David W. Miller, Mississippi State University John P. Bartkowski, Mississippi State University

  • Published on
    03-Feb-2016

  • View
    32

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

A Qualitative Analysis of Structural Emergence and Ascendant Leadership in Technological Appropriation. David W. Miller, Mississippi State University John P. Bartkowski, Mississippi State University Wm. David Salisbury, Ohio University ICIS 2000 Brisbane, Australia. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

<ul><li><p>A Qualitative Analysis of Structural Emergence and Ascendant Leadership in Technological AppropriationDavid W. Miller, Mississippi State UniversityJohn P. Bartkowski, Mississippi State UniversityWm. David Salisbury, Ohio University</p><p>ICIS 2000 Brisbane, Australia</p></li><li><p>Oh, the places well go!Theoretical backgroundAdaptive Structuration TheoryThe Duality of StructureResearch questionsMethodStories from the sessionsDiscussion and conclusions</p></li><li><p>Adaptive Structuration TheoryRules and resources (DeSanctis and Poole 1994)Schemata and their transposability (Sewell 1992)Resources (Giddens 1984; Sewell 1992; Fincham 1992)Human agency (Giddens 1984; Sewell 1992)</p></li><li><p>Research QuestionsHow do group members appropriate schemata and resources?Do schemata and resources called upon change any as a function of experimental treatment?What does the ability to recognize schemata and resources and call them into play do for ones ability to assert leadership?</p></li><li><p>Analysis MethodEthnomethodology (Garfinkel, 1964) Qualitative research approachNoninterventionistRemote observation of decision-making groups via analysis of video tapeInteraction fragmentsHow actors construct and give meaning to their actions</p></li><li><p>Experimental SettingRestrictiveness manipulatedrestricted groupsnon-restricted groupsStudent subjectsRole-play scenario School of Business Policy Task (Wheeler &amp; Mennecke, 1992)Small groups (4-5 members)</p></li><li><p>Meeting Room LayoutMicrophoneBCDFAE</p></li><li><p>Observation of Ascendant LeadershipDescribe and compare the emergence of social structure among the groupsMembers accumulation of resourcesHow ascendant leaders use accumulated resources to direct group interaction</p></li><li><p>Examination of ParticipantsVerbal and Nonverbal InteractionWith group and individual participantsWith facilitatorCalling GDSS and other resources into useStrategies and TacticsResource accumulationPower acquisition and influenceAppropriation and circumvention of the GDSS</p></li><li><p>Stories from the SessionsAppropriation of schemata and resources, both present and transposed from other situationsTreatment influencesPhysical proximityArtifacts present in the sessionFacilitator as de facto leaderTransposability of Schemata</p></li><li><p>Treatment InfluencesRestrictive treatmentFacilitator as de facto leaderAssociation with the FacilitatorPhysical proximity to FacilitatorNon restrictive treatmentInitial uncertaintyArtifacts present in sessionBids for leadership made without calling upon facilitators authority</p></li><li><p>Physical ProximityParticipants D &amp; E bid for leadershipBoth attempt to gain the attention of F to legitimize their positionsE physically blocks F from Ds view (and D from Fs view)BCDFAE</p></li><li><p>Artifacts in the SessionTo resolve an uncertainty about how to proceed, C refers group to Use the computerFrom that point on, C is then recognized as the leaderBCDFAE</p></li><li><p>To resolve another uncertainty about how to proceed, B suggests that group Use this handout they gave usFrom that point on, B is then deferred to on procedural issuesBCDFAEMore Artifacts in the Session</p></li><li><p>Leaders emerge when sanctioned by facilitator (de facto leader)A &amp; C appear concerned that there is no leader at first, until B takes over by suggesting brainstormingA &amp; C look to facilitator for validation of B as group leaderBCDFAEFacilitator as de facto Leader</p></li><li><p>Transposability of SchemataFacilitator viewed as de facto leaderPosition at frontAuthority as to sessionsPerhaps a class room schemata, with the teacher in the lead?BCDFAE</p></li><li><p>DiscussionGreater insights into the impact of technology mediated communication on social structurationAccumulation of resources to assert influence on the groupHow the technology is appropriatedHow the technology is circumvented</p></li><li><p>DiscussionProvides further support for ASTTheoreticallyMethodologicallyRicher view of GDSS phenomena in groups (cf. Gopal and Prasad, 2000)Future workNeed for diverse approaches in GDSS and AIT research</p></li><li><p>ConclusionsSchemata may be transposed and called upon in creative ways by human agentsArtifacts present in the session provide resources upon which individuals may draw to ascend to leadership</p></li><li><p>ConclusionsResources provided by the GDSS are often appropriated in ways not foreseen by the designers or implementersThe degree of restrictiveness in the session did influence which resources would be drawn upon</p><p>Looking beyond the deterministic view of seminal research.</p><p>Groups still decide whether to adopt or not. AGENCY/ACTORS</p><p>Begin looking for ways to describe the effects of interaction technology on social groups.</p><p>Perceptions of outcomes.</p><p>More interested in this process of Duality of Structure Not a simple cause and effect relationship.</p><p>Time - the process - how does group structure change over time, and is it repeated? Routinized?</p><p>Space - physical proximityExamine INTERACTION FRAGMENTS,</p><p> i.e., conversational and gestural exchanges.</p></li></ul>

Recommended

View more >