On Theory-Driven Design of Collaboration Technology and Process
The design and deployment of collaboration technology has, until lately been more of an art than a science, but it has produced some solid successes. Commercial groupware products now support millions of collaborations per year. Under certain circumstances teams that use Group Support Systems perform far better than groups that do not. However, as impressive as the achievements are in this field, we can do better. A rigorous theoretical approach to the design of collaboration technology and process can lead us to non- intuitive design choices that produce successes beyond those possible with a seat-of-the-pants approach. This paper explains the simple structure of a rigorous scientific theory and offers examples of theory-driven design choices that produced substantial benefits. It then differentiates rigorous theory from several classes of theory that have intuitive appeal, but cannot inform design choices. It then argues that the logic of the theory-driven design approach suggests that the most useful focus for collaboration technology researchers would be the technology-supported work process, rather than just the technology.
KeywordsDesign Choice Perceptual Load Group Support System Collaboration Technology Grand Theory
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Agres, A., Vreede, G.J., Briggs, R.O.: A Tale of Two Cities: Case studies of GSS Transition in Two Organizations. In: 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 5-8, IEEE, Kona Hawaii (2004) ;On CDGoogle Scholar
- 2.Briggs, R.O.: The Focus Theory of Group Productivity and Its Application to the Design and Deployment of Collaboration Technologies. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arizona (1994)Google Scholar
- 3.Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, G.J., Nunamaker Jr., J.F.: Collaboration Engineering with ThinkLets to Pursue Sustained Success with Group Support Systems. Journal of Management Information Systems 19(4), 31–63 (2003)Google Scholar
- 4.Briggs, R.O., Adkins, M., Mittleman, D., Kruse, J., Miller, S., Nunamaker Jr., J.F.: A Technology Transition Model Derived from Field Investigation of GSS use aboard U.S.S. CORONADO. Journal of Management Information Systems 15(3), 151–193 (Winter 1998-1999)Google Scholar
- 9.Fjermestad, J., Hiltz, S.R.: An assessment of Group Support Systems experimental research: methodology and results. Journal of Management Information Systems 15(3), 7–149 (1999)Google Scholar
- 10.Fjermestad, J., Hiltz, S.R.: Group Support Systems: A descriptive evaluation of case and field studies. Journal of Management Information Systems 17(3), 112–157 (2001)Google Scholar
- 13.Goethals, G.R., Darley, J.M.: Social Comparison Theory: self-evaluation and group life. In: Mullen, B., Goethals, G.R. (eds.) Theories of Group Behavior, pp. 21–48. Springer, New York (1987)Google Scholar
- 15.Hender, J.M., Dean, D.L., Rodgers, T.L., Nunamaker Jr., J.F.: An examination of the impact of stimuli type and GSS structure on creativity: Brainstorming versus nonbrainstorming techniques in a GSS environment. Journal of Management Information Systems 18(4), 59–85 (2002)Google Scholar
- 18.Post, B.Q.: Building the Business Case for Group Support Technology. In: Proceedings of the 25th annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science, pp. 34–45. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1992)Google Scholar
- 19.Santanen, E.L., Briggs, R.O., de Vreede, G.J.: The Cognitive Network Model of Creativity: A New Causal Model of Creativity and a New Brainstorming Technique. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (2000)Google Scholar