One aspect of brainstorming that has received little research attention is how the brainstorming problem should be presented to the group, whether as one all-encompassing question or as a series of separate questions each focusing on one aspect of the problem. This paper reports the results of two experiments in which subjects (MBAs in the first, senior executives in the second) electronically brainstormed on intact problems (where all parts of the problem were presented simultaneously) or on decomposed problems (where three subcategories of the problem were sequentially posed to the groups). In both experiments, groups using the decomposed process generated 60% more ideas. We attribute these differences to the ability of time constraints to increase the rate of idea generation, and the ability of problem decomposition to refocus members' attention more evenly across the entire problem.
This paper reports on a study aimed at integrating an important but neglected behavioral issue--group development--into group decision support systems (GDSS) research. Group development is based on the fact that most groups have a past and a future, and this affects group outcomes. However, most GDSS studies have investigated only a single group session. This study examined the behavior of groups using a GDSS over multiple sessions. The study reported in this paper specifically examined the following two questions: (1) does computer support affect the development of decision-making groups? and (2) do the patterns of development differ over time between computer-supported and manual groups? These two questions were studied using a two-factorial repeated measures research design. Results showed significant differences in development patterns between computer-supported groups and manual groups in terms of conflict management and degree of cohesiveness. After adapting to GDSS, computer-supported groups displayed more productive conflict management and higher group cohesiveness than manual groups.