On theory-driven design and deployment of collaboration systems

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.02.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Early efforts to design and deploy collaboration systems were more art than science, but they produced some solid successes. Commercial groupware products now support millions of collaborations per year. Under certain circumstances teams that use group support systems perform far better than groups that do not. However, as impressive as the achievements are in this field, we can do better. A rigorous theoretical approach to the design of collaboration technology and process can lead us to non-intuitive design choices that produce successes beyond those possible with an intuitive, seat-of-the-pants approach. This paper explains the simple structure of a rigorous scientific theory and offers examples of theory-driven design choices that produced substantial benefits. It then differentiates rigorous theory from several classes of theory that have intuitive appeal, but cannot inform design choices. It concludes that the logic of the theory-driven design approach suggests that the most useful focus for collaboration technology researchers would be the technology-supported work-process, rather than just the technology.

Section snippets

Collaboration technology design as an art

Early efforts to design and deploy collaboration technology were more art than science, founded on common sense and intelligence, guided by heuristics derived from inspiration tempered by hard experience. This approach has given rise to some solid long-term successes—consider, for example Lotus Notes, NetMeeting, and Webex, each of which now supports millions of collaborations per year. Further, a robust body of literature shows that, under certain circumstances, people who use group support

There is nothing so useful as a good theory

There is nothing as useful as a good theory. This assertion may draw snorts of derision from skeptics. Yet, a good theory can put people on the moon and return them safely to earth on the first try. What one theory can do for space travel, others can do and have done for collaboration technology. Rigorous theory can lead to designs for collaboration technology process that far surpass those produced by a good mind and a gut feel. This section explains what is meant by theory, and present

Good theories—better technologies

This section presents three examples that illustrate how a good theory can drive non-intuitive design choices that improve group outcomes.

Theoretical temptations: models that do not inform

There is nothing as useful as a good theory. A model of cause and effect can suggest ways to design and use our technologies to cause the effects we need. However, all models are not created equal. Our literature is rife with models that yield no useful insight. Such models are seductive, because on the surface, they seem logical. However, in the end, they cannot drive our design choices for collaboration processes and technologies. This section discusses several classes of models that could

Implications for collaboration technology research

This paper began with a series of questions, and suggested that good theory could be applied to answering each of them. Let us explore each of those questions in light of the arguments developed in the paper.

  • •

    How can we account for the dramatic success (and failures) of some collaboration technologies? Success can only be measured with respect to desirable changes in specific phenomena of interest. A good theory offers an explanation for the causes of a phenomenon of interest, and so can account

Conclusions

By driving our designs with rigorous theoretical models of cause-and-effect, the field of groupware technology can advance far beyond its already valuable achievements. If we understand the mechanisms that cause our phenomena of interest, we can use a technology in ways to deliberately cause better (or worse) outcomes. If we understand nothing of the causal mechanisms, then we can only achieve a given outcome by accident at first and by rote thereafter. Good theory can make us appear as

References (22)

  • J.S. Valacich et al.

    Idea generation in computer-based groups: a new ending to an old story

    Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    (1994)
  • Agres, A., Vreede, G.J., Briggs, R.O., 2004. A tale of two cities: case studies of GSS Transition in Two Organizations....
  • Briggs, R.O., 1994. The Focus Theory of Group Productivity and its Application to the Design and Deployment of...
  • R.O. Briggs et al.

    A technology transition model derived from field investigation of GSS use aboard USS. CORONADO

    Journal of Management Information Systems

    (1999)
  • R.O. Briggs et al.

    Collaboration engineering with thinklets to pursue sustained success with group support systems

    Journal of Management Information Systems

    (2003)
  • T. Connolly et al.

    Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups

    Management Science

    (1990)
  • F.D. Davis et al.

    User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models

    Management Science

    (1989)
  • A.R. Dennis et al.

    Computer brainstorms: more heads are better than one

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1993)
  • M. Diehl et al.

    Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: toward the solution of a riddle

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1987)
  • M. Diehl et al.

    Productivity loss in idea-generating groups: tracking down the blocking effect

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1991)
  • J. Fjermestad et al.

    An assessment of group support systems experimental research: methodology and results

    Journal of Management Information Systems

    (1999)

    • Cited by (72)

    • Editorial: Design Research Notes

      2022, Design Studies

    • Where next for design research? Understanding research impact and theory building

      2020, Design Studies
      Citation Excerpt :

      Examples include, Dorst's (2008) call for systematic use of explanatory frameworks, Galle's (2011) exploration of foundational and instrumental theory, and Love's (2002) proposal for an overall body of design theory. Hevner (2007) also provides a ‘Design Science’ model of theory and knowledge development, while Briggs (2006) explains general tenets of theory construction in applied fields. Further, Blessing and Chakrabarti's (2009, p. 9) Design Research Methodology and Eckert et al.’s (2013) tool-focused Spiral Model both aim to promote theory via robust research processes.

    • Developing theory-driven design research

      2018, Design Studies
      Citation Excerpt :

      Theory-driven research is at the core of robust scientific knowledge. This connects three symbiotic components: theory building, research methods and the body of scientific knowledge (Briggs, 2006; Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Kitchenham et al., 2002). ‘Good’ theory-driven research allows researchers to build a corpus of robust scientific knowledge that is valuable internally and accessible externally.

    • Uncertainty Driven Action (UDA) model: A foundation for unifying perspectives on design activity

      2017, Design Science

    • The importance of theory at the Information Systems Journal

      2023, Information Systems Journal

    • Shared digital artifacts – Co-creators as beneficiaries in microlearning development

      2023, Education and Information Technologies
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text
    Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.