| Organizational trends towards geographic expansion, supported by improved communication technologies, such as video and audioconferencing, and computer-based meeting tools, have caused teams to become dispersed, working at different times and locations. In response to the need to effectively manage these new forms of meetings, this study proposed ways to improve participation and performance by aligning task, composition, and communication channel.; Existing literature on this subject is not clear as to the selection and effect of alternate communication channels. In particular, little research exists on the relationship between communication channel and composition. Observational research is lacking which incorporates audio, video, and face-to-face communication over a full range of convergent and divergent tasks. Further, virtually all studies have used artificial groups performing simulated tasks, where group motivation may be lower than in normal work settings.; This multi-method field study included both non-participant structured observation of 90 meetings, followed by group member surveys. The dependent variables included were group composition (group size, gender, age, and organizational level); group participation (level and equality of participation); and group performance (achievement, efficiency, and satisfaction). The independent variables were communication channel used (face-to-face, audioconferencing, and videoconferencing); and task involved (convergent, such as decision-making, and divergent, such as idea generation).; There were a number of important findings reported in this study. Communication channel had a significant effect on group composition. For example, videoconferences were over twice as large as face-to-face meetings while males dominated audioconferences, representing three out of four participants. Participation and performance were also highly dependent on channel. Group members participated more often in face-to-face meetings but more equally in audioconferencing. Groups produced more ideas face-to-face and were least efficient using videoconferencing to generate ideas and decisions. Finally, group satisfaction was perceived to be highest for face-to-face meetings. |
