Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 685–705 | Cite as

Modifiers for Quality Assurance in Group Facilitation

  • G. L. Kolfschoten
  • P. Grünbacher
  • R. O. BriggsEmail author


A key task of a professional facilitator is to assure the quality of the knowledge products created through collaborative effort. To manage the quality of the knowledge a group generates, facilitators attend to, judge, and question the quality of the contributions a group makes, the decisions it makes and the commitments its members make toward achieving the group’s goals. When facilitators or group members detect deficiencies in ideas, decisions, agreements, or artifacts, facilitators may need to intervene to support the group in improving the quality of their output, without disrupting the flow of the group process. In this paper we present a framework for quality assessment and a toolbox with flexible interventions that can be added to a collaborative process on the fly as soon as quality deficiencies are detected. The toolbox is a set of conditional adjustment interventions that a facilitator can add to other facilitation techniques so as to guard the quality of the group’s intellectual products. The toolbox can also be used as a starting point for designing intelligent agents that support the automatic detection of quality deficiencies.


Facilitation Quality assurance ThinkLets Collaboration engineering Modifiers 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Badler N, Bindiganavale R, Bourne J, Palmer M, Shi J, Schuler W (1998) A parameterized action representation for virtual human agents. Paper presented at the Workshop on embodied conversational characters, Lake Tahoe, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  2. Badler NI, Palmer MS, Bindiganavale R (1999) Animation control for real-time virtual humans. Commun ACM 42(8): 65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Basili V, Caldiera G, Rombach HD (1994) The goal question metric approach encyclopedia of software engineering. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Boehm B, Grünbacher P, Briggs RO (2001) Developing groupware for requirements negotiation: lessons learned. IEEE Softw 18(3): 46–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boehm BW, Ross R (1989) Theory-W software project management: principles and examples. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 15(7): 902–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bragge J, Merisalo-Rantanen H, Hallikainen P (2005) Gathering innovative end-user feedback for continuous development of information systems: a repeatable and transferable E-collaboration process. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 48(1): 55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Briggs RO (1994) The focus theory of team productivity and its application to development and testing of electronic group support systems. TucsonGoogle Scholar
  8. Briggs RO, Kolfschoten GL, de Vreede GJ (2005) Toward a theoretical model of consensus building. Paper presented at the Americas conference on information systems, OmahaGoogle Scholar
  9. Briggs RO, Qureshi S, Reinig B (2004) Satisfaction attainment theory as a model for value creation. Paper presented at the Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Los AlamitosGoogle Scholar
  10. Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ (2001) ThinkLets, building blocks for concerted collaboration. Delft University of Technology, DelftGoogle Scholar
  11. Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ, Nunamaker JF Jr. (2003) Collaboration engineering with ThinkLets to pursue sustained success with group support systems. J Manage Inf Syst 19(4): 31–63Google Scholar
  12. Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ, Nunamaker JF Jr., David TH (2001) ThinkLets: achieving predictable, repeatable patterns of group interaction with group support systems. Paper presented at the Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Waikoloa, HIGoogle Scholar
  13. de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO (2005) Collaboration engineering: designing repeatable processes for high-value collaborative tasks. Paper presented at the Hawaii international conference on system science, Waikoloa, HIGoogle Scholar
  14. de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO, Kolfschoten GL (2006) ThinkLets: a pattern language for facilitated and practitioner-guided collaboration processes. Int J Comput Appl Technol 25(2/3): 140–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO, Massey AP (2009) Collaboration engineering: foundations and opportunities. J Assoc Inf Syst 10(3): 121–137Google Scholar
  16. de Vreede GJ, Koneri PG, Dean DL, Fruhling AL, Wolcott P (2006) Collaborative software code inspection: the design and evaluation of a repeatable collaborative process in the field. Int J Coop Inf Syst 15(2): 205–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fjermestad J, Hiltz SR (2001) A descriptive evaluation of group support systems case and field studies. J Manag Inf Syst 17(3): 115–159Google Scholar
  18. Grünbacher P, Halling SB, Kitapci H, Boehm BW (2004a) Integrating collaborative processes and quality assurance techniques: experiences from requirements negotiation. J Manage Inf Syst 20(4): 9–29Google Scholar
  19. Grünbacher P, Halling M, Biffl S, Kitapchi H, Boehm BW (2004b) Integrating collaborative processes and quality assurance techniques: experiences from requirements negotiation. J Manage Inf Sys 20(4): 9–29Google Scholar
  20. Grünbacher P, Seyff N, Briggs RO, In HP, Kitapci H, Port D (2007) Making every student a winner: the WinWin approach in software engineering education. J Syst Soft 80(8): 1191–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Higgs M, Plewnia U, Ploch J (2005) Influence of team composition and task complexity on team performance. Team Perform Manag 11(7/8): 227–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kolfschoten GL, Appelman JH, Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ (2004) Recurring patterns of facilitation interventions in GSS sessions. Paper presented at the Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Los AlamitosGoogle Scholar
  23. Kolfschoten GL, Briggs RO, de Vreede GJ, Jacobs PHM, Appelman JH (2006) Conceptual foundation of the ThinkLet concept for collaboration engineering. Int J Hum Comput Sci 64(7): 611–621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolfschoten GL, van Houten SPA (2007) Predictable patterns in group settings through the use of rule based facilitation interventions. Paper presented at the group decision and negotiation conference, Mt TremblantGoogle Scholar
  25. Kolfschoten GL, Rouwette E (2006) Choice criteria for facilitation techniques: a preliminary classification. Paper presented at the international conference on group decision and negotiation, KarlsruheGoogle Scholar
  26. Kolfschoten GL, Santanen EL (2007) Reconceptualizing generate ThinkLets: the role of the modifier. Paper presented at the Hawaii international conference on system science, Waikoloa, HIGoogle Scholar
  27. Krone KJ, Jablin FM, Putnam LL (1987) Communication theory and organizational communication: multiple perspectives. In: Jablin FM, Putnam LL, Roberts KH, Porter LW (eds) Handbook of organizational communication: an interdisciplinary perspective. Sage Publications, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  28. Leibold M, Probst GJB, Gibbert M (2005) Strategic management in the knowledge economy: new approaches and business applications (2nd edn). Wiley-VCH, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  29. Levi D (2007) Group dynamics for teams (2nd edn). Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  30. Newell A, Simon HA (1972) Human problem solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  31. Osborn AF (1953) Applied imagination. Scribner’s, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Reinig B (2003) Toward an understanding of satisfaction with the process and outcomes of teamwork. J Manag Inf Syst 19(4): 65–83Google Scholar
  33. Reinig BA, Briggs RO, Nunamaker JF Jr. (2007) On the measurement of ideation quality. J Manag Inf Syst 23(4): 143–161Google Scholar
  34. Rich E (1983) Artificial intelligence. McGraw-Hill, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  35. Santanen EL, de Vreede GJ (2004) Creative approaches to measuring creativity: comparing the effectiveness of four divergence ThinkLets. Paper presented at the Hawaiian international conference on system sciences, Waikoloa, HIGoogle Scholar
  36. Santanen EL, de Vreede GJ, Briggs RO (2004) Causal relationships in creative problem solving: comparing facilitation interventions for ideation. J Manag Inf Syst 20(4): 167–197Google Scholar
  37. Shepherd MM, Briggs RO, Reinig BA, Yen J, Nunamaker JF Jr (1996) Social comparison to improve electronic brainstorming: beyond anonymity. J Manag Inf Syst 12(3): 155–170Google Scholar
  38. Thomas DM, Bostrom RP, Gouge M (2007) Making knowledge work in virtual teams. Commun ACM 50(11): 85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Troy LC, Hirunyawipada T, Paswan AK (2008) Cross-functional integration and new product success: an empirical investigation of the findings. J Mark 72(6): 132–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Valacich JS, Jessup LM, Dennis AR, Nunamaker JF Jr (1992) A conceptual framework of anonymity in group support systems. Group Decis Negot 1: 219–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wand Y, Wang RY (1996) Anchoring data quality dimensions in ontological foundations. Commun ACM 39(11): 86–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wang RY, Storey VC, Firth CP (1995) A framework for analysis of data quality research. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 7(4): 623–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Winston PH (1984) Artificial intelligence. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhang J (1997) The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cogn Sci 21(2): 179–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. L. Kolfschoten
    • 1
  • P. Grünbacher
    • 2
  • R. O. Briggs
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of System Engineering, Faculty of Technology, Policy and ManagementDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Johannes Kepler UniversityLinzAustria
  3. 3.Department of Business administration, Institute for Collaboration ScienceUniversity of Nebraska at OmahaOmahaUSA

Personalised recommendations