IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v6y1997i1d10.1023_a1008636524765.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Multi-Agent View of Strategic Planning Using Group Support Systems and Artificial Intelligence

Author

Listed:
  • R. Orwig

    (University of Arizona MIS Department)

  • H. Chen

    (University of Arizona MIS Department)

  • D. Vogel

    (University of Arizona MIS Department)

  • J. F. Nunamaker

    (University of Arizona MIS Department)

Abstract

The strategic planning process is dynamic and complex. Including a Group Support System (GSS) in the problem-solving process can improve the content quality of the strategic plan by allowing increased participation by more members of the organization. However, it can also add to the complexity of the problem by increasing the quantity of textual information that can result from group activity. Added complexity increases cognitive overload and frustrations of those participants negotiating the contents of the strategic plan. This article takes a multi-agent view of the strategic planning process. It considers group participants as multiple agents concerned with the content quality of the strategic plan. The facilitator agent is responsible for guiding groups in the strategic plan construction process as well as for solving process problems such as cognitive overload. We introduce an AI Concept Categorizer agent, a software tool that supports the facilitator in addressing the process problem of cognitive overload associated with convergent group activities by synthesizing group textual output into conceptual clusters. The implementation of this tool reduces frustrations which groups encounter in the process of classifying textual output and provides more time for discussion of the concepts themselves. Because of the large amount of convergent activity necessary for strategic planning, the addition of the AI Concept Categorizer to the strategic planning process should increase the quality of the strategic plan and the buy-in of the participants in the strategic planning process.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Orwig & H. Chen & D. Vogel & J. F. Nunamaker, 1997. "A Multi-Agent View of Strategic Planning Using Group Support Systems and Artificial Intelligence," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 37-59, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:6:y:1997:i:1:d:10.1023_a:1008636524765
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008636524765
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1008636524765
    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/A:1008636524765?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. Terry Connolly & Leonard M. Jessup & Joseph S. Valacich, 1990. "Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 689-703, 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. Fotis Kitsios & Maria Kamariotou, 2021. "Artificial Intelligence and Business Strategy towards Digital Transformation: A Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Shuliang Li & Jim Zheng Li, 2009. "A multi‐agent‐based hybrid framework for international marketing planning under uncertainty," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(3), pages 231-254, July.
    3. Christoph Keding, 2021. "Understanding the interplay of artificial intelligence and strategic management: four decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 91-134, February.
    4. Keding, Christoph & Meissner, Philip, 2021. "Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).

    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. de Vet, A.J., 2007. "The effects of thinking in silence on creativity and innovation," Other publications TiSEM 75a9cbd3-19ab-4f82-ad2f-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Chen, Fang & Zhang, Limin & Latimer, Joseph, 2014. "How much has my co-worker contributed? The impact of anonymity and feedback on social loafing in asynchronous virtual collaboration," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 652-659.
    3. Sajda Qureshi, 1998. "Supporting a Network Way of Working in an Electronic Social Space," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(5), pages 399-416, September.
    4. Ni Huang & Yili Hong & Gordon Burtch, 2015. "Digital Social Visibility, Anonymity and User Content Generation: Evidence from Natural Experiments," Working Papers 15-04, NET Institute.
    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. Robert O. Briggs & John D. Murphy, 2011. "Discovering and Evaluating Collaboration Engineering Opportunities: An Interview Protocol Based on the Value Frequency Model," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 315-346, May.
    7. Kimmy Wa Chan & Stella Yiyan Li & Jian Ni & John JianJun Zhu, 2021. "What Feedback Matters? The Role of Experience in Motivating Crowdsourcing Innovation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(1), pages 103-126, January.
    8. Youngjin Kim & Starr Roxanne Hiltz & Murray Turoff, 2002. "Coordination Structures and System Restrictiveness in Distributed Group Support Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 379-404, September.
    9. Terri L. Griffith & Mark A. Fuller & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1998. "Facilitator Influence in Group Support Systems: Intended and Unintended Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 20-36, March.
    10. John D. Murphy & Deepak Khazanchi, 2008. "Synergistic Ideation Through Pairing Participants in Facilitated Group Support Systems Sessions," American Journal of Business, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(2), pages 27-35.
    11. Mi, Hwang, 1998. "Did Task Type Matter in the Use of Decision Room GSS? A Critical Review and a Meta-analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Sajda Qureshi & Min Liu & Doug Vogel, 2006. "The Effects of Electronic Collaboration in Distributed Project Management," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 55-75, January.
    13. Colin Eden & Fran Ackermann, 2014. "‘Joined-Up’ Policy-Making: Group Decision and Negotiation Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 1385-1401, November.
    14. Kent Marett & Joey F. George, 2013. "Barriers to Deceiving Other Group Members in Virtual Settings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 89-115, January.
    15. Viju Raghupathi & Raquel Benbunan-Fich, 2020. "A Social Capital Perspective on Computer-Mediated Group Communication and Performance: An Empirical Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 747-801, August.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Monica J. Garfield & Nolan J. Taylor & Alan R. Dennis & John W. Satzinger, 2001. "Research Report: Modifying Paradigms—Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques, and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 322-333, September.
    19. Isabella Seeber & Ronald Maier & Barbara Weber, 2013. "Macrocognition in Collaboration: Analyzing Processes of Team Knowledge Building with CoPrA," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 915-942, September.
    20. Jacqueline Ng Lane & Bruce Ankenman & Seyed Iravani, 2018. "Insight into Gender Differences in Higher Education: Evidence from Peer Reviews in an Introductory STEM Course," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 442-456, December.

    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:6:y:1997:i:1:d:10.1023_a:1008636524765. 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.