A Comparative Study of Participant Satisfaction with Group Decision-Making between Consensus and Analytic Hierarchy Process Techniques.

详细信息   

• 作者：Hightower ; Matthew W.
• 学历：D.B.A.
• 年：2014
• 毕业院校：Northcentral University
• Department：School of Business and Technology Management
• ISBN：9781321287462
• CBH：3642092
• Country：USA
• 语种：English
• FileSize：4095980
• Pages：180

文摘

Research indicates that the analytic hierarchy process' (AHP) influence on group decision-making outcomes shows promise. The use of the AHP technique has been found to provide structure to the group decision-making process and to increase participation. The specific problem this study addressed was the need for an understanding of the effectiveness of the AHP group decision-making technique in a higher education setting by comparing it to a consensus decision-making technique. The purpose of this quantitative,quasi-experimental study was to compare the AHP group decision-making technique with the consensus decision-making technique in terms of individuals' perceptions of satisfaction with the process (SP),satisfaction with the outcome (SO),and satisfaction with the group (SG). Data were collected from a convenience sample of faculty and staff members,administrators,and community members associated with a small community college in California. The conceptual framework of the study included: (a) group decision-making in organizations,(b) dissatisfaction with the group decision-making process,(c) negative outcomes of the dissatisfaction,and (d) use of the AHP for group decision-making. The study focused on three research questions that asked how the AHP group decision-making technique compares with the consensus technique in terms of participants' satisfaction with (a) the process,(b) the outcome,and (c) the group. The study's quantitative methodology utilized a quasi-experimental design that used within-subjects repeated measures. Repeated measures ANCOVA was intended to examine differences between the two decision-making techniques but,due to assumption issues,paired-samples t tests were used instead. Statistical results showed that participants were significantly more satisfied with the process,outcome,and group when using the consensus technique than with the AHP. Several study limitations informed the recommendations to allocate more time and provide adequate training when implementing new group decision-making techniques. Additionally,recommendations for future research suggest using another AHP trial with relative real-life workplace scenarios. Results from this study may contribute to improvements in the group decision-making implementation process in terms of increasing participant satisfaction,thereby addressing the broader issues of loss of productivity,lower morale,job dissatisfaction,and additional expenses for organizations.