2012/11/05 12:30 Fan Dong, Kelly Lyons, “Collaborative Decision Making: An Implementation of the Delphi Approach in a Social Platform”

Cascon 2012: Technical Paper Presentations, Session 1 – Database Management and Clouds

This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship, posted on the by David Ing.

Presentation by Kelly Lyons, on behalf of primary author Fan Dong


Research was supported by SAP and NSERC

Fan Dong was master’s stduent, now at the Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest

  • Other researchers are at SAP

SAP Streamwork, tried with Delphi method

Collaborative decision-making:  DeSantcis & Gallupe

  • Divergence phase
  • Convergence phase

Three activities

  • Information sampling
  • Information exchange
  • Information processing

Unstructured meetings

  • Problems:  only one person can talk, synchronous, may recall information but may not be accurate or complete, could have social structure effects (boss)

Organizations have implemented structured meetings

  • Highly administered
  • e.g. IBM ACT (Accelerate Change Today), everyone writes 5 ideas on recipe cards, facilitator helps people read out cards, then sticky page on wall — divergences — and then people could move around cards, vote with sticky dots — convergence
  • Helps process be less influenced by social-emotional, more focus, surfacing of nonconforming ideas

1960s example: Delphi decision technique

  • Emergent phase then convergent phase
  • People wouldn’t see who contributes what, anonymous
  • Coordinator summarizes, removes duplicates, passes back to experts iterate

Features of Delphi

  • Iterative
  • Anonymity

Group Decision Support Systems (GDSSs)

  • As simple as a computer phone, Skype, video
  • Could have computer terminals, structure provided through the tool, telepresence
  • More and more, see social features being added

How can social features (e.g. in social networking technologies) support collaborative decision-making.

Social features (from S-FIT: A Technique for Integrating Social Features in Existing Information Systems, Kelly Lyons and Lysanne Lessard, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2132176.2132210 ).

  • User profiles
  • Articulated networks (directed and undirected following)
  • Communities and groups (e.g. swim team)
  • User generated content (UGC)
  • Contribution to UGC

SAP Streamwork, used in research group, and with SAP

  • Can function as a GDSS
  • Can define decision activities, e.g. decide on a task, including SWOT analysis, brainstorming (ranking/rating)
  • Also a social system
  • Has user profile, contact information, phone number
  • Can direct graph, i.e. followers
  • Can set up group, e.g. current students
  • Can contribute content, e.g. activity to set up a meeting with background documents; can update status, people can respond / like

Can we understand how old fashion tools (with anonymity, structure) work with the current research?

  • Current tools aren’t anonymous, don’t have structure

Fan set out to implement the Delphi decision-making process in Streamworks

  • Idea generation and decision-making, where there aren’t right/wrong answers (e.g. a restaurant for lunch)
  • Two-step Delphi technique:  brainstorm, then ranking
  • Decision making group was diverse and unknown to each other, but eventually turned out to be homogenous
  • Evaluated with satisfaction with experience; no right/wrong means can’t report on outcome

Delphi, people come together, brainstorm, remove duplicates, rank

Had to figure out, how to deal with a coordinator, set as the person who initiated the activity

  • On Streamwork, could see who’s online, but then could then attribute ideas to people, so had to disable
  • To comment / update on something, change to say “someone comment”
  • Couldn’t reform content
  • Modify to make anonymous, e.g. brainstorming, can only see own, ranking see own, voting where people could vote for more than one

Brainstorming before and after

Evaluation:  Thought anonymity enhanced colloboration

Future: Can social features be used to enhance decision-making?

  • In this case, actually disabled to social features

[Questions]

Not liking the tool?

  • Recently implemented gamification in Streamworks, people said “can’t we just talk to each other”
  • Have found that it could be more effective as anonymous

People want to have attributed ideas?

  • Yes, could do with a decision tree, type of platform
  • Delphi may not be appropriate to everyone

Conference support systems

  • Depends what you want to do
  • In discussing papers, we may want to know where the voice is coming from

Do we need another social network tool specific to this?

  • Interested in how we could take an existing tool, and insert new features.

Other types of systems?

  • Other people doing something similar, e.g. recommender steps
  • Just need to find the right one for path
Advertisements

#delphi, #gdss, #group-decision-support-system