Showing papers in "Group Decision and Negotiation in 2001"

A Classification Scheme for Negotiation in Electronic Commerce

Abstract: In the last few years we have witnessed a surge of business-to-consumer and business-to-business commerce operated on the Internet. However many of these systems are often nothing more than electronic catalogues on which the user can choose a product which is made available for a fixed price. This modus operandi is clearly failing to exploit the full potential of electronic commerce. Against this background, we argue here that in the next few years we will see a new generation of systems emerge, based on automatic negotiation. In this paper we identify the main parameters on which any automatic negotiation depends. This classification schema is then used to categorise the subsequent papers in this book that focus on automatic negotiation.

Coalition analysis in group decision support

Abstract: GMCR II, a decision support system based on the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution, now contains an algorithm for Coalition Analysis to alert users that certain decision-makers would find it both feasible and beneficial to co-ordinate their actions The theory and implementation of Coalition Analysis in GMCR II are discussed and illustrated

Stakeholder values and scientific modeling in the Neuse River watershed

Abstract: In 1998, the North Carolina Legislature mandated a 30% reduction in the nitrogen loading in the Neuse River in an attempt to reduce undesirable environmental conditions in the lower river and estuary. Although sophisticated scientific models of the Neuse estuary exist, there is currently no study directly relating the nitrogen-reduction policy to the concerns of the estuarine system's stakeholders. Much of the difficulty lies in the fact that existing scientific models have biophysical outcome variables, such as dissolved oxygen, that are typically not directly meaningful to the public. In addition, stakeholders have concerns related to economics, modeling, implementation, and fairness that go beyond ecological outcomes. We describe a decision-analytic approach to modeling the Neuse River nutrient-management problem, focusing on linking scientific assessments to stakeholder objectives. The first step in the approach is elicitation and analysis of stakeholder concerns. The second step is construction of a probabilistic model that relates proposed management actions to attributes of interest to stakeholders. We discuss how the model can then be used by local decision makers as a tool for adaptive management of the Neuse River system. This discussion relates adaptive management to the notion of expected value of information and indicates a need for a comprehensive monitoring program to accompany implementation of the model. We conclude by acknowledging that a scientific model cannot appropriately address all the stakeholder concerns elicited, and we discuss how the remaining concerns may otherwise be considered in the policy process.

Evaluating a Framework for Multi-Stakeholder Decision Support in Water Resources Management

Abstract: In this paper we describe a framework for multicriteria modeling and support of multi-stakeholder decision processes. We report on its testing in the development of a new water level management policy for a regulated lake-river system in Finland. In the framework the stakeholders are involved in the decision process from the problem structuring stage to the group consensus seeking stage followed by a stage of seeking public acceptance for the policy. The framework aims at creating an evolutionary learning process. In this paper we also focus on the use of a new interactive method for finding and identifying Pareto-optimal alternatives. Role playing experiments with students are used to test the practical applicability of a negotiation support procedure called the method of improving directions. We also describe the preference programming approach for the aggregation of the stakeholder opinions in the final evaluation of alternatives and consensus seeking.

Adaptiveness in Virtual Teams: Organisational Challenges and Research Directions

Abstract: Computer supported teams are capturing the attention of academics and practitioners as organisations increasingly put them into practice as virtual teams. The practical relevance of current research into computer supported teams could be increased if greater attention is paid to organisational challenges as they form the context within which virtual teamwork takes place. A model of organisational challenges mapped against processes of adaptation is developed to highlight principle factors affecting virtual teams. A sample of current research groups studying computer-supported teams is plotted onto this map to reveal the extent to which current research addresses these contextual factors. From this map insights are distilled with respect to what is known and is not known about virtual teams. This paper concludes with specific research needs in the study of virtual teams.

Group decision and negotiation in strategy making

Abstract: For a large number of organisations effective delivery of strategy depends upon the psychological and emotional commitment of the Top Management Team (TMT) thus involving group negotiation and decision making. Computer based group support promoting open debate and developing commitment is therefore important and illustrated through examples from the presenter's large number of strategic interventions.

Modeling Distributive and Integrative Negotiations. Review and Revised Characterization

Abstract: The development of user-friendly negotiation support systems enabled negotiators to obtain advice directly from the system rather than via an intermediary. The emergence of e-commerce and the development of negotiating software agents further contributed to the automation of negotiation activities. These developments exposed inconsistencies in the descriptions of integrative and distributed negotiations. They also showed limitations of the existing modeling methods. These methods were designed to support negotiation experts who themselves had to make distinctions between distributive and integrative processes. Inconsistent descriptions and the lack of formal models that could be embedded in systems often contribute to a mechanical approach to negotiations compounding the difficulty in the design and development of software that can be used in real-life situations. The contradictions between the characteristics of integrative and distributive negotiations are discussed and assumptions for these two types as well as qualitative differences between them are proposed. Negotiation literature suggests that it is the negotiators' perception of the problem that leads to the their focus on either distributive or integrative conflict resolution. This may be the case for negotiations that are not supported with software. In case of the latter it is the design principles and information processing that that differentiates these two types of negotiations. Negotiation representation based on the information requirements for different types of conflict is proposed.

Contrasting single user and networked group decision support systems for strategy making

Abstract: The use of computers to support group work – as a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) – on strategy making has grown over the last decade Some GDSS's have a facilitator managing the computer with the group viewing a public screen displaying the debate, problem definition, and agreements of the group as it negotiates strategies Others involve members of the group in the direct input of data that forms part of the problem definition – data that is then used by the group employing electronic voting and other organizing devices This paper discusses a real case relating to an organization seeking to reach important agreements about its strategy The case involved the top management team and over 50 senior managers The organization used a facilitator driven GDSS for some of this work, and a networked system for other parts Some of the meetings were video taped, some were observed through one-way mirrors, and all of the participants were interviewed about their reactions to the different systems This paper reports on some of the significant contrasts between the two approaches

Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART

Abstract: Many complex decisions are made in a group environment, where the decision is made jointly by a committee or group structure. The individual group members are often not equally qualified to contribute equitably to the decision process, or may have different saliences (desires) to influence the decision. A quantitative knowledge of the players' decisional power is useful for better understanding of the group decision process, and could even be used in weighted voting within the group structure. We adapt the REMBRANDT suite of decision models (multiplicative AHP and SMART) to measure decisional power in groups, and we generalise this to cater for the case where power itself is deemed to be multidimensional in nature, and the case of uncertain subjective judgements of power amongst group members.

Interactive Multiple-Criteria Methods for Reaching Pareto Optimal Agreements in Negotiations

Abstract: The common features of two interactive methods that can be used in multiple-party negotiations over continuous issues are studied. One method is based on finding jointly improving directions to the parties to move along and the other on making constraint proposals to the parties. The history and the related literature on the subject is briefly surveyed in order to position the methods within the field. The basic similarities and differences together with the possibility to use them jointly are studied from the point of view of single negotiation text concept. Potential application areas including facilitation agents in distributed artificial intelligence are suggested.

A Multi-Attribute Negotiation Support System with Market Signaling for Electronic Markets

Abstract: Despite the rapid growth of technology and Internet-based markets, many of the current systems limit themselves to price as the single dimension variable and offer, if at all, only minimal negotiation support to the consumer. In the real world, commercial transactions take into account many other parameters both quantitative and qualitative such as product quality, speed, reputation, after sales service, etc. This paper discusses how these multiple attributes can be captured to augment standard negotiation processes in order to support electronic market transactions. Using a combination of utility theory and multicriteria decision-making, we propose heuristic algorithms to discover potential trades. In addition, the approach is included within a larger framework that incorporates market-signaling mechanisms. This not only allows for the systematic evolution of negotiation positions among buyers and sellers but can ultimately lead towards improving both market transparency and efficiency. To illustrate the multiple criteria model coupled with the dynamic market signaling framework, we report in this paper the implementation of a Web-based clearinghouse that serves the real estate market.

Provision of Step-Level Public Goods with Uncertain Provision Threshold and Continuous Contribution

Abstract: Common to most theoretical and empirical research on public goods is the assumption that the parameters of the game are common knowledge. Recent theoretical and empirical studies have questioned this assumption by arguing that many public goods situations are characterized by uncertainty regarding various aspects of the situation. In particular, Suleiman (1997) argued that members of production groups of step-level public goods are often uncertain about the value of the provision threshold. For this type of uncertainty he proposed three distinct models to account for the individual's contribution. The present study reports the results of an experiment designed primarily to test and contrast the predictions derived from two of these models – a subjective expected utility model and a cooperative model – regarding the effects of threshold uncertainty on contribution for the provision of step-level public goods. Other goals of the study were to test the joint effect of the threshold uncertainty level, and its mean (low vs. high), on contribution, and to examine the effect of threshold uncertainty on the individuals' estimates regarding the contributions of other group members. The results show that the effect of threshold uncertainty is moderated by the threshold mean: Contribution to the public good increased as a function of uncertainty for the lower threshold mean, and decreased (though not significantly) for the higher threshold mean. In contrast, for the two threshold means the subjects' estimates of the mean and variability of others' contribution increased with threshold uncertainty.The models' comparison revealed that the cooperative model was superior to the subjective expected utility model. This result adds to a substantial body of research on social dilemmas showing that under conditions of social (strategic) uncertainty, group members tacitly coordinate their choice behavior by anchoring their decisions on rules of fairness.

The Design of a GDSS Meeting Preparation Tool

Abstract: The facilitator is a critical resource in computer supported decision-making groups. Facilitation is a complex task, encompassing social and technical abilities, analysis and synthesis skills, and making use of planning and flexibility, which opens multiple opportunities for computational support. This paper addresses specifically the current limitations of pre-meeting support. Having the objective of increasing support to the facilitation activities that deal with the process facet, we developed a meeting preparation tool around a comprehensive model of the decision process. An experiment revealed that the tool produces considerably different meeting agendas, especially in what concerns size and diversity. An attempt to evaluate the quality of the meeting agendas indicates an increase in the clarity criterion.

A Distance-Based Collective Weak Ordering

Abstract: A group decision-making approach can be seen as a two stage process. The first stage allows for multi-cirteria evaluation of the alternatives and the second aims at deriving a collective weak ordering from the partial orderings supplied by the members after the first stage. The problem of combining the weak orderings to form a collective ranking is investigated. An axiomatic structure relating to the concept of distance between binary relations is developed. An algorithm for deriving the collective weak ordering is proposed, based on the idea of ranking first the least dominated alternatives.

Logrolling Procedure for Multi-Issue Negotiation

Abstract: In order to better deal with the complexity in multi-issue negotiation, a quantitative method which produces Pareto optimal solutions through jointly improving exchange of issues is proposed. The trade-off process is modelled using logrolling, in which loss in some issues is traded for gain in others, resulting in overall gain for all parties. This mutual gain approach is designed based on the integrative negotiation strategy. The objective of the logrolling method is in negotiation support by providing a structure and systematic analysis for ill-defined multi-issue negotiation problems. This study presents a formal representation of logrolling, the sequential logrolling procedure that is based on the exchange of two issues, and the general properties of the efficient frontier produced by logrolling under a linear preference assumption. The study also includes some discussion on implementation aspects of the logrolling method.

Analyzing Group Data in MIS Research: Including the Effect of the Group

Abstract: A review of recent group experimental research in three major MIS research journals indicates a lack of understanding of how to analyze group data measured at the individual level. This paper draws on statistical analysis literature from various disciplines to explain why current analysis of group data in MIS research is often incorrect and demonstrates how to analyze such data correctly.

Resolving Group Choice Paradoxes Using Probabilistic and Fuzzy Concepts

Abstract: The standard assumption of modern social choice theory is that the individuals are endowed with complete and transitive preference relations over the decision alternatives. A large number of incompatibility results has been achieved regarding aggregation of these kinds of preferences. Yet, most voting procedures make no use of this information. Instead they essentially cut down the information provided by the voters. In this paper we deal with some alternatives to the complete and transitive voter preference assumption. Particular attention is paid to imprecise notions: probabilistic and fuzzy preference relations. Rather than establishing new impossibility results, our focus is in resolving various voting paradoxes using imprecise preference concepts.

The Role of Leadership in Group Support Systems Failure

Abstract: This paper reports on a research case study in which the use of a Group Support System (GSS) by a multi-organizational alliance failed. The paper argues that the leadership style of the meeting champion may be a much greater moderating factor in GSS meeting success than previously thought. Transformational Leadership Theory is used to explain the results, and implications for both researchers and managers are drawn. Two themes emerge: first, the case shows where the concept of “phony democracy” may or may not occur. Second, the case illustrates conditions under which a GSS may generate, as opposed to mitigate conflict. For managers, it suggests that using a GSS may not be optimal if they choose to adopt a Transactional leadership style. For researchers, this work offers insights into boundary conditions affecting GSS usage, extending a paucity of research in negative GSS‐usage cases.

Constructionist Theory to Explain Effects of GDSS

Abstract: This paper analyses communication between actors as a major theoretical element in understanding the link between GDSS (Group Decision Support System) and the construction of shared meaning. The concept of shared meaning is discussed by using two schools of thought: Constructionism versus Constructivism. The schools differ in their approach to processes of communication and conversational techniques. Constructionist theory focuses on the necessity to activate process of intersubjectivity between individuals to reach shared meaning while constructivist theory focuses on process of negotiation. Arguments are given in this paper in favor of the Constructionist approach for dealing with the high complexity of the organizational issues involved in GDSS. The two theoretical approaches were operationalized under two different paradigms of communication: Intersubjective (Constructionist) versus Negotiative (Constructivist) and were compared in an experimental set-up. Better results were found for a GDSS based on the Constructionist paradigm.

On Creating and Claiming Value in Negotiations

Abstract: This paper presents a negotiation model that includes value creation. It shows that creative negotiation efforts tend to intensify toward the deadline, and that the deadline is determined endogenously by the tension between two motives, creating more value and claiming from existing value. When the parties can present “misleading” offers in order to claim rather than create value, the outcome in early negotiation rounds may display an impasse where any proposal is rejected without inspection, while negotiation activities such as value creation through “sincere” offers and inspection of clauses intensify toward the deadline.

Going Public and the Sale of Shares with Heterogeneous Investors: Agent‐Based Computational Modelling and Computer Simulations

Abstract: In this paper we use agent‐based computational modelling and computer simulations to examine the interrelationship between different selling strategies for going public. A great deal of recent empirical evidence suggests that to maximise the revenue raised from the shares sold in the public offering, it is fundamental to choose the appropriate design for the sale which, in turn, reflects the final ownership structure. This literature establishes that the market for shares is segmented and, particularly, that firms manage the sale of shares with the purpose of discriminating between relatively small and passive investors and applicants for large potentially controlling blocks. One of the key questions in this area, then, is: How and to what extent should this heterogeneity among potential investors influence the firm's strategy for selling shares? Here we attempt to address this question from the standpoint of using agent‐based computational modelling and computer simulations. Results show that the design of the sale is an important determinant of the performance of the negotiation process through which the firm is sold. A sequential sale beginning with an initial public offering of dispersed shares, followed by a negotiated sale of a controlling block is, in general, more effective than other alternative selling strategies. Changing the negotiation protocol itself can act as an effective way of impacting upon the revenue raised and the length of the process. The interrelationship between the method of sale and the performance may also depend on the degree of cognitive accuracy that characterises the negotiating agents' mental representations of their physical and social environment.

Information Collection Strategic Design in Experts-assisted Decision Making Paradigm

Abstract: In an experts-assisted decision making paradigm, the information collection design becomes a strategic variable under a weak assumption that the final decision is dependent on the design used to collect information as well. As a result, the same information of the experts and the decision maker about the problem can potentially produce different final decisions for different information collection designs. The implication is that a decision maker can strategically select a design which serves his/her objective. This paper uses a Bayesian estimation methodology for combining experts' information with the decision maker's prior. An information collection process is designed by setting constraints on this model. Several designs are developed here using such controlled factors as a one-stage versus a two-stage decision process, experts' rank ordering, and group versus individual lobbying/consultation. An example is provided to illustrate the applicability of the concept. It is shown that the information produced in the process of producing a decision can also give insights into the impacts of the decision maker and the experts on the decision.

Collective decision skill and decisive voting games

Abstract: The paper discusses various representations of collective decisional skill which are useful in the evaluation of decision structures. The recursion formulas we give here and the use of the concepts of majority deficiency as well as majority and unanimity games present expedient approaches in analyzing collective competence. Using the simple majority system as benchmark, applications to certain hierarchic decision structures are presented. The resulting inequalities dealing with collective decisional skills of hierarchic systems are an improvement of previous published results.

European research on group decision support systems : Introduction to the special issue

Abstract: Group Decision Support Systems have been around for nearly two decades now, and have made considerable strides since the original systems back in the early 80's, being used in numerous organizations for a wealth of different purposes. As they have developed, through both laboratory experiments and field studies we have seen them used in different contexts,and situations and consequently have seen the development of a number of 'strands' or'directions' being taken. Initially these emphases could be detected in the origins of the work. For example, in the US, a large proportion has taken a fairly technical focus stemming from their development springing from Information Systems/Computer Science backgrounds - and due to the traditions of that academic community largely comprised positivist research. In Europe however, the emphasis has been more on taking a socio-political perspective and working in organizations and along with researchers adopting predominantly interpretivist methodologies. Neither of these is better than one another, both giving rise to interesting and useful insights, and enriching the field. Moreover, in the last few years we have seen the two 'schools' come together more, as each has taken on board particular aspects of the other - resulting in 'hybrids' that potentially outperform those systems developed in either tradition.