Deam'nSuppo ELSEVIER Decision Support Systems 14 (1995) 75-83 Short note The anonymity and proximity factors in group decision support systems M.C E r a , , , A.C Ng b a ICS Dept, KFUPM, Box 1779, Dhahran 31261, SaudiArabia Dept of Commerce, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3083, Australia Abstract A group decision support system (GDSS) is an interactive computer-based information system which combines the capabilities of communication technologies, database technologies, computer technologies, and decision technologies to support the identification, analysis, formulation, evaluation, and solution of semi-structured or unstructured problems by a group in an user-friendly computing environment Following the completion of GDSS facilities, preliminary results on the effects and effectiveness of GDSSs on the group decision making process have been reported This paper sets forth to critically evaluate recent literature on anonymity of proponents and proximity of group members in connection with the use of GDSSs in group meetings It questions the assumptions made and research methodologies used in laboratory experiments Some of the experimental results are found to be inconclusive and contradictory It points out why some of the experiments are unrealistic, and thus the experimental results cannot be generalized It is argued that group dynamics, organizational settings, social contexts, and behavioral aspects are all important ingredients in shaping the outcomes of using GDSSs at group meetings, and therefore cannot be ignored by GDSS researchers Keywords: Group decision support system (GDSS); Anonymity; Proximity; Group decision making process; Com- puter-mediated communication; Impact of information technology Introduction The advents of information technologies and transnational communication networks have on the one hand made the world smaller, and on the other hand globalized businesses and markets The fierce competition for business survival and advantages means that many business decisions * Corresponding author have to be made more frequently, more promptly and with better quality The rapid falling prices of information technologies and the increased performance of low-cost personal computers have opened up untried avenues for information systems planners to extend the capabilities of information systems to support top-level executive decision making In the last two decades, the emphasis of information systems has been shifted from supporting routine transaction-based information processing to supporting semi-structured 0167-9236/95/$09.50 © 1995 Elsevier Science B.V All rights reserved SSDI 0167-9236(94)00013-I 76 M.C Er and A.C Ng / Decision Support Systems 14 (1995) 75-83 or unstructured decision making at top-level management, as reflected in the change of terminology from management information systems (MISs) to decision support systems (DSSs) [10] In large corporations, important decisions, such as strategic plans, are seldom made by a single person; more commonly, they are made by a group of senior executives It is natural that group decision support systems (GDSSs) have been developed in the past one decade in response to the needs of executive decision makers [21] Although the concept of computer-aided group decision making had been around for quite some time [19], physical constructions of modern facilities for supporting group decision making only occurred five years ago [13,23] Extensive experiments on the effects and effectiveness of group decision support systems on group behaviour only carried out in the past few years; this explains the rarity of experimental results [2,6,9] Even so, most experiments are concentrated on some very small aspects of GDSS, such as anonymity of participants and computer-mediated communications Within such a small set of experimental results, some contradictions of findings already exist For instance, in [5], it was found that a GDSS used in a face-to-face decision making context resulted in higher quality decisions compared with those not supported by a GDSS; but such a finding was not supported by a subsequent experiment [6] In another example, Lewis [14] and Steeb and Johnston [22] found that GDSS group members were more satisfied than nonGDSS group members in face-to-face meetings, but the results were contradicted by Gallupe [5] and Watson [24], who found that the use of a GDSS led to less satisfaction when compared to non-GDSS group The contradictions add more confusion to the current state of the field of group support decision systems This paper sets forth to critically examining the current literature on group support decision systems dealing with the issues of anonymity and proximity at group meetings, and offers suggestions and criticisms to experimental assumptions and research methodologies used It also summarizes the current state of knowledge, and pinpoints future research directions in GDSS In particular, it is argued that research on the effects and effectiveness of GDSSs on the group decision making process cannot be carried out in isolation - group dynamics, organizational settings, social contexts, and behavioral aspects are all important ingredients in shaping the outcomes of using GDSSs at group meetings Group decision support systems Part of the inconclusive experimental results stems from the confusion about the definition of group support decision systems Some of the experimental setups have nothing to with GDSS at all A group decision support system is defined as an interactive computer-based information system which combines the capabilities of communication technologies (LAN, WAN, telecommunication), database technologies (relational, hierarchical, and network models), computer technologies (mainframe computer, minicomputer, microcomputer, personal computer, VLSI system, supercomputer), and decision technologies (linear programming, integer programming, goal programming, compromise programming, multi-objective linear programming, sequential optimization, dynamic compromise programming, AHP, Electre, multi-attribute utility theory, Q-analysis, risk analysis, simulation, forecasting, statistical analysis, decision tree, etc.) to support the identification, analysis, formulation, evaluation, and solution of semi-structured or unstructured problems by a group A schematic diagram of GDSS is shown in Fig It is clear that a group decision support system is more than just a communication system; it involves decision modelling as well Decision modelling, of course, requires utilizations of a model base and a database for alternative assumptions and choice analyses One of the key factors in GDSS, apart from decision modelling, is to facilitate the exchange of information, ideas, opinions, and options leading to decision making during group deliberations Such communications can be verbal and computer-mediated, within the constraints of communication technologies For face-to-face meetings M.C Er and A.C Ng / Decision Support Systems 14 (1995) 75-83 ModelBase Database identifying problematic symptoms, analysing causes of a p r o b l e m from its symptoms, g e n e r a t ing possible solutions to the p r o b l e m , e v a l u a t i n g alternative solutions, deciding which solution to adopt, a n d f o r m u l a t i n g a strategy to i m p l e m e n t the a d o p t e d solution D u r i n g this complex process of g r o u p decision making, m a n y forms of i n f o r m a t i o n s e e k i n g / g i v i n g a n d o p i n i o n exc h a n g e take place, such as initial exploration, analysis of proposals, expression of p r e f e r e n c e , a r g u m e n t a t i o n , solution d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d implem e n t a t i o n n e g o t i a t i o n Some a u t h o r s [1,3] p r e f e r to take an i n f o r m a t i o n exchange perspective to this phase However, a g r o u p m e e t i n g is m o r e t h a n a formal way of solving p r o b l e m s a n d m a k i n g decisions It is also a f o r u m for achieving a n d m a i n t a i n i n g p e e r r e c o g n i t i o n s in a n o r g a n i z a t i o n Participants n o t only carry out collective tasks of g r o u p p r o b l e m solving, b u t also fulfil the p e r s o n a l n e e d s of social i n t e r a c t i o n s with peers This aspect is p e r h a p s the most n e g l e c t e d o n e in the G D S S literature W e shall r e t u r n to a discussion of this later I Decisi°n M°delJ