Abstract
Existing group support system (GSS) research has focused on the impacts of GSSs on conventional group-work patterns. Few studies have examined the effects of different group-work patterns in a GSS environment. Specifically, we are interested in group-work patterns that vary in terms of group members' experience or ability levels. In this paper, we report on an exploratory experiment designed to compare the effects of three distinct experience-based work patterns on group decision quality, efficiency, and participant satisfaction in the case of GSS usage. There is the conventional work pattern in which persons of differing experience levels work simultaneously in a meeting. An alternative pattern consists of experienced participants working on a problem first and then passing their results on to less experienced participants. Yet another pattern reverses this sequence. Our results show that while groups in the conventional work pattern are more efficient in considering alternative solutions, groups organized in the other two experience-based work patterns can produce higher quality solutions. We observed no significant differences in participant satisfaction among the three group-work patterns. These findings suggest that a GSS can be as effective (or even more effective) with alternative group-work patterns as it is with the conventional pattern.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Benbasat, L., and L. Lim. (1993). “The Effects of Group, Task, Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems: A Meta-analysis of Experimental Studies,” Small Group Research 24(4), 430–462.
Dhaliwal, J. S., and I. Benbasa. (1990). “A Framework for the Comparative Evaluation of Knowledge Aquisition Tools and Techniques,” Knowledge Acquisition 2(1), 145–166.
Dennis, A. R. et al. (1988). “Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings,” MIS Quarterly 12(4), 591–624.
Dennis, A. R., J. S. Valacich, and J. F. Nunamaker Jr. (1990). “An Experimental Investigation of the Effects of Group Size in an Electronic Meeting Environment,” IEEE System, Man and Cybernetics 25, 1049–1057.
Dennis, A. R., J. F. Nunamaker Jr., and D. R. A. Vogel. (1991). “Comparison of Laboratory and Field Research in the Study of Electronic Meeting System,” Journal of Management Information Systems 7(3), 107–135.
Dennis, A. R., J. S. Valacich, and J. F. Nunamaker Jr. (1991). “Group, Sub-group and Nominal Group Idea Generation in an Electronic Meeting Environment,” Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 3, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 573–579.
Dennis, A. R., and R. B. Gallup. (1993). “A History of Group Support Systems Empirical Research: Lessons Learned and Future Directions,” in L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich (eds.), Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Drucker, P. F. (1994). “The Age of Social Transformation,” Atlantic Monthly 274(5), 53–80.
Gallupe, R. B. (1990). “Suppressing the Contribution of the Group's Best Member: Is GDSS Use Appropriate for All Group Tasks?” Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 3, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 13–22.
Gallupe, R. B., and J. D. McKeen. (1990). “Enhancing Computer-mediated Communication: An Experiment Investigation into the Use of a Group Decision Support System for Face-to-face Versus Remote Meetings,” Information and Management 18(1), 1–13.
Gallupe, R. B. et al. (1992). “Electronic Brainstorming and Group Size,” Academy of Management Journal 35(2), 350–369.
Hackman, J. R., and C. G. Morris. (1976). “Group tasks, group interaction process and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration,” in L. Berkowitz (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 8, New York: Academic Press.
Hill, G. W. (1982). “Group Versus Individual Performance: Are N+1 Heads Better Than One?” Psychological Bulletin 91(3), 517–539.
Hoffer, J. A. and J. S. Valacich. (1993). “Group Memory in Group Support Systems: A Foundation for Design,” in L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich (eds.). Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Holsapple, C. W., and W. Luo. (1995a). “Organizational Computing Frameworks: Progress and Needs,” Information Society 11(1), 59–73.
Holsapple, C. W., and W. Luo. (1995b). “Dependent Variables for Organizational Computing Research - An Empirical Study,” Journal of Organizational Computing 5(1), 31–51.
Holsapple, C. W. and W. Luo. (1996). “A Framework For Studying Computer Support of Organization infrastructure,” Information & Management 31, 13–24.
Johansen, R. (1988). Groupware: Computer Support: for Business Teams. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Johansen, R. (1991). “Groupware: Future Directions and Wild Cards,” Journal of Organizational Computing 2(1), 219–227.
Laughlin, P. R., and H. H. Johnson. (1966). “Group and Individual Performance on a Complementary Task as a Function of Initial Ability Level,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2, 407–414.
Laughlin, P. R. L. G. Branch, and H. H. Johnson. (1969). “Individual Versus Triadic Performanc on a Unidimensional Complementary Task as a Function of Initial Ability Level,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 12(2), 144–150.
Laughlin, P. R., and L. G. Branch. (1972). “Individual Versus Tetradic Performance on a Unidimentional Complementary Task as a Function of Initial Ability Level,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 8, 201–216.
McGrath J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
McLeod, P. (1992). “An Assessment of the Experimental Literature on Electronic Support of Group Work: Results of a Meta-analysis,” Human Computer Interaction 7, 257–280.
Nunamaker, J. F. Jr., et al. (1989). “Experiences at IBM with Group Support Systems: A Field Study,” Decision Support Systems 5(2), 183–197.
Shaw, M. (1981). Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Groups Behavior. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Smith. V. L. (1982). “Microeconomic Systems as Experimental Science,” American Economic Review 72(5), 923–955.
Steiner, I. D. (1966). “Models for inferring relationships between group size and potential group productivity,” Behavior Science 11, 273–283.
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group Process and Productivity. New York: Academic Press.
Valacich, J. S. (1989). Group Size and Proximity Effects on Computer Mediated Idea Generation: A Laboratory Investigation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson.
Watson, R., G. DeSanctis, and M. S. Poole. (1988). “Using a GDSS to F'acilitate Group Consensus: Some Intended and Unintended Consequences,” MIS Quarterly 12(3), 463–478.
Yetton, P. W., and P. C. Bottger. (1982). “Individual Versus Group Problem Solving: An Empirical Test of a Best-Member Strategy,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 29, 307–321.
Zigurs, I., M. S. Poole, G. DeSanctis. (1988). “A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making,” MIS Quarterly 12(4), 625–644.
Zigurs, I. (1993). “Methodological and Measurement Issues in Group Support Systems Research,” in L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich (eds). Group Support Systems: New Perspectives, New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Holsapple, C.W., Luo, W. Effects of Experience-based Work Patterns in a GSS Environment. Group Decision and Negotiation 8, 305–324 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008694224029
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008694224029