. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Johns Hopkins University.
• 32: Lamm, H. and Trommsdorff, G. (1973). Group versus individual performance on tasks requiring ideational proficiency: A review. European Journal of Social Psychology. 3(4):361.
• 33: Lorge, I. et.al., (1958). A survey of studies contrasting the quality of group performance and individual performance. Psychological Bulletin. 55(6).
• 34: Maier, N. (1962). Creative Management. NY:Wiley and Sons.
• 35: Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. NY:Harper and Row.
• 36: Osborne, A. (1953). Applied Imagination. NY: Charles Scribner and Sons.
• 37: Phillips. L.D. (1984). A theory of requisite decision models. ACTA Psychologica. 56:29.
• 38: Siegel, J. et.al., (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 37.
• 39: Smith, H.W. (1975). Strategies of Social Research. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
• 40: Turoff, M. and Hiltz, S. R. (1982). Computer support for group versus individual decisions. IEEE Transactions on Communications. 30(1):82.
• 41: Van Gundy, A.B. (1981). Techniques of Structured Problem-Solving. NY: Van Nostrand, Reinhold.
• 42: Van Gundy, A.B. (1984). Managing Group Creativity. NY: American Management Association.
• 43: Vroom et.al., (1969). The consequences of social interaction in group problem-solving. Organizational Behavior and Group Performance. 4:77.