In this study we observed the coordination activities of groups collaboratively writing in a low-structure computer-supported meeting room. We used video analyses of the sessions to identify well-coordinated and poorly coordinated groups. Through user questionnaires, group members evaluated their work processes and products as well as the computer-supported environment. Writing experts independently rated the quality of the groups' final documents. We discovered that quality of coordination was strongly tied to groups' evaluations of their work processes, work products, and tools. Well-coordinated groups tended to be more efficient than poorly coordinated groups although we observed no differences in the quality of their documents. We also identify what coordination strategies lead to effective group work and offer suggestions for additional tools to facilitate coordination.
This exploratory study examines the impact of face-to-face collaborative technology on group writing. We compared small groups writing managerial memoranda in a computer-supported meeting room, and with conventional writing tools. The computer environment, the Capture Lab, allowed us to study how a technology designed for broad functionality and flexibility in group process affects collaborative work. We find that the technology alters the writing process, resulting in less initial group planning, more individual work, and more revising than when conventional tools are used. This affects negotiation and consensus-reaching processes. The technology also reduces speech and group focus. User feedback suggests the technology has both positive and negative effects on group interaction. The technology did not affect overall document quality, although one measure suggests it can enhance writers' audience adaptiveness. Comparisons of how different groups used the technology suggest that these patterns influence document quality. In the conclusion, we discuss what groups need in order to use this kind of collaborative technology effectively and future research directions.