Advertisement

Behavioral Considerations in Group Support

  • Colin EdenEmail author
Living reference work entry
  • 15 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter highlights a series of inter-related issues that significantly affect the success and failure of group support for decision and negotiation. The issues are derived from the GDN experience of the author, accumulated over 40 years and hundreds GDN interventions. While they refer to some of the well-established literature on the topic, they are not based on formal empirical analysis. The items in the lists all raise issues that involve behavioral considerations. In particular it will be suggested that, notwithstanding a recent focus on microanalysis in GDN, these topics are still worthy of greater research and debate within the GDN research community.

Keywords

Group facilitation Group behavior Group support systems 

References

  1. Ackermann F (1996) Participants perceptions on the role of facilitators using group decision support systems. Group Decis Negot 5:93–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackermann F, Eden C (1999) Contrasting single user and networked group decision support systems. In De Vreede GJ, Ackermann F (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th Euro GDSS, Copenhagen, 22 June 1999, pp 83–108Google Scholar
  3. Ackermann F, Eden C (2010) The role of group support systems: negotiating safe energy. In: Kilgour DM, Eden C (eds) Handbook of group decision and negotiation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 285–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ackermann F, Eden C (2011a) Making strategy: mapping out strategic success. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Ackermann F, Eden C (2011b) Negotiation in strategy making teams: group support systems and the process of cognitive change. Group Decis Negot 20:293–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ackermann F, Andersen DF, Eden C, Richardson GP (2011) ScriptsMap: a tool for designing strategy workshops. Omega 39:427–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ackermann F, Eden C, Pyrko I (2016) Accelerated multi-organization conflict resolution. Group Decis Negot 25:901–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ackoff RL, Emery F (1972) On purposeful systems. Tavistock, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Barnard C (1938) The functions of the executive. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger J (1974) Ways of seeing. BBC-Pelican Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Berger PL, Luckmann T (1966) The social construction of reality. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Black LJ, Andersen DF (2012) Using visual representations as boundary objects to resolve conflict in collaborative model-building approaches. Syst Res Behav Sci 29:194–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brewer GD (1981) Where the twain meet: reconciling science and politics in analysis. Policy Sci 13:269–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carlile PR (2002) A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organ Sci 13:442–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cropper S (1990) The complexity of decision support practice. In: Eden C, Radford J (eds) Tackling strategic problems. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Day R, Day J (1977) A review of the current state of negotiated order theory: an appreciation and a critique. Sociol Q 18:126–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Geus A (1988) Planning as learning harvard business review, March–April, pp 70–74Google Scholar
  18. Dutton JE, Ashford SJ (1993) Selling issues to top management. Acad Manag Rev 18:397–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dutton JE, Fahey L, Narayanan VK (1983) Understanding strategic issue diagnosis. Strateg Manag J 14:307–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dutton JE, Ashford SJ, O’Neill RM, Lawrence KA (2001) Moves that matter: issue selling and organizational change. Acad Manag J 44:716–736Google Scholar
  21. Eden C (1978) Operational research and organizational development. Hum Relat 31:657–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eden C (1987) Problem solving or problem finishing? In: Jackson MCKP (ed) New directions in management science. Gower, Hants, pp 97–107Google Scholar
  23. Eden C (1989) Operational research as negotiation. In: Jackson MC, Keys P, Cropper SA (eds) Operational research and the social sciences. Plenum Press, New York, pp 43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eden C (1990a) Managing the environment as a means to managing complexity. In: Eden C, Radford J (eds) Tackling strategic problems: the role of group decision support. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Eden C (1990b) The unfolding nature of group decision support. In: Eden C, Radford J (eds) Tackling strategic problems: the role of group decision support. Sage, London, pp 48–52Google Scholar
  26. Eden C (1992a) A framework for thinking about group decision support systems (GDSS). Group Decis Negot 1:199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eden C (1992b) Strategy development as a social process. J Manag Stud 29:799–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Eden C (1993) From the playpen to the bombsite: the changing nature of management science. Omega 21:139–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Eden C (1994) Cognitive mapping and problem structuring for system dynamics model building. Syst Dyn Rev 10:257–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Eden C (2000) On evaluating the performance of GSS: furthering the debate. Eur J Oper Res 120:218–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Eden C, Ackermann F (1998) Making strategy: the journey of strategic management. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. Eden C, Ackermann F (2004) Use of ‘soft-OR’ models by clients – what do they want from them? In: Pidd M (ed) Systems modelling: theory and practice. Wiley, Chichester, pp 146–163Google Scholar
  33. Eden C, Ackermann F (2013) Problem structuring: on the nature of, and reaching agreement about, goals. EURO J Decis Process 1:7–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Eden C, Ackermann F (2018) Theory into practice, practice to theory: action research in method development. Eur J Oper Res 271:1145–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Eden C, Sims D (1979) On the nature of problems in consulting practice. Omega 7:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Eden C, Sims D (1982) Definicao de Problemas Entre O Cliente e o Consultor. Analise Psicologica 23:337–346Google Scholar
  37. Eden C, Sims D, Jones S (1979) Policy analysis and organizational politics. Eur J Oper Res 3:207–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Eden C, Jones S, Sims D, Smithin T (1981) The intersubjectivity of issues and issues of intersubjectivity. J Manag Stud 18:37–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Eden C, Jones S, Sims D (1983) Messing about in problems. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Finlay P (1998) On evaluating the performance of GSS: furthering the debate. Eur J Oper Res 107:193–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fisher R, Brown S (1988) Getting together: building a relationship that gets to yes. Houghton-Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  42. Fisher R, Shapiro D (2007) Building agreement: using emotions as you negotiate. Random House, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Fisher R, Ury W (1982) Getting to yes. Hutchinson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Fisher R, Ury WL, Patton B (2011) Getting to yes: negotiating agreement without giving in, Revised edn. Peguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Franco LA (2013) Rethinking soft OR interventions: models as boundary objects. Eur J Oper Res 231:720–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Friend J, Hickling A (1987) Planning under pressure: the strategic choice approach. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. Ghoshal S (2005) Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Acad Manag Learn Educ 4:75–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Harvey J (1988) The Abilene paradox: the management of agreement. Organizational Dynamics Summer:17–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hickling A (1990) ‘Decision Spaces’: a scenario about designing appropriate rooms for group decision management. In: Eden C, Radford J (eds) Tackling strategic problems: the role of group decision support. Sage, London, pp 169–177Google Scholar
  50. Howick S, Ackermann F (2011) Mixing OR methods in practice: past, present and future directions. Eur J Oper Res 215:503–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Huxham C (1990) On trivialities in process. In: Eden C, Radford J (eds) Tackling strategic problems: the role of group decision support. Sage, London, pp 162–168Google Scholar
  52. Huxham C, Cropper S (1994) From many to one – and Back: an exploration of some components of facilitation. Omega 22:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Jackson MC, Keys P (eds) (1987) New directions in management science. Gower, HantsGoogle Scholar
  54. Jackson MC, Keys P, Cropper SA (1989) Operational research and the social sciences. Plenum Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Janis IL (1972) Victims of group think. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  56. Janis IL (1989) Crucial Decisions. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  57. Jones R, Lakin C (1978) The Carpetmakers. McGraw-Hill, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Kim WC, Mauborgne RA (1998) Procedural justice, strategic decision making, and the knowledge economy. Strateg Manag J 19:323–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Martinovski B (2010) Emotion in negotiation. In: Kilgour DM, Eden C (eds) Handbook of group decision and negotiation. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 65–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Martinovski B (2014) Emotion in group decision and negotiation. Springer, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  61. Mitroff II, Featheringham TR (1974) On systemic problem solving and the error of the third kind. Behav Sci 19:383–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nutt PC (1984) Types of organizational decision processes. Adm Sci Q 29:414–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nutt PC (2002) Why decisions fail: avoiding the blunders and traps that lead to debacles. Berrett-Koehler, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  64. Perrow C (1986) Complex organizations, 3rd edn. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Pettigrew A (1977) Strategy formulation as a political process. Int Stud Manag Organ 7:78–87Google Scholar
  66. Quick KS, Feldman MS (2014) Boundaries as junctures: collaborative boundary work for building efficient resilience. J Public Adm Res Theory.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosenhead J (1989) Rational analysis for a problematic world: structuring methods for complexity, uncertainty and conflict. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  68. Rouwette EAJA (2003) Group model building as mutual persuasion. Wolf Legal Publishers, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  69. Scheper W (1991) Group Decision Support Systems: an inquiry into theoretical and philosophical issues. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Brabant, TilburgGoogle Scholar
  70. Scheper WJ, Faber J (1994) Do cognitive maps make sense. Adv Manag Cogn Organ Inf Process 5:165–185Google Scholar
  71. Simon HA (1976) From substantive to procedural rationality. In: Latsis SJ (ed) Method and appraisal in economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  72. Sims D, Eden C, Jones S (1981) Facilitating problem definition in teams. Eur J Oper Res 6:360–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Strauss A (1978) Negotiations: varieties, contexts, processes and social order. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  74. Strauss A, Schatzman L (1963) The hospital and its negotiated order. In: Friedson E (ed) The hospital in modern society. Macmillan, New York, pp 147–169Google Scholar
  75. Tavella E, Franco AL (2015) Dynamics of group knowledge production in facilitated modelling workshops: an exploratory study. Group Decis Negot 24:451–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thibaut J, Walker L (1975) Procedural justice: a psychological analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  77. Tully P, White L, Yearworth M (2018) The Value Paradox of Problem Structuring Methods. Systems Research and Behavioral Science.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tyler TR, Blader SL (2000) Cooperation in groups: procedural justice, social identity, and Behavioural engagement. Psychology Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  79. Vickers G (1965) The art of judgement. Harper and Row, LondonGoogle Scholar
  80. Winnicott DW (1953) Transitional objects and transitional phenomena: a study of the first not-me possession. Int J Psychoanal XXXIV(2):89–97Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Strathclyde Business SchoolUniversity of StrathclydeGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations