This article presents an executive overview of the article "A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness," by Ilze Zigurs and Bonnie K. Buckland.
Cognitive maps are valuable tools for understanding individual and group perceptions. But developing such maps is a resource-intensive activity. To reduce required resources, group support system (GSS) technology is proposed as an aid in uncovering cognitive maps. A GSS session was used to develop a cognitive map of users of object-oriented (OO) techniques perceptions of OO system complexity. Seven participants identified concepts and categories, categorized the concepts, rated category importance, and defined relationships between categories. The data collected and analyses performed provide the basis for a cognitive map of the participants' perceptions of OO system complexity. A comparison with similar individual cognitive mapping results supports further investigation of using the GSS approach for identifying perceptions of complexity.
The emerging technology of group support systems has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of team work in organizations. One critical factor that has received little attention in technology-supported environments is that of the roles participants fill in meetings. This paper develops a theoretical model of roles in computer-supported meetings and examines the impact of a group support system on roles. An exploratory field study of 10 work teams was conducted to investigate the perceptions of participants about their own roles and the roles that the group support system technology might fill. The study found a gap between the role expectations of meeting initiators and meeting participants, as well as between participants' role expectations and actual roles filled. The group support system technology was perceived to fill an unexpectedly large variety of roles. The study also showed that the group support system assumed some of the roles that participants expected to fill, resulting in fewer roles filled by participants.
To permit exploration of the development of attitudes in a group decision support system environment, eight groups of four and five persons each met in a computer-supported conference room over a period of two months. Each group addressed two strategic planning tasks, meeting for a total of eight two-hour sessions. The computer support provided was Software-Aided Meeting Management (SAMM), a system designed to support common group needs such as problem identification, alternatives generation, and alternatives evaluation. Groups were permitted to use or not use SAMM, according to their own perceived needs. Members' attitudes toward the group decision process and their perceptions of meeting quality were assessed after each meeting. As part of an academic course in which they were enrolled, the groups were required to submit a detailed report of their plans for each task; the plans were evaluated by the course instructor. Results suggested two patterns of adoption of SAMM: (1) groups that accepted the technology and used it throughout their meetings, and (2) groups that discarded the technology and ceased to use it. This paper discusses attitudinal development in these two types of groups and explores the relationship between attitudes and the quality of group planning in the SAMM environment.
An emerging body of research in group decision support systems (GDSS) provides evidence that computer technology can and does impact the quality of decision making in groups. Most GDSS research is oriented toward examining the effects of a computer system on group outcomes, typically decision quality or group consensus, with the process itself often treated as a "black box." The research reported in this article addresses the need for a closer, micro-level examination of group process. An important group variable, namely influence behavior, was isolated and examined at various levels and by multiple methods. A model of specific GDSS effects on influence behavior was developed, based on an information exchange view of decision making and on the impact of a GDSS as a communication channel. Based on the research questions of interest in the study, several propositions and hypotheses were advanced and empirically tested on a specific implementation of a GDSS. Results were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. The major empirical findings of the study showed no significant difference between the overall amount of influence behavior attempted in computer-supported versus unsupported groups, although significant differences were found in the pattern of influence behaviors, i.e., the different types of behaviors used. In addition, the distribution of influence behavior was more even in GDSS groups than in unsupported groups on one of two measures used. Empirical findings partially supported the research model, with indications that decision-making groups need more active guidance in understanding how to adapt computer support technology to their view of decision-making processes.