A critical view of dialectical inquiry as a tool in strategic planning

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Despite weak empirical support for its effectiveness, the dialectical inquiry system (DIS) has been recommended to improve the strategic decision‐making process. This study compares the effectiveness of the DIS to alternative techniques. Thirty‐two organizational planners from the United Way of America were randomly assigned to a DIS and three other planning conditions. All planners submitted a planning report for a common case situation. Results suggest that, in general, the quality of the reports from planners in the DIS condition was inferior to the quality of reports submitted by subjects in the other conditions. For example, reports submitted by planners in a devil's advocate condition were judged to reflect a significantly more appropriate degree of risk than reports submitted by DIS planners. These results suggest that further investigation of the DIS is necessary before the validity of the technique is assumed.