Developmental differences between distributed and face-to-face groups in electronically supported meeting environments: An exploratory investigation

This longitudinal pilot study compared the developmental patterns of groups in three types of electronically supported meeting modes: face-to-face, dispersed-synchronous, and dispersed-asynchronous. The modes differed primarily in interactivity, channel capacity, and synchronicity. Comparisons were made along several behavioral and socio-technical dimensions which influence the group development process. Face-to-face groups tended to exhibit more effective leadership and coordination competence over time as compared to the distributed groups. However, along several other group process dimensions such as cohesiveness and equality of participation, dispersed groups did not differ from their face-to-face counterparts. Moreover, groups in all three modes performed equally well in terms of the quality of outputs. These results suggest that electronically distributed work groups—with adequate time and training—can become cohesive and perform effectively in the long run.

[1]  Anthony Giddens,et al.  Studies in social and political theory , 1979 .

[2]  S. Seashore.  Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group , 1955 .

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

[4]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Using a GDSS to Facilitate Group Consensus: Some Intended and Unintended Consequences , 1988, MIS Q..

[5]  J. Walther.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1992 .

[6]  J. Kutsko,et al.  Effectiveness measures for distributed teams using electronic meeting technology: the Larson/LaFasto instrument , 1991, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  B. Fisher.  Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process , 1980 .

[8]  R. Rice,et al.  Electronic Emotion , 1987 .

[9]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[10]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[11]  David W. Park,et al.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[12]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[13]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  A longitudinal experiment on relational tone in computer-mediated and face to face interaction , 1992, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  J. Smith,et al.  A nonsimultaneous computer conference as a component of group decision support systems , 1989, [1989] Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Volume III: Decision Support and Knowledge Based Systems Track.

[15]  L. Floyd Lewis,et al.  A decision support system for face-to-face groups , 1987, J. Inf. Sci..

[16]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Group Decision Support Systems on Group Development , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[17]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making , 1988, MIS Q..

[18]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[19]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Relationships and Tasks in Scientific Research Collaboration , 1987, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[20]  B. Latané.  The psychology of social impact. , 1981 .

[21]  R. Bostrom,et al.  Evolution of group performance over time: A repeated measures study of GDSS effects , 1993 .

[22]  S. R. Hiltz,et al.  Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. , 1986 .

[23]  Robert Johansen.  TEAMS FOR TOMORROW , 1991 .

[24]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group processes in computer-mediated communication☆ , 1986 .

[25]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  Understanding the use of Group Decision Support Systems: The Theory of Adaptive Structuration , 1990 .

[26]  Pedro Sánchez,et al.  Collaborative technology and group process feedback: their impact on interactive sequences in meetings , 1990, CSCW '90.

[27]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  User satisfaction with computer-mediated communication systems , 1990 .

[28]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  A communication-based framework for group interfaces in computer-supported collaboration , 1991, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[29]  J. Valacich,et al.  Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups , 1990 .

[30]  G. Hiemstra.  Teleconferencing, Concern for Face, and Organizational Culture , 1982 .

[31]  R. Daft,et al.  Understanding Managers' Media Choices: A Symbolic Interactionist Perspective , 1990 .

[32]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[33]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Computer Support for Meetings of Groups Working on Unstructured Problems: A Field Experiment , 1988, MIS Q..

[34]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Computer-mediated communication for intellectual teamwork: a field experiment in group writing , 1990, CSCW '90.

[35]  J. McGrath.  Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP) , 1991 .

[36]  Sara Kiesler,et al.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication , 1984 .