Bringing automated support to large groups: The Burr-Brown experience

The Impact of Group Size and Social Presence on Small-Group Communication

This study evaluates the impact of varying group size and social presence on small-group communication. It compares key communication factors—faceto-face (FtF) without computer-mediated communication (CMC) support, FtF with CMC support, and virtual with CMC support—on two different small group sizes (3 and 6). Results indicate that smaller groups establish and maintain higher levels of communication quality, and FtF with CMC support groups have higher levels of communication quality than virtual with CMC support groups; however, no significant difference between traditional FtF groups and virtual groups with CMC support was found. Also, CMC minimized the impact of increased group size. Process losses that a larger FtF group might ordinarily experience can be reduced through the use of CMC. These results should help project managers plan for and deal with the difficulty of communication between project group members in virtual environments.

Avoidance of Groupthink

Groupthink is a problem thatplagues decision-making groups. This article reviews antecedent and procedural conditions leading to groupthink and examines productive meeting processes that can prevent groupthink. The article then explores the possible role that group support systems (GSS) may play in the development of these productive meeting processes. Group support systems are an advanced information technology that provide electronic support to groups involved in teamwork. This technology possesses certain inherent resources or structuralfeatures. This article proposes aframeworkfor the study of the effects of GSS on groupthink. It examines the effects of GSS structuralfeatures on antecedent and procedural conditions predisposing groupthink. Existing GSS research relevant to groupthink-related variables is reviewed. The review of GSS structural features and of existing GSS research indicates that GSS use might indeed be an appropriate method of preventing groupthink. Finally, the article proposes a methodologyfor the empirical study of the impact of GSS use on groupthink.

Group Size and Anonymity Effects on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation

Some for,ns of computer-mediated communication enable groups to engage simultaneously in multiple electronic conversations. One interesting aspect of this technology, in addition to this parallelism, is that the channel is configurable to support forms of group interaction that were previously difficult, if not impossible. This article reports a laboratory experiment that examined the effects of group size (3 and 9 members) and group member anonymity on the performance of groups using a computer-mediated idea-generation system. Although group members in all conditions made, on average, the same number of comments, larger groups generated significantly more ideas (and higher-quality ideas as rated by judges) than did smaller groups. Anzonymity had no effect on ideational performance. Members of small-idenitified groups made the fewest critical remarks, were the most satisfied, and rated themselves more effective than group members from the other experimental conditions.

The Implications of Group Development and History for Group Support System Theory and Practice

The psychology, sociology, and management literature is rich with theory on the topic of group development. Three general categories of developmental models have been proposed: progressive models, cyclical models, and nonsequential models. These models predict that group performance, member behavior, and task focus change as the group matures and develops. Groups are integral components of organizations. Group support systems (GSSs) have been created to assist groups in performing their tasks and activities. Numerous research studies have been conducted to identify key variables that influence group performance in GSS environments. Many of these studies have produced mixed and, in some cases, conflicting results. This may be due partially to a lack of attention to the issue of group development. Few studies have looked at the influence that group development and group history have on group behavior and performance. Only two GSS studies have been conducted on the effects of group development and group history on group process, performance, and efficiency. To facilitate additional research into this area, a research framework that incorporates a mechanism for representing this development process is proposed In addition, a number of propositions implied by the relationships represented in this framework are presented and discussed

Exploring asynchronous brainstorming in large groups: a field comparison of serial and parallel subgroups

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the results of two different modes of using multiple groups (instead of one large group) to identify problems and develop solutions.

BACKGROUND

Many of the complex problems facing organizations today require the use of very large groups or collaborations of groups from multiple organizations. There are many logistical problems associated with the use of such large groups, including the ability to bring everyone together at the same time and location.

METHODS

A field study involved two different organizations and compared productivity and satisfaction of group. The approaches included (a) multiple small groups, each completing the entire process from start to end and combining the results at the end (parallel mode); and (b) multiple subgroups, each building on the work provided by previous subgroups (serial mode).

RESULTS

Groups using the serial mode produced more elaborations compared with parallel groups, whereas parallel groups produced more unique ideas compared with serial groups. No significant differences were found related to satisfaction with process and outcomes between the two modes.

CONCLUSION

Preferred mode depends on the type of task facing the group. Parallel groups are more suited for tasks for which a variety of new ideas are needed, whereas serial groups are best suited when elaboration and in-depth thinking on the solution are required.

APPLICATION

Results of this research can guide the development of facilitated sessions of large groups or "teams of teams."

The relation of agenda creation and use to group support system experience

The meeting agenda is often recommended as a critical element for conducting successful meetings. However, assertions about the value of meeting agendas are rarely explained or empirically tested. This study surveyed 238 group facilitators, including 113 who reported facilitating at least one meeting using group support systems (GSS), to examine their views on the use of agendas in meetings.Analyses are based on overall responses by group facilitators and by responses of the subset of facilitators who have used GSS. In addition, correlation analyses between the amount of GSS experience and the responses of the full group of facilitators and the subset with GSS experience are reported. Frequency of agenda use and of evaluation of the "goodness of the agenda" both correlated with GSS experience. Pre-meeting sessions with the group sponsors correlated significantly with GSS experience as did the frequency of varying from the agenda. Finally, quality of meeting deliverables, satisfaction with outcomes, and satisfaction with process were viewed as most important benefits of using an agenda; but they did not correlate with GSS experience. Meeting efficiency as a benefit of agenda use was negatively correlated with GSS experience. The implications of these findings for GSS facilitation and for future research are discussed.

The facilitators perspective on meetings and implications for group support systems design

Based on research into group process facilitation, a meeting model is proposed that defines the many activities comprising group work and highlights the critical facilitator actions. Facilitating group work is a dynamic process that involves managing relationships among people, tasks and technology, as well as structuring the interactions contributing to an effective meeting. By examining existing group support systems (GSS), it is shown that assistance for facilitation is low. With this information, methods are proposed to improve facilitation support (and therefore the meeting process) in GSS for face-to-face or dispersed environments.

Building group decision support rooms using "off-the-shelf" computing resources: prospects and issue

The concept of a decision support system (GDSS) is appealing to many organizations as ways are sought to improve the productivity of group meetings. Unfortunately, the purchase or development of group decision support systems may be prohibitively expensive. This paper explores an alternative way of acquiring GDSS capabilities. First, the fundamental features of a GDSS are identified based upon a review of literature. These features provide a framework in which to identify GDSS requirements and capabilities. Then, an implemented GDSS composed of off-the-shelf software and readily available hardware is described. A general model is presented for GDSS developers that clarifies choices and options that must be made when assembling a GDSS using off-the-shelf components. The article closes with a discussion of important issues for developers of "off-the-shelf" GDSSs.