Rosalie Ocker
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Information technology teams are often partially distributed teams (PDTs). A PDT consists of two or more subteams that are separated geographically. This articles describes research focused on the use of PDTs to engage students in “real world” IT team learning about the subject matter while also teaching them the skills they will need to work in global software development teams. Findings from a large-scale international study indicate that the introduction of training modules enhanced perceived learning of appropriate PDT teaming behaviors; students with training reported improved shared team identification, trust, awareness, coordination, competence, and conflict with respect to distant subteam members, and higher overall team performance.
- Adya, M., Nath, D., Sridhar, V., and Malik, A. 2008. Bringing global sourcing into the classroom: Lessons from an experiential software development project. Comm. AIS 22, 33--48.Google Scholar
- Amabile, T. M. 1983. The social psychology of creativity, A componential conceptualization. J. Personal. Social Psych. 45, 2, 357--376.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Amir, Y. 1969. Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psych. Bull. 71, 319--342.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bandura, A. 1982. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Amer. Psychol. 37, 122--147.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
- Baskerville, R. L. and Wood-Harper, A. T. 1996. A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. J. Inform. Tech. 11, 235--246.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Beranek, P. M. 2005. A comparison of relational and trust training techniques for virtual team communication: How much training is enough? In Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’05). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Beranek, P. M. and Martz, B. 2005. Making virtual teams more effective: Improving relational links. Team Perform. Manage. 11, 5/6, 200--213.Google Scholar
- Bos, N., Shami, N. S., Olson, J., Cheshin, A., and Nan, N. 2004. In-group/out-group effects in distributed teams: An experimental simulation. Comput. Supp. Coop. Work 6, 3, 429--436. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carmel, E. and Abbott, P. 2007. Why “nearshore” means that distance matters. Comm. ACM 50, 10, 40--46. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carroll, J. M., Neale, D. C., Isenhour, P. L., Rosson, M. B., and McCrickard, D. S. 2003. Notification and awareness: Synchronizing task-oriented collaborative activity, Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 58, 605--632. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chen, G. and Bliese, P. D. 2002. The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: Evidence for discontinuity. J. Appl. Psych. 87, 3, 549--556.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chin, W. 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research. G. Marcoulides Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 295--336.Google Scholar
- Clear, T. and Daniels, M. 2000. Using groupware for international collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 30th American Society for Engineering Education/Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Frontiers in Education Conference (ASEE/IEEE’00), Vol. 1, T. Batchman Ed. IEEE, 18--23. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Clear, T. and Kassabova, D. 2008. A course in collaborative computing: Collaborative learning and research with a global perspective. SIGCSE Bull. 40, 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., and Rotter, N. 2004. Building trust in virtual teams. IEEE Trans. Prof. Comm. 47, 2, 95--104.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cramton, C. D. 2001. The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organiz. Science 12, 346--371. Google ScholarDigital Library
- DeLuca, D., Gallivan, J. J., and Kock, N. 2008. Furthering information systems action research: A post-positivist synthesis of four dialectics. J. Assn. Inform. Syst. 9, 2, 48--72.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dourish, P. and Bellotti, V. 1992. Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW’92), 107--114. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dube, L. and Pare, G. 2001. Global virtual teams. Comm. ACM 44, 12, 71--73. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Egea, K. 2006. Relationship building in virtual teams: An academic case study. In Proceedings for Informing Science + Information Technology Education Joint Conference (InSite’02), 25--28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Faraj, S. and Sambamurthy, V. 2006. Leadership of information systems development projects. IEEE Trans. Engine. Manage. 53, 2, 238--249.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fiol, C. M. and O’Connor, E. 2005. Identification in face-to-face, hybrid, and pure virtual teams: Untangling the contradictions. Organiz. Science 16, 1, 19--32. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Market. Resear. 18, 39--50.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fuller, M. A., Hardin, A. M., and Davison, R. M. 2006-2007. Efficacy in technology-mediated distributed teams. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 23, 3, 209--235. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategy for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company, Hawthorne, NY.Google Scholar
- Guzzo, R. A. and Shea, G. P. 1992. Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough Eds., 3, 269--313.Google Scholar
- Hanisch, J. and Corbitt, B. 2007. Impediments to requirements engineering during global software development. Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 16, 6, 793--805.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hardin, A. M., Fuller, M. A., and Valacich, J. S. 2006. Measuring group efficacy in virtual teams: New questions in an old debated. Small Group Resear. 37, 1, 68--85.Google Scholar
- Hause, M., Petre, M., and Woodroff, M. 2003. Performance in international computer science collaboration between distributed student teams. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference on Frontiers in Education (FIE’03), 3, 5--8.Google Scholar
- Hecht, T. D., Allen, N. J., Klammer, J. D., and Kelly, E. C. 2002. Group beliefs, ability, and performance: The potency of group potency. Group Dynam.: Theory, Resear., and Prac. 6, 2, 143--152.Google Scholar
- Herbsleb, J. D. and Grinter, R. E. 1999. In splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway’s law revisited. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’99), 85--95. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hertel, G., Geister, S., and Konradt, U. 2005. Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Hum. Resource Manage. Rev. 15, 69--95.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hinds, P. and Mortensen, M. 2005. Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: An empirical investigation. Organiz. Science 16, 3, 290--307. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hosmer, L. T. 1995. Trust: The connecting link between organizational theory and philosophical ethics. Acad. Manage. Rev. 20, 379--403.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hung, Y. C., Dennis, A. R., and Robert, L. 2004. Trust in virtual teams: Towards an integrative model of trust formation. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’04). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., and Leidner, D. E. 1998. Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 14, 4, 29--75. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D. E. 1999. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organiz. Science 10, 6, 791--815. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jehn, K. A. 1995. A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Admin. Science Quar. 40, 2, 256--282.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jehn, K. A. 1997. A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Admin. Science Quar. 42, 530--557.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., and Neale, M. A. 1999. Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Admin. Science Quar. 44, 741--763.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., and Wei, K. 2006-2007. Conflict and performance in global virtual teams. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 23, 3, 237--274. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kayworth, T. and Leidner, D. E. 2000. The global virtual manager: A prescription for success. Eur. Man. J. 18, 2, 183--194.Google Scholar
- Kramer, R. M. 1991. Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization process. In Research in Organizational Behavior, L. Cummings and B. Staw Eds., JAI Press. Greenwich, CT. 191--228.Google Scholar
- Last, M. Z., Daniels, M., Hause, M. L., and Woodroffe, M. R. 2002. Learning from students: Continuous improvement in international collaboration. SIGCSE Bull. 34 3, September. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lindgren, R., Henfridsson, O., and Schultze, U. 2004. Design principles for competence management systems: A synthesis of an action research study. MIS Quar. 28, 3, 435--472. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lindsley, D. H., Brass, D. J., and Thomas, J. B. 1995. Efficacy-performance spirals: A multilevel perspective. Acad. Manage. Rev. 20, 3, 645--678.Google Scholar
- Lott, A. and Lott, B. 1965. Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: A review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. Psych. Bull. 64, 259--309.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Luhman, N. 1979. Trust and Power. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Lunt, B. M., Ekstronm J. J., Gorka, S., Hislop, G., Kamali, R., Lawson, E., Leblanc, R., Miller, J., and Reichgelt, H. 2008. Information technology curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information technology. ACM/IEEE. http://www.acm.org/education/education/curricula/IT2008%20Curriculum.pdf.Google Scholar
- Malone, T. W. and Crowston, K. 1994. The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Comput. Surv. 26, 1, 87--119. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mannix, E. A., Griffith, T. L., and Neale, M. A. 2002. The phenomenology of conflict in virtual work teams. In Distributed Work, P. J. Hinds and S. Kiesler Eds. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Mark, G. 2001. Social foundations for collaboration in virtual environments. In Access to Knowledge: New Information Technologies and the Emergence of the Virtual University, F. T. Tschang and T. D. Senta Eds. Elservier Science, Oxford, UK. 241--263.Google Scholar
- Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., and Maynard, M. T. 2004. Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? J. Manage. 30, 6, 805--835.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Massey, A. P., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., and Hung, Y.-T. 2003. Because time matters: Temporal coordination in global virtual project teams. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 19, 4, 129--155. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., and Schoorman, F. D. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manage. Rev. 20, 3, 709--734.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Maznevski, M. L. and Chudoba, K. M. 2000. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organiz. Science 11, 473--492. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mortensen, M. and Hinds, P. J. 2001. Conflict and shared identity in geographically distributed teams. Int. J. Conflict Manage. 12, 3, 212--238.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ocker, R. J., Huang, H., Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S. R. Forthcoming. Leadership dynamics in partially distributed teams: An exploratory study of the effects of configuration and distance. Group Decision Negotiation. (Special Issue).Google Scholar
- Ocker, R. J., Hiltz, S. R., Turoff M., and Fjermestad, J. 1995-1996. The effects of distributed group support and process structuring on software requirements development teams. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 12, 3, 127--154. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Rechner, P. L., Sanchez, R. J., Schmidtke, J. M. 2007. Utilizing virtual teams in a management principles course. Edu. Train. 49, 5, 408--423.Google ScholarCross Ref
- O’Reilly, C., Caldwell, D., and Barnett, W. 1989. Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Admin. Science Quar. 34, 21--37.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Panteli, N. and Davison, R. M. 2005. The role of subgroups in the communication patterns of global virtual teams. IEEE Trans. Prof. Comm. 48, 2, 191--200.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pinsonneault, P. and Caya, O. 2005. Virtual teams: What we know, what we don’t know. Int. J. e-Collaboration 1, 3, 1--16.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Plotnick, L., Ocker, R. J., Hiltz, S. R., Rosson, M. B. 2008a. Leadership roles and communication issues in partially distributed emergency response software development teams: A pilot study. In Proceedings of the 41st First Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’08). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Plotnick, L., Hiltz, S. R., Ocker, R. J., and Rosson, M. B. 2008b. Leadership in partially distributed emergency response software emergency response software. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Relief and Management (ISCRAM’08). CD-ROM.Google Scholar
- Plotnick, L., Hiltz, S. R., Ocker, R. J., Rutkowski, A.-F., and Rosson, M. B. 2008c. Leadership and trust in partially distributed software development teams. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS’08). CD-ROM.Google Scholar
- Polzer, J. T., Crisp, B., Jarvenpaa, S. L., and Kim, J. W. 2006. Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How colocated subgroups can impair group functioning. Acad. Manage. J. 49, 4, 679--692.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Powell, A., Piccoli, G., and Ives, B. 2004. Virtual teams: A review of current literature and directions for future research. Datab. Advances 35, 1, 6--36. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Richardson, I., Moore, S., Paulish, D., Casey, V., and Zage, D. 2007. Globalizing software development in the local classroom. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET’07), 64--71. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robey, D. L., Smith, L. A., and Vijayasarathy, L. R. 1993. Perceptions of conflict and success in information systems development projects. J. Man. Inform. Syst. 10, 1, 123--139. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rosen, B., Furst, S., and Blackburn, R. 2006. Training for virtual teams: An investigation of current practices and future needs. Hum. Resource Manage. 45, 2, 229--247.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rutkowski, A-F., Vogel, D., van Genuchten, M., Saunders, C. 2008. Communication in virtual teams: Ten years of experience in education. IEEE Trans. Prof. Comm. 51, 3, 302--312.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sarker, S. and Sahay, S. 2002. Understanding virtual team development: An interpretive study. J. Assn. Inform. Syst. 3, 247--285.Google Scholar
- Shen, J., Hiltz, S. R., and Bieber, M. 2008. Learning strategies in online collaborative examinations. IEEE Trans. Prof. Comm. 51, 1, 63--78.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sivasubramaniam, N., Murry, W., Avolio, B., and Jung, D. 2002. A longitudinal model of the effects of team leadership and group potency on group performance. Group Organiz. Manag. 27, 1, 66--96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Smith, K., Smith, K., Olian, J., Sims, H., O’Bannon, D., and Scully, J. 1994. Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Admin. Science Quar. 39, 412--438.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sole, D. and Edmondson, A. 2002. Situated knowledge and learning in dispersed teams. British J. Manage. 13, S17--S34.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Susman, G. I. and Evered, R. D. 1978. An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Admin. Science Quar. 23, 4, 582--603.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tajfel, H. 1978. Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. Academic Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. 1981. Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In Psychology of Intergroup Relations, S. Worchel and W. G. Austin Eds. Nelson, Chicago, IL. 7--24.Google Scholar
- Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K.-K. et al. 2000. A dialogue technique to enhance electronic communication in virtual teams. IEEE Trans. Prof. Comm. 43, 2, 153--165.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Turner, J. C. 1981. The experimental social psychology of intergroup behaviour. In Intergroup Behaviour, J. C. Turner and H. Giles Eds. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, UK. 66--101.Google Scholar
- Weisband, S. 2002. Maintaining awareness in distributed team collaboration: Implications for leadership and performance. In Distributed Work, P. Hinds and S. Kiesler Eds. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 311--334.Google Scholar
- Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., and Garud, R. 2001. Organizational identification among virtual workers: The role of need for affiliation and perceived work-based social support. J. Manage. 27, 213--229.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zigurs, I. 2002 Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? Organiz. Dynamics 31, 4, 339--351.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zucker, L. 1986. Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920. In Research in Organizational Behavior, B. Staw and L. Cummings Eds. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT. 53--111.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Training Students to Work Effectively in Partially Distributed Teams
Recommendations
Shared identity helps partially distributed teams, but distance still matters
GROUP '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM International Conference on Supporting Group WorkPrevious research on partially distributed teams has revealed a cluster of problems, including difficulty coordinating, 'ingroup' formation among members in different locations, and lower trust in teammates across distance. But these prior studies ...
Preliminary insights into the in-group/out-group effect in partially distributed teams: an analysis of participant reflections
SIGMIS CPR '06: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMIS CPR conference on computer personnel research: Forty four years of computer personnel research: achievements, challenges & the futureThis paper explores issues related to the effectiveness of partially-distributed teams. In each of 12 student teams within a major university, the majority of team members were collocated at the main campus, while the remaining members were located at ...
Virtual teamwork training: factors influencing the acceptance of collaboration technology
The purpose of this study was to identify the factors that influence the acceptance of electronic collaboration technology by higher education students and that influence their predicted usage of the technology for virtual team collaboration. The ...
Reviews
Stewart Mark Godwin
In response to curriculum guidelines and employers seeking information technology (IT) graduates who are "job ready," this study examines how training affects students working on a project within partially distributed teams. The paper explores two research questions: How does training affect team interaction processes and outcomes in terms of 1) overall team performance and 2) effects on six intervening variables that are likely to affect performance ... trust, shared identity, awareness, coordination, conflict, and competence__ __ Trust and shared identification are socio-emotional constructs that emphasize how individuals feel about their team. Awareness and coordination concern the procedural aspects of team management, and perceived competence and conflict relate to a more behavioral aspect. After reviewing the literature in similar studies, the authors were able to identify the "us versus them" dynamic as the critical problem for successful cohesion of partially distributed teams. They collected data over three semesters from 689 participants, who were grouped into 84 partially distributed teams at nine universities. At the completion of each project, a survey was administered to all of the participants that measured the relevant constructs of the research questions. This paper uses an action research methodology to provide evidence that additional training in virtual teamwork results in positive outcomes across all variables. The introduction of the training was designed specifically to meet the needs of the students working on their respective team projects. Although the training added more structure to the project and may have contributed to the final results, this study still has considerable significance for educators. As online education continues to grow, this research offers a timely reminder that group work offers a new set of challenges. Educators who are engaged in online or distributed learning should consider reading this paper. Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments