Differences between workstations and keypad group support systems: Implications for keypad GSS facilitators

Organizations are successfully using group support systems (GSS) to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction in organizational meetings. Meeting success relies on making an appropriate match between group, taks, and technology. This responsibility often falls to the meeting facilitator. This article draws upon GSS and facilitation literature to develop a framework for the discussion of effective facilitation in workstation and keypad meeting environments. The article identifies differences between the systems and how they impact upon the behavior of the meeting facilitators and their choice of technology. Compensatory actions are proposed for keypad facilitators to address the lack of key workstation features. Keypad strengths are also identified to show the opportunities available to facilitators to maximize the benefits of using these GSS. Further, it is proposed that different types of GSS are not mutually exclusive and should be seen as complementary components of a suite of GSS tools designed to support organizational goals.     

Providing for Organizational Memory in Computer-Supported Meetings

Meeting memory features are poorly integrated into current group support systems (GSS). In this article, I discuss how to introduce meeting memory functionality into a GSS. The article first introduces the benefits of effective meetings and organizational memory to an organization. Then, the following challenges to design are discussed: How to store semantically rich output, how to build up the meeting memory with a minimum of additional effort, how to integrate meeting memory into organizational memory, and how to protect the privacy of the meeting participants. Finally, using the group-object object-oriented model of a GSS, the article shows how meeting memory functionality can be implemented in a GSS.     

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.     

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.     

The Importance of Facilitator Role Behaviors

SUMMARY

Shifting the emphasis from working alone to working together in the classroom or on the job is a relatively simple idea. However, implementing collaborative work and learning has not been so easy!

This paper argues that critical meeting facilitation skills and the appropriate use of Group Support Systems' (GSS) tools support the collaborative meeting and learning paradigm. These skills and tools greatly enhance the teacher's and meeting leaders? ability to create effective collaborative situations. The use of GSS with the case study methodology is discussed as one example of blending facilitation and technology to teach people to work together more productively in multinational settings.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Negotiation in Strategy Making Teams: Group Support Systems and the Process of Cognitive Change

This paper reports on the use of a Group Support System (GSS) to explore at a micro level some of the processes manifested when a group is negotiating strategy—processes of social and psychological negotiation. It is based on data from a series of interventions with senior management teams of three operating companies comprising a multi-national organization, and with a joint meeting subsequently involving all of the previous participants. The meetings were concerned with negotiating a new strategy for the global organization. The research involved the analysis of detailed time series data logs that exist as a result of using a GSS that is a reflection of cognitive theory.     

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.     

Using GSS to Design Organizational Processes and Information Systems: An Action Research Study on Collaborative Business Engineering

During an action research study a collaborative business engineering approach was developed, applied, and evaluated. Key characteristic of the approach is its focus on the participative design of organizational processes and supporting information systems. Following the approach, various design activities are carried out in close cooperation with groups of stakeholders supported by a Group Support System (GSS). This paper describes and reflects on the execution of these collaborative design activities in a police organization. Lessons learned with respect to GSS and collaborative design are formulated. Key insights illustrate the stakeholders' perception of the group technology and the way in which it facilitated an efficient design process.     

The Role of Groupware in Requirements Specification

This article describes how 2 forms of groupware - electronic Mail and Group Support Systems (GSS) were employed to support user requirements specification in a university department. The system being specified was a bibliographic information system, while the users were both qualified systems analysts and academic staff in the department. The background literatures to both requirements specification and GSS are introduced and linked. Groupware tools were used to support the group interaction and consensus formation. The article discusses the key stages in this process and discusses the appropriateness of the techniques used. The results are significant in that they identify techniques appropriate to supporting user groups in the clarification of system requirements before the involvement of development personnel.     

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.