Divergent and Convergent Idea Generation in Teams: A Comparison of Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Communication
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Many tasks and decisions in business, including management consulting, are performed in group settings. Computer-mediated communication (CMC) tools (e.g., Lotus Notes) are increasingly being used by businesses to support teams in a variety of settings. Considerable research in information systems has demonstrated the advantages of “electronic brainstorming” (EBS) for generic tasks involving only divergent thinking. However, it is unclear whether the benefits of CMC extend to tasks that require both divergent and convergent processes. Per task–technology fit theory (TTF) (Zigurs and Buckland 1998), the use of computer-based group communication support tools, including “chat” systems in wide-spread use today, may be less effective for convergent processes than for divergent processes. This study experimentally compares the performance of computer-mediated and face-to-face (FTF) teams on tasks requiring both divergent and convergent processes. Consistent with theoretical predictions, the results revealed that computer-mediated teams outperformed FTF teams in the divergent aspects of the tasks, while FTF teams outperformed computer-mediated teams in the convergent aspects of the tasks.
- Bamber, E. M., R. T. Watson, and M. C. Hill. (1996). "The Effects of Group Support System Technology on Audit Group Decision Making," Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory.15(1), 122–134.
- Barki, H. and A. Pinsonneault. (2001). "Small Group Brainstorming and Idea Quality-Is Electronic Brainstorming the Most Effective Approach?, Small Group Research 32(2), 158–205.
- Briggs, R. O., P. A., Balthazard and A. R. Dennis. (1996). "Graduate Business Students as Surrogates for Executives in the Evaluation of Technology," Journal of End User Computing 8(4), 11–17.
- Carey, J. M. and C. J. Kacmar. (1997). "The Impact of Communication Mode and Task Complexity on Small Group Performance and Member Satisfaction?," Computers in Human Behavior 13(1), 23–49. CrossRef
- Connolly, T., L. M. Jessup, and J. S. Valacich. (1990). "Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups," Management Science 36(6), 689–703.
- Cottell, P. G. and B. J. Millis. (1992). "Cooperative Learning in Accounting," Journal of Accounting Education 10, 95–111. CrossRef
- Cottell, P. G. and B. J. Millis. (1993). "Cooperative Learning Structures in the Instruction of Accounting," Issues in Accounting Education 8(1), 40–59.
- Daft, R. L. and R. H. Lengel. (1986). "Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design," Management Science 32(5), 554–571.
- Dennis, A. R. (1996). "Information Exchange and Use in Group Decision Making: You Can Lead a Group to Information, But You Can't Make It Think," MIS Quarterly 20(4), 433–457.
- Dennis, A. R. and J. S. Valacich. (1999). "Research Note. Electronic Brainstorming: Illusions and Patterns of Productivity," Information Systems Research 10(4), 375–377.
- Dennis A. R, B. H. Wixom and R. J. Vandenberg. (2001). "Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems via Meta-Analysis," MIS Quarterly 25(2), 167–193.
- Gallupe, R. B., L. M. Bastianutti, and W. H. Cooper. (1991). "Unblocking Brainstorms," Journal of Applied Psychology 76(1), 137–142. CrossRef
- Gallupe, R. B., Cooper, W. H., Grise, M. L., and L. M. Bastianutti. (1994). "Blocking Electronic Brainstorms," Journal of Applied Psychology 79(1), 77–86. CrossRef
- Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M. and J. F. Nunamaker, Jr. (1992). "Electronic Brainstorming and Group Size," Academy of Management Journal 35(2), 350–369.
- Goodhue, D. L. (1995). "Understanding User Evaluations of Information Systems," Management Science 41(12), 1827–1844.
- Goodhue, D. L. and R. L. Thompson. (1995). "Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance," MIS Quarterly 19(2), 213–236.
- Ho, J. (1999). "Technology and Group Decision Process in Going-Concern Judgements," Group Decision and Negotiation 8(1), 33–49. CrossRef
- Jessup, L. M, Connolly, T. and D. A. Tansik. (1990). "Toward a Theory of Automated Group Work: The Deindividuating Effects of Anonymity," Small Group Research 21(3), 333–348.
- Karan, V., Kerr, D. S., Murthy, U. S. and A. S. Vinze. (1996). "Information Technology Support for Collaborative Decision Making in Auditing: An Experimental Investigation," Decision Support Systems 16, 181–194. CrossRef
- Kerr, D. S. and U. S. Murthy. (1994). "Group Support Systems and Cooperative Learning in Auditing: An Experimental Investigation," Journal of Information Systems 8(2), 85–96.
- Lamont, I. (2000). "The Coolest Kind of Collaboration," Network World 17(46); Framingham (November 13), 117–119.
- Menezes, J. (1999). "Knowledge Apps Hit the High End," Computing Canada (25)27;Willowdale (July 9), 19–22.
- McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Murthy, U. S. and D. S. Kerr. (2004). "Comparing Audit Team Effectiveness via Alternative Modes of Computer-Mediated Communication," Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 23(1), 141–152.
- Nunamaker J. F., Dennis A. R., Valacich J. S., Vogel D. R., and J. F. George. (1991). "Electronic Meeting Systems to Support Group Work," Communications of the ACM 34(7), 40–61. CrossRef
- Orwig R. E., Chen H. C. and J. F. Nunamaker. (1997). "A Graphical, Self-Organizing Approach to Classifying Electronic Meeting Output," Journal of the American Society for Information Science 48(2), 157–170. CrossRef
- Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem-Solving, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
- Petty, R. E. and J. T. Cacioppo. (1986). "Communication and Persuasion, New York, Springer-Verlag.
- Pinsoneault, A., Barki, H., Gallupe, R. B. and N. Hoppen. (1999). "Research Note. The Illusion of Electronic Brainstorming Productivity: Theoretical and Empirical Issues," Information Systems Research 10(4), 378–380.
- Pollard C. (2003). "Exploring Continued and Discontinued Use of IT: A Case Study of OptionFinder, A Group Support System," Group Decision and Negotiation 12(3), 171–193. CrossRef
- Remus,W. (1986). "Graduate Students as Surrogates for Managers in Experiments on Business Decision Making," Journal of Business Research 14, 19–25. CrossRef
- Satzinger, J. W., Garfield, M. J. and M. Nagasundaram. (1999). "The Creative Process: The Effects of Group Memory on Individual Idea Generation," Journal of Management Information Systems 15(4), 143–160.
- Shirani, A. I., Tafti, M. H. A. and J. F. Affisco. (1999). "Task and Technology Fit: A Comparison of Two Technologies for Synchronous and Asynchronous Group Communication," Information & Management 36(3), 139–150.
- Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group Process and Productivity, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Valacich, J. S., Paranka, D., George, J. F. and J. F., Nunamaker Jr. (1993). "Communication Concurrency and the New Media: A New Dimension for Media Richness," Communication Research 20(2), 249–276.
- Valacich, J. S., Dennis, A. R. and T. Connolly. (1994). "Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 57(3), 448–467. CrossRef
- Zigurs, I. and B. K. Buckland. (1998). "A Theory of Task-technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness," MIS Quarterly 22(3) 313–334.
- Divergent and Convergent Idea Generation in Teams: A Comparison of Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Communication
Group Decision and Negotiation
Volume 13, Issue 4 , pp 381-399
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- computer-mediated communication (CMC)
- group support systems (GSS)
- task–technology fit theory
- idea generation
- divergent and convergent processes