Trust and surprise in distributed teams: towards an understanding of expectations and adaptations

ABSTRACT

Trust can be defined in terms of one party's expectations of another, and the former's willingness to be vulnerable based on those expectations. Surprise results from a failure to meet expectations, which can influence trust. We conducted an empirical study of surprises stemming from cultural differences in distributed teams and their influence on trust. Our study findings provide two primary contributions. First, we find that trust judgments in culturally diverse teams are made from accumulated experiences that involve a sequence of cultural surprise, attribution, formulation of new expectations, and the application of adaptations in new situations. Second, we document adaptations that individuals develop to avoid future surprises and which ultimately helped them to improve their sense of trust towards others. In general, our findings contribute to the existing body of work by providing evidence of how people attribute specific cultural surprises, the impact on their sense of trust and adaptations.

References

1. Al-Ani, B., Redmiles, D. Supporting Trust in Distributed Teams through Continuous Coordination. IEEE Software 99, 1 (2009), 35--40.
2. Al-Ani, B., Wilensky, H., and Redmiles, D. An Understanding of the Role of Trust in Knowledge Seeking and Acceptance Practices in Distributed Development Teams. In Proc. ICGSE 2011, IEEE (2011), in press.
3. Anawati, D. and Craig, A. Behavioral adaptation within cross-cultural virtual teams. IEEE Trans. On Professional Communication 49, 1 (2006), 44--56.
4. Bos, N., Olson, J., Gergle, D., Olson, G., and Wright, Z. Effects of Four Computer-Mediated Communications Channels on Trust Development. In Proc. CHI '02, ACM (2002), 135--140.
5. Cramton, C. D. Attribution in distributed work groups. In P. J. Hinds, S. Kiesler (Eds.). Distributed Work, MIT Press (2002), 191--212.
6. Cramton, C. D., and Hinds, P. The dialectical dynamics of nested structuration in globally distributed teams. Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, (2009).
7. Furst, S., Blackburn, R., and Rosen, B. Virtual team effectiveness: A proposed research agenda. Information Systems Journal 9 (1999), 249--269.
8. Gibbs. J. Culture as kaleidoscope: navigating cultural tensions in global collaboration. In Proc. IWIC '09, ACM (2009), 89--98.
9. Hall, E. T. Beyond Culture. Anchor Books/Doubleday, Garden City, NJ, USA, 1976.
10. Hantual, D., Kock, N., D'Arcy, J., and DeRosa, D. (2011). Media Compensation Theory: A Darwinian Perspective on Adaptation to Electronic Communication and Collaboration, In G. Saad (ed.), Evolutionary Psychology in the Business Sciences. Springer Publishing.
11. Hofstede, G. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, London, UK, 1991.
12. Holton, J. A. Building Trust and Collaboration in a Virtual Team. Team Performance Management 7, 3-4 (2001), 36--47.
13. Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D. E. Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Organization Science 10, 6 (1999), 791--815.
14. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., and Leidner, D. E. Is Anybody Out There?: Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Journal Manage. Info. Systems 14, 4 (1998), 29--64.
15. Kittler, M. G., Rygl, D., and Mackinnon, A. Beyond Culture or Beyond Control? Reviewing the Use of Hall's High-Low-Context Concept. Int. Journal of Cross Cultural Management 11, 1 (2011), 63--82.
16. Lau, D. C., and Murnighan, J. K. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review 23, 2 (1998), 325--340.
17. Lutters, W., and Seaman, C. Revealing actual documentation usage in software maintenance through war stories. Information and Software Technology 49, 6 (2007), 576--587.
18. March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. 1958. Organizations. New York: Wiley.
19. McAllister, D. J. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal 38, 1 (1995), 24--59.
20. McSweeney, B. "Hofstede's 'Model of National Cultural Differences and Consequences': A Triumph of Faith - A Failure of Analysis, Human Relations", (2002), 55.1, 89--118.
21. Nisbett, R. E. The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently - and Why. Free Press, New York, NY, USA, 2003.
22. Olson J., Olson, G. Culture surprises in Remote Software Development Teams. ACM Queue 1, 9 (2003), 52--59.
23. Orr, R. J. and Scott, W. R. Institutional Exceptions on Global Projects: A Process Model. Journal of International Business Studies 39, 4 (2007), 562--588.
24. Patton, M. Q. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, 3rd ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2002.
25. Powell, A., Piccoli, G., and Ives, B. Virtual Teams: A Review of Current Literature and Directions for Future Research. Database for Advances in Information Systems 35, 1 (2004), 6--36.
26. Pyysiäinen, J. Building Trust in Global Inter-Organizational Software Development Projects: Problems and Practices. In Proc. Int. Workshop on Global S.E., IEEE Computer Society (2003), 69--74.
27. Sabherwal, R. The role of trust in outsourced IS development projects. Communications of the ACM 42, 2 (1999), 80--96.
28. Samovar, L. A. and Porter, R. E. Communication Between Cultures, 4th Ed. Wadsworth Publishing, 1995.
29. Wang, H.-C., Fussell, S. F., and Setlock, L.D. Cultural difference and adaptation of communication styles in computer-mediated group brainstorming. In Proc. CHI '09, ACM (2009), 669--678.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing

  • Collaborative and social computing