Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Time, Technology, and Teams: From GSS to Collective Action

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

Abstract

In this chapter we update the work of Chidambaram and Bostrom (Group Decis Negot 6(2):159–187, 1997a, Group Decis Negot 6(3): 231–254, 1997b) who synthesized decades of research on group development and examined their relevance for, what was then, an emerging technology – group support systems (GSS). Over the past two decades, their original conceptualizations of technology, teams, and time have evolved. Digital technology is ubiquitous, accessible through mobile devices, and more powerful in terms of its capabilities. These capabilities represent a variety of technological affordances that can be invoked by users at their discretion and represent a broader and more flexible array of choices compared to the relatively immutable structures embedded in GSS. Moreover, the teams using these affordances transcend organizational boundaries, and membership is fluid with members entering and exiting at will. Finally, notions of time have also evolved from chronic (clock time) to kairotic (experienced time). Two areas that exemplify these changes in technology, teams, and time are crowdfunding and digital activism. We examine the relevant literature in these two areas and synthesize the key findings, which illustrate that collective action is a broader, more fluid, and inclusive phenomenon compared to group support systems, and new approaches that embrace these changes are needed to study them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alonzo M, Aiken M (2004) Flaming in electronic communication. Decis Support Syst 36(3):205–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Applegate LM, Konsynski BR, Nunamaker JF (1986) A group decision support system for idea generation and issue analysis in organization planning. In: Proceedings of the 1986 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work. ACM, pp 16–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Bade M, Krezdorn D (2018) Cohesion among crowd investors in the presence of moral hazard. Ventur Cap 20(4):339–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Block J, Hornuf L, Moritz A (2018) Which updates during an equity crowdfunding campaign increase crowd participation? Small Bus Econ 50(1):3–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke K, Aytes K, Chidambaram L, Johnson JJ (1999) A study of partially distributed work groups: the impact of media, location, and time on perceptions and performance. Small Group Res 30(4):453–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burtch G, Ghose A, Wattal S (2013) An empirical examination of the antecedents and consequences of contribution patterns in crowd-funded markets. Inf Syst Res 24(3):499–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burtch G, Ghose A, Wattal S (2016) Secret admirers: an empirical examination of information hiding and contribution dynamics in online crowdfunding. Inf Syst Res 27(3):478–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burtch G, Hong Y, Liu D (2018) The role of provision points in online crowdfunding. J Manag Inf Syst 35(1):117–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butticè V, Colombo MG, Wright M (2017) Serial crowdfunding, social capital, and project success. Entrep Theory Pract 41(2):183–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buxton M (2018) Facebook Birthdays Have Turned Into Fundraisers, But Is That Such A Bad Thing? Refinery29 Inc. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/04/193319/facebook-birthday-fundraiser. Accessed 11 Mar 2020

  • Chidambaram L (1996) Relational development in computer-supported groups. MIS Q 20(2):143–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chidambaram L, Bostrom R (1997a) Group development (I): a review and synthesis of development models. Group Decis Negot 6(2):159–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chidambaram L, Bostrom R (1997b) Group development (II): implications for GSS research and practice. Group Decis Negot 6(3):231–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chidambaram L, Bostrom RP, Wynne BE (1990) A longitudinal study of the impact of group decision support systems on group development. J Manag Inf Syst 7(3):7–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clapper DL, McLean ER, Watson RT (1991) An experimental investigation of the effect of a group decision support system on normative influence in small groups. In: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on Information systems: University of Minnesota, pp 273–282

    Google Scholar 

  • Colombo MG, Franzoni C, Rossi-Lamastra C (2015) Internal social capital and the attraction of early contributions in crowdfunding. Entrep Theory Pract 39(1):75–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Reuver M, Sørensen C, Basole RC (2018) The digital platform: a research agenda. J Inf Technol 33(2):124–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dennis AR (1996) Information exchange and use in group decision making: you can Lead a group to information, but you Can't make it think. MIS Q 20(4):433–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctis G, Poole MS (1994) Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organ Sci 5(2):121–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Earl J (2007) Leading tasks in a leaderless movement: The case of strategic voting. Am Behav Sci 50(10):1327–1349

    Google Scholar 

  • George J, Leidner D (2018a) Digital activism: a hierarchy of political commitment. In: Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii international conference on system sciences

    Google Scholar 

  • George JJ, Leidner DE (2018b) Why marginalized groups struggle to leverage digital activism. In: Americas conference on information systems, AIS (ed) New Orleans: AIS

    Google Scholar 

  • George JJ, Leidner DE (2019) From clicktivism to hacktivism: Understanding digital activism. Infor Organ 29(3):101016

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersick CJ (1988) Time and transition in work teams: toward a new model of group development. Acad Manag J 31(1):9–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghobadi S, Clegg S (2015) “These days will never be forgotten…”: a critical mass approach to online activism. Inf Organ 25(1):52–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopal A, Miranda SM, Robichaux BP, Bostrom RP (1997) Leveraging diversity with information technology gender, attitude, and intervening influences in the use of group support systems. Small Group Res 28(1):29–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashim MJ, Kannan KN, Maximiano S (2017) Information feedback, targeting, and coordination: an experimental study. Inf Syst Res 28(2):289–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hensby A (2017) Open networks and secret Facebook groups: exploring cycle effects on activists’ social media use in the 2010/11 UK student protests. Soc Mov Stud 16(4):466–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornuf L, Neuenkirch M (2017) Pricing shares in equity crowdfunding. Small Bus Econ 48(4):795–811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanalley C (2013) Why Twitter Verifies Users: The History Behind the Blue Checkmark. The Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/twitter-verified-accounts_b_2863282

  • Kang L, Jiang Q, Tan C-H (2017) Remarkable advocates: an investigation of geographic distance and social capital for crowdfunding. Inf Manag 54(3):336–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karahanna E, Xu SX, Xu Y, Zhang NA (2018) The needs–affordances–features perspective for the use of social media. MIS Q 42(3):737–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JR, McGrath JE (1985) Effects of time limits and task types on task performance and interaction of four-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49(2):395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuppuswamy V, Bayus BL (2017) Does my contribution to your crowdfunding project matter? J Bus Ventur 32(1):72–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus ML, Silver MS (2008) A foundation for the study of IT effects: A new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts of structural features and spirit. J Assoc Inf Syst 9(10):5

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath JE, Kelly JR, Machatka DE (1984) The social psychology of time: entrainment of behavior in social and organizational settings. Appl Soc Psychol Annu 5:21–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melgaço L, Monaghan J (2018) Introduction: taking to the streets in the information age. In: Protests in the information age. Routledge, pp 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer AD (1982) Adapting to environmental jolts. Adm Sci Q 27:515–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson D, Weick KE, Kramer RM (1996) Swift trust and temporary groups. In: Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, vol 166. SAGE, London, p 195

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda S, Bostrom R (1993) The impact of group support systems on group conflict and conflict management. J Manag Inf Syst 10(3):95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miranda S, Saunders C (2003) The social construction of meaning: an alternative perspective on information sharing. Inf Syst Res 14(1):87–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miranda SM, Young AG, Yetgin E (2016) Are social media emancipatory or hegemonic? Societal effects of mass media digitization in the case of the SOPA discourse. MIS Q 40(2):303–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi A, Shafi K (2018) Gender differences in the contribution patterns of equity-crowdfunding investors. Small Bus Econ 50(2):275–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreau E (2019) Using Facebook Groups Do More. Lifewire. https://www.lifewire.com/facebook-groups-4103720

  • Nan N, Lu Y (2014a) Harnessing the power of self-Organization in an Online Community during Organizational Crisis. MIS Q 38(4):1135–1157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nan N, Lu Y (2014b) Harnessing the power of self-organization in an online community during organizational crisis. Manag Inf Syst Q 38(4):1135–1157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemeyer C, Teubner T, Hall M, Weinhardt C (2018) The impact of dynamic feedback and personal budgets on arousal and funding behaviour in participatory budgeting. Group Decis Negot 27(4):611–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker JF Jr, Applegate LM, Konsynski BR (1987) Facilitating group creativity: experience with a group decision support system. J Manag Inf Syst 3(4):5–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh O, Tahmasbi N, Rao HR, Vreede G-JD (2012) A sociotechnical view of information diffusion and social changes: From reprint to retweet

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh O, Agrawal M, Rao HR (2013) Community intelligence and social media services: a rumor theoretic analysis of tweets during social crises. MIS Q 37(2):407–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh O, Eom C, Rao HR (2015) Research note – role of social Media in Social Change: an analysis of collective sense making during the 2011 Egypt revolution. Inf Syst Res 26(1):210–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski WJ, Yates J (2002) It’s about time: temporal structuring in organizations. Organ Sci 13(6):684–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz J, Young A, Myers MD, Bedeley RT, Carbaugh D, Chughtai H, … Grimshaw E (2019) Giving voice to the voiceless: The use of digital technologies by marginalized groups. Commun Assoc Inform Syst 45(1):2

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Nordtvedt L, Payne GT, Short JC, Kedia BL (2008) An entrainment-based model of temporal organizational fit, misfit, and performance. Organ Sci 19(5):785–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinig BA, Shin B (2002) The dynamic effects of group support systems on group meetings. J Manag Inf Syst 19(2):303–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salge CADL, Karahanna E (2018) Protesting corruption on twitter: is it a bot or is it a person? Acad Manag Discov 4(1):32–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval-Almazan R, Gil-Garcia JR (2013a) Cyberactivism through social media: Twitter, YouTube, and the Mexican political movement I’m number 132 2013 46th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. IEEE, pp 1704–1713

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval-Almazan R, Gil-Garcia JR (2013b) Cyberactivism through social media: Twitter, YouTube, and the Mexican political movement I’m number 132 system sciences (HICSS), 2013 46th Hawaii international conference on: IEEE, pp 1704–1713

    Google Scholar 

  • Selander L, Jarvenpaa SL (2016) Digital action repertoires and transforming a social movement organization. MIS Q 40(2):331–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo H (2019) Collective action in digital age: a multilevel approach. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences

    Google Scholar 

  • Sine WD, Lee BH (2009) Tilting at windmills? The environmental movement and the emergence of the US wind energy sector. Adm Sci Q 54(1):123–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skirnevskiy V, Bendig D, Brettel M (2017) The influence of internal social capital on serial creators’ success in crowdfunding. Entrep Theory Pract 41(2):209–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart M, Schultze U (2017) A performative identity perspective of Cyberactivism: the case of my stealthy freedom

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart M, Schultze U (2019) Producing solidarity in social media activism: The case of my stealthy freedom. Inform organ 29(3):100251

    Google Scholar 

  • Thies F, Wessel M, Benlian A (2016) Effects of social interaction dynamics on platforms. J Manag Inf Syst 33(3):843–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treem J, Leonardi P (2012) Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Comm Yearb 36:143–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Turoff M, Hiltz SR, Bahgat AN, Rana AR (1993) Distributed group support systems. MIS Q 17(4):399–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tye M, Leong C, Tan F, Tan B, Khoo YH (2018) Social media for empowerment in social movements: the case of Malaysia’s grassroots activism. Commun Assoc Inf Syst 42(1):15

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaast E, Safadi H, Lapointe L, Negoita B (2017) Social media affordances for connective action: an examination of microblogging use during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. MIS Q 41(4):1179–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vismara S (2016) Information cascades among investors in equity crowdfunding. Entrep Theory Pract 42(3):467–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wessel M, Adam M, Benlian A (2019) The impact of sold-out early birds on option selection in reward-based crowdfunding. Decis Support Syst 117:48–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao S, Yue Q (2018) Investors’ inertia behavior and their repeated decision-making in online reward-based crowdfunding market. Decis Support Syst 111:101–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yetgin E, Young A, Miranda SM (2012) Cultural production of protest frames and tactics: cybermediaries and the SOPA movement. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information systems, Orlando

    Google Scholar 

  • Young AG (2018) Using ICT for social good: cultural identity restoration through emancipatory pedagogy. Inf Syst J 28(2):340–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Younkin P, Kuppuswamy V (2017) The colorblind crowd? Founder race and performance in crowdfunding. Manag Sci 64(7):3269–3287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng Y, Yu A (2016) Affordances of social media in collective action: the case of free lunch for children in China. Inf Syst J 26(3):289–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zigurs I, Poole MS, DeSanctis GL (1988) A study of influence in computer-mediated group decision making. MIS Q 12(4):625–644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman E (2014) Cute cats to the rescue? Participatory media and political expression. In: Allen D, Light J (eds) Youth, new media, and political participation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michael F. Price College of Business, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

    Laku Chidambaram

  2. University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA

    Jama D. Summers

  3. University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

    Shaila M. Miranda

  4. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA

    Amber G. Young

  5. University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    Robert P. Bostrom

Authors
  1. Laku Chidambaram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jama D. Summers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shaila M. Miranda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Amber G. Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert P. Bostrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laku Chidambaram .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Chidambaram, L., Summers, J.D., Miranda, S.M., Young, A.G., Bostrom, R.P. (2020). Time, Technology, and Teams: From GSS to Collective Action. In: Kilgour, D., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_28-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_28-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation