Supporting Distributed Groups with Group Support Systems - End User Computing Challenges and Technologies: Emerging Tools and Applications - page 234

limitation and Future
researCh

reFerenCes

Barkhi, R., Jacob, V. S., Pipino, L., & Pirkul, H.
(1998). A study of the effect of communication
channel and authority on group decision processes
and outcomes. Decision Support Systems, 23 (3),
205-226.

One limitation of the study was the training of
groups before the experiment. The task given
to all the training groups was the selection of a
group leader to serve as a leader in the experiment.
The selected leader was announced to groups in
with-a-leader conditions at the beginning of the
experiment. In groups in without-a-leader condi-
tions, the selected leader was never announced.
However, it is suspected that by selecting a group
leader during the training session, the subjects in
without-a-leader conditions may have participated
in the experiment, subconsciously feeling the
presence of a group leader. A different training
task could have prevented this feeling in groups
in without-a-leader conditions. Fortunately, how-
ever, not many of the leaders selected in training
sessions emerged as informal leaders in groups
in without-a-leader conditions.
This study can be extended further to examine
the impact of different leadership styles in GSS
settings. Leadership is a very complex construct
for which a stronger theoretical basis is needed
to develop software support for leadership and
facilitation roles in DGSS and GSS, in general.
Leadership might not be affected by GSS; how-
ever, the use of GSS may be affected by a leader,
particularly by leadership style (Parent & Gallupe,
2001). For example, one study found that while
interaction-oriented transformational leader-
ship positively has amplified the effect of GSS
anonymity on group potency and effectiveness,
outcome-oriented transactional leadership did not
(Sosik et al., 1997). Unfortunately, in this study,
leadership styles were not controlled. Groups in
the same experimental condition could have had
different interaction environments because of the
different leadership styles used by group leaders.
In a future study with the group leader variable, it
may be necessary to control different leadership
styles rather than simply to adopt the with-and-
without-a-group-leader conditions.

Bordia, P. (1997). Face-to-face versus computer-
mediated communication: A synthesis of the
experimental literature. Journal of Business
Communication, 34 (1), 99-120.

Briggs, R. O., Nunamaker, J. F., & Sprague, R. H.
(1997-1998). 1001 unanswered research questions
in GSS. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 14 (3), 3-21.

Chidambaram, L., & Jones, B. (1993). Impact on
communication medium and computer support on
group perceptions and performance: A compari-
son of face-o-face and dispersed meetings. MIS
Quarterly, 17 (4), 465-491.

Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L. (1987). Informa-
tion technologies. Handbook of Organizational
Communication , 420-443.

Dennis, A. R., George, J. F., Jessup, L. M., Nuna-
maker, J. F., & Vogel, D.R. (1988). Information
technology to support electronic meetings. MIS
Quarterly, 12 (4), 591-616.

DeSanctis, G., & Gallupe, R. (1987). A foundation
for the study of group decision support systems.
Management Science, 33 (5), 589-609.

Dess, G. G., & Orieger, N. K. (1987). Environment
structure and consensus in strategy formulation:
A conceptual integration. Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 12 (2), 313-330.

Dickson, G. W., Lee-Partridge, J., & Robinson,
L. H. (1993). Exploring ,modes of facilitative
support for GDSS technology. MIS Quarterly,
17 (2), 173-194.