IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v30y2021i1d10.1007_s10726-020-09711-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Collaboration Engineering to Mitigate Low Participation, Distraction, and Learning Inefficiency to Support Collaborative Learning in Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Xusen Cheng

    (Renmin University of China)

  • Shixuan Fu

    (Beijing International Studies University
    Research Center of Beijing Tourism Development)

  • Gert-Jan Vreede

    (University of South Florida)

  • Yuanyuan Li

    (University of International Business and Economics)

Abstract

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is widely adopted in industry learning, but it still faces challenges, including low participation, distraction, and learning inefficiency. In our study, we follow the design science research method to develop artifacts (a process and discussion platform) to address these CSCL challenges. Collaboration engineering was used as our design theory. A Discussion Platform was designed as a tool to help non-expert practitioner instruct collaborative learning process. We carried out evaluations on the two designed artifacts through 81 managers working in various industries through a mixed-method approach, including survey and qualitative interviews. We find that our designed artifacts receive high satisfaction in industry CSCL and reduce problems of low participation, distraction, and learning inefficiency. We identified several factors that contribute to the problem solving of low participation, distraction and inefficiency in industry CSCL, including usability, expression affordance, process guidance, goal clarity, flexibility affordance, thinkLet instruction, and flow experiences.

Suggested Citation

  • Xusen Cheng & Shixuan Fu & Gert-Jan Vreede & Yuanyuan Li, 2021. "Using Collaboration Engineering to Mitigate Low Participation, Distraction, and Learning Inefficiency to Support Collaborative Learning in Industry," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 171-190, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:30:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-020-09711-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-020-09711-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-020-09711-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-020-09711-0?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natarajan Balasubramanian & Marvin B. Lieberman, 2010. "Industry learning environments and the heterogeneity of firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 390-412, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Bryson, Noel & Mobolurin, Ayodele, 1997. "An action learning evaluation procedure for multiple criteria decision making problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 379-386, January.
    4. Bruce A. Reinig & Gert-Jan Vreede & Robert O. Briggs, 2017. "An Investigation of the Yield Shift Theory of Satisfaction Using Field Data from the United States and the Netherlands," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 973-996, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arie Y Lewin & Silvia Massini & Carine Peeters, 2020. "Absorptive capacity, socially enabling mechanisms, and the role of learning from trial and error experiments: A tribute to Dan Levinthal’s contribution to international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(9), pages 1568-1579, December.
    2. Sébastien Damart, 2010. "A Cognitive Mapping Approach to Organizing the Participation of Multiple Actors in a Problem Structuring Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 505-526, September.
    3. Maggie Wang, Yazhu & Matook, Sabine & Dennis, Alan R., 2024. "Unintended consequences of humanoid service robots: A case study of public service organizations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Younès El Manzani & Mohamed Larbi Sidmou & Jean-Jack Cegarra, 2018. "Does IS0 9001 quality management system support product innovation? An analysis from the sociotechnical systems theory," Post-Print hal-03080217, HAL.
    5. Saeedeh Ahmadi & Saeed Khanagha & Luca Berchicci & Justin J. P. Jansen, 2017. "Are Managers Motivated to Explore in the Face of a New Technological Change? The Role of Regulatory Focus, Fit, and Complexity of Decision‐Making," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 209-237, March.
    6. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    7. Marco Cucculelli, 2018. "Firm age and the probability of product innovation. Do CEO tenure and product tenure matter?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 153-179, January.
    8. Kareem Haggag & Brian McManus & Giovanni Paci, 2017. "Learning by Driving: Productivity Improvements by New York City Taxi Drivers," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 70-95, January.
    9. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    10. Marco Cucculelli & Lidia Mannarino & Valeria Pupo & Fernanda Ricotta, 2014. "Owner‐Management, Firm Age, and Productivity in Italian Family Firms," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(2), pages 325-343, April.
    11. Natarajan Balasubramanian, 2011. "New Plant Venture Performance Differences Among Incumbent, Diversifying, and Entrepreneurial Firms: The Impact of Industry Learning Intensity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(3), pages 549-565, March.
    12. Osmundsen, Petter & Roll, Kristin Helen & Tveterås, Ragnar, 2010. "Faster Drilling with Expercience?," UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2010/7, University of Stavanger.
    13. Funk, Jeffrey L. & Magee, Christopher L., 2015. "Rapid improvements with no commercial production: How do the improvements occur?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 777-788.
    14. Henner Gimpel & Robert Laubacher & Oliver Meindl & Moritz Wöhl & Luca Dombetzki, 2024. "Advancing Content Synthesis in Macro-Task Crowdsourcing Facilitation Leveraging Natural Language Processing," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1301-1322, October.
    15. Sarah S. Stith, 2018. "Organizational learning-by-doing in liver transplantation," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 25-45, March.
    16. Mulotte, L., 2013. "Do experience effects vary across governance modes? Evidence from new product introduction in the global aerospace industry, 1948–2000," Other publications TiSEM 2c79d4d6-2b71-4160-9781-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Mohamed Khalifa & RonChi-Wai Kwok & Robert Davison, 2002. "The Effects of Process and Content Facilitation Restrictiveness on GSS-Mediated Collaborative Learning," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 345-361, September.
    18. Wonsang Ryu & Brian T. McCann & William P. Wan, 2022. "Learning by doing and corporate diversification," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1635-1665, August.
    19. Natarajan Balasubramanian & Mariko Sakakibara, 2015. "Spinout Formation: Do Opportunities and Constraints Benefit High Capital Founders?," Working Papers 15-07, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    20. Yu, Wantao & Jacobs, Mark A. & Salisbury, W. David & Enns, Harvey, 2013. "The effects of supply chain integration on customer satisfaction and financial performance: An organizational learning perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(1), pages 346-358.

    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:spr:grdene:v:30:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-020-09711-0. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.