The role of the management when using meeting software.

Hans Mulder | January 12, 2021

Managers flee in quantitative or qualitative studies. The results are one-sided. Decision-making systems can help integrate the two approaches. How do managers make decisions? Managers must use both their left and right hemispheres to be successful, said Henry Mintzberg years ago (The nature of managerial work, Prentice Hall, 1973).

Prof.dr. P.M.A. Ribbers distinguishes two approaches in making decisions.
1. The methodical approach: rational, analytical, formal and documented. Examples of this way of thinking are methods such as net present value and payback time.
2. The Social Intervention and is characterized by working on a shared vision through experimentation and collaboration between the stakeholders.

According to Ribbers, research shows that managers are successful through a combination of the methodical and intervention approach. In other words, decision-making systems must support both an analytical and an intervention approach. But the practice is often different.

On the one hand, there is a flight in investment calculations, data warehouses, quantitative market research: the methodical approach. The end result is numbers.

On the other hand, we see a flight in committees, qualitative pile driving sessions, corridors and charismatic advisers: the social intervention. The end result is a text.

The reporting systems of the methodical approach mainly use data from transaction systems. The managers receive various lists about this, which are the sum of the daily processes and the historical course of events. This makes going through those lists comparable to reading yesterday's newspaper. In addition, the data from the operational processes is self-contained. However, managers above all need to look ahead, to the road ahead.

The weakness of the methodical approach is that management information is seen as a by-product of the transaction systems, as described by John F. Rockart as early as 1979 (Chief executives define their own data needs, Harvard Business Review March-April 1979). While management is mainly interested in new trends, needs and expectations, and not in determining the damage afterwards.

The social intervention approach is very similar to Rockart's Null approach. In the Zero approach, managers meet their information needs by maintaining a large network of employees and advisers themselves, using the telephone, notes and corridors. An important tool in decision-making is the intuition of the manager. This 'soft' support is also a weakness compared to the 'hard' figures and systems of the methodical approach. In the Zero approach, decisions are often made on the basis of feelings, while there is no substantiation.

In addition to 'hard' and 'soft' information, managers need internal and external orientation points, which supports social intervention. The meeting session combines both with meeting software (Group support system), as in quantitative and qualitative SWOT analysis.

Within a GSS, the original expectations and the progress scores (on both 'hard' and 'soft' criteria) can easily be compared with each other. The difference in perception - both textually and numerically - between the different groups of stakeholders can be made visible by means of filtering. Any adjustments can be discussed and applied in a result-oriented manner.

In summary, it can be concluded that a combined approach with group support systems leads to high-quality management information, while the involvement of employees, customers and / or partners is high. On a frequent basis and / or on a large scale, group support systems provide management with the necessary qualitative and quantitative information to take responsible and supported decisions.

Agile Development & TestingOther practical applications concern the use of conference systems in agile development and the testing of Internet applications. These agile sessions can be well supported online by GSS. Every day the wishes and requirements are structured and priorities are set by the team for further development. This form of development and testing is particularly interesting for Internet applications, because use can be made of different place meetings with Teams, Google or Zoom and the opening of two browser tabs: one tab is used to test the Internet application. , the other - the Internet page with the meeting software - is used to inventory, structure and evaluate the test results. In this way any user can be involved at any random place. The development process is thus accelerated and more structured.

Risk analysis and managementFor risk analysis and management there are specific agendas for information security, for example. The police have been using meeting systems for risk analysis and management for years, but also for evaluating scenarios in Cold Cases, stakeholder and citizen participation, large-scale research, the national threat assessment and expert panels, see appendices. In summary, it can be concluded that a combined approach with group support systems leads to high-quality management information, while the involvement of employees, customers and / or partners is high. On a frequent basis and / or on a large scale, group support systems provide management with the necessary qualitative and quantitative information to take responsible and supported decisions.