IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v1y1990i4p394-415.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support

Author

Listed:
  • Joey F. George

    (Department of Management Information Systems, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721)

  • George K. Easton

    (Department of Information and Decision Systems, San Diego State University, San Diego, California 92182)

  • J. F. Nunamaker

    (Department of Management Information Systems, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721)

  • Gregory B. Northcraft

    (Department of Management and Policy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721)

Abstract

As organizational environments become more turbulent and as managers spend more time in meetings in an effort to deal with that turbulence, using information technology to support meetings has become more important. This paper reports on an experiment that compared meetings supported by information technology to meetings with conventional manual support only. The experiment differs from most previous group decision support system (GDSS) experiments in that solutions to the task it used could be objectively scored, it introduced assigned leadership as an independent variable, and it is the first GDSS experiment to compare use of a subset of the University of Arizona GroupSystems GDSS tools to manual group methods. In addition to a communication condition (GDSS or manual) and assigned leadership, the experiment also investigated the effects of anonymity on group process and outcomes. The experiment found that GDSS groups were less likely to reach consensus, took more time to reach a decision, and had more equal levels of member participation than manual groups. No main effects were found for assigned leadership or anonymity.

Suggested Citation

  • Joey F. George & George K. Easton & J. F. Nunamaker & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1990. "A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 1(4), pages 394-415, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:1:y:1990:i:4:p:394-415
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.1.4.394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1.4.394
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.1.4.394?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wm. David Salisbury & Michael Parent & Wynne W. Chin, 2008. "Robbing Peter to Pay Paul: The Differential Effect of GSS Restrictiveness on Process Satisfaction and Group Cohesion," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 303-320, July.
    2. Wanda J. Orlikowski & C. Suzanne Iacono, 2001. "Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the “IT” in IT Research—A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 121-134, June.
    3. Edward Christensen & Jerry Fjermestad, 1997. "Challenging Group Support Systems Research: The Case for Strategic Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 351-372, July.
    4. Gajendran, Ravi S. & Loewenstein, Jeffrey & Choi, Hyeran & Ozgen, Sibel, 2022. "Hidden costs of text-based electronic communication on complex reasoning tasks: Motivation maintenance and impaired downstream performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. Terri L. Griffith & Mark A. Fuller & Gregory B. Northcraft, 1998. "Facilitator Influence in Group Support Systems: Intended and Unintended Effects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 20-36, March.
    6. Matthias Gräuler & Michael Freundlieb & Kerstin Ortwerth & Frank Teuteberg, 2013. "Understanding the beliefs, actions and outcomes of sustainability reporting: An experimental approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 779-797, November.
    7. Smith, Antoinette L. & Murthy, Uday S. & Engle, Terry J., 2012. "Why computer-mediated communication improves the effectiveness of fraud brainstorming," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 334-356.
    8. Stephanie Watts Sussman & Lee Sproull, 1999. "Straight Talk: Delivering Bad News through Electronic Communication," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 150-166, June.
    9. Alain Pinsonneault & Henri Barki & R. Brent Gallupe & Norberto Hoppen, 1999. "Electronic Brainstorming: The Illusion of Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 110-133, June.
    10. Chih-Hung Peng & Nicholas H. Lurie & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2019. "Using Technology to Persuade: Visual Representation Technologies and Consensus Seeking in Virtual Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(3), pages 948-962, September.
    11. Mi, Hwang, 1998. "Did Task Type Matter in the Use of Decision Room GSS? A Critical Review and a Meta-analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-15, February.
    12. Leslie Monplaisir, 2002. "Enhancing CSCW with Advanced Decision Making Tools for an Agile Manufacturing System Design Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 45-63, January.
    13. Choon-Ling Sia & Bernard C. Y. Tan & Kwok-Kee Wei, 2002. "Group Polarization and Computer-Mediated Communication: Effects of Communication Cues, Social Presence, and Anonymity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 70-90, March.
    14. Joanna L.Y. Ho, 1999. "Technology and Group Decision Process in Going-Concern Judgements," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-49, January.
    15. Daily, Bonnie F. & Teich, Jeffrey E., 2001. "Perceptions of contribution in multi-cultural groups in non-GDSS and GDSS environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 70-83, October.
    16. Wynne W. Chin & Barbara L. Marcolin & Peter R. Newsted, 2003. "A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 189-217, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:1:y:1990:i:4:p:394-415. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.