47 CONTRASTING SINGLE USER AND NETWORKED GDSS’S FOR STRATEGY MAKING Group Decision and Negotiation 10: 47–66, 2001 © 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands Contrasting Single User and Networked Group Decision Support Systems for Strategy Making FRAN ACKERMANN AND COLIN EDEN Department of Management Science, University of Strathclyde, 40 George Street, Glasgow, G1 1QE, Scotland, UK (Email: Fran@mansci.strath.ac.uk) Abstract The use of computers to support group work – as a Group Decision Support System (GDSS) – on strategy mak- ing 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 strate- gies. 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 dis- cusses 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. Key words: GDSS, strategy, facilitation, single user group support, networked group support, manual techniques 1. Introduction Over the last decade there has been substantial growth in the interest and use of computers to support group work. Two of the system types widely discussed are Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) and Group Support Systems (GSS) (see Jessup and Valacich 1993). While the main aim of each type is to support group work, there are important dif- ferences. For example, the extent to which they each seek to explore issues such as: reach- ing agreements, determining accountability, and considering the political feasibility of agreements (Ackermann and Eden 1997; Eden 1994, 1995). Group Decision Support Sys- tems focus on providing a group with modelling support (Ackermann 1997) helpful when solving problems. The success of these decision-focussed systems largely depends upon the quality of the decisions made (although see Eden and Ackermann (1996) for a discus- sion on how multiple stakeholders evaluate such systems). Thus, a GDSS is usually built around a particular theoretical and methodological approach to decision modelling, prob- lem solving and the management of complexity (DeSanctis and Gallupe 1987; Dickson et al. 1992; Phillips 1987; Quinn et al. 1985). Computer supported GDSS’s may make con- siderable use of multiple workstation direct entry methods exploiting GSS’s focus on (a) helping increase the productivity of the group (McGoff et al. 1990; Vogel et al. 1990), (b) improving participation levels (Gallupe et al. 1991), and (c) providing anonymity to the