Lotus Notes and collaboration: le plus c/spl cedil/a change

Work in organizations is becoming increasingly focused on collaborative work in groups. Groupware is widely touted as the information technology that can support this new mode of work by fostering collaboration. In a study of Lotus Notes, a popular groupware product, implemented throughout the professional staff of a large American insurance company, we found the impact of groupware to be somewhat different from what many might have expected. While almost everyone was quite pleased with the Notes implementation and its perceived impact, there was no evidence of a change in the degree of collaboration among organization members. Two key themes are explored as possible explanations for this result: the fit of the technology to the organization, and limited training in how best to use this new technology.

[1]  R. Reed.  Bimodality in diversification: An efficiency and effectiveness rationale , 1991 .

[2]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[3]  Michael J. Ginzberg,et al.  Key Recurrent Issues in the MIS Implementation Process , 1981, MIS Q..

[4]  Jeffrey K. Liker,et al.  Electronic Meeting Systems: Evidence from a Low Structure Environment , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  E. Trist,et al.  Renewing American Industry. , 1984 .

[6]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Comparison of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting Systems , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Ananth Srinivasan,et al.  Alternative Measures of Systems Effectiveness: Associations and Implications , 1985, MIS Q..

[8]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Structuring computer-mediated communication systems to avoid information overload , 1985, CACM.

[9]  L. J. Williams,et al.  Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment as Predictors of Organizational Citizenship and In-Role Behaviors , 1991 .

[10]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations , 1976 .

[11]  Richard M. Steers.  Problems in the Measurement of Organizational Effectiveness , 1975 .

[12]  Kenneth L. Kraemer,et al.  Computer-based systems for cooperative work and group decision making , 1988, CSUR.

[13]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable , 1992, Inf. Syst. Res..

[14]  Sherry K. Schneider,et al.  COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL INFORMATION: STATUS SALIENCE AND STATUS DIFFERENCES , 1995 .

[15]  C. Barnard.  The Functions of the Executive , 1939 .

[16]  Michael Blumfield.  Learning to Share. , 1997 .

[17]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Implementing Electronic Meeting Systems at IBM: Lessons Learned and Success Factors , 1990, MIS Q..

[18]  Peter G. W. Keen,et al.  Mis Research: Reference disciplines and a Cumulative Tradition , 1980, ICIS.

[19]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems , 1991, CACM.

[20]  Wendy Pickering.  Can suites fill groupware needs , 1994 .

[21]  Blake Ives,et al.  The measurement of user information satisfaction , 1983, CACM.

[22]  N. Venkatraman,et al.  Measurement of Business Economic Performance: An Examination of Method Convergence , 1987 .

[23]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Learning from Notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation , 1992, CSCW '92.

[24]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..