This article presents the authors' response to Hewes's (1986, 1996, 2009) models of communication effects on small group outcomes. As sophisticated and thoughtful as Hewes's new model is, however, the authors take issue with it. For one, there is reason to question whether his approach is feasible. For another, his models are not founded on solid empirical ground, they rest on too many assumptions about the empirical realities of communication in task groups. For those reasons, they are premature. At the heart of the matter is that the authors think that Hewes's question of how one can show that communication influences group outcomes is the wrong question, the wrong starting point, once the authors agree with him that the research to date has assumed but not shown that communication does have an influence. The authors do not discount the importance of underlying cognitive processes, but until the functionalities of communication in task groups are sorted out, and the influences on its regularities identified, they contend that it is premature to formulate what they are or model them, even provisionally for the purpose Hewes had in attempting it. [For the original article by Dean E. Hewes, see EJ832779.]