Skip to main content
Log in

Facilitation Methods for Collaborative Modeling Tools

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents results of an ongoing research effort to support effective user involvement during modeling and analysis meetings. Productivity and user participation of traditional group meetings have been limitations imposed by chauffeured facilitation and single-user tools. These tools have been designed for analysts rather than for direct use by non-analyst users. Recently, electronic meeting systems (EMS) modeling tools that allow users to work in parallel to contribute directly during meetings have been developed. Such tools allow more domain experts to participate directly and productively during model development meetings than is possible using the traditional approach. Although previous research has demonstrated that EMS modeling tools may be used to develop some model content, little research had been done on collaborative facilitation methods that employ these tools. This paper presents a comparison of modeling approaches for use with EMS modeling tools and proposes an approach that overcomes significant problems inherent in other approaches. It leverages the productivity enhancement afforded by direct group access and still results in production of complete, integrated, high quality models. This approach allows models to be developed two to four times faster than with traditional modeling support and yet avoids model ambiguities and inconsistencies.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alter, S. (1978). “Development patterns for decision support systems”. MIS Quarterly 2, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anson, R., R. P. Bostrom, and B. Wynne. (1995). “An experiment assessing group support system and facilitator effects on meeting outcomes”. Management Science 41, 2, 189-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baroudi, J. J., M. H. Olson, and B. Ives. (1986). “An empirical study of the impact of user involvement on system usage and user satisfaction”. Communications of the ACM 28, 3, 232-238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, R. P., R. Anson, and V. K. Clawson. (1993). “Group facilitation and group support systems”. In L. M. Jessup and J. S. Valacich (eds.), Group Support: New Perspectives. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company, 146-168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, E. (1988). “IBM combines rapid modeling technique and simulation to design PCB factory-of-thefuture”. Industrial Engineering 20, 6, 19-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H. and S. E. Brennan. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. Levine, and S. D. Teasley (eds.) Socially Shared Cognition. American Psychological Association, 127-149.

  • Curtis, B., M. I. Kellner, and J. Over. (1992). “Process modelling”. Communications of the ACM 35, 9, 75-90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, B., H. Krasner, and N. Iscoe. (1988). “A field study of the software design process for large systems”. Communications of the ACM 31, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T. H. and D. B. Stoddard. (1994). “Reengineering: business change of mythical proportions?” MIS Quarterly 16, 2, 121-127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, D. L., J. D. Lee, R. E. Orwig, and D. R. Vogel. (1995). “Technological support for group process modeling”. Journal of Management Information Systems 11, 3, 43-64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, D. L., J. D. Lee, M. O. Pendergast, A. M. Hickey, and J. F. Nunamaker Jr. (1998). “Enabling the effective involvement of multiple users: methods and tools for collaborative software engineering”. Journal of Management Information Systems 14, 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, D. L., R. E. Orwig, J. D. Lee, and D. R. Vogel. (1994). “Modeling with a group modeling tool: group support, model quality, and validation”. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., G. S. Hayes, and R. M. Daniels. (1999). “Business process modeling with group support systems”. Journal of Management Information Systems 15, 4, 115-142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennis, A. R., G. S. Hayes, and R. M. Daniels. (1994). “Re-engineering business process modeling”. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Information Processing Standards Committee. Integration Definition for Function Modeling (IDEF0).

  • Fox, G. (1995). “The challenge of convergence”. Proceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franz, C. R. and D. Robey. (1986). “Organizational context, user involvement, and the usefulness of information systems”. Decision Sciences 17, 329-356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, G., J. Rosenthal, and J. Wade. (1993). “How to make reengineering really work”. Harvard Business Review. 71, 6, 119-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M. and J. Champy. (1993). Reengineering the Corporation: A Manifesto for Business Revolution. New York, NY: Harper Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, H. J. (1991). Business Process Improvement: The Breakthrough Strategy for Total Quality, Productivity, and Competitiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirokawa, R. Y. and D. S. Gouran. (1989). “Facilitation of group communication”. Management Communication Quarterly. 3, 1, 71-92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. E. and T. Lofgren. (1994). “Model decomposition speeds distribution center design”. Interfaces 24, 5, 95-106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowal, J. A. (1988). Analyzing Systems, London: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marca, D. A. and C. L. McGowan. (1988). SADT: Structured Analysis and Design Techniques. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirhram, A. (1972). “The modeling process”. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 2, 5: 621-629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J. F. Jr., R. O. Briggs, D. Mittleman, and D. R. Vogel. (1997). “Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: a discussion of lab and field findings”. Journal of Management Information Systems 13, 3, 163-207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunamaker, J. F. Jr., A. R. Dennis, J. S. Valacich, D. R. Vogel, and J. F. George. (1991). “Electronic meeting systems to support group work”. Communications of the ACM 34, 7, 40-61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pendergast, M. O., D. L. Dean, J. D. Lee, B. Nevstrujev, and N. Katic. (1996). “Current advances in group supported business process reengineering”. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, D. T. (1977). “Structured Analysis (SA). A language for communicating ideas”. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-3, No. 1, 16-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, D. T. (1985). “Douglas Ross talks about Structured Analysis”. Computer July, 80-88.

  • Schnitt, D. L. (1993). “Re-engineering the organization using information technology”. Journal of Systems Management January, 14-20, 41-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suri, R. and G. Diehl. (1987). “Rough-cut modeling: an alternative to simulation”. CIM Review 3, 3, 25-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • UM (1981). Integrated Computer-aided Manufacturing (ICAM) Function Modeling Manual (IDEF0), Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Materials Laboratory, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vennix, J. (1996). Group Model Building: Facilitating Team Learning Using System Dynamics. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, W. R. (1991). Systems Analysis Quality Metrics, Adroit Systems, Inc.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dean, D., Orwig, R. & Vogel, D. Facilitation Methods for Collaborative Modeling Tools. Group Decision and Negotiation 9, 109–128 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008702604327

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008702604327

Navigation