J. D. Eveland
Abstract
It is frequently suggested that work groups that have computer technology to support activities such as text editing, data manipulation, and communication develop systematically different structures and working processes from groups that rely on more conventional technologies such as memos, phone calls, and meetings. However, cross-sectional or retrospective research designs do not allow this hypothesis to be tested with much power. This field experiment created two task forces, each composed equally of recently retired employees and employees still at work but eligible to retire. They were given the identical tasks of preparing reports for their company on retirement planning issues, but they were randomly assigned to different technology conditions. One group had full conventional office support; the other had, in addition, networked microcomputers with electronic mail and routine office software. Structured interviews were conducted four times during the year-long project; in addition, electronic mail activity was logged in the on-line group. Although both groups produced effective reports, the two differed significantly in the kind of work they produced, the group structures that emerged, and evaluations of their own performance. Although the standard group was largely dominated by the employees through the extensive reliance on informal meetings, the electronic technology used by the other task force allowed the retirees to exercise primary leverage. We conclude that use of computer support for cooperative work results in both quantitative and qualitative changes but that effective participation in such electronically supported groups requires significant investments of time and energy on the part of its members to master the technology and a relatively high level of assistance during the learning process.
- 1 BIKSON, T. K. Understanding the implementation of office technology. Technology and the Transformation of White-Collar Work, R. Kraut, Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, N.J., 1987, pp. 155-176; also The Rand Corporation, N-2619-NSF, June 1987.Google Scholar
- 2 BIKSON, T. K., AND EVELAND, J. D. New Office Technology: Planning for People, Work in America Institute's Series in Productivity. Pergamon Press, New York, 1986.Google Scholar
- 3 BIKSON, T. K., EVELAND, J. D., AND GUTEK, B. A. Flexible interactive technologies for multiperson tasks: Current problems and future prospects. In Technological Support for Work Group Collaboration, M. Olson, Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 89--112. Google Scholar
- 4 BIKSON, T. K., GUTEK, B. A., AND MANKIN, D. Implementing computerized procedures in office settings: Influences and outcomes. The Rand Corporation, R-3077-NSF, Oct. 1987.Google Scholar
- 5 BIKSON, T. K., STASZ, C., AND MANKIN, D. A. Computer-mediated work: Individual and organizational impact in one corporate headquarters. The Rand Corporation, R-3308-OTA, Nov. 1985.Google Scholar
- 6 BIKSON, T. K., EDEN, R., GILLOGLY, J., HAHM, W., PAYNE, J., AND SHAPIRO, N. How to use the task force microcomputer. The Rand Corporation, N-2670-MF, Sept. 1987.Google Scholar
- 7 EVELAND, J. D., AND BIKSON, T.K. Evolving electronic communication networks: An empirical assessment, in O/rice Technology and People, Elsevier Science Publications, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1987, pp. 103-128. Google Scholar
- 8 FREEMAN, L. A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40 (1976), 35-41.Google Scholar
- 9 HILTZ, S.R. On-Line Research Communities: A Case Study of the Office o/the Future. Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, 1983. Google Scholar
- 10 HUFF, C., SPROULL, L., AND KIESLER, S. Computer communication and organizational commitment: Tracing the relationship in a city government. J. Applied Social Psychology, In press.Google Scholar
- 11 JOHNSON, B. M., AND RICE, R. Managing Organizational Innovation: The Evolution from Word Processing to Office Information Systems. Columbia University Press, New York, 1987. Google Scholar
- 12 KLING, R., AND SCACCm, W. The web of computing: Computer technology as social organization. Advances in Computers 71 (1982), 2-60.Google Scholar
- 13 KNOKEM, D., AND KUKLINSKI, J.H. Network Analysis. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Calif., 1982.Google Scholar
- 14 MARKUS, M.L. Toward a 'critical mass' theory of interactive media: Universal access, interdependence and diffusion. Communication Research 14, 5 (Oct. 1987), 491-511.Google Scholar
- 15 McEvoY, B., AND FREEMAN, L. UCINET: A Microcomputer Package for Network Analysis. University of California, Irvine, Calif., 1986.Google Scholar
- 16 PAVA, C. H.P. Managing New Office Technology. The Free Press, New York, 1983.Google Scholar
- 17 RICE, R. E. Mediated group communication. In The New Media: Communication, Research and Technology, R. E. Rice and Associates, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, Calif., 1984, pp. 129-154.Google Scholar
- 18 RICE, R. E., AND CASE, D. Computer-based messaging in the university: A description of use and utility. Journal of Communication 33, 1 (1983), 131-152.Google Scholar
- 19 ROGERS, E., AND KINCAID, D. L. Communication Networks: Toward a New Paradigm for Research. Macmillan, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
- 20 STASZ, C., BIKSON, T. K., AND SHAPIRO, N.Z. Assessing the Forest Service's implementation of an agency-wide information system: An exploratory study. The Rand Corporation, N-2463- USFS, May 1986.Google Scholar
- 21 TAYLOR, J.C. Job design and quality of working life. In Technology and the Transformation of White Collar Work, R. Kraut, Ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, N.J., 1987, pp. 211-235.Google Scholar
- 22 TRIST, E. L. The sociotechnical perspective: The evolution of sociotechnical systems as a conceptual framework and as an action research program, in Perspectives on Organization Design and Behavior, Andrew H. Van de Ven and William F. Joyce, Eds. Wiley and Sons, New York, 1981, pp. 19-75.Google Scholar
- 23 ZUBOFF, S. In the Age of the Smart Machine. Basic Books, New York, 1988. Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Work group structures and computer support: a field experiment
Recommendations
Computer-mediated communication for intellectual teamwork: a field experiment in group writing
CSCW '90: Proceedings of the 1990 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative workTo work together on complex projects, people must agree on a set of shared goals, coordinate the actions of contributors, and weave the components they have created independently into a unified whole. These activities are the basic components of ...
Computer support for group work: perceptions of the usefulness of support scenarios and end-user tools
Special section: Navigation in information-intensive environmentsComputer support for group work-often called "groupware"-is receiving considerable attention from researchers and system developers. Despite these efforts, not much is really known about user-perceived needs for group support. This study surveyed ...
A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support
<P>As organizational environments become more turbulent and as managers spend more time in meetings in an effort to deal with that turbulence, using information technology to support meetings has become more important. This paper reports on an ...
Reviews
William Edward Mihalo
Eveland and Bikson describe an interesting field experiment. They wanted to ascertain if the use of technology would affect the structure of a task group. They selected workers who were about to retire or had recently retired and assigned them randomly to one of two task groups: a standard group and a computer-as-tool group. After tracking the two groups for one year, the authors discovered that an electronic network can provide an effective infrastructure for sustained collaborative activity—even among people who initially are not computer sophisticated. They also noted that electronic media reinforce other, more conventional forms of interaction. They concluded that the computer group developed a different social structure, provided members with a more flexible time schedule for contributing to the group, and displayed more contacts, more involvement, and better satisfaction. This paper has several problems. First, it is not clear whether the authors controlled for the three hours of computer training that the members of the computer group received at the beginning of the study. This training was necessary so that the people in the group could better use these tools, but it also gave these members an edge by introducing them and allowing them to meet. Second, the authors do not describe the type of electronic media they used. They mention the use of RANDMAIL software but give no other details about the software or technological characteristics of their experiment. They refer the reader to another document for additional information, but they could have clarified some of the questions that come to mind by describing this aspect of the experiment in their appendix. Third, Bikson and Eveland traced an electronic network structure that they based upon an analysis of mail headers such as the sender, the recipient, and time and date stamping. They do not mention any analysis of the messages' content. Consequently, they observe that 25 percent of the computer group members posted 75 percent of the messages, without even remarking how long any of the messages were. Finally, their paper includes sociograms that are difficult to follow. A sociologist may be able to digest them, but people outside the discipline may not. Overall, these criticisms are minor, and this interesting experiment certainly merits replication.
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments