Rethinking Media Synchronicity Theory: Examining the Cooperative Assumption

Much of information systems (IS) literature assumes team members have completely aligned goals. In practice, people interpret goals to suit personal agendas, even when they are collaborating. This motivates our examination of the cooperative assumption in Media Synchronicity Theory (MST)-”a leading IS theory of communication performance. We assess the boundaries of MST by relaxing the assumption of cooperation. Our results support MST for explaining communication and task performance in a cooperative context. However, MST was insufficient to capture how media capabilities influence performance in a non-cooperative context. Our study shows that relaxing the assumption of cooperation changes MST in profound ways-”altering which media capabilities are central to the model and the very processes that underlie communication

Multi-organizational Embeddedness: Impacts on Developers’ Turnover and Career Mobility

Software development often requires developers to simultaneously engage multiple organizations. Outsourcing or consulting arrangements exemplify such situations. We synthesize job embeddedness theory with human capital theory to understand how a developer’s engagement with other organizations influences their relationship with their primary employer, as well as their movement between employers. We test our model with two studies using survey and archival data. We find that being embedded in an OSS community increases turnover from an employer and is associated with increased job mobility. We also discuss the relationship between OSS embeddedness, intellectual capital, social capital and job mobility

Don’t Marginalize Me: How Organizations Facilitate Social Injustice Via Social Media

One emerging area in Information Systems scholarship is understanding how social injustices are related to social media use. We conduct a theorizing review to offer a theory of social injustice on social media. We examine the current literature at the intersection of social media and social injustice by using a grounded theory method. Our review will result in a theoretical framework. We illustrate one example from our developing framework with propositions related to how organizations facilitate marginalization. We discuss the contributions and implications of our framework for theory and practice, along with future directions such as offering a research agenda

E-profiles, Conflict, and Shared Understanding in Distributed Teams

In this research, we examine the efficacy of a technological intervention in shaping distributed team members’ perceptions about their teammates. We argue that, by exposing distributed team members to electronic profiles (e-profiles) with information emphasizing their personal similarities with one another, distributed teams should experience lower levels of relational and task conflict. In turn, reductions in conflict should facilitate a shared understanding among team members, which should increase their team effectiveness. The results of a laboratory experiment of 46 distributed teams generally support these assertions. Specifically, we found that a simple, technological intervention can reduce task conflict in distributed teams, which, in turn, improves shared understanding and team effectiveness. We also uncovered important differences in the antecedents and impacts of relational and task conflict. Although we found that the e-profile intervention was effective in accounting for variance in task conflict (R2 = .41), it was quite poor in accounting for variance in relational conflict (R2 = .04). The model accounts for 33% and 43% of the variance in shared understanding and team effectiveness, respectively. Taken together, the results of this research suggest that the information shared about team members in distributed team settings has important implications for their ability to collaborate, achieve a common understanding of their work, and accomplish their task effectively. We suggest that e-profiles may be a useful intervention for management to enhance effectiveness in distributed teams

In or Out? Perceptions of Inclusion and Exclusion Among AIS Members

People want a sense of community, a benefit that a professional association such as the Association for Information Systems (AIS) can provide to members. When attempts to create a shared experience fall short and we feel excluded, we disengage and stop further attempts to participate. In this paper, we lay a foundation for individual and association inclusion practices in the AIS. First, we describe the current state of inclusion practices in the academy and in the AIS. Then, we describe findings from a survey of AIS members that measured their perceptions about inclusion and exclusion and factors that cultivated these perceptions. In doing so, we establish a baseline against which we can measure future change. Our data yields key insights about diversity and inclusion in the AIS, and we offer recommendations for all individuals in various roles and positions in the AIS

Social Inclusion in Practice: Supporting Diversity, Inclusion, and Engagement in the AIS (SIGSI)

The Special Interest Group on Social Inclusion (SIGSI) is committed to promoting diversity, inclusive practices, and engagement. Thus, SIGSI recently created a task force to assist the AIS in developing services and policies that enable all IS scholars to fully participate in the AIS scholarly community. In support of that aim, this symposium will: (1) facilitate discussion of social inclusion and exclusion in the AIS and scholarly engagement in public and political discourse; (2) inform the SIGSI community about the task force’s agenda and progress to date; and (3) solicit feedback on its efforts to identify barriers to inclusion and to develop recommendations for the AIS

Framing Communication: How Agenda Alignment and Media Capabilities Shape Partially Cooperative Communication

People frame their communications to suit their personal agendas, even when they are collaborating. However, most information systems (IS) literature assumes people working together have completely aligned agendas. The assumption of agenda alignment in prior research motivates our examination of how agendas and media capabilities influence communication performance. By relaxing the assumption of complete agenda alignment, we reconceptualize how media capabilities interact with communication processes to influence communication performance. We empirically test our model using a lab study with 712 participants interacting face-to-face or via virtual worlds on tasks with differing degrees of agenda alignment. We used a hierarchical linear modeling approach to test our hypotheses. Our results support the role of media synchronicity for explaining communication performance when agendas are aligned. However, our study shows that relaxing the assumption of agenda alignment changes communication in profound ways. We find that media synchronicity is insufficient for describing how media capabilities influence performance in partially cooperative communication contexts. Our findings reveal the importance of anonymity and communication framing when communicants’ agendas differ

Divided We Stand: Polarization across Social Media Platforms and Affordances

One culprit in the sharp increase in political polarization is social media use. We conduct two studies to explore this relationship. In Study 1, we explicate the mechanisms that link social media use to polarization—interpersonal political tension and political identity salience. We test this model with data from 2,820 Americans on two of the most popular platforms for political engagement: Facebook and Twitter. In Study 2, we drill into affordance use and ideological content on Facebook and Twitter to develop a theory of social media affordances and political polarization. Our theory explains the routes by which different ideological content are linked to a certain group of social media affordances and how this cultivates tension that activates political identities and thus polarization. We test our theory via a survey of 492 Facebook and Twitter users. We discuss the contributions and implications of our two studies for theory and practice

Evaluating Effects of Information Incongruence and Gender on Online Review Helpfulness

Empirical research has shown mixed results regarding the effect of online review attributes (e.g., tone, valence, congruence) on consumer perceptions of reviews. Drawing on selectivity theory and cognitive dissonance theory, we dive deeper into decision making to understand how different people perceive helpfulness. The study explores the interplay between review attributes and gender on perceptions of review helpfulness. We conducted a between-subject, controlled laboratory experiment to test our model. We propose that review information congruence plays an important role in evaluating online review helpfulness. We also expect that women consider negative informative and positive persuasive online reviews more helpful whereas men consider positive informative and negative persuasive online reviews more helpful. The study brings important extensions to existing research on relationships between online review helpfulness and online review attributes