Ethical Decision Making: A Comparison of Computer- Supported and Face-to-face Group

This study compares computer-supported groups, i.e., groups using group support systems (GSS), and face-to-face groups using ethical decision-making tasks. A laboratory experiment was conducted using five-person groups of information systems professionals. Face-to-face (FTF) and GSS groups were compared in terms of their decision outcomes and group members' reactions. The results revealed that computer-supported and face-to-face groups showed no significant difference in terms of the decision outcomes of choice shift and decision polarity. However, FTF groups reached their decisions more quickly and they were more successful in attaining group consensus than GSS groups. Subjects evaluated face-to-face communication more favorably than GSS interaction on most post-group measures related to perceived group processes and satisfaction. Despite these outcomes, some possibilities for using GSS technology in an ethical decision making context are examined.     

The Effects of Process and Content Facilitation Restrictiveness on GSS-Mediated Collaborative Learning

Group Support Systems (GSS) technology, extensively applied in decision-making contexts, is now seeing increased application in the educational sector. Previous work has suggested that GSS applications can have significant positive effects on both the process and the outcome of collaborative learning. This study extends this work to examine the effects of process (high/low) and content (high/low) facilitation restrictiveness on GSS-supported collaborative learning. Our results indicate that content facilitation restrictiveness has no significant bearing on student learning. Process facilitation restrictiveness, on the other hand, is more influential, with knowledge acquisition by students requiring a low restrictive environment.     

Distributed group support systems: Social dynamics and design dilemmas

A “distributed group support system”; includes decision support tools and structures embedded within a computer‐mediated communication system rather than installed in a “decision room.”; It should support groups who are distributed in space but not time ("synchronous”; groups), as well as “asynchronous”; groups whose members participate at different times. Pilot studies conducted in preparation for a series of controlled experiments are reviewed in order to identify some of the problems of implementing such a system. Many of the means used by groups meeting in the same place at the same time to coordinate their activities are missing. Embedding decision support tools within a different communications medium and environment changes the way they “work.”; Speculations are presented about software tools and structuring or facilitation procedures that might replace the “missing”; coordination channels.     

Group Development (II): Implications for GSS Research and Practice

This article is the second of a two-part series that examines the issue ofgroup development and its impact on the study and design of group supportsystems. It builds on the ideas developed in the preceding article anddiscusses the implications of group development for group support systems(GSS) research. Specifically, the paper examines the impact of computersupport systems on group development processes. Our previous paper reviewed models of development—based on two competingparadigms, sequential and nonsequential—proposed by various researchers.Despite differences between the two paradigms, individual models share somecommon aspects, from the types of processes experienced to the nature ofoutputs produced, that jointly help describe group development. Commonprocesses displayed in the evolution of a group, distilled from the variousmodels, include cohesiveness, conflict management, balance betweensocioemotional and task needs, effective communication, and involvement ingroup activities. Additionally, the various models also indicate that groupshave critical periods in their developmental path. This paper develops the idea that GSS structures can support groups withtheir developmental processes and help them deal with critical periods. MostGSS provide global structures like anonymity, simultaneity, and the capacityfor enhanced information processing. These structures, if appropriatedeffectively by groups, can influence their developmental paths over time. Inmany cases these structures can help the development of groups by improvingtheir ability to manage conflict, increasing their cohesiveness, developing asense of group identity, and enhancing open communication. This paperdevelops a set of testable propositions that can guide researchers of groupbehavior, organizational users of GSS, and developers of these systems.     

Challenging Group Support Systems Research: The Case for Strategic Decision Making

Strategic decision making (SDM) often occurs in groups that can benefit from the use of group support systems (GSS). However, no comprehensive review of this logical intersection has been made. We explore this intersection by viewing GSS research through the lens of SDM. First, SDM is broadly characterized and a model of GSS-mediated SDM is produced. Second, we review empirical GSS research linking these findings to the characteristics of SDM. We conclude that GSS research has not produced sufficient knowledge about group history, heterogeneity, member experience, task type, time pressure, technology or tool effects, and decision consensus for a favorable evaluation of SDM in GSS groups. SDM in GSS groups challenges researchers to study the effects of group processes such as those just mentioned in a context that involves ongoing and established groups, political activity, and a multiplicity of tasks.     

An Experimental Analysis of Face to Face versus Computer Mediated Communication Channels

Experimental research on Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS) has generally focused on democratic groups whose members typically share the same objectives. In organizations, however, there are many situations where groups have a leader who has the power to override the group's recommendation, the objective of the leader may not be the same as the objective of each member, and not everyone may have the same information. This paper reports the results of an experiment in which the groups, having a designated leader, worked on a mixed-motive task. Within this context, we analyze group decision outcomes and processes for groups that use a face-to-face channel of cormnunication and those that utilize computer mediated communication. We compare performance of the leader and members with respect to an objective measure of performance, the efficient frontier. The results indicate that for this task groups using face-to-face channel outperform groups using computer mediated communication.     

Using and Influence Level of Information to Explain the Non-consensus Process Loss

Much of the Group Support System (GSS) literature comparing GSS groups with manual groups has produced contrarian 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 low levels of consensus are not necessarily harmful and should be expected given the assumptions about GSSs. This study uses an alternate measure to compare face-to-face groups with GSS groups; an influence level of information. Experimental results using an influence level of information show no difference between face-to-face group members and GSS group members. We discuss these implications, as well as additional directions for further consensus research.     

The Meta Environment: A New Group Support System Structure

The greatest success of conventional group support systems (GSS) has been in meetings whose purpose is to extract and record the ideas that participants bring to the meeting. Research supports the usefulness of GSS when complexity is high and groups are large. Conventional GSS almost always require a facilitator or group leader to guide a group through a desired set of tasks. The next natural step beyond conventional GSS is to empower people to use even a broader set of tools in meetings. This article proposes a new GSS structure called the meta environment in which group members bring material into the meeting from their individual workstations, and interact dynamically not only to generate new material, but also to access and analyze existing computer-based information such as spreadsheets and documents. More importantly, a meta environment enables people to work both in synchronism and out of synchronism with the meeting, and adjust to and remember work across meetings. A prototype development project and user testing shows how meta environment components can be built and used. Results from the user testing suggest the need for a new cycle of empirical testing in GSS research to evaluate the effect of the meta environment on existing and new group structures.     

Distance education in the future: Exploring the application of distributed group support systems

Distributed Group Support Systems (DGSS) provide a means for several individuals to interact with one another from different geographic locations using telecommunications and Group Support Systems (GSS) technologies. As this technology emerges, new applications will be sought to utilize the tremendous capabilities for long distance interaction and communication. One potential application of DGSS is its use in the delivery of Distance Education. Distance Education (DE) involves the delivery of education (or training) from one site to one (or more) geographically dispersed sites. The capability of DGSS to add an additional communications channel, one by which all students could interact with one another at the same time, provides an exciting array of opportunities for the application of DGSS. This article explores ways in which DGSS could be utilized to improve the delivery of education and training to dispersed locations. Background information of GSS and DE are provided Results of a case, study in which a fiber optic cable network was used for delivering a DE class on Information Systems are briefly highlighted, along with suggestions for future research in this area.A previous version of this article appears in the Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Volume IV, pp. 142–148.     

Group Development (I): A Review and Synthesis of Development Models

This is the first of two parts that examine the issue of group development and its impact on the study design of group support systems (GSS). We review the various models of group development, analyze the sources of differences among these models, and synthesize common themes across various models. The paper concludes with a meta-framework for understanding group development; this framework highlights the two areas of focus that have dominated group development research in the past: group processes and outcomes. The second paper will build on the ideas developed here and discuss the implications of group development for GSS research.Previous research on group behavior suggests that groups change over time; patterns of change, referred to as group development models, have been an important area of study for the past four decades. For the first three of these decades, unitary models of group development were very popular; that is, the notion that all groups go through a certain series of predefined stages. In the last decade, however, researchers have cast doubt on such unitary models of group development. Nonsequential models that recognize the uniqueness of each group (and consequently reject the idea of a single, predetermined series of stages) have become increasingly popular. This paper examines the implications of these issues for researchers and managers of groups. It also attempts to serve as the foundation for the propositions developed in the next paper, in which the relevance of group development for GSS research and practice are discussed.     

Towards an Instrument to Measure Participants' Perceptions on Facilitation in Group Support Systems Meetings

Facilitation is often considered to be one of the key factors in the successful application of GSS. Research on GSS facilitation has revealed insight into the types of tasks performed by facilitators and the potential positive effects of facilitation on group consensus and satisfaction. However, earlier research has rarely approached GSS facilitation from the participants' point of view. In this study a questionnaire was developed and distributed to 369 participants of facilitated GSS meetings in order to measure their perceptions of various facilitation tasks. The results suggested three categories of facilitation tasks that are perceived as important by participants. Each of these categories strongly correlated with participants' meeting satisfaction. Further research is needed to refine these categories so that the instrument may be used to evaluate a facilitator's performance.     

A conceptual framework of anonymity in Group Support Systems

As the development and use of automated systems for collaborative work grows, the need for a better understanding of these systems becomes more important. Our focus is on one type of system, a Group Support System (GSS) and, in particular, on one important aspect of a GSS—anonymity. A conceptual framework for the study of anonymity in a GSS is presented, which describes the general classes of variables and their relationships. These variables include the factors that influence anonymity in a GSS, types of anonymity, and the effects of anonymity on a message sender, receiver, group process, and outcome. Each of these variables is discussed with working propositions presented for important group process and outcome measures. The objectives of this article are to highlight the importance and complexity of anonymity, to act as a guide for empirical investigations of anonymity, and to influence future GSS development and use.     

Exploring Continued and Discontinued Use of IT: A Case Study of OptionFinder, a Group Support System

This study explores how perceptions, experience, attitudes, communication behavior and environment affect continued and discontinued use of a group support system (GSS) as an organizational innovation. The case study method was used to investigate the largely unexplored process of GSS adoption and diffusion in terms of human factors, internal organizational context, external organizational environment and GSS management activities. Analysis of data collected in 25 in-depth interviews with informants who had voluntarily adopted GSS for use in one or more meetings they initiated, suggests GSS diffusion is a complex process. The author concluded the most significant determinants of initial adoption was support of a champion, while the presence of an intra-departmental champion and a well-rounded GSS infrastructure strongly influenced continued use. Lack of task-technology fit and perception of GSS as a large group tool strongly influenced discontinued use. The surprising finding that intentions to use GSS were the same for continued and discontinued users, led to the conclusion that some discontinued users are in reality stalled users who should not be classified as rejecters of the technology.These research findings have important implications for devising strategies for the effective introduction and assimilation of GSS and other information system technologies, and point to the need for continued support throughout the different stages of the diffusion process.     

Effects of Experience-based Work Patterns in a GSS Environment

Existing group support system (GSS) research has focused on the impacts of GSSs on conventional group-work patterns. Few studies have examined the effects of different group-work patterns in a GSS environment. Specifically, we are interested in group-work patterns that vary in terms of group members' experience or ability levels. In this paper, we report on an exploratory experiment designed to compare the effects of three distinct experience-based work patterns on group decision quality, efficiency, and participant satisfaction in the case of GSS usage. There is the conventional work pattern in which persons of differing experience levels work simultaneously in a meeting. An alternative pattern consists of experienced participants working on a problem first and then passing their results on to less experienced participants. Yet another pattern reverses this sequence. Our results show that while groups in the conventional work pattern are more efficient in considering alternative solutions, groups organized in the other two experience-based work patterns can produce higher quality solutions. We observed no significant differences in participant satisfaction among the three group-work patterns. These findings suggest that a GSS can be as effective (or even more effective) with alternative group-work patterns as it is with the conventional pattern.     

An ESD Computer Culture for Intercultural Problem Solving and Negotiation

Intercultural problem solving and negotiation involves interaction of two or more cultures. These processes may be formally modeled using the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework implemented by appropriate computer group support systems (GSS). The ESD/GSS combination provides an ESD computer culture for intercultural problem solving and negotiation in a same place/same time or telework mode. With this, players in a multicultural group can be computer supported in generating and formally representing an evolving common culture (a situational culture) with regard to the specific problem at hand - an intercultural evolving group problem representation and solution. At the same time, the ESD computer culture provides an operational cybernetic/self-organization framework for the empirical study of cultural emergence in a multicultural group. This paper uses and develops work by Shakun (1996b).     

The Role of Leadership in Group Support Systems Failure

This paper reports on a research case study in which the use of a Group Support System (GSS) by a multi-organizational alliance failed. The paper argues that the leadership style of the meeting champion may be a much greater moderating factor in GSS meeting success than previously thought. Transformational Leadership Theory is used to explain the results, and implications for both researchers and managers are drawn. Two themes emerge: first, the case shows where the concept of phony democracy may or may not occur. Second, the case illustrates conditions under which a GSS may generate, as opposed to mitigate conflict. For managers, it suggests that using a GSS may not be optimal if they choose to adopt a Transactional leadership style. For researchers, this work offers insights into boundary conditions affecting GSS usage, extending a paucity of research in negative GSSusage cases.     

The Role of Information Feedback in the Management Group Decision-Making Process Applying System Dynamics Models

The research project addresses the influence of feedback information on the decision process supported by the application of system dynamics models. A user-friendly application was developed and used in the experiment with decision groups. The participants were 174 undergraduate management science students. They had the task of determining the optimum business strategy by maximizing the multiple criteria function under three experimental conditions: a ₁) an indivIDual decision process without the support of a system dynamics model, a ₂) an indivIDual decision process supported by a system dynamics model, and a ₃) a decision process supported by a system dynamics model and subject interaction via computer mediation. The hypotheses that the indivIDual decision process supported by a system dynamics model yields higher Criteria Function values than one without a system dynamics model, as well as the decision process supported by both a system dynamics model and subject interaction yields higher Criteria Function values than one supported by a system dynamics model alone were confirmed.