Editorial
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 33, Heft 1, S. 1-5
ISSN: 1572-9907
25 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 33, Heft 1, S. 1-5
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 32, Heft 1, S. 1-4
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 31, Heft 1, S. 1-5
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 30, Heft 1, S. 1-5
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 271-272
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 15, Heft 3, S. 195-196
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 14, Heft 4, S. 265-266
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: International journal of information management, Band 57, S. 102301
ISSN: 0268-4012
In: International journal of information management, Band 41, S. 57-64
ISSN: 0268-4012
In: International journal of information management, Band 37, Heft 2, S. 25-35
ISSN: 0268-4012
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 26, Heft 5, S. 973-996
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Small group research: an international journal of theory, investigation, and application, Band 37, Heft 6, S. 585-611
ISSN: 1552-8278
Research shows that people who feel dissatisfied with a technology-supported meeting may discontinue use of such technology, even if it provides demonstrable benefits. It is therefore important to derive theoretical understandings of the satisfaction phenomenon. This article validates an instrument that measures the constructs of a goal-attainment model of meeting satisfaction. It then tests the model among 237 working professionals in 19 groups in the field. Results support the propositions that satisfaction with meeting process and satisfaction with meeting outcome are both a function of an individual's perceived net goal attainment with respect to the meeting. The results also support a proposed link between satisfaction with meeting outcome and satisfaction with meeting process. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for research and practice.
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 30, Heft 1, S. 171-190
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Group decision and negotiation, Band 20, Heft 3, S. 347-371
ISSN: 1572-9907
In: Human factors: the journal of the Human Factors Society, Band 52, Heft 2, S. 189-202
ISSN: 1547-8181
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the results of two different modes of using multiple groups (instead of one large group) to identify problems and develop solutions. Background: Many of the complex problems facing organizations today require the use of very large groups or collaborations of groups from multiple organizations. There are many logistical problems associated with the use of such large groups, including the ability to bring everyone together at the same time and location. Methods: A field study involved two different organizations and compared productivity and satisfaction of group. The approaches included (a) multiple small groups, each completing the entire process from start to end and combining the results at the end (parallel mode); and (b) multiple subgroups, each building on the work provided by previous subgroups (serial mode). Results: Groups using the serial mode produced more elaborations compared with parallel groups, whereas parallel groups produced more unique ideas compared with serial groups. No significant differences were found related to satisfaction with process and outcomes between the two modes. Conclusion: Preferred mode depends on the type of task facing the group. Parallel groups are more suited for tasks for which a variety of new ideas are needed, whereas serial groups are best suited when elaboration and in-depth thinking on the solution are required. Application: Results of this research can guide the development of facilitated sessions of large groups or "teams of teams."