Blog #1

Berry, G. R. (2006). Can computer-mediated asynchronous communication improve team process and decision making? Learning from the management literature. Journal of Business Communication 43(4), 344-366.

Many online writing courses have a group project component. This is especially the case in Professional Writing courses, as one of the major objectives of these courses regardless of the form of delivery is to teach students how to collaborate with others in data-gathering from printed and online sources, and in selecting, organizing, revising, and reporting information in written and oral form. Since it is important in Professional Writing courses to introduce students to the best communication practices used in the corporate world when designing these courses, research articles that describe lessons learned in the corporate environment cannot be neglected.

One such article, written by Berry, provides a review of business communication and management studies published in the last 25 years that address the advantages and disadvantages of computer-mediated asynchronous communication (CMAC) in improving team work and aiding the decision making process. In this article, Berry argues that CMAC has a positive effect on team decision making process, because it allows every team member to contribute equally regardless of their status in the organization and thus results in more alternatives to be considered. In addition when using CMAC, team members have more time to react to each individual’s contribution and the discussion is archived and can be retrieved any time. Furthermore, CMAC can help eliminate free riders in teams, since as the discussion progresses it becomes increasingly apparent when someone is not participating. CMAC may also allow increased participation of team members who are shy and would be reluctant to speak up in face-to-face meetings. While all these advantages can aid the decision making process, Berry points out that it is important to have an explicit communication plan and that expectations need to be made clear ahead of time. Also, other means of communication, especially face-to face, may need to be used when trying to reach a consensus towards the end of the decision making process.

I believe that the lessons learned about CMAC from management research listed in Berry’s article can effectively be applied in the design of a team project for an online Professional Writing course. This study can especially be helpful in the process of designing procedures in the prewriting phase, when important decisions have to be made about the content and main points of the group report, the end product of the group project. Berry’s findings would suggest that asynchronous communication is the right way to prepare for making a decision, however when consensus needs to be reached, it is advisable to switch to a synchronous method, such as group chat or possibly video conferencing. Because this article has some directly applicable findings that could improve group projects, I would recommend it to Professional Writing teachers and scholars.