The impact of nonverbal cues on computer-mediated communication system effectiveness.

Abstract

The increasingly complex and turbulent organizational environments demand more effective organizational communication. Computer mediated communication systems (CMCS) which include computer conferencing systems, electronic and voice mail systems, and group decision support systems are designed to satisfy this demand. However, these systems have often been found to be ineffective; many researchers believe that this ineffectiveness is due to the lack of a good theory of CMCS in organizations. To this end, a model highlighting the impact of an important CMCS characteristic, nonverbal cues, on unstructured task effectiveness was developed based on the organizational theory and information systems literatures. In accord with communication systems researchers' suggestions, this model is less holistic (more variable-centered) than most communication models in that it focuses on the behavioral, cognitive, and affective linkages leading from nonverbal cues to unstructured task effectiveness. A laboratory experiment is used to validate the nonverbal cues-unstructured task effectiveness model. Nonverbal cues were manipulated by employing four different communication systems: face-to-face meeting, ShrEdit (a type of GDSS), Confer II (an electronic conferencing system), and the MTS electronic mail system. The results provide support for less than half of the hypothesized relationships. It is suggested that the major reason for this lack of support for the model is the complexity of group communication and the lack of an appropriately complex theory. Contributions of this dissertation include implications for both researchers and practitioners. Research implications include a realization that several of the nonverbal cues-unstructured task effectiveness model relationships may be moderated by characteristics of participants, task, and CMCS. In addition, the results reinforce the importance of variable-centered approach by suggesting a more variable-centered model. Implications for practice include the conclusion that it is unreasonable to attempt to find "the" effective CMCS for a specific task. Rather, the effectiveness of a CMCS implementation should be expected to vary as different participants are assigned to a task and as participants work together over time. In addition, research into the impact of CMCS on task effectiveness is too immature to be able to provide explicit guidelines for CMCS employment.