An empirical investigation of the effects of process restrictiveness sources on the perceptions and performance of decision-making groups in a group support system environment

Abstract

Group Support Systems (GSSs) have been advanced to improve group decision making. Much work on group decision making has advocated that groups use structured decision procedures or heuristics to enhance their decision processes. Organizational research, however, has documented that groups seldom adhere to structured decision procedures, instead they pattern group interaction in ways which are more familiar or less effortful. The present research extends adaptive structuration theory by investigating the role of process restrictiveness. An experiment evaluated the efficacy of facilitation-based, user-based (e.g., training), and technology-based sources of process restrictiveness to improve group outcomes. The process restrictiveness sources were investigated individually and in combinations. Five person groups worked on an intellective hidden-profile task and all groups used a GSS. Group level measures of decision quality and consensus along with individual member satisfaction were assessed among eight different process restrictiveness treatments.

The results found that the three sources of process restrictiveness frequently interacted to moderate decision quality, consensus, and satisfaction. In general, facilitation resulted in high decision quality, low process satisfaction, high outcome satisfaction, and no impact on consensus. User training resulted in low decision quality, low process satisfaction, high outcome satisfaction, and low consensus. System-based process restrictiveness resulted in low decision quality, high process satisfaction, low outcome satisfaction, and high consensus.

Facilitation was effective in correcting process deviations when the group strayed from the structured decision procedure. User training produced an awareness of the decision procedure, but did not sufficiently equip the groups to faithfully appropriate it. System-based process restrictiveness provided procedural focus for the group.

These results have implications for the design and organizational adoption of GSS technology. They can help guide efforts to embed group decision process expertise in GSSs.