Comment Distribution in Electronic Poolwriting and Gallery Writing Meetings

Two types of electronic brainwriting are used typically in Group Support Systems research: poolwriting and gallery writing. While a large number of academic studies have used the former technique, the latter is more efficient and effective, but has been used less frequently. This paper describes these two group idea generation techniques and discusses prior comparison studies. An experiment using the two brainwriting techniques shows that subjects were more satisfied with and preferred gallery writing. In addition, subjects using poolwriting were able to see only about 50% of the comments generated in the electronic meeting, while gallery writing subjects were able to view all comments. INTRODUCTION Much research has shown how groups in electronic meetings can participate more, save more time, and be more satisfied than groups in traditional, verbal meetings (McLeod, 1992). A major factor often not addressed in studies of Group Support Systems (GSS), however, is the nature of the technology used (Benbasat & Lim, 1993). A different electronic meeting technique or an improvement in the computer technology itself can change experimental results. For example, researchers found in a comparison of two GSS tools that subjects using one produced better quality solutions, but subjects using the other produced more unique alternatives (Easton, et al., 1990). Many studies of GSS have been based upon "electronic brainstorming" using electronic poolwriting (Pervan, 1998), and leading GSS researchers have published electronic poolwriting studies in highly-respected journals (e.g., Dennis, et al., 1999; Dennis & Valacich, 1993; Dennis, et al., 1997; Dennis, et al., 1996; Kahai, et al., 1998; Reinig, et al., 1998). Several million people in more than 1,500 organizations have used GSS in meetings throughout the world (Briggs, et al., 1998), and electronic poolwriting has been used in many of these meetings. However, a superior technique called electronic gallery

[1]  Milam Aiken,et al.  An automated idea consolidation tool for computer supported cooperative work , 1992, Inf. Manag..

[2]  Bruce J. Avolio,et al.  Effects of Source and Participant Anonymity and Difference in Initial Opinions in an EMS Context , 1998 .

[3]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Using Two Different Electronic Meeting System Tools for the Same Task: An Experimental Comparison , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[4]  Milam Aiken,et al.  Group impacts using four meeting facilitation techniques , 1997 .

[5]  Monica J. Garfield,et al.  Research Report: The Effectiveness of Multiple Dialogues in Electronic Brainstorming , 1997, Inf. Syst. Res..

[6]  Neal Schmitt,et al.  Student Guinea Pigs: Porcine Predictors and Particularistic Phenomena , 1987 .

[7]  Milam Aiken,et al.  Idea generation with electronic poolwriting and gallery writing , 1996 .

[8]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Process Structuring in Electronic Brainstorming , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[9]  Poppy Lauretta McLeod,et al.  An Assessment of the Experimental Literature on Electronic Support of Group Work: Results of a Meta-Analysis , 1992, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Group Decision Support System impact: Multi-methodological exploration , 1990, Inf. Manag..

[11]  John J. Sosik,et al.  EFFECTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLE AND PROBLEM STRUCTURE ON WORK GROUP PROCESS AND OUTCOMES IN AN ELECTRONIC MEETING SYSTEM ENVIRONMENT , 1997 .

[12]  Milam W. Aiken,et al.  A comparison of two electronic idea generation techniques , 1996, Inf. Manag..

[13]  I. Benbasat,et al.  The Effects of Group, Task,Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems , 1993 .

[14]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Experimental studies of group decision support systems: an assessment of variables studied and methodology , 1997, Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[15]  J. Valacich,et al.  Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. , 1993 .

[16]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  1001 Unanswered Research Questions in GSS , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Graham Pervan A review of research in Group Support Systems: leaders, approaches and directions , 1998, Decis. Support Syst..

[18]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  ELECTRONIC BRAINSTORMING AND GROUP SIZE , 1992 .

[19]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Invoking Social Comparison to Improve Electronic Brainstorming: Beyond Anonymity , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[20]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems: Results from the field , 1992, Decis. Support Syst..

[21]  Milam Aiken,et al.  The Use of Two Electronic Idea Generation Techniques in Strategy Planning Meetings , 1997 .

[22]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Flaming in the Electronic Classroom , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[23]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Structuring Time and Task in Electronic Brainstorming , 1999, MIS Q..

[24]  Leonard M. Jessup,et al.  The Effects of Anonymity on GDSS Group Process with an Idea-Generating Task , 1990, MIS Q..