C. Erik Timmerman

Virtually Working: Communicative and Structural Predictors of Media Use and Key Outcomes in Virtual Work Teams1 A previous version of this work was presented as a Top 3 Paper in the Organizational Communication Division at the International Communication Association Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA (May 2004).

Organizational trends toward team-based structures, globalization, and reliance on communication technology have spurred research addressing the communication processes of virtual teams. However, much of the extant research focuses on the ways virtual teams differ from conventional, face-to-face teams and fails to examine variations in virtual team characteristics that may impact team communication behaviors and experiences. The study reported here identifies two categories of virtual team characteristics (communicative and structural) and uses these to explore their relationships to team communication technology use and team outcomes. Analysis of data from 98 virtual teams reveals that structural features primarily relate to media use, whereas communication considerations are associated with team outcomes. Additional analyses indicate that various communicative predictors moderate the relationships between technology use and outcomes. These results point to theoretical and practical implications for researchers, team members, managers, and organizations related to virtual team design and communication processes.

Media Selection During The Implementation Of Planned Organizational Change A Predictive Framework Based on Implementation Approach and Phase

Although communication issues are central to processes of organizational change, a surprisingly small body of literature focuses on the use of communication media during the implementation process. This article integrates literature that addresses implementation approaches and phases with media selection research to provide a descriptive framework for understanding and predicting media use during planned change implementation. Propositions derived from conceptualizations of change approaches, phases of change, and the interactions between these constructs identify the media that are likely to be used by implementers throughout the implementation process. Further propositions suggest that the media used by implementers may recursively lead to reinforcement or modification of an implementation approach and may signal the development of a change across implementation phases. The article concludes by synthesizing the findings that emerge from the integration of these bodies of literature and describing implications for research and practice.

Organizational Newc(ust)omers: Applying Organizational Newcomer Assimilation Concepts to Customer Information Seeking and Service Outcomes

The process through which customers resolve uncertainty regarding their participative role in service transactions may be similar to the process that organizational newcomers experience as they gain role clarity and assimilate into organizations.This study applies organizational socialization literature to examine customer socialization, information seeking, role clarity, and service outcomes. Results (N = 328) indicate that (a) customers’ perceived social costs have a stronger association with information seeking than does felt need for information, (b) overt and indirect information seeking is related to role clarity, and (c) role clarity mediates relationships between overt and third-party information seeking tactics and service outcomes.The report concludes with discussion of the benefits of applying organizational socialization frameworks to service contexts.

Effects of Supportive Feedback Messages on Exergame Experiences

Since their inception, the popularity of exercise-based video games, or exergames, has continued to grow. Acknowledging the rapid growth of exergames, scholars have investigated exergame play experiences with a focus on the feedback a player receives about performance (e.g., progress bar, score) and how this information can influence game play experiences. To extend the existing exergame research, this study has two primary goals: (a) to test how the supportiveness of verbal feedback messages from an exergame can influence players’ exergame experiences and (b) to evaluate the way that a player’s sense of social presence may serve as a mechanism for understanding the link between feedback and experiences. An experiment (N = 47) was conducted using a between-subjects design. Two groups were compared: highly supportive versus lowly supportive feedback condition. The findings reveal that players who receive highly supportive feedback report greater exergame experience (e.g., enjoyment) than players who receive lowly supportive feedback. Further, social presence is a key variable that mediates the relationship between feedback and exergame experiences. Although the current research findings are important, they are limited to explaining short-term, immediate responses after exergame play among college students. The current research provides implications for research and practice. In particular, the study contributes to an extended understanding of feedback in exergame research and social presence research. At a practical level, the findings suggest that exergame designers should consider incorporating more supportive social feedback messages into a game.

Forum Introduction: Has Communication Research Made a Difference?

There is little doubt that the communication discipline has generated a sizeable body of research. For instance, the National Communication Association (NCA) sponsors 10 journals, with the oldest dating back to 1915 (The Quarterly Journal of Speech). In addition, the International Communication Association (ICA) presents five journals as well as a variety of other publications such as Communication Yearbook and the International Encyclopedia of Communication. Beyond the numerous publications sponsored by international and US regional associations, there is also a wide range of independent publications that present scholarship from the communication field (e.g., Communication Research, Management Communication Quarterly). And, a quick scan of any university library database will point to abundance of books, edited volumes, conference proceedings, and beyond. Given this sizeable body of literature, one would certainly think that at least some of this research has utility beyond its appearance in our discipline’s journals. Yet, a variety of initiatives reveal a level of historical and contemporary unease about whether this research is producing an impact in communication practices and outcomes. In the past, the Journal of Applied Communication Research was launched with the suggestion that it contain research that is socially relevant and ‘‘will help bring about communico-social change’’ (Hickson, 1973, p. 3). More recently, the Communication Currents web magazine was developed to make communication scholarship ‘‘available in a form understandable and usable for broad audiences’’ (NCA, 2008, p. 1). And informal commentary on forums such as the Communication Research and Theory Network (CRTNET) raise additional concerns about the discipline’s impact when, for example, media outlets fail to recognize the our discipline’s expertise about topics that are clearly communication-centered phenomena (e.g., Corman, 2008). Thus, the goal of this forum is to more directly address these concerns and stimulate formal dialogue about whether communication research has made a difference.

Forum Responses: Has Communication Research Made a Difference?

A joint forum published in Communication Monographs and the Journal of Applied Communication Research focuses upon the question, ‘‘Has communication research made a difference?’’ To begin the special forum, four communication scholars (Condit, 2009; Frey, 2009; Hummert, 2009; Seeger, 2009) presented arguments that provide initial perspectives about the question and some possible answers. Readers were then invited to submit response essays that extend, clarify, and challenge the ideas presented by the initial authors. Although measures of the value of a publication may vary considerably, the quantity and quality of reader responses to the call suggests that the four initial publications were quite successful at stimulating consideration of the topic. Upon receipt, submitted response essays were sent to a panel of reviewers who considered the merits of each response essay and focused upon the degree to which each essay contributed to our field’s understanding of difference making research. This process yielded a total of 11 essays, six appearing in this issue of Communication Monographs and five that appeared in Volume 38, Number 3 of Journal of Applied Communication Research. The response essays cover considerable ground with consideration of the question as well as potential answers. In Journal of Applied Communication Research, Harwood suggested that message-focused theory and method may extend the discipline’s ability to make a difference and Kahl argued that fundamental changes in our pedagogical approaches may heighten the value of our research contributions. Keyton, Beck, Messersmith, and Bisel identified the way that language and measurement are central elements for improving communication practice. Rush and Tracy provided an intriguing analysis of the degree to which communication theory and research is available in a popular web-based knowledge source*Wikipedia. And last, Sherry (in press) considered the characteristics of applied and basic research to identify common ground between them. The essays that appear in Communication Monographs also delve deeply into the discussion of difference making research. Garcı́a-Jiménez and Craig as well as Koschmann describe the potential benefits of a truly communication-based approach

Emergent Patterns in Organizational Communication

All three conferences were organized using Murray’s framework, so we had a unique opportunity to observe how organizational communication, as a holistic discipline, has evolved over the previous 40 years. Furthermore, we believe that conference participants had the opportunity to identify important trends that create spaces for discussion that extended our approaches to the study of organizational communication. When reflecting back, selected papers from the 1976 and 1996 conferences are available in Salem (1999) and, to look forward, selected papers from the 2016 conference are available in Salem and Timmerman (in press). When we mention specific authors, their papers are part of one of those volumes. The organizational communication domain has moved from constructs describing communication problems to a mix that includes constructs central to theories and paradigms. Put another way, the disciplinary domain appears to be less about understanding communication problems and more about seeing the field as one that can address problems as well as produce innovation that is oriented toward understanding processes, in general. The sharpest contrast is between Goldhaber’s 1999 communication audit summary with Putnam’s 1999 description of 11 research areas organized into three perspectives. In 2016, Kuhn emphasized the process and social nature of communication, and he argued for developing a communicative imagination revealing relevant and important problems. At the forefront of this current consideration