This research compared the use of an electronic meeting system tool to a manual group process in large and small groups in a controlled laboratory experiment. Outcomes measured include the quality of decision, the time taken in various stages of the decision making process, and group
member satisfaction. A research model of the variables influencing group decision making was
developed. The six independent variables included in this model are group size, the rule by which the group makes a decision, the incentives driving the group, the distribution of useful information within the group, the task complexity, and the meeting support (electronic or manual). In this research group size and method of support were manipulated, while the other variables were controlled. A decision-making task was developed for this research to specify and manipulate the six independent variables. The task described a product mix problem in which information on each product was given to group members. The group shared information and jointly determined an outcome. The group used an unanimous decision rule to chose a solution. A numerical outcome was used to objectively measure decision quality. Each member of the group received a cash payoff determined by the group's solution as incentive in accomplishing the task. All groups found the optimal solution. The simplicity of the task may have minimized the differences found between groups. There was no significant difference in general member satisfaction or time to decision. Prior knowledge was found to influence general member satisfaction and the time needed for the group to share information. Members of large groups perceived more uneven distribution of participation than members of small groups. Voting differences were very large: large groups took significantly more votes than small groups, and electronic groups took significantly more votes than manual groups. "Conjunctive" and "disjunctive" task descriptions are used to discuss task/tool interaction.
A descriptive framework has the purpose of identifying the major components of a system and their relationships. This paper proposes a descriptive framework for electronic meeting systems. Our intention is to clarify and organize the conceptually and functionally distinctive components that we find in this technology. The proposed framework simplifies the evaluation of EMS functionality by organizations. The adoption of the UML language increases the potential of communicating EMS requirements to IS developers. The paper presents the evaluation grids of a collection of 10 EMS highlighting what framework components are supported and what components have been ignored. Electronic meeting systems (EMS) can help conflicting groups
move from disagreement to consensus—from groups to teams—and ultimately achieve the strategic partnership that is essential to their survival. This study provides a detailed account of the operation of an EMS, describes the many potential benefits of the system, and gives practical advice on how to use it while avoiding the common pitfalls.
Groups are responsible for many of the activities and decisions made in
business and government. These activities include generating ideas and
solutions to problems, sharing information, negotiating a jOint decision, and building consensus to aid in the implementation of a plan. These activities are not always accomplished efficiently or effectively. One mid-sized Fortune 500 company estimated 71 Million dollars in losses due to meeting inefficiencies in one yearl [Mosvick and Nelson, 1987] It is difficult to measure the cost of ineffective meetings, but the impact of bad decisions, inappropriate actions, and untimely solutions on profit could be larger than the costs due to meeting inefficiencies. The potential gain from improving group work is very large.
Electronic meeting systems (EMS) are environments made of hardware, software, and human facilitators which impact, and possibly improve, group processes. Features of the system, aspects of the task, and characteristics of the group all interact to change group outcomes. Case
and field studies on electronic meeting systems have often shown gains in efficiency, effectiveness, and member satisfaction when groups use these systems. However, laboratory studies comparing manual groups to electronic groups have shown mixed results. Further experimental research is needed to form a taxonomy of task and group characteristics, and the system functionality to improve this interaction. Because labour and management have very rarely stepped outside their confining adversarial approach to negotiation, little pro g ress has been made toward the strategic union management partnerships that are increasingly necessary if Canadian organizations are to
remain competitive in a rapidly changing global economy (Downie and Coates 1993;
| 1 - 5 of 96 Reviews |