Better group decisions: using knowledge acquisition techniques to build richer decision models

Abstract

Existing group decision support systems used in meeting rooms can help teams reach decisions quickly and efficiently. However, the decision models used by these systems are inadequate for many types of problems. This paper describes our laboratory's experience with knowledge acquisition systems and decision support tools. Our studies lead us to develop a comprehensive decision model for group decision support systems. This model combines current brainstorming-oriented methods, structbed text argumentation (using the gIBIS model), repertory grids, possibility tables (morphological charts), and influence diagrams from decision analysis. Each component addresses weaknesses in current group decision support systems. We are assembling these components together into a group decision support workbench (Figure 1). Enhancing group productivity with decision supportTo better solve complex problems and foster interdisciplinary work, The Boeing Company has made major organizational changes. For example, the design and fabrication of a commercial airplane requires hundreds of disciplines to cooperatively work together to satisfy customer expectations. These activities require group decisions which integrate sources of information such as customer requirements, technological advancements, and manufacturing methods. Decision alternatives must be evaluated against assumptions, objectives, and constraints. For the next generation airplane, this will require the development of new collaborative information support environments. To promote the development of a collaborative support environment, we are combining group decision support systems and knowledge acquisition Figure 1. Our decision support model combines components of current group decision support systems and knowledge acquisition tools and methods. 4 0073-1 129-1/92 $3.00 0 1992 IEEE

Knowledge acquisition tools based on personal construct psychology

“…It was originally developed for NASA as part of an effort to capture design knowledge for the Space Station Freedom program (Boose, Shema and Bradshaw, 1990). In recent years, a major focus of activity for the group has become the development of group decision support systems based on extended repertory grids and decision analysis (Boose, Bradshaw, Koszarek and Shema, 1992). Figure 27 Engineering design in Canard 10 TOOLS BASED ON PERSONAL CONSTRUCT PSYCHOLOGY-KSSn KSS0 and AQUINAS were both developed commencing with the standard, rating-scale based repertory grid and extending it in various ways.…”

“…It was originally developed for NASA as part of an effort to capture design knowledge for the Space Station Freedom program (Boose et al, 1990). In recent years, a major focus of activity for the group has become the development of group decision support systems based on extended repertory grids and decision analysis (Boose et al, 1992).…”

Lean management, group support systems, and hypermedia: a combination whose time has come

“…The Boeing Computer Science Technology Organization has developed an example of an advanced TSS for use within its parent organization [20]. One thing noteworthy about their approach is that they have designed and built an environment, DDUCKS, rather than an application.…”

The case for interpretive structural modelling as a technique for enhancing electronic meeting system support

“…However, the decision models used by these systems (i.e. Nominal Group Technique, Ideawriting) are incapable of fully supporting the multifarious nature of many types of problems in today's complex organizational environment, particularly in the convergence phase of complex tasks when users are reducing and categorizing ideas (Boose, Bradshaw, Koszarek & Shema, 1992). For example, TeamFocus and Groupsystems are good at sorting lists, but poor at structuring, while OptionFinder becomes somewhat unmanageable for the comparison of large numbers of pairs of items because it lacks inferencing capabilities.…”