See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/312402401

Factors for electronic media selection in project communication

Conference Paper · September 2016

DOI: 10.1109/PICMET.2016.7806709

CITATIONS READS

0 454

3 authors, including:

Cornelis Cristo van Waveren Kai-Ying Chan

University of Pretoria University of Pretoria
37 PUBLICATIONS   107 CITATIONS    33 PUBLICATIONS   146 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Project Management Offices View project

QM in Academics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kai-Ying Chan on 24 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Please cite the paper as:

Magwenzi, R., van Waveren, C.C. and Chan, K.Y., 2016, September. Factors for electronic media
selection in project communication. In Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), 2016
Portland International Conference on (pp. 2058-2066). IEEE.

Factors for Electronic Media Selection in Project Communication

Rachel Magwenzi, Cornelis Cristo van Waveren, Kai-Ying Chan

Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Graduate School of Technology

Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Abstract

Knowledge transfer in projects are more complex and challenging than such transfers in
normal operations due to the temporary nature of project teams in which team members
often do not see the capturing and transferring of knowledge across projects as important for
long term benefits to the organization. Understanding how and why different communication
media, computer-mediated or otherwise, are used in organisations becomes essential to
prescribe and to predict sound rationale organisational investments in different media
choices. Although a lot of research has been done on factors that influence media selection
as a knowledge transfer tool, organisations are becoming more dependent on using the
electronic media for communication and further advancement in the electronic media
necessitate continued research. This study investigates the key factors that influence the
selection of electronic media in projects communication focussing on the engineering sector
as well as identifying factors which are more dominant that others. The communication
factors which were identified during the study were grouped into four groups: system
characteristic factors, task factors, organisational factors and people factors. The study
investigated the influence of the communication factors on the following forms of electronic
media: e-mail, internet, intranet, extranet, electronic bulletin boards, television networks,
audio recordings, video conferences, tele conferences, instant messaging, telephonic
systems and multimedia presentations. Results showed that the top ten key factors which
influence selection of electronic media consisted of; six system factors, three task factors,
one organisational factor and one people factor. Systems factors were more critical than the
other factors in influencing the choice of electronic media.

Keywords: Project communication, communication factors, electronic media selection.

1. Introduction

Project communication is the exchange of project-specific information with the emphasis on

creating understanding between the sender and the receiver. Projects communication is the
basis of collaboration and it’s critical that everyone understands the communication shared
among the project team members. Electronic media is now being commonly used as a
communication tool to convey information amongst project stakeholders and is the second
most commonly used media to verbal communication. The electronic media distributes
information in electronic/digital form using several mechanisms or systems which allow one
to access, search, share, store and publish information within and outside organisations.

Although many studies have been done with regards to factors influencing communication
media choice [1], [2], the increase in organisations reliance on the electronic media for
communication and continuous advances in electronic media technology have necessitated
continued research in the area of electronic media choice. Although rich media facilitates
communication, media choice is seen as a strategic component of communication because
but “there is no single medium that is uniformly correct [1]. Media choice is dependent upon
the characteristics of the media and each communication medium is unique in its ability to
convey certain information content. Understanding how and why different electronic/digital
communication media are used in organisations becomes essential to prescribe and to
predict sound rationale organisational investments in different media choices [3].

The objective of this paper is to identify factors that influence the selection of certain forms of
electronic media in terms of their characteristics in project communication. This study asks
the following two research questions:

 Which forms of electronic media are frequently used in project communication?

 Which factors influence the users’ choice of electronic media in project communication?

By answering the above two research questions this paper contributes to media choice
literature in two ways. Firstly, there are limited studies on media choice in project
environments. Over time, projects have become a common form of doing business [4].
Knowing the importance of factors influencing electronic communication media choices will
allow more effective and efficient project communication, thus the success of projects.
Secondly, media richness theory [5] has been the most commonly applied theory in
exploring factors influencing media choice. However, due to the complexity of projects, this
paper applies other theories such as media synchronicity theory [6], behavioural complexity
theory [7] and social influence theory [8] with the aim to build a more comprehensive list of
factors.
2. Literature review and conceptual model

This section will review various forms of electronic media and factors that influence the
choice of electronic media. After the review, a conceptual framework model for this research
was developed which examines the extent of the influence of the factors in the selection of
various electronic media. The application of the different forms of the electronic media will
be detailed as well as how the factors influence users to select the electronic media.

2.1. Forms of electronic media

This study reviewed the literature and identified the following forms of electronic media: e-
mail, internet, intranet, extranet, electronic bulletin boards, television networks, audio
recordings, video conferences, teleconferences, instant messaging, telephonic systems and
multimedia presentations. E-mail is an asynchronous, fast, text based medium that supports
multiple uses and uses computers, mobile phones and tablets to exchange information.
Sivulen & Valo [9] mention that e-mail messages can be stored and accessed, can be
distributed to all team members at the same time, can easily be send and forwarded, as well
as used to attach documents. The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer
networks that use the standard internet protocol suite (TCP/IP) to link several billion
electronic devices worldwide. The intranet allows access to information on an organisation’
website to members within the organisation only whilst the extranet allows access to
information on an organisation’s website to members outside the organisation. Instant
messaging is a synchronous computer mediated messaging system that allows chatting
between individuals. Chen et.al. [10] states that instant messaging has a number of
capabilities which include visual and non-verbal cues, such as emotional icons, presence
awareness, presence notification, voice chat, video conferencing, file exchange, drawing
pads, application sharing. Sivunen and Valo [9] mention that telephonic systems are usually
used when performing urgent tasks and they enable speaking to clarify uncertain issues.
Verbal communication via telephonic system is often used as an informal way of
communication in projects [11]. Video conferencing involves conducting a conference
between two or more participants at different sites by using computer networks to transmit
audio and video data. In their study Sivunen and Valo [9] state that video conferences are
used when there is need to discuss a number of issues at the same time. Teleconferencing
occurs when phones are used to initiate and conduct conference calls, which enable multiple
callers to listen and/or talk on the same call. Multimedia presentations refers to the use of
computers to present text, graphics, video, animation, and sound in an integrated way, an
example is the PowerPoint presentations. Audio recordings occur when there is electronic
recording of sound. A television network is a telecommunications network for distribution of
television program content. When project stakeholders are the public, television is an
efficient way to communicate with the public by broadcasting projects’ information.
Electronic bulletin boards (also known as message boards or as computer forums) are
online communication systems where one can share, request, or discuss information on just
about any subject.

2.2. Factors that influence the choice of electronic media

The factors which were identified during the study were identified by various media choice
theories and grouped into four groups namely: system characteristic factors, task factors,
organisational factors and people factors.

The system factors which influence the choice of electronic media in projects are usefulness
and system characteristics. To, et.al. [12] mention that individual perceptions of ease of use
and usefulness of electronic media influences the selection for use of electronic media within
and outside organisations for various task requirements. System characteristics factors
which influence the selection of electronic media for use are identified in this paper by using
media richness theory [5] and media synchronicity theory [6]. These are: capability to carry
information of media, immediacy of feedback, multiple cues, language variety,
personalisation, parallelism, rehearse-ability, reviewability, simultaneity, and configuration.
Capability of media refers to the ability of media to carry desired amount of information from
low amount of information to high amount of information. Sun and Cheng [13] state that the
richness of media is based on four factors: (1) immediacy of feedback: the promptness of
responses, such as questions to be asked; (2) multiple cues: use of multiple information
channels, such as vocal inflection and body gestures; (3) language variety: use of numbers
and formulas provide clarity and (4) personalisation: personal emotions and feelings.
Immediacy of feedback refers to the urgency in which the message is sent and a quick
response is needed. Palvia et al [3] and Sun and Cheng [13] also describe multiple cues as
the ability of the media to display an array of cues, which includes physical presence, voice
inflections, body gestures, words, numbers, and graphic symbols, facilitate conveyance of
interpretation and meaning, rather than simply information or data. Language variety refers
to the ability of the media to allow the use of numbers and formulas to provide clarity.
Personalisation refers to the ability of media to display personal emotions and feelings in
communication. According to Calefato and Lanubile, [14] parallelism refers to the ability of
media to allow a number of simultaneous conversations that can exist effectively i.e. the
‘‘width’’ of the medium. According to Calefato and Lanubile, [14] rehearseability refer to the
extent to which the media enables the sender to rehearse or fine tune the message before
sending. According to Calefato and Lanubile, [14] reviewability refers to the ability of media
to allow the user to re-examine and process the message to ensure accurate understanding,
thus fostering conveyance. According to Calefato and Lanubile, [14] simultaneity refers to
the ability of the medium to allow for full-duplex communication that allows individuals to
send and receive communication at once and simultaneously. Zack [15] mention that
configuration refers to the ability of the media to communicate to a wider audience, one-to-
many communication increases the effectiveness of use of that type of media. An e-mail
can be sent to everyone in the organisation no matter how large the organisation is.

Calefato and Lanubile, [14] and Plotnick et al [16] mention that use of appropriate
technology which provides features that support the task requirements increases
performance and effective use of the technology. Behavioural complexity theory state that
task at hand affects the selection of media [7]. The task factors which influence the choice of
electronic media in projects are task complexity, task interdependency, task confidentiality
and task related accountability. Sun and Cheng, [13] established that task complexity and
variety is directly linked to the amount of information to be processed. Complex tasks require
more information to be communicated to reduce uncertainty. According to Jarvenpaa and
Staples [2], the social exchange theory assumes that relationships between individuals as
interdependent. Individuals who perform tasks which are interdepended of others feel
obliged to use electronic media for information sharing. Palvia et al, [3] state that the high
need for confidentiality in communication will lead to selection of media that is assumed to
be secure by individuals. They also state that the requirement for individual and task related
accountability will lead to the selection of a medium perceived to provide more
accountability. Task related accountability refers to the ability of media to show who is
responsible for communication sent or received.

The organisational factors which influence the choice of electronic media in projects are
environment, economy and communication across authority. These factors are related to the
social influence theories with specific focus on institutional factors [17]. The environmental
effects include influence due to expectation and perceptions of peers and superiors and their
business counterparts outside their organisations. Kwon and Onwuegbuzie [18] mention
that individuals tend to use forms of electronic media that are used by peers and business
associates because they need to have the sense of connection to their business
environment. Lo and Lie, [19] state that distance affects the choice of media due to different
access cost, error cost and delay cost. During recession companies had to reduce cost by
reducing unnecessary travel, the use of videoconferencing increased as it was a cheaper
and efficient option. The choice of media differs depending on the one’s position of authority
in the organisation. D’Ambra and Rice [20] identified that managers use different
communication media for similar tasks, and suggest that when an individual moves from one
position to the next, they tend to choose certain media because of their new positions.

The people factors which influence the choice of electronic media in projects are users
experience, cultural differences and language differences. These factors relate to “social
proximity and cultural diversity” in the behavioural theory by Shachaf and Hara [7]. Gaining
experience with certain forms of electronic media channels increases the perceived richness
of the media and the effectiveness of their use. King & Xia, [21] contend that media choice
is correlated with one’s prior experience with media. Snyder and Lee-Partridge, [22] state
that people tend to choose to use electronic media which they have experience and feel
comfortable to use. Klitmoller and Lauring, [23] argue that cultural differences and low
shared language commonality play a significant role in the effectiveness of communication
and knowledge sharing. Culture can influence the selection of certain media for certain
tasks due to cultural perceptions. Plotnick et.al. [16] mention that the choice of media for
formal, official and business use may vary by culture

2.3. Conceptual framework

This research identified 22 factors for consideration. Table 1 provides the research
framework and definition of the 22 factors from the literature discussed in the previous
section. The degree of influence of these factors on electronic media choice will be
examined in the context of engineering projects.

Table 1: Research framework

Factors Definition
Capability to carry desired amount of
Capability to carry
SF1 information from low amount of information to
information of media
high amount of information
Ability of media to convey important, relevant,
SF 2 Usefulness
useful or valuable information
The degree to which a prompt response is
SF 3 Immediacy of feedback required from the receiver by the sender of
System
the communications.
Characteristic
SF 4 Personalisation Personal emotions and feelings
Factors
The extent to which media enables the sender
Rehearseability or
SF 5 to rehearse or fine tune the message before
Revisitability
sending
Ability to re-examine and process the
Reviewability or
SF 6 message to ensure accurate understanding,
reprocessability
thus fostering conveyance
SF 7 Simultaneity Refers to the ability of the medium to allow for
 Factors Definition
full-duplex communication, that is, individuals
can send and receive at once and
simultaneously
Ability of media to communicate to a broader
SF 8 Configuration
audience
An array of cues, including physical presence,
voice inflections, body gestures, words,
SF 9 Multiple cues numbers, and graphic symbols, facilitate
conveyance of interpretation and meaning,
rather than simply information or data.
Use of numbers and formulas to provide
SF 10 Language variety
clarity
The number of simultaneous conversations
SF 11 Parallelism that can exist effectively—the ‘‘width’’ of the
medium.
Complex tasks require more information to be
TF1 Task complexity
communicated to reduce uncertainty
Task related This is when communication is not disclosed
TF2
confidentiality to unauthorised persons, or organisations
People whose work involves tasks that are
TF3 Task Interdependency
interdependent of others
Task Factors
The ability of media to show who is
Task related
TF4 responsible for communication sent or
accountability
received.
Ambiguous, unclear tasks which results in
TF5 Task equivocality multiple and conflicting interpretations of the
task
The environment in which individuals do their
OF1 Environment projects influence the way they choose the
forms of electronic media to use.
Organisational Distance affects the choice of media due to
Factors OF2 Economy different access cost, error cost and delay
cost.
Communication across The choice of media differs depending on the
OF3
authority one’s position of authority in the organisation
One’s prior experience with media influences
PF1 User’s experience
the choice of electronic media
Culture can influence the selection of certain
PF2 Cultural differences media for certain tasks due to cultural
People Factors
perceptions.
Language differences influence your choice of
PF3 Language differences electronic media to use in project
communication.

3. Research Methodology

A quantitative research methodology was used in this study by using a questionnaire survey.
The research was cross sectional as the respondents were only interviewed once. The
surveys were collected during the period July to August 2015. The population for this
research was the engineering industry. The unit of analysis were employees from the
engineering sector. A sample of the population was surveyed through questionnaires with a
sample size of 403 people. Of this sample size, 345 people were current Masters students
enrolled for Engineering Management and Project Management at the University of Pretoria
in South Africa. These students are also involved in projects in the engineering industry.
The research instrument used to collect data for this research was a written web based
survey questionnaire using Survey Monkey as a tool. Questionnaire survey was chosen as
a research instrument because the data gathered can be statistically analysed. There is less
bias as there is uniform questions presentation and no middle-man bias. Moreover, it is less
intrusive than interviews [24]. The questionnaire for this research consisted of a set of
questions which were designed to answer the research questions. The type of questions in
the questionnaire included close ended as well as open ended questions. The close ended
questionnaire included statements in which the respondents need to express the degree of
influence a specific factor has on his/her choice of electronic media using a five-point Likert
scale where a 1 indicated “no influence”, 2 indicated “minor influence”, 3 indicated “neutral”,
4 indicated “moderate influence” and a 5 indicated “major influence”. Questions asking
respondents’ frequency of usage of the 12 forms of electronic media were also included in
the questionnaire using a five-point Likert scale where 1 indicated “never used”, 2 indicated
“rarely”, 3 indicated “sometimes”, 4 indicated “most of the time” and a 5 indicated “always”.
Other questions with regards to respondents’ personal demographic such as age, gender,
education level and project experience. The questionnaire was pre-tested and revised before
being sent to the respondents.

Statistical analysis was used to analyse the responses received from the respondents. In
order to rank the degree of influence of the 21 factors, Friedman’s test as the non-parametric
alternative to the one-way ANOVA with repeated measures was used to determine the
differences between the factors’ mean ranks. In addition, chi-square test determines whether
the differences in the mean ranks amongst the factors are statistically significant or not.

4. Results

A total of 65 responses were completed out of a sample size of 403, the response rate was
therefore 16.1%. After screening for completeness of the surveys, there were 63 usable
questionnaires. The results are listed under the headings, demographics, media selection
and ranking of the media.

4.1. Demographics

As reported in Table 2, results found in this study will be biased towards users younger than
40 years and male users. This is expected in South Africa, as engineering is male
dominated. The majority of respondents are technical and/or professional with a minimum
education qualification of a Bachelor’s degree or higher. 71.4% of the respondents have
more than 5 years of project experience, this indicates that the respondents are
knowledgeable in this area and their opinions to the other parts of the questionnaire are
valid.

Table 2: Frequency table of demographics of the respondents

Demographics Frequency % Cumulative %

Younger than 30 years old 14 22.2 22.2

30 ~ 39 years old 33 52.4 74.6

Age Group
40 ~ 49 years old 10 15.9 90.5
50 ~ 59 years old 6 9.5 100.0
Male 39 61.9 61.9
Gender
Female 24 38.1 100.0
Clerical/Secretarial 2 3.2 3.2

Technical/Professional 47 74.6 77.8

Job Position
Professor/ Researcher 3 4.8 82.5
Manager/ Administrator 11 17.5 100.0
Other (please specify) 2 3.2 3.2

Grade 12 (School) 2 3.2 6.3

Diploma / Advanced Certificate 1 1.6 7.9

Education
Bachelor Degree / Advanced Diploma 32 50.8 58.7
Level
Postgraduate Diploma 9 14.3 73.0
Master’s Degree 16 25.4 98.4
Doctoral Degree 1 1.6 100.0
Less than 5 years 18 28.6 28.6

5 - 9 years 22 34.9 63.5

Project
10 - 19 years 17 27.0 90.5
Experience
20 - 29 years 4 6.3 96.8
30 years and more 2 3.2 100.0

4.2. Media selection

This research identifies and focused on the following forms of electronic media used in
project communication: e-mail, instant messaging, video conferences, teleconferences,
multimedia presentations, television networks, audio recordings, telephonic systems,
intranet, extranet, internet, electronic bulletin boards. The respondents were asked to
express the frequency of usage of these forms on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1
(never used) to 5 (always). The Friedman test was used to compare mean ranks between
the usage of media and to indicate how the usage of media differed. The results of the
ranking from highest to lowest rank is depicted in Table 6. The results show that the
differences amongst the mean ranks were statistically significant (Chi square value is
significant at p<0.05).

Table 3: Ranking of Electronic Media

Media Mean Rank Ranking

Media 1: E- mails 10,19 1

Media 11: Internet 10,17 2

Media 9: Intranet 8,67 3

Media 8: Telephonic systems 8,62 4

Media 2: Instant message 7,72 5

Media 10: Extranet 6,18 6

Media 5: Multimedia presentations 5,33 7

Media 4: Tele conferences 4,92 8

Media 3: Video conferences 4,64 9

Media 12: Electronic bulletin boards 4,37 10

Media 7: Audio recordings 3,75 11

Media 6: Television networks 3,43 12

4.3. System Characteristic Factors

The mean ranks from the Friedman test were determined and used to rank the system
characteristic factors. The results for the ranking of the System characteristic factors are
depicted in Table 4. The results show that the differences amongst the mean ranks were
statistically significant (Chi square value is significant at p<0.05). The media’s capability to
carry information (System Factor 1) is mostly considered when selecting the electronic
media to use whilst the media’s capability of personalisation (System Factor 4) has the least
influence when selecting the electronic media for project communication.
Table 4: Ranking of System Factors (SF)

Factor Mean Rank Ranking Test Statisticsa

SF1: Capability to carry

9,73 1 N 59
information of media

SF2: Usefulness 7,18 3 Chi-Square 217,049

SF3: Immediacy of feedback 7,33 2 df 10

SF4: Personalisation 3,23 11 Asymp. Sig. ,000

SF5: Rehearseability or Revisitability 4,67 9 a. Friedman Test

SF6: Reviewability or reprocessability 6,35 6

SF7: Simultaneity 6,38 5

SF8: Configuration 6,79 4

SF9: Multiple cues 3,64 10

SF10: Language variety 5,17 8

SF11: Parallelism 5,54 7

4.4. Task Factors

The results in Table 5 shows that the differences amongst the mean ranks were statistically
significant (Chi square value is significant at p<0.05). Confidentiality (Task Factor 2) is
mostly considered when selecting the electronic media to use task equivocality had the least
influence when selecting the electronic media to use in project communication.

Table 5: Ranking of Task Factors (TF)

Factor Mean Rank Ranking Test Statisticsa

TF1: Task Complexity 3,17 2 N 59

TF2: Task related confidentiality 3,24 1 Chi-Square 16,236

TF3: Task Interdependency 3,16 3 df 4

TF4: Task related accountability 2,97 4 Asymp. Sig. 0,003

TF5: Task equivocality 2,46 5 a. Friedman Test

4.5. Organisational factors

The results in Table 6 shows that the differences amongst the mean ranks were statistically
significant (Chi square value is significant at p<0.05). The environment (Organisational
Factor 1) is mostly considered when selecting the electronic media to use whilst the position
of authority (Organisational Factor 3) has the least influence when selecting the electronic
media to use in project communication.

Table 6: Ranking of Organisational Factors (OF)

Factor Mean Rank Ranking Test Statisticsa

OF1: Environment 2,19 1 N 57

OF2: Economy 2,05 2 Chi-Square 9,879

OF3: Communication across authority 1,75 3 df 2

Asymp. Sig. 0,007

a. Friedman Test

4.6. People factors

The results in Table 7 shows that the differences amongst the mean ranks were statistically
significant (Chi square value is significant at p<0.05). The user’s experience with the media
(People Factor 1) is mostly considered when selecting the electronic media to use whilst
cultural differences (People Factor 2) has the least influence when selecting the electronic
media to use in project communication.

Table 7: Ranking of People Factors (PF)

Factor Mean Rank Ranking Test Statisticsa

PF1: User’s experience 2,36 1 N 59

PF2: Cultural differences 1,69 3 Chi-Square 21,436

PF3: Language differences 1,94 2 df 2

Asymp. Sig. 0,000

a. Friedman Test

4.7. Ranking of the factors influencing the electronic media selection

The Friedman test was used to compare mean ranks of all 21 factors described in the above
sections. Table 8 shows that System Factor 1 has the highest mean rank. The differences
amongst the mean ranks were statistically significant (Chi square value is significant at
p<0.05). Among the top 10 factors (based on the highest ten mean ranks), systems factors
are more dominant than all the other factors for all respondents. The top ten factors are
comprised of: six system factors, three task factors, one organisational factor and one
people factor (due to a tie at No.10).

Table 8: Ranking of All Factors

Factors Mean Rank Ranking Test Statisticsa

System Factor 1 19,05 1 N 57

System Factor 3 14,34 2 Chi-Square 287,487

System Factor 2 14,11 3 df 21

Task Factor 1 13,54 4 Asymp. Sig. 0,000

Task Factor 2 13,54 5 a. Friedman Test

Task Factor 3 13,41 6

System Factor 8 12,96 7

Organisation 1 12,71 8

System Factor 7 12,24 9

System Factor 6 12,18 10

People 1 12,18 10

Task Factor 4 12,07 11

Organisation 2 12,03 12

Task Factor 5 10,40 13

System Factor 11 10,35 14

System Factor 10 9,64 15

Organisation 3 9,57 16

People 3 9,04 17

System Factor 5 8,80 18

People 2 7,94 19

System Factor 9 6,86 20

System Factor 4 6,03 21

5. Conclusion

From the demographics data, the research results (that is, the ranking of factors) are more
biased towards electronic media users who are younger than 40 years, males, users with a
minimum education qualification of a Bachelor’s degree and technical/professionals working
in the engineering field.

The study investigated the frequency of use of 12 types of electronic media. These media
were then ranked using mean ranks. The selection of electronic media for use were ranked
as follows: 1-e-mails (most frequently used), 2-internet, 3-telephonic systems, 4-intranet, 5-
instant messaging, 6-extranet, 7-multimedia presentations, 8-teleconferences, 9-video
conferences, 10-electronic bulletin boards, 11-audio recordings, and 12-television networks.
The finding corresponds to the findings from the previous research of George et.al. [1] where
e-mails and telephonic systems are the two most commonly used communication media.
From media richness theory, e-mails are considered to be more formal with slow feedback,
whereas telephone is a more informal way of communication with immediate feedback [5]. It
is reported in the qualitative research by Watson-Manheim and Bélanger [25] that “If you talk
to me on the phone I probably, after you tell me something, I’ll say, great! Can you send that
to me as an e-mail?”. In engineering projects, collaborative problem solving and knowledge
sharing are important activities which require mixture of communication media. From
interviews reported by Niinimäki et al, [26] the project manager stated that “status reporting
works very well [via email], as well as assignment of technical tasks, but if you want
something more conceptual, out-of-the-box-thinking, it’s better to use the telephone”.
Telephonic verbal communication fulfils the tasks of stay in touch and exchange
urgent/timely information [21] but on the other hand it requires “a large share of constant
attention that working on other tasks simultaneously is impossible” [26]. This implies that
depending on the importance and urgency of the message to be communicated, the use of
telephonic verbal communication can be applied more efficiently in the project
communication.

This study investigated 22 factors which influence the choice of electronic media in four
groups of factors identified by using various media selection theories: system characteristic
factors, task factors, organisation factors and people factors. For system factors, system
characteristic factor 1 (capability to carry information of media) is mostly considered when
selecting the electronic media to use followed by system characteristic factor 3 (immediacy
of feedback) and then system characteristic factor 2 (usefulness). For task factors, task
factor 2 (task related confidentiality) is mostly considered when selecting the electronic
media to use followed by task factor 1 (task complexity) and then task factor 3 (task
interdependency). Organisational factor 1 (environment) is mostly considered when
selecting the electronic media to use followed by organisational factor 2 (economy) and then
organisational factor 3 (communication across authority). For people factors, people factor 1
(users experience) is mostly considered when selecting the electronic media to use followed
by people factor 3 (language differences).

The key factors which influence selection of electronic media consists of, six system factors,
three task factors, one organisational factor and one people factor. The key factors are
detailed in Table 9.

Table 9: Key factors that influence choice of media

Rank No Factors Codes Factor Factor Definition

Capability to carry desired amount of information

Capability to carry
1 System Factor 1 from low amount of information to high amount of
information of media
information.

The degree to which a prompt response is required

Immediacy of
2 System Factor 3 from the receiver by the sender of the
feedback
communications.

Ability of media to convey important, relevant,

3 System Factor 2 Usefulness
useful or valuable information.

Complex tasks require more information to be

4 Task Factor 1 Task complexity
communicated to reduce uncertainty

Task related This when communication is not disclosed to

5 Task Factor 2
confidentiality unauthorised persons, or organisations.

Task People whose work involves tasks that are

6 Task Factor 3
Interdependency interdependent of others

Ability of media to communicate to a broader

7 System Factor 8 Configuration
audience.

The environment in which individuals do their

8 Organisation 7 Environment projects influence the way they choose the forms of
electronic media to use.

Refers to the ability of the medium to allow for full-

9 System Factor 7 Simultaneity duplex communication, that is, individuals can send
and receive at once and simultaneously.
Rank No Factors Codes Factor Factor Definition

Ability to re-examine and process the message to

Reviewability or
10 System Factor 6 ensure accurate understanding, thus fostering
reprocessability
conveyance.

One’s prior experience with media influences the

11 People Factor 1 Users experience
choice of electronic media.

The factors which influence the choice of electronic media in terms of their characteristics
are in order of decreasing influence: system factors, task factors, organisational factors and
people factors. It can be concluded that system factors are more critical than the other
factors in influencing the choice of electronic media: people tend to consider system
characteristic factors first when choosing the form of electronic media to use. In project
communication large amount of information often needs to be shared to various
stakeholders simultaneously and feedback is required as quickly as possible to aid in the
project decisions and project work. Electronic media that support these functions are
considered first to allow the project to complete successfully. The systems characteristic
factors were identified by media richness theory and media synchronicity theory and
therefore it seems that both these theories explain the choice of media in engineering project
communication, rather than social influence theory [27]. This may be to the fact that project
teams are temporary in nature (the team dissolves when project ends) therefore, the social
proximity is low amongst the team members to socially influence each other on the choice of
media.

6. Limitation and Recommendation

This research focussed on the key factors that influence the choice of electronic media in the
field of engineering therefore the results are not applicable to selection of electronic media
for use in projects outside the engineering sector as there may be different factors that
influence the selection of the electronic media in those sectors. Moreover, this study is
limited to a smaller sample size and therefore it is recommended to expand this research by
including bigger sample including non-engineering sectors.

The following factors are key and should be considered before implementation or decisions
on which electronic media to use in projects communication can be done (in order of
decreasing importance): capability to carry information of media, immediacy of feedback,
usefulness, task complexity, task related confidentiality. We recommend engineering
organisations to use the following most commonly used media in project communication: e-
mails, internet, telephonic systems, intranet, instant messaging. However, it is important to
note that there is no elimination phenomenon in terms of use communication technology
tools, people may use one or more forms of electronic media at any time.

7. References

[1] J. F. George, J. R. Carlson, and J. S. Valacich, “Media Selection as a Strategic

Component of Communication,” MIS Q., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 1233–1251, 2013.

[2] S. . Jarvenpaa and D. . Staples, “The use of collaborative electronic media for
information sharing: an exploratory study of determinants,” J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., vol. 9,
no. 2–3, pp. 129–154, 2000.

[3] P. Palvia, P. Pinjani, S. Cannoy, and T. Jacks, “Contextual constraints in media

choice: Beyond information richness,” Decis. Support Syst., 2011.

[4] S. J. Benade and C. C. van Waveren, “Technology Management for Emerging

Technologies,” in Technology Management for Emerging Technologies, Proceedings
of PICMET ’12, 2012, pp. 2395–2404.

[5] R. L. Draft, R. H. Lengel, and L. K. Trevino, “Message Equivocality , Media Selection ,

and Manager Performance : Implications for Information Systems Author ( s ): Richard
L . Daft , Robert H . Lengel and Linda Klebe Trevino Published by : Management
Information Systems Research Center , University o,” MIS Q., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 355–
366, 1987.

[6] A. R. Dennis and J. . Valacich, “Rethinking media richness: Towards a theory of

media synchronicity,” in Systems Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32. Proceedings of the
32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 10-pp). IEEE., 1999.

[7] P. Shachaf and N. Hara, “Behavioral complexity theory of media selection: a

proposed theory for global virtual teams,” J. Inf. Sci., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 63–75, 2007.

[8] J. Fulk, “Social construction of communication technology,” Acad. Manag. J., vol. 36,
no. 5, pp. 921–950, 1993.

[9] A. Sivunen and M. Valo, “Team leaders’ technology choice in virtual teams,” Prof.
Commun. IEEE …, 2006.

[10] K. Chen, D. Yen, S. Hung, and A. Huang, “An exploratory study of the selection of
communication media: The relationship between flow and communication outcomes,”
 Decis. Support Syst., 2008.

[11] M. M. Carvalho, “Communication issues in projects management,” in PICMET:

Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology,
Proceedings, 2008, pp. 1280–1284.

[12] P. To, C. Liao, and J. Chiang, “An empirical investigation of the factors affecting the
adoption of Instant Messaging in organizations,” Comput. Stand. …, 2008.

[13] P. Sun and H. Cheng, “The design of instructional multimedia in e-Learning: A Media
Richness Theory-based approach,” Comput. Educ., 2007.

[14] F. Calefato and F. Lanubile, “Communication Media Selection for Remote Interaction
of Ad Hoc Groups,” Adv. Comput., vol. 78, pp. 271–313, 2010.

[15] M. Zack, “Electronic messaging and communication effectiveness in an ongoing work

group,” Inf. Manag., 1994.

[16] L. Plotnick, S. Hiltz, and R. Ocker, “Media choices over time in partially distributed
teams,” Syst. Sci. (HICSS), 2012 …, 2012.

[17] C. Saunders and J. W. Jones, “Temporal sequences in information acquisition for

decision making: A focus on source and medium,” Acad. Manag. Rev., vol. 15, no. 1,
pp. 29–46, 1990.

[18] N. Kwon and A. Onwuegbuzie, “Modeling the factors affecting individuals’ use of
community networks: A theoretical explanation of community‐based information and
communication technology use,” J. Am. Soc. …, 2005.

[19] S. Lo and T. Lie, “Selection of communication technologies—A perspective based on

information richness theory and trust,” Technovation, 2008.

[20] J. D’Ambra and R. E. Rice, “Multi-method approaches for the study of computer-
mediated communication, equivocality, and media selection,” IEEE Trans. Prof.
Commun., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 231–239, 1994.

[21] R. C. King and W. Xia, “Media Appropriateness: Effects of Experience on

Communication Media Choice,” Decis. Sci., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 877–910, Oct. 1997.

[22] J. Snyder and J. E. Lee-Partridge, “Understanding communication channel choices in

team knowledge sharing,” … An Int. J., 2013.

[23] A. Klitmøller and J. Lauring, “When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media
richness, cultural difference and language commonality,” J. World Bus., 2013.
 [24] D. Walonick, “A selection from survival statistics,” StatPac Inc. Bloom. MN, 2010.

[25] M. B. Watson-Manheim and F. Bélanger, “Communication Media Repertoires: Dealing

with the Multiplicity of Media Choices,” MIS Q., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 267–293, 2007.

[26] T. Niinimäki, A. Piri, C. Lassenius, and M. Paasivaara, “Reflecting the choice and
usage of communication tools in global software development projects with media
synchronicity theory,” J. Softw. Evol. Process, vol. 24, pp. 677–692, 2012.

[27] P. J. Carlson and G. B. Davis, “An Investigation of Media Selection among Directors
and Managers: From ‘Self’ to ‘Other’ Orientation,” MIS Q., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 335–362,
1998.

View publication stats