Abstract
AbstractPrevious research has found that groups using dialectical inquiry (DI) or devil's advocacy (DA) make better strategic decisions than groups using a consensus (C) approach. This paper explains those findings by using new data to show that the DI and DA approaches make better use of the capabilities of individual group members. Specifically, the DI and DA groups yielded significantly higher quality recommendations and assumptions than the average of the individuals in the respective groups, whereas the C groups did not. Moreover, the recommendations and assumptions of the DI groups and the recommendations of the DA groups significantly exceeded those of the best individual in the respective groups. There were no significant differences for the C groups.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
