IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v13y2004i4d10.1023_bgrup.0000042859.55760.2f.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Group Consensus: The Impact of Multiple Dialogues

Author

Listed:
  • William B. Martz

    (College of Business, University of Colorado)

  • Morgan M. Shepherd

    (College of Business, University of Colorado)

Abstract

The research results on group consensus have been ambiguous within the field of Group Support Systems (GSSs). Some research studies have shown that groups using multiple communication channels produce more ideas, and more unique ideas than groups using a single communication channel. In addition, a second set of research findings have shown that groups using GSSs report group members hold “less consensus” with the group's decision. This research studies more closely how these two characteristics; communication channel and consensus, interact. Specifically, can “less consensus” be a function of the choice of channels used in problem solving. The results show that groups using a single communication channel generate more actual consensus than groups using multiple communication channels. Furthermore, the single channel discussions provide more integrative comments and these integrative comments may help explain the difference in consensus. These results suggest that those striving for consensus from group members should consider production methods used to create the information that is to be used in the decision.

Suggested Citation

  • William B. Martz & Morgan M. Shepherd, 2004. "Group Consensus: The Impact of Multiple Dialogues," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 315-325, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:13:y:2004:i:4:d:10.1023_b:grup.0000042859.55760.2f
    DOI: 10.1023/B:GRUP.0000042859.55760.2f
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000042859.55760.2f
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000042859.55760.2f?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wm. Benjamin Martz & Morgan M. Shepherd, 2002. "Using and Influence Level of Information to Explain the Non-consensus Process Loss," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 281-291, July.
    2. M. Lynne Markus & Daniel Robey, 1988. "Information Technology and Organizational Change: Causal Structure in Theory and Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 583-598, May.
    3. Valacich, Joseph S. & Dennis, Alan R. & Connolly, Terry, 1994. "Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 448-467, March.
    4. Sniezek, Janet A. & Henry, Rebecca A., 1990. "Revision, Weighting, and commitment in consensus group judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 66-84, February.
    5. Alain Pinsonneault & Henri Barki & R. Brent Gallupe & Norberto Hoppen, 1999. "Electronic Brainstorming: The Illusion of Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 110-133, June.
    6. Alain Pinsonneault & Henri Barki & R. Brent Gallupe & Norberto Hoppen, 1999. "Research Note. The Illusion of Electronic Brainstorming Productivity: Theoretical and Empirical Issues," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 378-380, December.
    7. Alan R. Dennis & Joseph S. Valacich & Traci A. Carte & Monica J. Garfield & Barbara J. Haley & Jay E. Aronson, 1997. "Research Report: The Effectiveness of Multiple Dialogues in Electronic Brainstorming," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 203-211, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Deepa K. Ray & Nicholas C. Romano, 2013. "Creative Problem Solving in GSS Groups: Do Creative Styles Matter?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1129-1157, November.
    2. Francineide Morais Bezerra & Paulo Melo & João Paulo Costa, 2014. "Visual and Interactive Comparative Analysis of Individual Opinions: A Group Decision Support Tool," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 101-125, January.
    3. Bruce A. Reinig & Robert O. Briggs, 2013. "Putting Quality First in Ideation Research," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 943-973, September.
    4. Valerie L. Bartelt & Alan R. Dennis & Lingyao Yuan & Jordan B. Barlow, 2013. "Individual Priming in Virtual Team Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 873-896, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bruce A. Reinig & Robert O. Briggs, 2008. "On The Relationship Between Idea-Quantity and Idea-Quality During Ideation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 403-420, September.
    2. David S. Kerr & Uday S. Murthy, 2004. "Divergent and Convergent Idea Generation in Teams: A Comparison of Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Communication," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 381-399, July.
    3. Pawel Weichbroth, 2016. "Facing the Brainstorming Theory. A Case of Requirements Elicitation," GUT FME Working Paper Series A 42, Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdansk University of Technology.
    4. Kerr, David S. & Murthy, Uday S., 2009. "Beyond brainstorming: The effectiveness of computer-mediated communication for convergence and negotiation tasks," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 245-262.
    5. William G. Heninger & Alan R. Dennis & Kelly McNamara Hilmer, 2006. "Research Note: Individual Cognition and Dual-Task Interference in Group Support Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 415-424, December.
    6. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy & Katharina Buhtz & Andreas König, 2018. "Social influence in technology adoption: taking stock and moving forward," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 37-76, February.
    7. Bruce A. Reinig & Robert O. Briggs, 2013. "Putting Quality First in Ideation Research," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 943-973, September.
    8. Laku Chidambaram & Lai Lai Tung, 2005. "Is Out of Sight, Out of Mind? An Empirical Study of Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Groups," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 149-168, June.
    9. D Shaw, 2003. "Evaluating electronic workshops through analysing the ‘brainstormed’ ideas," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(7), pages 692-705, July.
    10. Rajiv Kohli & Sarv Devaraj, 2003. "Measuring Information Technology Payoff: A Meta-Analysis of Structural Variables in Firm-Level Empirical Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 127-145, June.
    11. Bianco, Federica & Michelino, Francesca, 2010. "The role of content management systems in publishing firms," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 117-124.
    12. Sony, Michael & Naik, Subhash, 2020. "Industry 4.0 integration with socio-technical systems theory: A systematic review and proposed theoretical model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3232 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Mähring, Magnus, 2002. "IT Project Governance: A Process-Oriented Study of Organizational Control and Executive Involvement," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2002:15, Stockholm School of Economics.
    15. Pamela J. Hinds & Diane E. Bailey, 2003. "Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 615-632, December.
    16. Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    17. Nagy, A., 2009. "Adoption of interorganizational information systems : The adoption position model," Other publications TiSEM af471297-bf03-43bf-88c1-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Hedström, Peter & Wennberg, Karl, 2016. "Causal Mechanisms in Organization and Innovation Studies," Ratio Working Papers 284, The Ratio Institute.
    19. Runhui Lin & Yuan Gui & Zaiyang Xie & Lu Liu, 2019. "Green Governance and International Business Strategies of Emerging Economies’ Multinational Enterprises: A Multiple-Case Study of Chinese Firms in Pollution-Intensive Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-32, February.
    20. Byrd, Terry Anthony & Thrasher, Evelyn H. & Lang, Teresa & Davidson, Nancy W., 2006. "A process-oriented perspective of IS success: Examining the impact of IS on operational cost," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 448-460, October.
    21. Hwang, Yujong & Al-Arabiat, Mohanned & Rouibah, Kamel & Chung, -->Jin-Young, 2016. "Toward an integrative view for the leader-member exchange of system implementation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 976-986.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:13:y:2004:i:4:d:10.1023_b:grup.0000042859.55760.2f. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.