Robert O. Briggs

Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: a discussion of lab and field findings

During the past dozen years, researchers at the University of Arizona have built six generations of group support systems software, conducted over 150 research studies, and facilitated over 4,000 projects. This article reports on lessons learned through that experience. It begins by presenting a theoretical foundation for the Groupware Grid, a tool for designing and evaluating GSS. It then reports lessons from nine key domains: (1)GSS in organizations; (2) cross-cultural and multicultural issues; (3) designing GSS software; (4) collaborative writing; (5) electronic polling; (6) GSS facilities and room design; (7) leadership and facilitation; (8) GSS in the classroom; and (9) business process reengineering.

Collaboration Engineering: Designing Repeatable Processes for High-Value Collaborative Tasks

By collaborating people can accomplish more than they could as separate individuals. Yet, achieving effective team collaboration remains a challenge. Organizations struggle to make collaboration work. They often resort to implementing technologies, while experiences show that technology alone seldom is the answer. Collaboration processes need to be explicitly designed structured and managed to maximize the focus of purposeful effort. This is at the heart of a new area of research: Collaboration Engineering - designing recurring collaboration processes that can be transferred to groups that can be self-sustaining in these processes using collaboration techniques and technology. Through a number of action research studies with a host of organizations we developed a Collaboration Engineering design approach. This paper presents and illustrates this approach in terms of its way of thinking, working, modeling and controlling. Finally, an agenda for future research is defined.

Information Systems Success

ROBERT O. BRIGGS is Research Coordinator at the Center for the Management of Information at the University of Arizona and Associate Professor of Collaboration Engineering at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. He is also Director of Research and Development for GroupSystems.com. As a researcher, he has published more than 60 scholarly works on the theoretical foundations collaboration, and he applies his findings to the development and deployment of collaborative technology to enhance team productivity, team creativity, and team satisfaction. His work on organizational transition to collaborative technology led to new insights about how to conceive of and deploy group support systems so as to create self-sustaining and growing communities of users. He received his Ph.D. from University of Arizona in 1994.is Research Coordinator at the Center for the Management ofInformation at the University of Arizona and Associate Professor of CollaborationEngineering at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands. He is also Directorof Research and Development for GroupSystems.com. As a reseiu-cher, he has pub-lished more than 60 scholarly works on the theoretical foundations collaboration,and he applies his findings to the development and deployment of collaborative tech-nology to enhance team productivity, team creativity, and team satisfaction. His workon organizational transition to collaborative technology led to new insights abouthow to conceive of and deploy group support systems so as to create self-sustainingand growing communities of users. He received his Ph.D. from University of Arizonain 1994.

The Yield Shift Theory of Satisfaction and Its Application to the IS/IT Domain

Robert O. Briggs Institute for Collaboration Science, University of Nebraska at Omaha Center for Distance Education, College of Rural and Community Development, University of Alaska Fairbanks rbriggs@mail.unomaha.edu

GSS for presentation support

COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM September 2000/Vol. 43, No. 9 91 P resentations are an ubiquitous feature of organizational life. They are a key method for achieving a clear understanding of complex ideas among large groups of people. However, there is often little time for genuine interaction among presenters and their audiences. Imagine a presentation where the entire audience jumped into a lively debate as soon as the presentation began. Imagine the presenter continued unconcerned, that everybody heard the presentation without losing the thread of the discussion in the audience. Imagine the participants could report the discussions months later with complete accuracy. With standard methods this would be impossible, yet with Group Support Systems (GSS) this scenario can be realized fairly easily. A GSS is a suite of software tools for focusing and structuring group deliberation, while reducing the cognitive costs of communication and information access among teams making a joint cognitive effort toward a goal [3]. GSS participants simultaneously type their contributions into a network of computers. The software immediately makes all contributions available to the other participants. If the team feels it appropriate, the GSS allows for anonymous input. A GSS may have tools for collaborative idea generation and organization, electronic polling, simultaneous document authoring, and multicriteria decision-making, among others. Each tool creates a different kind of group dynamic. One may encourage participants to diverge from customary thought patterns, while another may cause them to converge quickly on key issues. One may encourage them to contribute in great depth and detail, while another may move them to a broader, big-picture view. Here, we rethink the traditional presentation-and-discussion structure, exploring means that may enhance its value for both audiences and presenters. Supercharging the audience through simultaneous discussions during presentations. ■ Robert M. Davison and Robert O. Briggs

Principles for effective virtual teamwork

OrganizatiOns tOday Often establish OperatiOns and strategic alliances across the globe, making virtual teamwork critical to their success.5 Many government and military organizations face new challenges, such as combating terrorism, that are better tackled by nimble, well-informed teams than by large hierarchical bureaucracies. In the wake of global expansion and outsourcing, other organizations seek to cut the cost and hassle of bringing team members to a single location. Virtual teams are becoming ubiquitous (Figure 1). Intel Corporation recently conducted a study which revealed that approximately two-thirds of their employees collaborated with team members located at different sites and in different regions. Therefore, it is important to understand how to make virtual teams effective. Virtual teams face new challenges that make them more difficult to manage than traditional face-to-face teams (see Table 1). For example, approximately half of the employees in the study above worked with team members whose work processes and collaboration technologies differed from their own. Virtual teams may struggle to establish cohesive relationships necessary for achieving their objectives. Virtual team members also face competing demands for their attention from their virtual team and from their immediate workplace, and from the practical challenges of assimilating new technologies into their daily routines. Over the past decade of working with virtual teams, we have derived a set of principles for effective virtual teamwork (Table 2). These principles are derived from field experience with hundreds of virtual teams in government, military and business organizations and from extensive laboratory studies. Two assumptions underlie these principles. First, we assume that the collaboration is interpersonal which implies that the virtual team consists of a welldefined group of individuals brought together to produce a specific deliverable such as a software specification, a strategic plan, or a budget proposal. This is referred to as “closed” collaboration by Pisano and Verganti and is distinguished from community-based collaboration which is open to the public. Second, we assume that the technology employed by the virtual teams is reliable and secure. Technological glitches will cripple the productivity of even the most knowledgeable and motivated virtual teams. Our principles are intended to help designers, managers, and virtual team members improve the effectiveness of their virtual teams.

EasyWinWin: managing complexity in requirements negotiation with GSS

More than 3/4 of large software projects suffer large cost and schedule overruns or fail outright. Deficits in project requirements cause more than half of these failures and overruns. This is in part because the establishment of software requirements is fraught with complexity. Finding ways to manage that complexity might be an important step in reducing the risk of software development. Group support systems (GSS) offer functionality that may reduce some aspects of complexity and reduce the cognitive load of addressing other aspects of complexity. We examine the sources of causes of complexity in software requirements in the context of EasyWinWin, a requirements negotiation methodology supported by GSS. Early field trials suggest that EasyWinWin is a significant step forward in managing the complexity of establishing requirements, and that further advantage could be gained by combining a GSS solution with other technologies like intelligent agents and requirements management systems.

Toward a broader vision for Information Systems

In December of 2009, several founders of the Information Systems (IS) academic discipline gathered for a panel discussion at the International Conference on Information Systems to present their visions for the future of the field, and their comments were summarized in the inaugural issue of TMIS [Davis et al., 2010; J. F. J. Nunamaker et al., 1991]. To assure a robust future, they argued, IS journals, conferences, reviewers, promotion committees, teachers, researchers, and curriculum developers must broaden the scope of IS. This article explores the need for a broader vision to drive future development of the IS discipline.

A theory and measurement of meeting satisfaction

For many years, meeting satisfaction has been a key outcome variable in experimental group support systems (GSS) research. GSS research results on meeting satisfaction are conflicting, reporting positive, negative, or no effects. Unfortunately, no causal model of meeting satisfaction has been developed that could explain these effects. This paper derives satisfaction attainment theory (SAT), a causal model of meeting satisfaction. It further presents a survey instrument for measuring the constructs in the model. This instrument was statistically validated with a field study involving 156 working professionals. Furthermore, the field study provided support for the hypotheses that were derived from SATs propositions. A number of implications for future GSS research on meeting satisfaction are identified.

Increasing Intellectual Bandwidth: Generating Value from Intellectual Capital with Information Technology

An organizations Intellectual Bandwidth (IB) is its capacity to transform External Domain Knowledge (EDK) into Intellectual Capital (IC), and to convert IC into Applied Knowledge (AK), from which a task team can create value. An organizations IB is an upper boundary on its ability to solve complex problems. To create value, members of an organization must search for knowledge, share it, and, bring it to bear on the issue at hand. The Intellectual Bandwidth of an organization must therefore be, to a certain extent, a function of the ability of its members to access data, information, and knowledge that is relevant in the context of the task at hand in order to understand the causes and consequences of their problem. They must reason about possible solutions and their potential consequences. Throughout the task they must communicate with other stakeholders and subject matter experts as they make a joint effort toward their goal. This paper develops a model of IB based on these and other concepts. It posits that IB is the product of a Hierarchy of Understanding and a Hierarchy of Collaboration. The paper suggests that the model may be useful for analyzing and deploying IT in ways that reduce the cognitive load of bringing EDK and IC to bear on the task at hand. Future research must focus on refining and validating constructs and developing measures of IB, and using those measures to find ways to increase the value derived from EDK and IC.