Assignment Two: input-process-output (Katie Dreier)

My final project in a class once was to work with a team of four to create a website for a company. We were given most of the inputs: the personnel – group members – were assigned, and our tasks were outlined for us in weekly deliverable installments. The input that was not specifically given to us was the tool/technology that would help us effectively communicate.

As is pointed out in Kraut’s article and outlined in the input-process-output model, I knew the success of our group (our outcomes) would depend upon our resources, such as individual capabilities (a predetermined input), and our interaction between group members (the second input – yet to be determined). Kraut claims, “both inputs to the group and the processes that group members use when working together influence whether groups will be effective in achieving their production goals.”

My group members and I became committed to using an online computer interface called Basecamp. As suggested by Kraut, this technology helped our conventional group to be more effective. Using the interface we organized our group calendar, assigned individual to-do items, had continuous wiki white boards, and enabled document version control. This tool directly influenced the way we communicated and in turn affected our interaction process. We were able to adhere to interaction patterns by communicating through the wiki. We conformed to group norms by completing our listed individual to-do items. Kraut says, “Communication is perhaps the most important component of group interaction … team members must have a substantial amount of interpersonal communication to be successful.” This was absolutely true. Because of the tools enabled by Basecamp, our interaction was positively affected by our communication input, which in turn provided us with positive output.

We successfully produced a well working website. The outcome was a well-oiled, successful group of individuals. Our production needs were met and Basecamp guaranteed group maintenance.

The Kiesler and Cummings article observes, “Once people are no longer collocated, then direct observation and FtF conversation are difficult or impossible.” Further, it is supposed, “physical separation drastically reduces the liklihood of collaboration.” It is true that at first our group struggled without constant FtF collaboration. Once we were comfortable with our group identitie and individual roles though, proximity did not have such a large impact anymore. In fact, one member had to leave school before the project was completed. She was still able to communicate with the group and effectively contribute to the final stages of the project.