Journal of International Technology and Information

Management
Volume 17 | Issue 1 Article 3

2008

Expanding Group Support System Capabilities

from the Knowledge Management Perspective
Shin-Yuan Hung
National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan

King-Zoo Tang
National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan

Tsan-Chuan Shu
National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/jitim

Part of the Management Information Systems Commons

Recommended Citation
Hung, Shin-Yuan; Tang, King-Zoo; and Shu, Tsan-Chuan (2008) "Expanding Group Support System Capabilities from the
Knowledge Management Perspective," Journal of International Technology and Information Management: Vol. 17: Iss. 1, Article 3.
Available at: http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/jitim/vol17/iss1/3

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of International
Technology and Information Management by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Expanding Group Support System Capabilities from the Knowledge

Management Perspective

Shin-Yuan Hung
National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan
and
University of Arizona

King-Zoo Tang
Tsan-Chuan Shu
National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan

ABSTRACT

A group support system (GSS) is a computer-based system that enables people in different places to
discuss and make decisions on connected computers. Expanding GSS capabilities from the knowledge
management perspective is believed to significantly improve the performance and satisfaction of group
meetings. This study develops the organizational knowledge management process, proposed by Alavi and
Leidner (2001), to expand the capabilities of a GSS. Additionally, a prototype system has been
implemented. Finally, an experiment is conducted to evaluate the system and demonstrate its applicability
and usability.

Experimental results indicate that users perceive a web-based GSS with knowledge management
capabilities to be more helpful and more satisfying than a conventional GSS. They also perceived that
using a web-based GSS with knowledge management capabilities can improve the decision quality.

INTRODUCTION

Accompanied by organizational expansion and globalization, organizational decisions making are become more
multi-faceted considerations for conforming to stakeholder, legislation, environment and macro economic situation.
Organizational decisions are much more complex and interconnected now than in the past (Courtney, 2001).
Organizations now encounter with more complicated and chaotic environments than before, and thus require
unequivocal decisions for rapidly to responding to critical situations.

Banker and Kauffman (2004) concluded that decision makers need to discriminate between imperfect and perfect
information. Decisions might be made not only by single person, but also by groups of specialists in the related
spheres. Communication technology can be employed to collect experts and veterans experiences in the group
meeting, and meet the requirements of ameliorate group decision efficiency of IT researchers. Liou and Nunamaker
(1999) conclude that Group Support Systems (GSS) environment can electronically facilitates the seizure of
knowledge.

Nevertheless, until now, there are only a few GSS studies have contributed significantly to make true design-science
research. Consequently, this investigation, proposes a prototype of web-based GSS with group memory and
knowledge context in order to enhance the efficiency of access to knowledge in GSS. A critical component of the
GSS-based concept-generation process is group memory, which is a granary of ideas formed by users of GSS
(Satzinger, et al., 1999).

Group meetings play a significant role in the daily operation of most businesses. Neustadt and May (1986) observed

21
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

that “the future has no place to come from but the past.” Decision makers must understand how the past affects their
present decisions. In troublesome circumstance, it is controversially that any good decision could be made in a
single meeting with few persons (Huber, 1990). Hence, the GSS combined with collective memory is likely to
provide additional information processing support (Paul et al., 2004).

Williams, et al. (1988) asserted that GSS provides academics with an extraordinary opportunity to tell
comprehensive details of group member interactions. Satzinger, et al., (1999) stated that group memory provides
stimuli, in the form of ideas, to the individuals using the software. Liou and Nunamaker (1990) concluded that a
group meeting supported by GSS can facilitate the electronic acquisition of knowledge, and distill individual
experts’ knowledge in a parallel fashion.

Paul, et al. (2004) argued that information and knowledge are not easily accessible in large organizations and that
the use of group memory is expected to provide information processing support. Therefore, a shared repository that
preserves prior experience of group members for group meetings needs to be developed.

Orlikowski (1992) noted that group members’ mental models and organization skeletons and conventions eventually
affect how GSS is implemented and applied in organization. Boose, et al. (1992) also observed that combining GSS
and knowledge acquisition techniques will encourage the collaborative support environment. Thus, leveraging
knowledge management realizes the strategic value and enforces the competitive advantage of an organization.
Holsapple and Whinston (1996) found that GSS might enable group meeting participants to possess their own
knowledge stores and hold them in its knowledge system. Information technology can escort to a greater radius and
profound of knowledge creation, storage, transfer and application in organization (Alavi &Leinder, 2001).

The process of the meeting is accelerated, if we can promote the share willing among group members, and it will
also facilitate the communication among group members and enhance the connections among them. The knowledge
context information recorded in GSS is improved and connected in this case. The concept of organizational
knowledge management process proposed by Alavi and Leidner (2001) is utilized. This study integrates some
helpful knowledge management concepts to expand the capabilities of GSS, including group memory, knowledge
context, and knowledge sharing.

This study develops a Chung Cheng University Knowledge-based GSS (CCUKGSS) and evaluates the
effectiveness of the CCUKGSS. In order to understand the group members’ response about the CCUKGSS, a
laboratory experiment was conducted to measure the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived decision
quality, and perceived satisfaction with the meeting. The experimental results support our arguments.

The remainder of this article is organized as follows Section 2 gives a comprehensive review of previous GSS and
knowledge management studies. Section 3 describes a framework for expanding GSS capabilities from the
knowledge management perspective. Section 4 presents the methodology of system evaluation and results of system
evaluation. Finally, Section 5 discusses and concludes the findings.

LITERATURE REVIEW

DeSanctis (1993) first elucidated why GSS is a significant research field. The study of GSS can help our
understanding of organizations and the role of technology in organizational change. GSS technologies are designed
to support groups working in different places and times, trying to joint their experience and knowledge for fulfill
group tasks, beyond the constraint of space and time.

Group Support System

Huber, et al. (1993) defined GSS as the collective computer technologies for serving groups to identify and address
problems, opportunities, and issues. Efficient and effective IT artifacts will help solve new challenges before us.
Artifact based on technology, organization-based and people-based are necessary to address the problems faced and
the opportunities afforded by interaction among people (Hevner et al., 2004).

22
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

GSS is an information technology system for supporting group tasks to elevate group performance. It is composed
of communication technology, computer artifacts, and decision election. Briggs, et al., (1998) described GSS as a
suite of network-based software to support coordinated and consensus team efforts toward achieving a goal.

Nunamaker, et al., (1993) observed that the use of GSS technology can often significantly improve group processes
and outcomes in many cases. DeSanctis and Gallupe (1987) categorized GSS into three levels. The level 3 GSSs are
characterized by machine-induced group communication patterns and can comprise expert advice in selecting and
forming rules to be adopted during a meeting.

A GSS gives participants their own knowledge stores in its knowledge system (Holsapple & Whinston, 1996). A
GSS is a computer-based software system that allows people in different places to discuss and make decisions on
connected computers. Many researchers believe that expanding GSS capabilities from the perspective of knowledge
can significantly enhance the performance and satisfaction of group meetings. DeSanctis and Gallupe (1987) defined
a GSS as follow “A GSS combines communication, computing, and decision support technology to facilitate
formulation and solution of unstructured problems by a group of people.” Thereupon, GSS can bring positive change
to organizations. GSS can be as an organizational change mechanism depending upon our assumptions about the
role of computing technology in management and organizational success (DeSanctis, 1993).

Table 1: Related Studies in GSS.

Year Author Primary Finding

1987 DeSanctis and Gallupe Categorize GSS into three levels

1987 DeSanctis and Gallupe GSS facilitate the solution of unstructured problem

1993 DeSanctis GSS can be an organizational change mechanism

1993 Huber, et al. GSS is a collective computer technologies for serving people
to conquer problems
1993 Nunamaker, et al. GSS can improve group processes and outcome

1993 Zigurs GSS make us realize group member interaction

1996 Holsapple and Whinston Participants’ own knowledge can be stored in GSS’s
knowledge system
1998 Briggs, et al. GSS is a suite of network-based software

1998 Dennis, et al. Information exchange was affected by parallel

2002 Liang communication, group memory and anonymity

2004 Hevner, et al. Technology, organization and people-based artifacts can

address the problems we faced and the opportunities afforded
by the interaction of people

Additionally, GSS provides an extraordinary chance to learn the details of group member interactions (Zigurs, 1993).
Table 1 summarizes the related studies in GSS. In GSS, information exchange and use is affected by three
components namely parallel communication, group memory and anonymity (Dennis, et al., 1998; Liang, 2002).

23
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Group Memory

Memory can be broadly defined as the inherent ability of human beings to accumulate, preserve, and accordingly
refresh their own experience. Those stored up practices can be held in personal repositories, which are likely to be
explicitly transmitted or open for sharing. (Huber, 1984) Memory is “the faculty of retaining and recalling things
from past” (American Heritage Dictionary, 1969; Paul, et al., 2004). Neustadt and May (1986) stated, “The future
has no place to come from but the past.” Decision makers have to understand how the past shapes their current
decisions. Paul, et al. (2004) observed that the organizational memory has two roles, action guidance and
interpretation. They can affect the actions of individual or groups and can be adopted to filter and categorize
information or knowledge.

Simon (1960) revealed that the group memories of organization members are vast thesauruses of realistic
knowledge, customary skills and operating practices. Conklin (1996) claimed that the Holy Grail of teamwork is
shared understanding. GSS facilitates associates to form opinions anonymously if stipulated. Nagasundaram et al.
(1995) argued that a group memory allows members to queue and filter information and may reduce information
overload. Dennis, et al., (1998) found that information shapes the group’s decision results, with or without GSS.

Group memory is commonly employed to deliberate upon the past and reflect the interest of the present
(Schwartz, 1997). A group has a capacity to remember, collective memory is not a given but rather a socially
constructed concept, and group memory is the reconstruction of the past (Halbwachs, 1941). Within the knowledge
base of GSS, electronic knowledge repositories of GSS can keep a group memory drawn from electronic minutes of
group meetings and also offers it to the group meeting participants, who need to access historical information or
knowledge for recommendations. According to Weiser and Morrison (1998), a project memory can seizes, saves,
and appendixes project information for later use by others. An important function of a group and organizational
memory is to enable new group members to obtain information rapidly from prior group session (Hoffer & Valacich,
1993). Table 2 summarizes the related studies in group memory.

Table 2: Related Studies in Group Memory.

Year Author Primary Finding

1941 Halbwachs Collective memory is a socially constructed view, and group
memory is the reconstruction of the past
1960 Simon Group memory of organization members are vast treasures of
realistic knowledge, customary skills and operating practices

1969 American Heritage Memory is the faculty of retaining and recalling things past
Dictionary
Shapiro and Varian

1984 Huber Store in personal repository, Practices can be explicitly

transmitted or opened to be shared
1986 Neustadt and May The future has no place to come from but the past
1993 Hoffer and Valacich Organizational memory can accelerate new group members reap
information from prior group session
1995 Nagasundaram, et al. Group memory can enables members to queue and filter
information and may reduce information overload

1996 Conklin The Holy Grail of teamwork is shared understanding

1997 Schwartz Group memory is the way of common people deliberate upon
the past and then reflects the interest of the present

24
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

1998 Dennis, et al. Information will shape the group’s decision results, with or
without GSS
1998 Weiser and Morrison Project memory can seizes, saves, and appendixes project
information for external persons to use it later
2004 Paul, et al. Organizational memory has two roles- action guidance and
interpretation role

Knowledge Management
Knowledge management (KM) is form from “the strategies and processes of identifying, capturing and leveraging
knowledge” (Manasco, 1996). The knowledge consolidation process involves individuals’ social interactions, by
using internal communication channels for knowledge delivery to achieve at a common purpose for problem solving
(Mitchell, 2006).

Ives, et al. (1998) argued that knowledge management may particularly be regarded as the effort to make knowledge
of an organization available to raise human and organizational accomplishment. Alavi and Leinder (2001) noted that
knowledge has occupied the minds of philosophers since the classical Greek era, and has led to many
epistemological debates. Sveiby (1997) defined knowledge as “the capacity to act.” Knowledge is usually not
discernible from information or data (Alavi & Leidner, 1999). Knowledge also has the potential to be applied across
the time and space domains to generate increasing returns (Fortune, 1991; Shapiro & Varian, 1999; Garud &
Kumaraswamy, 2005).

Knowledge management has abstracted the minds of IT researchers for many years, and has led to many theories.
Knowledge can be created, shared, amplified, enlarged, and justified in organizational settings (Nonaka, 1994).
Knowledge management can be treated as turning raw data into carefully selected information, and converting it to
valuable knowledge (Kanter, 1999). In addition, McManus and Snyder (2003) proposed that KM had became a key
business strategy and knowledge can be delivered by an Electronic Performance Support System (EPSS).

Data and information are originate in group members’ communications, historical legends, narratives, and can be
causally converted into knowledge. Knowledge is a fluid mixture of framed practice, values, contextual information
and expert intuition that provides a skeleton for measuring and assimilating novel experiences and information
(Davenport & Prusak, 1998). Additionally, knowledge frequently becomes embedded in documents, repositories,
routines, processes, practices and norms. In an organization, knowledge management refers to identifying and
leveraging the collective knowledge to improve the organization’s competitive advantages (Von Krogh, 1998).
Furthermore, IT can construct external meeting places and create a forum in which tacit knowledge can be
transformed into explicit knowledge (Johannessen, et al., 2001). The ultimate aim of KM is to give the right
information to the right person in the right place at the right time (Von Krogh, et al., 2000). Table 3 summarizes the
related studies in knowledge management.

Table 3: Related Studies in KM.

Year Author Primary Finding

1991 Fortune Knowledge can be applied across time and space domain to
create increasing returns
1999 Shapiro and Varian
1994 Nonaka Through group or individual’s mental process, knowledge can
be created, shared, amplified and justified in organizational
settings

25
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

1996 Manasco KM is the strategies and processes of identifying, capturing and

leveraging knowledge

1997 Svelby Knowledge is the capacity to act

1998 Davenport and Prusak Knowledge provide a skeleton for evaluating and assimilating
new experience and information
1998 Ives, et al. KM can increasing human and organizational accomplishment
1998 Von Krogh KM refer to identifying and leverageing the collective
knowledge to improve the organization competitive advantages

1999 Alavi and Leidner Knowledge is usually not discernible from information or data

1999 Kanter KM is turning raw data into well selective information and
convert to valuable knowledge

2000 Von Krogh The ultimate goal of KM is to lead the right information to the
right person at right place in the right time

2001 Johannessen, et al. Tacit knowledge can be transformed into explicit knowledge
through the place construct by IT

2001 Alavi and Leidner Information exchange was affected by parallel communication,
group memory and anonymity

2003 McManus and Snyder Knowledge can be deliver by an EPSS and KM had became a
business strategy

2006 Mitchell Deliver by internal communication channel, knowledge can

achieve the common purpose of problem solving

Integrating KM concepts into GSS Design

KM concepts should be integrated into GSS design for several reasons. For instance, a human resources department
recruiting new members for organization, always needs to retrieve information from inside personnel databases or
from the extraneous human resources providers and job-hunters. Meetings then need to be held to enroll new
workers. The process always involves several rounds of interviews with new people, and consumes precious time of
the CEO, CIO or other chief supervisors in company.

If personal expertise records from inside or beyond the organization can be kept and integrated into the GSS
knowledge base in order to mine out the useful information about manpower with dedicated knowledge management,
then the annual recruitment process can be accelerated. DeSanctis and Gallupe (1987) defined a decision-making
group as two or more people working together to find the solution to problems, and group decisions need to follow
the collaborative experience of the group meeting.

Kwok, et al. (2002) adopted the concepts map in semantic network to locate the knowledge structure resident in
students, and they found that GSS can promotes knowledge procurement providing a productive collaborative
learning context where people can interact, constitute and estimate knowledge acquired and shared by groups. Parent,
et al., (2000) specified that knowledge is created among groups through the interaction of ideas formed by group
members.

Since man is mortal, group members gradually die, and their collective memory dies with them. If the group

26
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

memory is not recorded in time, then it fades and eventually disappears. Therefore, keeping the collective memory
of group members became a major issue in this study. Cultivate knowledge among groups and organizations, is an
important issue. Information technology can contribute to the dynamic processes of knowledge creation,
preservation, propagation and absorption in an organization.

Organizational decisions are now much more severed, involved and interconnected than they were in the past
(Courtney, 2001). By enhancing the functional ability of GSS, those ideas invented in the group meeting can be
preserved so that they can be easily accessed at the following meeting. Group memory can grow best if stored in the
knowledge base in the GSS’s electronic repository. The depth offered by a group memory information system raise
the confidence of decision makers (Stein & Zwass, 1995).

Parent et al. (2000) stated GSS can elevate knowledge creation in focus groups by capturing and enhancing more
ideas, and thus increase knowledge creation in terms of the collection of relevant ideas. Kwok and Khalifa (1998)
found that a GSS-supported meeting assists the acquisition of knowledge related to the task at hand, and helps
participants to know more about the task, thus in turn, further improving the group process. Hence, this study
proposes a reputation rating mechanism to enhance participants’ self-esteem and stimulate GSS participants’
sentiment toward knowledge-sharing.

Ma and Agarwal (2007) found out reputation system that rate participator on their contributions quality can provide
a readily available collection of “experts” to knowledge seeker. Wasko and Faraj (2005) noted that reputation in a
website forum is an important motivation for contributing knowledge. Knowledge thus acquired can be accessed
electronically in a GSS, and supported by knowledge extraction from individual experts, and by providing a group
interaction milieu to uplift the realm of expertise (Liou & Nunamaker, 1990). Table 4 summarizes the related studies
in GSS and KM. To demonstrate the advantage of the proposed web-based GSS product, Table 5 shows the
comparison results of different GSS products, namely CCUKGSS and four other well-known products of GSS
products: GroupSystems (University of Arizona), SAMM (University of Minnesota), Facilitator, and OptionFinder.

Table 4: Related Studies in GSS and KM.

Year Author Primary Finding
1987 DeSanctis and Gallupe The decision-making group is two or more people who are work
together for finding the solution of problem
1990 Liou and Nunamaker Knowledge can be accessed electronically inside GSS, and
support knowledge extraction form individual experts in a
parallel way
1995 Stein and Zwass The depth offered by a group memory information system will
positive effect on the decision makers’ confidence
1998 Kwok and Khalifa GSS supported meeting will facilitates the acquisition of
knowledge related to the task at hand
2000 Parent, et al. Knowledge is created among groups by the interaction of ideas
generated by group members
2002 Kwok, et al. GSS can promotes knowledge procurement through its functions
that can provide a productive collaborative learning context
2005 Wasko and Faraj Reputation in forum of website is an important motivation for a
person to contribute his knowledge
2007 Ma and Agarwal Reputation system that rate participator on their contributions
quality provide a readily available collection of “experts” to
knowledge seeker

27
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Table 5: A Comparison of Functionality of Various GSSs.

GSS
CCUKGSS SAMM GroupSystmes Facilitator OptionFinder
Function
Use For Academic For Academic Merchandise Merchandise Merchandise
Research Research Product Product Product
Reputation Yes No No No No
Mechanism to
Motivate
Knowledge
Share
Meeting Keep Meeting Keep Meeting Keep Meeting Keep Meeting Use diagram
Minute Minute in .txt Minute in ideas, review, ideas, review, to indicate the
Report Format Records voting results in voting results aggregate
DOC or RTF in several results of
format Formats opinions
Note: * Facilitate’s Facilitator was cited from “http://www.facilitate.com/”
** OptionFinder was quoted from “http://www.facilitate.com/”

CCUKGSS: A WEB-BASED GROUP SUPPORT SYSTEM INTEGRATING KNOWLEDGE

MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES

GSS is computer-based software that allows people in different places to discuss and make decisions on
inter-connected computers. Venkatraman (2004) found Web-Services can help organization to seamlessly bridge
communication gaps among different systems. Opera and Marchewa (2006) manifested that the Internet had
provided an exceptional opportunities for both organization and individual to connect each others. In addition,
expanding GSS capabilities from the perspective of knowledge management can significantly improve the
performance and satisfaction of group meeting participants. This study deployed a knowledge base GSS within
Taiwan’s Chung Cheng University (CCUKGSS) to design a useful GSS product. The architecture follows
conventional design of GSS, based on the computer-based facilities of CCUKGSS, and a U-shaped decision room
(Figure 1).

Figure 1: A Snapshot of the CCUKGSS Laboratory.

28
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Figure 2: A Sample Screen (Logon Meeting of the CCUKGSS).

By adopting the concept of organizational knowledge management process proposed by Alavi and Leidner (2001),
this study constructed a novel framework of web-based GSS from the perspective of knowledge management, and
integrated it into the primary developed GSS. The architecture of CCUKGSS is a client-server framework designed
for constructing a conceptual model to create, capture, absorb and extend ideas produced in group meeting processes.
The CCUKGSS mainly supports the pooled decisions, and needs a meeting facilitator to arbitrate the meeting
process. Figure 2 is a sample screen in logging on meeting of the CCUKGSS.

Design of knowledge capturing model of CCUKGSS

Knowledge moves slowly or rapidly through organizations and it is exchanged, bought, bartered, found, generated,
and applied to work (Davenport & Prusak,1998). Since knowledge can be traded, a knowledge market must exist
for knowledge buyer and seller to exchange their knowledge goods.

To capture and preserve the knowledge generated in group meetings, the CCUKGSS form from a group meeting
system, knowledge management system and knowledge base as illustrated in Figure 3. These basic components
construct the premier design of knowledge apprehend model for knowledge buyers and sellers to barter with each
others in group meetings. Inside the subsystem of group meeting, this study had amended the deficiency of
conventional GSS without mechanism for acquiring and preserving knowledge. User motivation differs in term of
the degree to which contributed information is instrumental to a user’s goal (Stein & Zwass, 1995). A reputation
umpire who can participate, what type of information is requested from participants, how it is accumulated, and how
it is made aboveboard obtainable to other community members (Dellarocas, 2005).

To increase the motivation for knowledge sharing, this study considered the knowledge query and reputation
functions into the original group meeting subsystem. To elevate improve the sharing motivation of individual that
participate in group meeting, an evaluation mechanism was added to GSS. Davenport and Prusak (1998) revealed
that a person with a reputation for knowledge sharing is likely to achieve reciprocity in company. Therefore, in the
group meeting, the participants can use the reputation function to measure others’ ideas, and inquire solutions from
knowledge database.

The knowledge management system is utilized for participants to inquire about information related to group
meetings. It also allows participants to offer their evaluation and rank for what they had seized. Group members can
also apply this function to recommend their own ideas or others’ notion. By withdrawing experience from reputable
person or knowledge database, group meeting members will acquire abundant information to make their own choice
efficiently, and agree on how to achieving the task in group meeting. Accordingly, the knowledge management
system can preserve those originated ideas and transfer them into knowledge base. By preserving those contents of
group meeting, the knowledge base in CCUKGSS will become a knowledge repository, thus facilitating the
knowledge exchange and retrieval for the next group meeting.

29
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Figure 3: The Architecture of the CCUKGSS.

An IBM’ xSeries-355 was used as a server to build the system, and the application was developed with a web-based
design. The database was MS SQL2000, and Java and JSP (Java Server Pages) were adopted to generate HTML and
other of documents for web-based design.

Rationale of CCUKGSS Design

The entity-relationship model is useful for realizing and deriving the entity set view of data (Chen, 1976). The
entity-relationship model is a set of abstractions for symbolizing the semantics of data, and for trying to provide a
conceptual mechanism for depicting the skeleton of rationale design of CCUKGSS.

To locate and preserve the group memory created in group meeting, the “Meeting_Session”, “Group_Member”, and
“Knowledge_Item” were adopted to carry information about group meetings. This information was then extracted,
and transformed into helpful knowledge. This study used the power designer (Sybase) version 9.5 to develop the
entity-relationship diagram of CCUKGSS, as depicted in Figure 4.

In the entity of “Meeting_Session”, each meeting could be related to its own tasks, contexts and participants. The
“Group_Member” entity contains the profile and the reputation rating of participants for members to identify
themselves and others. Finally, the entity of “Knowledge_Item” includes the reviews of group members, the meeting
scheme solutions, the rules, the web resources, and the results of discussion process. One meeting session contains
many knowledge items, and the group members can also contribute many knowledge items within many meetings.

30
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Relate

Meeting_Session Participate
Group_Member

Belong Contribute

Inherit_5
Review_Comment Knowledge Item Inherit4 Scheme_Solution

Inherit1 Inherit2 Inherit3

Resource_Document Discussion Criteria_Rule

Figure 4: The E-R Model of the CCUKGSS.

Description of CCUKGSS

Knowledge is the expressively organized accumulation of information through experience, communication, or

inference, and it can also be regarded as objects to be stored and manipulated. (Zack, 1999) Traditionally,
researchers frequently categorized knowledge as tacit or explicit. In group meetings, the participants’ interaction
activities are always complicated and continuous.

Knowledge transfer in an organization is the procedure through which one unit (e.g., group, department or division)
is affected by the knowledge of another (Argote & Ingram, 2000). In order to depict the group meeting flow and
knowledge inquiry process, this study constructed a knowledge web to prevent those ideas from being lost. Figure 5
display the function decomposition diagram that was employed to develop the system. One major subsystem of the
CCUKGSS is “Meeting Subsystem”, which includes the functions of creating and controlling the group meeting
process, and regulates the process of recommendation participants to other group members.

Figure 5: The Function Decomposition Diagram of the CCUKGSS.

31
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Another main subsystem of the CCUKGSS is “Knowledge Management Subsystem”, which contains the processes
of knowledge inquiry, bulletins, recommend ideas, and member recommendations. The qualified participants join
the session at the start of meetings. Figure 6 illustrates the four group meeting stages, namely criteria contention,
schemes discussion, rating of alternative options, and voting.

Figure 6: The Primitive Diagram of the CCUKGSS.

Participants can also accumulate these processes and digest them into their own minds. They can then absorb
sufficient practices and quickly apply them to the other organizational tasks in subsequent group meeting.

The CCUKGSS facilitator governs the entire group meeting processes and system, as illustrated in Figure 7. The
facilitator can also initiate the group meetings, as depicted in Figure 8. The participants in the group meeting can

32
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

utilize CCUKGSS to draw on previous experiences and information in order to enhance their creativity in group
meetings.

Figure 7: The Context DFD of the CCUKGSS.

Figure 8: The Group Meeting Initiate Flow of the CCUKGSS.

SYSTEM EVALUATION

A laboratory experiment was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of the CCUKGSS system. The participants of
CCUKGSS filled in a questionnaire to access their experience of the grouping meetings once the experiment was
finished, to discover the group members’ perception of CCUKGSS. The system evaluation processes had five stages:
experimental design, development of instruments, lab experiments, data analysis, analysis result and description.

33
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Experimental Design

The “Yearly Computer Selection Task” was chosen as the research task. Participants were asked to read the task
information in advance, and then join the group meeting to work out the best solution to it. All experiments were
processed in the laboratory of CCUKGSS.

The task involved a fictitious case study about a computer company that need to procure new personal
computer (PC) apparatus to handle increasing numbers of transactions. The company also had to consider about the
different practices and requirements for more powerful PCs. Therefore, the procurement manager had to prepare
four alternative solutions, to be discussed by three managers from the IS, Accounting, and R&D departments in a
group meeting. The participants used the CCUKGSS to communicate with each others, and obtain information from
the system and internet, in order to help them choose an optimal computer.

Instrument Development

Explaining and canvass personal acceptance of new technology is one of the most mature research fields in the
contemporary IS domain. In particular, Davis’s (1989) technology acceptance model (TAM) posits that the strength
of personal intention to use a technology can be explained by recognition of the technology’s usefulness and attitude
towards its use (Chau & Hu, 2001).

Regarding instrument construction, the items adopted to operationalize the constructs of each investigated variables
were adopted mostly from relevant previous studies, with appropriate validation and wording changes. Specifically,
items measuring perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) were adapted from Davis (1989),
while items measuring perceived decision quality (PDQ) and perceived satisfaction with the meeting (PSM) were
taken from Becerra-Fernandez and Sabherwal (2001). All items were measured with a seven-point Likert-type scale
with anchors ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”. The final questionnaire was validated by two
professional translators to ensure that no syntax or semantic biases arose during the translation from English to
Chinese.

Experiment Procedure

The participants were asked to fulfill a questionnaire about their demographical data before joining the experiment
to help discover group members’ experience of CCUKGSS. The facilitator of CCUKGSS then introduced the
experiment process flow and tasks so that participants understood the missions and purpose of the group meeting.
The facilitator of CCUKGSS acquainted the group members with GSS before the beginning of the group meeting.
Participants were asked to follow the system menu and exercise the functions of CCUKGSS, to ensure they could all
operate the system correctly. The facilitator also assigned to each participant one of the three department roles of IS,
Accounting, and R&D manager.

During the experiment process is proceeding, every group meeting member was required to use the GSS to discuss,
rank and vote for a preferred solution for the “Yearly Computer Selection Task”. Each participant also had to fill a
questionnaire to evaluate their perceived experience about the CCUKGSS after they had finished the experiment.

Data Analysis

Fifteen experiments were performed to collect evaluation data. The experienced participants were recruited from
CCU’s BBS (Bulletin Board System), all students have to meet the term of previously used the early version of
CCUKGSS on BBS. Forty-five volunteer participants joined these group meeting experiments. The participants
were paid about US$3 to complete the experiment. Table 6 presents the profile of the participants.

34
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Table 6: Profile of the Participants.

Variable Category Count Percentage (%)

Gender Male 24 53.3
Female 21 46.7
Department MIS 33 73.3
Others 12 26.7
Education Undergraduate 23 51.1
Graduate 22 48.9
GSS Meeting One time 26 57.8
Experience Two times 14 31.1
Three times 5 11.1
Teamwork Low 3 6.6
Experience Medium 2 4.4
High 40 89.0
Computer Usage Low 8 17.8
Frequency High 37 82.2

The survey adopted a 7 points Likert Scale. The user satisfaction with the system was tested by t-test. A mean score
(μ) of t-test above four was taken to indicate above-average satisfaction with the CCUKGSS. The functionalities of
CCUKGSS involving the knowledge component were tested with the statistics tool-SPSS 10.0.

The mean μ was utilized as the participant satisfaction criterion. A value μ > 4 would denote positive that the group
support system was treated as evidence of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use about this web-based
group support system.

Before employing the collected data for t-test statistical assumptions, the shape of data distribution was tested for
correspondence to the normal distribution (Hair, et al., 1998). The results of skewness and kurtosis tests demonstrate
that the normal distribution assumption was satisfied.

Analytical Results

The group support system was measured by an instrument with 7 points Likert Scale, in which a score of four is a
neutral (neither negative nor positive) feeling about the expansion of knowledge component in CCUKGSS. A score
above four represents user confidence in this web-based system. Adapted from Davis (1989) and Becerra-Fernandez
and Sabherwal’s (2001) measurements, this study adopted four constructs, namely “perceived usefulness” (PU),
“perceived ease of use” (PEOU), “perceived decision quality” (Quality), and “satisfaction of knowledge”
(Satisfaction), and to reveal the participants’ perceptions of CCUKGSS. By using a t-test with SPSS 10.0, four
hypotheses were tested as below:

H1: Users feel that the CCUKGSS is more useful than the conventional GSS.
H2: Users feel that the CCUKGSS is easier to use than the conventional GSS.
H3: Users are more satisfied with the CCUKGSS than with conventional GSS.
H4: Users perceive higher decision quality with the CCUKGSS than with conventional GSS.

35
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

After verifying the shape of data distribution for correspondence to the normal distribution with SPSS, three outliers
were identified inside the data, and then eliminated to ensure a normal distribution of data. Table 7 shows the
skewness and kurtosis values after remove the outliers. Statistical results indicate that all skewness, kurtosis and Z
values are in range ± 1.96 , thus satisfying the standard of normality assumption.

Table 7: Tests of the Skewness and Kurtosis (after outliers removed).

Skewness Kurtosis
Statistic Z Statistic Z
PU -0.082 -0.217 0.367 0.483
PEOU -0.211 -0.558 0.656 0.863
PSM -0.452 -1.196 -0.122 -0.161
PDQ -0.438 -1.159 1.268 1.668
PU: perceived usefulness; PEOU: perceived ease of use; PSM: perceived satisfaction with the meeting;
PDQ: perceived decision quality,. # of observations = 42.

According to the descriptive statistics results in Table8, PEOU was the most significant variable. Thus, although
CCUKGSS involved new components of knowledge, its interface and functions were user-friendly, enabling users to
use it effortlessly. The second significant factor is the perceived decision quality, which demonstrates the new
system can enhance the quality of decisions made by group meeting members.

Table 8: Descriptive Statistics.

Variable Sample Mean Standard Standard
Deviation Error
PU 42 5.39 0.59 0.09
PEOU 42 5.94 0.52 0.08
PSM 42 5.32 0.71 0.11
PDQ 42 5.52 0.52 0.08
PU: perceived usefulness; PEOU: perceived ease of use; PSM: perceived satisfaction with the meeting;
PDQ: perceived decision quality.

Table 9 presents the t-test results when α=0.025, indicating that all four variables were significant. These results
reveal the web-based CCUKGSS is more useful and easier to use than conventional GSS. Moreover, there results
indicate that participants needing to make an optimal decision need the related specific knowledge about the topic of
that group meeting. The GSS designer always seeks to provide the right information to the right members of the
group meeting at the right time. This not only improves the effectiveness of group meetings, but also improves the
efficiency of achieving right target of group meeting.

Introducing a knowledge component into GSS can clearly improve the function of GSS. Additionally, analytical
results indicate that the users of a web-based group support system are comfortable with the new design, because
they have already used browser to surf on the Internet with the other IT artifacts. Therefore, adding a knowledge
component to a web-based GSS can also help users easier to search for advice from the Internet or draw them from
knowledge base within the GSS.

36
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Table 9: Results of the t-test.

Variable d.f. t-value Significance

PU 41 15.369 .000
PEOU 41 24.351 .000
PSM 41 12.064 .000
PDQ 41 19.006 .000
PU: perceived usefulness; PEOU: perceived ease of use; PSM: perceived satisfaction with the meeting;
PDQ: perceived decision quality.

CONCLUSION
Discussion

Orlikowski (1992) asserted that deploying the technology widely and using it over time, enable creative ideas and
innovations to flourish. One of the most important recent innovations in GSS technology is web-based GSS, in
which users can ubiquitously access groupware beyond the limitations of time and space. As noted by Grudin (2002),
“Once a digital representation of an action reaches a network, it can surface anywhere on the planet at any future
time.”

Paul, et al. (2004) insisted that the combining GSS with collective memory is likely to provide additional
information processing support. From the perspective of knowledge management, this study has constructed a
web-based GSS framework, based on the organizational knowledge management process proposed by Alavi and
Leidner (2001). The capabilities of organization memory, knowledge context, and knowledge sharing are integrated
into the CCUKGSS.

The process of IT adoption and usage is important to deriving the benefits of IT. (Karahanna, et al., 1999) This study
elaborated a reputation rating mechanism in order to elevate participants’ self-esteems and stimulate GSS
participants’ sentiment toward knowledge-sharing. Ma and Agarwal (2007) observed that a reputation system that
rate participants on the quality of their contributions provides a readily available collection of “experts” to
knowledge seekers.

Although the sharing willing of users still requires further investigation (Lippert & Swiercz, 2007), Wasko and
Faraj (2005) found that reputation might be an important motivation for contributing knowledge. Promoting share
willing among group members speed up meetings, facilitates communication among group members and enhance
the connections among them. Hence, the knowledge context information recorded in CCUKGSS is enhanced and
connected. These knowledge components are eventually applied to proactively transfer proper knowledge, and to
retrieve knowledge items from knowledge base within the CCUKGSS, according to user queries.

Information held in personal repository is likely to be inconsistent, and must be explicitly transmitted or opened
in order to be shared (Huber, 1984). Davenport and Prusak (1998) believe that reputation is a proxy for value, to be
used to evaluate the flood of information received. Most of users are used to retrieving information through Web
browsers. Thus, adding a knowledge component to a web-based GSS helps users to search the information from
internet, or to draw it from the knowledge base within the GSS. Additionally, group meeting members can easily
operate with the new GSS, reducing their resistance to use new IT artifact. Since this new web-based GSS can
provide fund of knowledge to users, the user satisfaction can be improved, thus also ameliorate the group meeting
process.

Stein and Zwass (1995) indicated that preserving organizational memory is an essential concern among
organizations. The real power of GSS technology lies in how it transforms the process of group work (Dennis &
Gallupe, 1993). This study also reveals that the perceived decision quality is refined by increasing the efficiency of

37
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

finding right targets in group meetings.

Implications

The knowledge consolidation process involves individuals’ social interactions, by using internal
communication channels for knowledge delivery in order to arrive at a common purpose for problem solving
(Mitchell, 2006). This study show that CCUKGSS that with reputation rating mechanism and preserved historical
group memory can enhance participants’ self-esteems and stimulate GSS participants’ sentiments toward
knowledge-sharing, thus improving the coherence of participants for upgrading performance in group meeting.

Current GSS technologies are designed to support different groups working together within a period of times,
and attempt to combine their experience and knowledge for achieve group tasks, that beyond the constraints of space
and time.

Human mental models and organization structures and cultures significantly influence how groupware is
implemented and used (Orlikowski, 1992). CCUKGSS can improve performance in group meetings, and support the
entire group meeting processes. It can also be used to search the related knowledge in a specific group meeting
context, and discover associated tacit knowledge. The reputation rating mechanism improves participants’
self-esteems and encourages knowledge-sharing among GSS participants, thus accumulating organization memory
into the group system.

Therefore, IT can evoke a greater breadth and depth of knowledge creation, storage, transfer, and application in
organization (Alavi & Leinder, 2001). Technology dissipates into the atmosphere around us, becoming emblematic
of the modern era (Orlikowski & Icono, 2001). Group Support systems (GSS) are computer-based software system
that allows people in different places to discuss and make decisions on connected computers. This study shows that
expanding GSS capabilities with the knowledge management functions can improve the performance and
satisfaction of group meeting.

Limitations and Future Research

Nunamaker, et al. (1991) stated that group meetings may lack a clear focus, and that group members may not
participate in them, making GSS less effective than they could be. Results of the previous studies show that group
meetings are not as productive as expected (Dennis, et al., 1988). This study did not dichotomize the experiment
samples into control and treatment groups. Participants were all proficient in GSS. Therefore, this investigation
could be criticized for lacking the rigorous of a traditional experiment.

To control the cost of the experiment, the participants were all recruited from campus possibly distorting the
group meeting experiment result. Group meeting members participated in only one experiment for one time.
Therefore, the GSS users might not have appreciated the importance of the reputation rating mechanism. These
restrictions all might distort the group meeting experiment results.

Dennis et al. (1998) explored the effect of GSS under a majority/minority split of opinion in the group. This
information would shape a group’s decision, with or without GSS. In future, IT should be employed to help filter
messages coming into group memory, and to determine not only where to store this new information, but also even
whether to keep it.

Jessup and Valacich (1993) concluded that designing a GSS to effectively support groups operating in a wide,
interrelated, and chaotic environment is still a large technical challenge. Artificial intelligence, agents, and work
flow routines should be integrated into group memory technologies, so that GSS can automatically self-regulate its
own knowledge.

38
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

REFERENCES

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. (2001). Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems:
Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly 25(1), 107-136.

Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. (1999). Knowledge Management Systems: Issues, Challenges, and Benefits.
Communications of the AIS 1(7).

American Heritage Dictionary (1969). American Heritage Publishing Company and Houghton Mifflin Company.

Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 82(1), 150-169.

Banker, R. D., & Kauffman, R. J. (2004). The Evolution of Research on Information Systems: A Fiftieth-Year
Survey of the Literature in Management Science. Management Science 50(3), 281-298.

Becerra-Fernandez, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2001). Organizational Knowledge Management: A Contingency

Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems 18(1), 23-55.

Boose, J. H., Bradshaw, J. M., Koszarek, J. L., & Shema, D.B. (1992). Better group decisions: Using knowledge
acquisition techniques to build richer decision models. Proceedings of the 1992 Hawaii International
Conference on Systems Sciences, January.

Briggs, R., Nunamaker, J. Jr., Reinig, B., Romano, N., & Sprague, R. (1998). Group Support Systems: a
Cornucopia of Research Opportunities. HICSS’98, IEEE.

Chen, P. (1976). The Entity-Relationship Model: Toward a Unified View of Data. ACM Transaction on Database
Systems (1), 9-36.

Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P.J.H. (2001). Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professionals: A Model
Comparison Approach. Decision Sciences 32(4), 699-719.

Conklin, J. (1996). Designing Organizational Memory: Preserving Intellectual Assets in a Knowledge Economy.
Electronic Publication by Corporate Memory Systems, available at: http://www.cmsi.com/.

Courtney, J. F. (2001). Decision making and Knowledge Management in Inquiring Organizations: Toward a New
Decision-Making Paradigm for DSS. Decision Support Systems 31, 17–38.

Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge. Boston, Harvard Business School Press.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.
MIS Quarterly 13(3), 319-339.

Dellarocas, C. (2005). Reputation Mechanism Design in Online Trading Environments with Pure Moral Hazard.
Information Systems Research 16(2) 209-230.

Dennis, A. R., George, J. F., Jessup, L. M., Nunamaker, J. F., & Vogel, D. R. (1988). Information Technology to
Support Electronic Meetings. MIS Quarterly 12(4), 591-624.

Dennis, A. R., & Gallupe, R.B. (1993). A History of Group Support Systems Empirical Research: Lessons Learned
and Future Directions. Group Support Systems: New Perspectives. L. M. Jessup, and Valacich, J.S. New
York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 59-76.

Dennis, A.R., Hilmer, K., & Taylor, N.J. (1998). Information Exchange and Use in GSS and Verbal Group Decision

39
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Making: Effects of Minority Influence. Journal of Management Information Systems 14(3), 61-88.

DeSanctis, G. L. (1993). Shifting Foundations in Group Support System Research. Group Support Systems: New
Perspectives. L. M. Jessup, and Valacich,J.S. New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 97-111.

DeSanctis, G. L., & Gallupe, R. B. (1987). A Foundation of the Study of Group Decision Support Systems.
Management Science 33(5), 589.

Fortune. (1991). Now Capital Means Brains Not Bucks. January 1991, 31-32.

Garud, R., & Kumaraswamy, A. (2005). Vicious and Virtuous Circles in the Management of Knowledge: The Case
of Infosys Technologies. MIS Quarterly 29(1), 9-33.

Grudin, J. (2002). Group dynamics and ubiquitous computing. Communications of the ACM (12), 76.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. (5th ed.).
Prentice-Hall International (UK).

Halbwachs, M. (1950). Collective Memory. New York, Harper and Row.

Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., & Park, J. (2004). Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly
28(1), 75-105.

Hoffer, J. A., & Valacich, J. S. (1993). Group Memory in Group Support Systems: A Foundation for Design. Group
Support Systems: New Perspectives, L. M. Jessup, and Valacich, J.S. New York, Macmillan Publishing.
Company, 214-229.

Holsapple, C. W., & Whinston, A. B. (1996). Decision Support Systems: A Knowledge-Based Approach. West
Publishing, St. Paul.

Huber, G. P. (1984). Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support System. MIS Quarterly 18(3), 195-204.

Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures. Organization Science
2(1), 88-115.

Huber, G. P., Valacich, J.S., & Jessup, L.M. (1993). A Theory of the Effects of Group Support Systems on an
Organization’s Nature and Decisions. Group Support Systems: New Perspectives. L. M. Jessup, and
Valacich, J. S. New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 253-268.

Ives, W., Torrey, B., & Gordon, C. (1998). Knowledge Management: An Emerging Discipline with a Long History.
Journal of Knowledge Management 1(4), 269-274.

Jessup, L. M., & Valacich, J.S. (1993). On the Study of Group Support Systems: An Introduction to Group Support
System Research and Development. Group Support Systems: New Perspectives. L. M. Jessup, and Valacich,
J. S. New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 3-5.

Johannessen, J. A., Olaisen, J., & Olsen, B. (2001). Mismanagement of Tacit Knowledge: The Importance of Tacit
Knowledge, The Danger of Information Technology, and What To Do About It. International Journal of
Information Management 21(1), 3-20.

Kanter, J. (1999). Knowledge Management, Practically Speaking. Information Systems Management. Fall, 7-15.

Karahanna, E., Straub, D. W., & Chervany, N. L. (1999). Information Technology Adoption across Time: A
Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and Post-Adoption Beliefs. MIS Quarterly 23(2), 183-213.

40
Expanding GSS Capabilities from KM Journal of International Technology and Information Management

Kwok, R. C. W., Ma, J., & Vogel, D. (2002). Effects of Group Support Systems and Content Facilitation on
Knowledge Acquisition. Journal of Management Information Systems 19 (3), 195-229.

Liang, T. P. (2002). Decision Support Systems and Business Intelligence. Taipei, BestWise Co., Ltd.

Liou, Y.I., & Nunamaker, J.F. (1990). Using a Group Decision Support System Environment for Knowledge
Acquisition: A Field Study. System Sciences, Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Hawaii International
Conference 3, 40-49.

Lippert, S.K. & Swiercz, P.M. (2007). Personal Data Collection via the Internet: The Role of Privacy Sensitivity and
Technology Trust. Journal of International Technology and Information Management 16(1), 17-30.

Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007). Through a Glass Darkly: Information Technology Design, Identity Verification,
and Knowledge Contribution in Online Communities. Information Systems Research. 18(1), 42–67.

McManus, D. J., & Synder, C.A. (2003). Knowledge Management: The Role of EPSs. Journal of International
Technology and Information Management 12(2), 17-28.

Manasco, B. (1996). Leading Firms Develop Knowledge Strategies. Knowledge Inc. 1(6), 26–29.

Mitchell, V. L. (2006). Knowledge Integration and Information Technology Project Performance. MIS Quarterly
30(4), 919-939.

Nagasundaram, M., & Bostrom, R.P. (1995). Structuring of Creative Processes Using GSS. Journal of
Management Information Systems 11(3), 87-114.

Neustadt, R. E., & May, E. R. (1986). Thinking in Time: The Uses of History for Decision Makers. New York, Free
Press.

Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organization Science 5(1), 14-37.

Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R. & George, J. F. (1991). Electronic Meeting Systems
to Support Group Work. Communication of the ACM 34(7), 40-61.

Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogol, D. R., & George, J.F. (1993). Group Support Systems
Research: Experience from the Lab and Field. Group Support Systems: New Perspectives. L. M. Jessup,
and Valacich, J. S. New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 125-145.

Opara, E.U. & Marchewka, J. T. (2006). Enterprise Integrated Security Platform: A Comparison of Remote Access
and Extranet Virtual Private Networks. Journal of International Technology and Information Management
15(2), 39-48.

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992). The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations.
Organization Science 3(3), 398-427.

Orlikowski, W.J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research-A
Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact. Information Systems Research 12(2), 121-134.

Parent, M., Gallupe, R. B., Salisbury, W. D., & Handelman, J. M. (2000). Knowledge Creation in Focus Groups:
Can Group Technologies help? Information and Management 38(1), 47-58.

Paul, S., Haseman, W. D., & Ramamurthy, K. (2004). Collective Memory Support and Cognitive-Conflict Group
Decision-Making: an experimental investigation. Decision Support Systems 36, 261–281.

41
S. Y. Hung, K. Z. Tang & T. C. Shu 2008 Volume 17, Number 1

Satzinger, J. W., Garfield M. J., & Nagasundaram M. (1999). The creative process: The effects of group memory on
individual idea generation. Journal of Management Information Systems 15(4), 143-160.

Schwartz, B. (1997). Collective Memory and History: How Abraham Lincoln Became a Symbol of Racial Equality.
The Sociological Quarterly 38(3), 469-496.

Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. (1999). Information Rules. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Stein, E. W., & Zwass, V. (1995). Actualizing Organizational Memory with Information Systems. Information
Systems Research 6(2), 85-117.

Sveiby, K.(1997). The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets.
Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco.

Simon, H.A. (1960). The New Science of Management Decision. New York, Harper and Row.

Venkatraman, S.S. (2004). Web-Services ?The Next Evolutionary Stage Of E-Business. Journal of International
Technology and Information Management 13(2), 111-122.

Von Krogh, G. (1998). Care in Knowledge Creation. California Management Review 40(3), 133-153.

Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling Knowledge Creation. New York, Oxford University
Press.

Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution
in Electronic Networks of Practice. MIS Quarterly 29(1), 35-57.

Weiser, M., & Morrison, J. (1998). Project memory: information management for project teams. Journal of
Management Information Systems 14(4),149-166.

Williams, F., Rice R. E., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Research methods and the media. New York, the Free Press.

Zack, M. H. (1999). Managing Codified Knowledge. Sloan Management Review 40(4), 45-58.

Zigurs, I. (1993). Methodological and Measurement Issues in Group Support Systems Research. Group Support
Systems: New Perspectives. L. M. Jessup, & Valacich, J. S. New York, Macmillan Publishing. Company,
112-120.

42