Research on computer-mediated communication and group support systems has focused on the study of a single mode of communication technology in comparison to unsupported face-to-face (FtF) groups. However, as organizations combine traditional FtF meetings with a variety of anytime/anyplace communication technologies to support collaborative work, the need to study these new forms of interaction grows greater. This experiment builds on prior work by comparing the effectiveness of four modes of communication for groups working on the upstream phases of software development: (1) face-to-face, (2) synchronous computer conferencing, (3) asynchronous computer conferencing, and (4) combined FtF and asynchronous computer conferencing. Teams of graduate students determined the requirements for an automated post office as a course assignment over a period of two weeks. The creativity and quality of solutions produced by groups in the combined condition were higher than those in the remaining three communication modes. Combined groups were generally more satisfied with their solutions, although no differences among conditions were found regarding satisfaction with the process used to accomplish work.
Twenty-four groups of five professionals and managers used computer conferences to reach agreement on the best solution to a complex ranking problem. Two software tools for structuring the conferences were employed in a two-by-two factorial design. Groups with "designated leadership" (DL) used software support to elect a discussion leader. Groups with"statistical feedback" (SF) were presented with tables periodically that displayed the mean rank and degree of consensus for each item. DL improved levels of consensus; in the absence of a leader, SF improved level of agreement slightly. Statistical feedback as operationalized in this experiment was detrimental to the ability of a group to achieve "collective intelligence," defined as a group decision better than the prediscussion decision of any of its individual members. Characteristics of the individuals and groups were also associated with variations in outcomes.