Experiences in Using a Web-Based GDSS to Coordinate Distributed Group Decision-Making Processes

  • Patrick P. Cao
  • Jocelyn C. San Pedro
  • Frada Burstein
Conference paper


As modern organizations shift from vertical hierarchy to networked structure, distributed group decision-making becomes more prevalent. Distributed mode has the potential to not only reduce the costs of meetings but also improve the outcomes of group decision-making processes. However, as the group decision-making process takes place more asynchronously in time and dispersedly in proximity, coordination of group activities becomes more critical to the success of the process.


Group Decision Support System Group Support System Small Group Research Electronic Communication Medium Facilitation Support 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boland, R. J., Maheshwarl, A. K., Te’enl, D., Schwartz, D. G., and Tenkasi, R. V., 1992, Sharing perspectives in distributed decision making, in: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 92), The ACM, pp. 306–313.Google Scholar
  2. Burke, K., Aytes, K., Chidambaram, L., and Johnson, J.J., 1999, A study of partially distributed work groups: The impact of media, location, and time on perceptions and performance, Small Group Research,30: 453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burke, K., and Chidambaram, L., 1999, How much bandwidth is enough? A longitudinal examination of media characteristics and group outcomes, MIS Quarterly,23: 557.Google Scholar
  4. Cao, P. P., Burstein, F. V., and San Pedro, J., 2003, Coordinating distributed group multiple criteria decision-making processes: Preliminary results from a laboratory experiment, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the International Society for Decision Support Systems (ISDSS’03), Poland.Google Scholar
  5. Carlson, P., and Davis, G. B., 1998, An investigation of media selection among directors and managers: From “self” to “other” orientation, MIS Quarterly, 22: 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cass, K., Heintz, T. J., and Kaiser, K. M., 1992, An investigation of satisfaction when using a voice-synchronous GDSS in dispersed meetings, Information & Management, 23: 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chidambaram, L., and Jones, B., 1993, Impact of communication medium and computer support on group perceptions and performance: A comparison of face-to-face and dispersed meetings, MIS Quarterly, 17: 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cockburn, A., and Greenberg, S., 1993, Making contact: Getting the group communicating with groupware, in: Proceedings of the Conference on Organizational Computing Systems (COOCS’93), The ACM, pp. 3141.Google Scholar
  9. Daft, R. L., and Lengel, R. H., 1986, Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design, Management Science, 32: 554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Speier, C., and Moms, M. G., 1998, Beyond media richness: An empirical test of media synchronicity theory, in: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, pp. 48–57.Google Scholar
  11. Dennis, A. R., and Valacich, J. S., 1999, Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of media synchronicity, in: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. DeSanctis, G., and Gallupe, R. B., 1987, A foundation for the study of group decision support systems, Management Science,33: 589.Google Scholar
  13. Frey, L. R., 1996, Remembering and “re-membering”: A history of theory and research on communication and group decision making, in: Communication and Group Decision Making, R. Y. Hirokawa and M. S. Poole eds., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 19–51.Google Scholar
  14. George, J. F., and Carlson, J. R., 1999, Group support systems and deceptive communication, in: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, CD ROM.Google Scholar
  15. Hiltz, S. R., Dufner, D., Holmes, M., and Poole, S., 1991, Distributed group support systems: Social dynamics and design dilemmas, Journal of Organizational Computing, 2: 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoffer, J. A., and Valacich, J. S., 1993, Group memory in group support systems: A foundation for design, in Group Support Systems: New Perspective, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich eds., Macmillan, New York, pp. 214–229.Google Scholar
  17. Hollingshead, A. B., McGrath, J. E., and O’Connor, K. M., 1993, Group task performance and communication technology: A longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups, Small Group Research, 24: 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Horton, M., and Biolsi, K., 1993–94, Coordination challenges in a computer-supported meeting environment, Journal of Management Information Systems, 10: 7.Google Scholar
  19. Johnson, J. J., 1999, A field study of partially distributed group support, in: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, CD ROM.Google Scholar
  20. McGrath, J. E., and Hollingshead, A. B., 1993, Putting the “group” back in group support systems: Some theoretical issues about dynamic processes in groups with technological enhancements, in: Group Support Systems: New Perspective, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich eds., Macmillan, New York, pp. 78–96.Google Scholar
  21. Mennecke, B. E., Valacich, J. S., and Wheeler, B. C., 2000, The effects of media and task on user performance: A test of the task-media fit hypothesis, Group Decision and Negotiation, 9: 507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Murthy, U. S., and Kerr, D. S., 2000, Task/technology fit and the effectiveness of group support systems: Evidence in the context of tasks requiring domain specific knowledge, in: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE, CD ROM.Google Scholar
  23. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R., and George, J. F, 1993, Group support systems research: Experience from the lab and field, in Group Support Systems: New Perspective, L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich eds., Macmillan, New York, pp. 125–145.Google Scholar
  24. Ocker, R., Hiltz, S. R., Turoff, M., and Fjermestad, J., 1995–1996, The effects of distributed group support and process structuring on software requirements development teams: Results on creativity and quality, Journal of Management Information Systems, 12: 127.Google Scholar
  25. Olson, J., and Teasley, S., 1996, Groupware in the wild: Lessons learned from a year of virtual collocation, in: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW’96), The ACM, pp. 419–427.Google Scholar
  26. Pervan, G. P., 1998, A review of research of group support systems: Leaders, approaches and directions, Decision Support Systems, 23: 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rana, A. R., Turoff, M., and Hiltz, S. R., 1997, Task and technology interaction (TTI): A theory of technological support for group tasks, in: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Hawaii International Conference of System Sciences, IEEE, pp 66–75.Google Scholar
  28. Schmidt, K., and Simone, C., 1996, Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW system design, Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 5: 155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shirani, A. I., Tafti, M. H. A., and Affisco, J. F., 1999, Task and technology fit: A comparison of two technologies for synchronous and asynchronous group communication, Information & Management, 36: 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Straus, S. G., and McGrath, J. E., 1994, Does the medium matter? the interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions, Journal of Applied Psychology, 79: 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Suh, K. S., 1999, Impact of communication medium on task performance and satisfaction: An examination of media-richness theory, Information & Management, 35: 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yoon, K. P., and Hwang, C.-L., 1995, Multicriteria Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  33. Zigurs, 1., and Buckland, B. K., 1998, A theory of task/technology fit and group support systems effectiveness. MIS Quarterly, 22: 313.Google Scholar
  34. Zigurs, I., Buckland, B. K., Connolly, J. R., and Wilson, E. V., 1999, A task of task-technology fit theory for group support systems, DATA BASE, 30: 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick P. Cao
  • Jocelyn C. San Pedro
  • Frada Burstein
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information Management and SystemsMonash UniversityCaulfield EastAustralia

Personalised recommendations