Advertisement

Interpersonal Teleconferencing in an Organizational Context

  • Arthur D. Shulman
  • Jerome I. Steinman
Part of the Nato Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 6)

Abstract

Communication in organizations functions primarily to reduce uncertainty (Galbraith, 1973). Because of increasingly turbulent environments (Emery and Trist, 1965; Terreberry, 1968), many organizations today, be they health service delivery, legal, educational, or manufacturing, are confronted with the necessity of dealing with increased uncertainty and thus with growth in the volume and complexity of communications. Employing new communications technologies is one means of coping with this problem. This paper is concerned with identifying the appropriateness of employing interpersonal teleconferencing modes—audio, video, or computer—for that purpose.

Keywords

Lateral System Work Unit Impression Formation Audio System Slack Resource 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berman, H. J., Shulman, A. D., and Marwit, S. J. Comparison of multidimensional decoding of affect from audio, video and audio- video recordings. Sociometry, March, 1976, 39 83–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Champness, B. The perceived adequacy of four communications systems for a variety of tasks. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1972. (E/72245/CH)Google Scholar
  3. Champness, B. The assessment of user reactions to confravision to analysis and conclusions. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1973 (E/732250/CH)Google Scholar
  4. Chapanis, A. Interactive Human Communication. Scientific American, March, 1975.Google Scholar
  5. Chapanis, A, and Overby, C. M. Studies in interactive communication. II: Effects of similar and dissimilar communications channels and two interchange options on team problem solving. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1974, 38 343–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christie, B. An evaluation of the audio video conference system installed in the department of the environment. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1973. (W/73360/CR).Google Scholar
  7. Christie, B. Perceived usefulness of person-person telecommunications media as a function of the intended application. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1974, 4, 366–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christie, B., and Holloway, S. Factors affecting the use of telecommunications by management. Journal of Occupational Psycholoar, 1975, 48 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, A., Robinson, E., and Edwards, J. Experiments in organizational embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1969, 14, 208–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connell, S. The 1973 office communications survey. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1974. (P/14067/CN).Google Scholar
  11. Conrath, D. Communications environment and its relationship to organizational structure. Management Science, 1973, 20 586–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gönrath, D. and Blair, J. H. The computer as an interpersonal communication device: A study of augmented technology and its apparent impact on organizational communication. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computer Communication, Stockholm, Sweden, August, 1974.Google Scholar
  13. Dewhirst, H. D. Influence of perceived information-sharing norms on communication channel utilization. Journal of the Academy of Management, 1974, 14, 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Emery, F. E., and Trist, E. L. The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 1965, 18 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Etzioni, A. An engineer-social science team at work. Technology Review, 1975, 27–31.Google Scholar
  16. Galbraith, J. Designing complex organizations. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1973.Google Scholar
  17. Goldmark, P. C. The new rural society. Papers in communication. No. 5. Department of Communication Arts, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1973.Google Scholar
  18. Hough, R. W. Teleconferencing systems: A state of the art survey and preliminary analysis. Final report prepared for the National Science Foundation, May, 1976. Grant No. SSH74–22611.Google Scholar
  19. Kraus, R. M., Geller, V., and Olson, C. Modalities and cues in the detection of deception. Paper given at the meetings of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., September 2, 1976.Google Scholar
  20. Kollen, J. H., and Vallee, J., eds. Travel/Communication Relationships, Bell, Canada, July, 1974.Google Scholar
  21. Konen, P., and Shulman, A. D. Who, how and why of group meetings: A functional analysis. Paper presented at Midwestern Psychological Association meetings, Chicago, Illinois, May, 1976.Google Scholar
  22. Penley, L. E. Organizational communication: Its relationship to the structure of work groups. In Readings in interpersonal and organizational communication by R. C. Huseman, C. M. Logue, and D. L. Freshley, eds. Boston, Mass.: Holbrook Press, Inc., 1977.Google Scholar
  23. Perrow, C. Organizational analysis: A sociological view. Belmont, Calif: Brooks/Cole, 1970.Google Scholar
  24. Pye, R., Champness, B., Collins, H. and Connell, S. The description and classification of meetings. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1973. (P/73160/PY).Google Scholar
  25. Short, J., Williams, E. and Christie, B. The Social Psychology of Telecoinmunications. London: John Wiley and Sons, 1976.Google Scholar
  26. Shulman, A. D, Mode of communication and communication flow: A review of telecommunications research. Paper presented at Human Factors meetings, October, 1975, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
  27. Shulman, A. D., and Mutschler, E. Individual variation in verbal and nonverbal cue utilization: decoding of affect. Presented at Psychonomie meetings, November, 1976, St. Louis, Missouri.Google Scholar
  28. Simon, H. A. Administrative behavior. (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan, 1976.Google Scholar
  29. Terreberry, S. The evolution of organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1968, 12, 590–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thompson, J. D. Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
  31. Tyler, M., Cartwright, B., and Collins, H. Interaction between telecommunications and face-to-face contact: Prospects for teleconference systems. Long Range Intelligence Division (TSS6), British Post Office, August, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L., and Koenig, R. Jr. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 1976, 41 322–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Williams, E. A summary of the present state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of the substitution of face-to-face meeting by telecommunicated meetings. Type allocation revisited. Technical report. Communications Studies Group, University College, London, 1974. (P/74294/WL)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arthur D. Shulman
    • 1
  • Jerome I. Steinman
    • 1
  1. 1.Washington UniversitySt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations