I used a multiple-linear-regression model to test the effects of meeting group members’ expectations on strength of consensus in a group decision-making situation. The combination of met expression-of-views expectations and met decision-quality expectations, along with their associated valences, had a significant effect on consensus (p = .01). Expression-of-views expectations are composed of expectations about opportunity to express views and the information sharing. I proposed a new model consisting of two terms. The first term was the sum of the individual products of met expression-of-views expectations times their respective valences. The second term was the sum of the individual products of met decision-quality expectations times their respective valences. This new model was a much better predictor of strength of consensus than the original (p = .001). The two terms used in the new model had an equivalent influence on strength of consensus (p = .05). The results of this research suggest managers should elicit and try to meet group members’ high-valence expectations (i.e., expectations group members feel are important to be met). Managers should also realize expression-of-views and decision-quality expectations are important to meet in a consensus-gaining process. / Master of Science

No description available.

No description available.

There are a variety of creative problem solving techniques. Selected techniques are compared and contrasted and an ideal type is developed. The Idea Machine (TIM) is introduced and the six major steps involved with the technique are described. Results of using TIM in conjunction with three projects are presented. Improvements in TI:M sessions are described and insights associated with sessions in the second project are highlighted. Evaluations by participants are introduced and discussed. TIM is compared with the ideal type technique. It is concluded that while TIM is not comparable to this ideal in every respect, evaluations suggest that it is an extremely effective creative problem solving technique. / Ph. D.

Thesis (M. Div.)--Emmanuel School of Religion, 2006. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 68-72).

Thesis (MBA)--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Changes in the global salt market have presented Walvis Bay Salt Refiners with an opportunity to increase its current sales by approximately 40%. Following several pre-feasibility studies, the expansion project plan was created. The construction of new ponds, canals and sluices were to be performed by a subcontractor as selected through a tender process. The scope of the work comprised approximately 70% of the total project cost and it also represented the most critical part of the expansion project. Thomas Saaty’s Analytic Hierarchy Process, was used as a group decision support system for the selection of the most suitable subcontractor. The weighted average mean method was used to aggregate individual scores. A sensitivity analysis was performed following the final outcome to gain a deeper understanding of the problem, obtain a measure of margin between subcontractor scores and to check for the correctness of numbers. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Veranderinge in die wêreld soutmark het vir Walvis Bay Salt Refiners 'n geleentheid gebied om sy verkope met ʼn beraamde 40% te verhoog. Na verskeie voorondersoeke is 'n volledige projekplan opgestel. Die vervaardiging van damwalle, kanale en sluise sou deur 'n kontrakteur gedoen word wat deur ʼn tenderprosedure gekeur sou word. Die omvang van hierdie gedeelte van die uitbreidingsprojek verteenwoordig ongeveer 70% van die totale projekkostes en is terselfdelyk die mees sensitiewe gedeelte van die projek. Thomas Saaty se Analytic Hierarchy Process is gebruik as die groepbesluitnemingsondersteuningstelsel om die mees geskikte kontrakteur te kies. Die geweegde gemiddelde is gebruik om die individuele oordele saam te voeg. Sensitiwiteits analise is uitgevoer nadat die finale uitslag bepaal is om sodoende beter insig in die probleem te ontwikkel, om ʼn beter onderskeiding tussen die kontrakteur puntetellings te kry en om die juistheid van die syfers na te gaan.

Many complex and interdependent systems engineering challenges involve more than one stakeholder or decision maker. These challenges, such as the definition and acquisition of future air mobility systems, are often found in situations where resources are finite, objectives are conflicting, constraints are restricting, and uncertainty in future outcomes prevail. Air mobility operational models which simulate fleet wide behavior effects over time, in various mission scenarios, and potentially over the entire design life-cycle, are always multi-dimensional, cover a large decision space, and require significant time to generate sufficient solutions to adequately describe the design space. This challenge is coupled with the fact that, in these highly integrated solutions or acquisitions, multiple stakeholders or decision makers are required to cooperate and reach agreement in selecting or defining the requirements for the design or solution and in its costly and lengthy implementation. However, since values, attitudes, and experiences are different for each decision maker, reaching consensus across the multiple criteria with different preferences and objectives is often a slow and highly convoluted process. In response to these common deficiencies and to provide quantitative analyses, this research investigates and proposes solutions to two challenges: 1) increase the speed at which operational solutions and associated requirements are generated and explored, and 2) systematize the group decision-making process, to both accelerate and improve decision making in these large operational problems requiring cooperation. The development of the Air Mobility Operations Design (AirMOD) model is proposed to address the first challenge by implementing and leveraging surrogate models of airlift capability across a wide scenario space. In addressing the second major challenge, the proposed Multi-Agent Consensus Reaching on the Objective Space (MACRO) methodology introduces a process to reduce the feasible decision space, by identifying regions of high probability of consensus reaching, using preference distributions, power relationships, and game-theoretic techniques. In a case study, the MACRO methodology is demonstrated on a large air mobility solution space generated by AirMOD to illustrate plausibility of the overall approach. AirMOD and MACRO offer considerable advantages over current methods to better define the operational design space and improve group decision-making processes requiring cooperation, respectively.

published_or_final_version / Business Administration / Master / Master of Business Administration

Knowledge acquisition is not only the most important but also most difficult task knowledge engineers face when they begin to develop expert systems. One of the first problems they encounter is the need to identify at least one individual with appropriate expertise who is able and willing to participate in the development project. They must also be able to use a variety of techniques to elicit the knowledge that they require. These include such traditional knowledge acquisition methods as interviewing, thinking-aloud protocol analysis, on-site observation, and repertory grid analysis. As expert system applications have become more complex, knowledge engineers have found that they must work with and tap the domain knowledge of not one but several individuals. They have also discovered that the traditional methods do not work well in eliciting the knowledge residing in a group of individuals. The complexity of the systems, the difficulties inherent in working with multiple experts, and the lack of appropriate tools have combined to make the knowledge acquisition task even more arduous and time consuming. Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) have been proven to be useful tools for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of a multiplicity of group activities. It would appear that by bringing experts together in a GDSS environment and using computer-based tools to facilitate group interaction and information exchange, a knowledge engineer could eliminate many of these problems. This research was designed to explore the possibility of using a GDSS environment to facilitate knowledge acquisition from multiple experts. The primary research question was "Does A GDSS environment facilitate the acquisition of knowledge from multiple experts?" The principle contributions of this research are (1) demonstration of the first use of a GDSS environment to elicit knowledge from multiple experts; (2) establishment of a methodology for knowledge acquisition in a GDSS environment; (3) development of process models for acquiring knowledge; (4) development of guidelines for designing and evaluating group support tools; and (5) recognition of some implications of using a computer-supported cooperative approach to extract knowledge from a group of experts. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.)

This dissertation develops the Focus Theory of Group Productivity, describes the use of the theory to guide development of several electronic group support tools, and reports the results of experiments testing whether the tools yield the predicted productivity gains. Focus theory posits that to be productive group members must divide their attention between three cognitive processes: communication, Deliberation, and information access. Communication, Deliberation, and information access are, in turn, constrained by limited attention and fading memory. Finally group members are only willing to engage their attention resources to the extent that the group goal is congruent with their individual goals. Electronic tools can reduce the attention demand of each of the three cognitive processes, and focus participant attention on appropriate problem-solving behaviors. Electronic tools can foster goal congruence under some circumstances. This dissertation describes how Focus Theory guided the development of the several electronic tools to support the needs of real groups experiencing real productivity problems. It reports the results of several laboratory experiments to test the goal-congruence hypothesis of Focus Theory. The first experiment frames social loafing and social comparison as goal congruence issues, showing that subjects using a real-time graph to compare their own performance to that of an average group generated more unique ideas than a group with no basis for comparison. Facilitation techniques boosted the salience of the comparison, further increasing performance. The second study frames affective reward as a goal congruence issue and develops and validates a measure for the construct. The third study frames user interface design in terms of goal congruence and demonstrates the strengths (pointing, selecting, moving, fine motor control) and weaknesses (handwriting recognition) of pen-based interfaces in those terms. The fourth study frames the classroom as a group-productivity setting and demonstrates that group support systems can be used to improve classroom interactions.