Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2004-12
Beyond the Silo Approach: Using Group Support Systems in Organizational Behavior Classes to Facilitate Student Understanding of Individual and Group Behavior in Electronic Meetings
In this article we show how management faculty have successfully incorporated teaching and research to better acquaint their students in organizational behavior classes with how groupware actually works in organizations and how to think through the ramifications of the groupware process in organizational decision making. The exercise is conducted with multiple classes, varying facilitator and agenda style across classes. A postexercise debriefing with the students examines the differing results and behavioral concerns critical in group support systems (GSS) decision-making design. This exercise provides instructors with a means of enhancing student learning in management and organizational behavior courses through classroom integration of electronic decision-making software and through analysis of the results of this integration.
Benbasat, I., & Lim, L. (1993). The effects of group, task, context, and technology variables on the usefulness of group support systems: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Small Group Research, 24, 430-462.
2.
Berger, J., Fisek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interactions: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier Science.
3.
Brief, A. P., Butcher, A. H., & Roberson, L. (1995). Cookies, disposition, and job attitudes: The effects of positive mood-inducing events on job satisfaction in a field experiment. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 62, 55-62.
4.
Clawson, V. R., & Bostrom, R. (1996). Research driven facilitation training for group support systems environments. Group Decision & Negotiation, 6(1), 7-29.
5.
Dennis, A. R., Heminger, F. F., & Vogel, D. R. (1990). Bring your own automated support to large groups: The Burr-Brown experience. Information & Management, 18, 111-121.
6.
Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 46, 735-754.
7.
Enbysk, M. (2001, October 22). Virtual meetings cut travel costs. Retrieved from www.bcentral.com/resource/articles/enbysk/132.asp?cobrand=msn
8.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
9.
Fjermestad, J., & Hiltz, S. (1999). An assessment of group support systems research: Methodology and results. Journal of Management Information Systems, 15, 7-149.
10.
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1996). The experience of work and turnover intentions: Interactive effects of value attainment, job satisfaction, and positive mood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 318-325.
11.
Greene, C. N. (1972, February). The satisfaction-performance controversy. Business Horizons, 15(5), 31-42.
12.
Hostager, T. J., Lester, S. W., Ready, K. J., & Bergmann, M. (2003). Matching facilitator style and agenda structure in group support systems: Effects on participant satisfaction and group output quality. Information Resources Management Journal, 16(2), 56-72.
13.
Lester, S. W., Ready, K. J., Hostager, T. J., & Bergmann M. (in press). The human side of group support systems: Influences on satisfaction and effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Issues.
14.
Niederman, F., Beise, C., & Beranek, P. (1996). Issues and concerns about computer-supported meetings: The facilitator’s perspective. MIS Quarterly, 20, 1-22.
15.
Nunamaker, J. F., Briggs, R. O., Mittleman, D. O., Vogel, D. R., & Balthazard, P. A. (1997). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: A discussion of lab and field findings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13, 163-207.
16.
Petty, M. M., McGee, G. W., & Cavender, J. W. (1984, October). A meta-analysis of the relationship between individual job satisfaction and individual performance. Academy of Management Review, 9(4), 712-721.
17.
Schwartz, R. M. (1994). The skilled facilitator. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
Venkatesh, V., & Speier, C. (1999). Computer technology training in the workplace: A longitudinal investigation of the effect of mood. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 79, 1-28.
19.
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief scales of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
20.
Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 78, 1-24.
21.
Whiteley, A., & Garcia, J. (1996). The facilitator and the chauffeur in GSS: Exploration in the forging of a relationship. Group Decision & Negotiation, 5, 31-50.
