The non-consensus process loss: an alternative interpretation

Much of the GSS literature comparing GSS groups with manual groups has produced contrary results. One of the more confusing is that GSS groups have a higher level of non-consensus than manual groups. Lack of consensus in GSS groups is considered to be a negative aspect of GSS. This paper argues that non-consensus is not necessarily harmful, and proposes an alternative interpretation of non-consensus using a measure other than actual consensus: an influence level of information. Experimental results show GDSS provide more influential information than manual groups and that measuring influential information can be a better predictor of satisfaction than actual consensus. We discuss these implications, as well as additional directions for further consensus research.