Information technology can facilitate the dissemination of knowledge across the organization--even to the point of making virtual teams a viable alternative to face-to-face work. However, unless managed, the combination of information technology and virtual work may serve to change the distribution of different types of knowledge across individuals, teams, and the organization. Implications include the possibility that information technology plays the role of a jealous mistress when it comes to the development and ownership of valuable knowledge in organizations; that is, information technology may destabilize the relationship between organizations and their employees when it comes to the transfer of knowledge. The paper advances theory and informs practice by illustrating the dynamics of knowledge development and transfer in more and less virtual teams.
This paper addresses facilitation, a developing area of Group Support Systems (GSS) research. The facilitator role is one of improving a group's communication and information flow; facilitators are meant to enhance the manner in which a group makes decisions without making those decisions for the group. However, there is a paradox in facilitation: The influence required to facilitate a group changes the group's outcomes. Additionally, strict impartiality for facilitation may be too much to expect because facilitators may unintentionally bias group outcomes, or because facilitators may have their own agendas. Acknowledgment, training, and standards for facilitators may prove useful ways for groups to retain the benefits of facilitation without incurring the costs of inappropriate facilitator influence. Implications are drawn for new research acknowledging the complexity of the GSS sociotechnical system, and the importance of sociotechnical facilitation in organizations.
This article focuses on the cognitive model in the implementation of new technology. One study of 2,000 U.S. companies found that 40 percent had not achieved the intended benefits from implementing an office technology so the authors suggest a model that would aid in the successful implementation of technology.This paper explores the major mechanisms within the cognitive model which examines differences in cognitions among users, designers, and implementers which can determine the success or failure of implementation. This model offers a view of how user and implementer understandings influence implementation and describes user and implementer understanding.