Angela C. Sodan
Abstract
Teamwork has evolved to play an important role in science and is called for by funding agencies, universities, and industry. However, as important as teamwork nowadays is, teamwork may not be the only approach to produce relevant research results. Furthermore, cooperation does not always match its ideal and ranges from nominal collaboration to close interaction. Given that researchers in technical sciences are often rated as introverts, the question is whether this is true and how this affects their collaboration style and their capability to solve conflicts in collaboration. This paper presents the results of a study that investigates to what extent researchers collaborate, what their motivation for collaboration is, and how they deal with conflicts. Furthermore, the paper assesses the researchers' personality types and checks whether a correlation exists between collaboration-related choices and personality types. The study was carried out with researchers in the area of high-performance computing.
- ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. Last updated May 2003, retrieved from http://www.acm.org/constitution/code.html in December 2003.Google Scholar
- C. M. Avery with M. A. Walker and E. O'Toole Murphy. Teamwork is an Individual Skill. Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco / CA, USA, 2001.Google Scholar
- I. Briggs-Myers. Introduction to Type, 3rd edition (includes statistics) and 6th edition. Palo Alto, CA/USA, Consulting Psychologists Press (CPP), 1998.Google Scholar
- N. Chen. The Experience of Chinese Youth Adjusting to Canadian Education. SSTA Research Centre Report #96-04, Summary of Master's Thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 1996.Google Scholar
- S. R. Covey. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Fireside, Simon&Schuster, New York / NY, USA, 1990.Google Scholar
- CPP, Inc. Description of MBTI. Available at http://www.cpp.com/products/mbti/index.asp, retrieved 2003.Google Scholar
- G. Evans. She Wins. You Win---The Most Important Strategies for Making Women More Powerful. Gotham Books, New York, 2003.Google Scholar
- R. Fisher, W. Ury, and B. Patton. Getting to Yes---Negotiating Without Giving In, 2nd Edition. Penguin Books, New York / NY, USA, 1991.Google Scholar
- W. Herkner. Sozialpsychologie (Social Psychology), 2nd edition. Verlag Hans Huber, Bern, etc, 1996.Google Scholar
- IEEE Code of Ethics. August 1990. Retrieved from http://www.ieee.org in December 2003.Google Scholar
- P. G. Neumann. Psychologial implications of computer software development and use: Zen and the art of computing. Theory and Practice of Software Technology, pp. 221--232.Google Scholar
- C. G. Jung. Psychological Types (H.G. Baynes, translation revised by R. F. C. Hull), Vol. 6 of the collected works of C. G. Jung. University Press, Princeton, NJ/USA, 1971 (original work published 1921).Google Scholar
- H. Lacey. How to Resolve Conflict at the Workplace. Gower Publishing Limited, Hamphire, England, 2000.Google Scholar
- D. Leeds. Smart Questions. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, 1987.Google Scholar
- National Network of Eisenhower Regional Consortia and Clearinghouse. What Experience Has Taught Us About Collaboration, March 2004.Google Scholar
- H. Robbins and M. Finley. The New Why Teams Don't Work. Berreit-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco, 2000.Google Scholar
- J. A. Schellenberg. Conflict Resolution: Theory, Research, and Practice. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1996.Google Scholar
- A. Schulze and Sabine Fiedler-Weiss. Social Conflicts in the Field of Computer Science---A Cross-Cultural Comparison. Proc. IACM conference, June 2001.Google Scholar
- Sharcnet web page, http://www.sharcnet.ca, retrieved 2004.Google Scholar
- A. C. Sodan. Toward Successful Personal Work and Relations. Social Behavior and Personality---An International Journal. Vol. 27, No. 1, 1999, pp. 39--72.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. C. Sodan and L. F. Capretz. Shared-Data or Message-Passing Computing Models---A Human Factor in Technical Choices? Proc. ISCA Int. Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing Systems (PDCS). Louisville/USA, Sept. 2002, pp. 500--506.Google Scholar
- A. C. Sodan. Societies' Different Strengths in Computer-Science Education and Research. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 32, No. 1, February 2004, pp. 73--94.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. W. Stevenson. Learning from Asian Schools. Scientific American, December 1992.Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. W. Stevenson, S. Lee, C. Chen, J. W. Stigler, C. C. Hu, and S. Kitamura. Context of Achievement---A Study of American, Chinese, and Japanese Children. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Vol. 221, 1990.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Strauss. How to Make Collaboration Work. Berett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco / CA, USA, 2002.Google Scholar
- D. Tannen. Talking from 9 to 5. William Morrow and Company, New York / NY, 1994.Google Scholar
- W. Ury. Getting to Peace---Transforming Conflict at Home, at Work, and in the World. Viking, New York / NY, USA, 1999.Google Scholar
Recommendations
Not Really There: Understanding Embodied Communication Affordances in Team Perception and Participation
CSCW '15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social ComputingWe conducted a study that compared basic video conferencing, emergent kinetic video-conferencing techniques, and face-to-face meetings. Remote and co-located participants worked together in groups of three. We show, in agreement with prior literature, ...
Comments