skip to main content
research-article

A "Distance Matters" Paradox: Facilitating Intra-Team Collaboration Can Harm Inter-Team Collaboration

Published:07 April 2022Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

By identifying the socio-technical conditions required for teams to work effectively remotely, the Distance Matters framework has been influential in CSCW since its introduction in 2000. Advances in collaboration technology and practices have since brought teams increasingly closer to achieving these conditions. This paper presents a ten-month ethnography in a remote organization, where we observed that despite exhibiting excellent remote collaboration, teams paradoxically struggled to collaborate across team boundaries. We extend the Distance Matters framework to account for inter-team collaboration, arguing that challenges analogous to those in the original intra-team framework --- common ground, collaboration readiness, collaboration technology readiness, and coupling of work --- persist but are actualized differently at the inter-team scale. Finally, we identify a fundamental tension between the intra- and inter-team layers: the collaboration technology and practices that help individual teams thrive (e.g., adopting customized collaboration software) can also prompt collaboration challenges in the inter-team layer, and conversely the technology and practices that facilitate inter-team collaboration (e.g., strong centralized IT organizations) can harm practices at the intra-team layer. The addition of the inter-team layer to the Distance Matters framework opens new opportunities for CSCW, where balancing the tension between team and organizational collaboration needs will be a critical technological, operational, and organizational challenge for remote work in the coming decades.

References

  1. Emily C Anania, Timothy J Disher, Jason P Kring, Chelsea L Iwig, Joseph R Keebler, Elizabeth H Lazarra, and Eduardo Salas. 2017. Communication in the Spaceflight Multi-Team System: Training and Technology Recommendations to Support Boundary Spanners. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 61. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 150--154.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Deborah G. Ancona and David F. Caldwell. 1992. Bridging the Boundary - External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37, 4 (1992), 634--665. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393475Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Roger Bakeman and Stephen Beck. 1974. The Size of Informal Groups in Public. Environment and Behavior, Vol. 6, 3 (1974), 378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Michael Barrett, Eivor Oborn, Wanda J Orlikowski, and JoAnne Yates. 2012. Reconfiguring Boundary Relations: Robotic Innovations in Pharmacy Work. Organization Science, Vol. 23, 5 (2012), 1448--1466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Beth A. Bechky. 2003 a. Object Lessons: Workplace Artifacts as Representations of Occupational Jurisdiction. Amer. J. Sociology, Vol. 109, 3 (2003), 720--752. https://doi.org/10.1086/379527Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Beth A. Bechky. 2003 b. Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a production floor. Organization Science, Vol. 14, 3 (2003), 312--330. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.3.312.15162Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Saskia Bick, Kai Spohrer, Rashina Hoda, Alexander Scheerer, and Armin Heinzl. 2017. Coordination challenges in large-scale software development: a case study of planning misalignment in hybrid settings. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 44, 10 (2017), 932--950.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Pernille Bjørn and Lars Rune Christensen. 2011. Relation Work: Creating Socio-Technical Connections in Global Engineering. In ECSCW 2011: Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 24--28 September 2011, Aarhus Denmark. Springer, 133--152.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Pernille Bjørn, Morten Esbensen, Rasmus Eskild Jensen, and Stina Matthiesen. 2014. Does Distance Still Matter? Revisiting the CSCW Fundamentals on Distributed Collaboration. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Vol. 21, 5 (2014), 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Kirsten Boehner and Carl DiSalvo. 2016. Data, Design and Civics: An Exploratory Study of Civic Tech. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2970--2981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Richard J Boland Jr and Ramkrishnan V Tenkasi. 1995. Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing. Organization Science, Vol. 6, 4 (1995), 350--372.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Nathan D Bos, Ayse Buyuktur, Judith S Olson, Gary M Olson, and Amy Voida. 2010. Shared Identity Helps Partially Distributed Teams, but Distance Still Matters. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Supporting group work. 89--96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Erin Bradner and Gloria Mark. 2002. Why Distance Matters: Effects on Cooperation, Persuasion and Deception. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. 226--235.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Janis A Cannon-Bowers, Eduardo Salas, Sharolyn Converse, and Jr. Castellan, N. John. 1993. Shared Mental Models in Expert Team Decision Making .Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 221--246. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=1993--98047-012&site=ehost-live&scope=siteGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Scott Carter, Jennifer Mankoff, and Patrick Goddi. 2004. Building Connections Among Loosely Coupled Groups: Hebb's Rule at Work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Vol. 13, 3--4 (2004), 305--327.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Sandra E Cha and Amy C Edmondson. 2006. When Values Backfire: Leadership, Attribution, and Disenchantment in a Values-Driven Organization. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17, 1 (2006), 57--78.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Chia-Fang Chung, Elena Agapie, Jessica Schroeder, Sonali Mishra, James Fogarty, and Sean A Munson. 2017. When Personal Tracking Becomes Social: Examining the Use of Instagram for Healthy Eating. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1674--1687.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Stacey L Connaughton, Elizabeth A Williams, et al. 2012. Social Identity Issues in Multiteam Systems: Considerations for Future Research. In Multiteam Systems. Routledge, 123--153.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Alessia Contu and Hugh Willmott. 2003. Re-Embedding Situatedness: The Importance of Power Relations in Learning Theory. Organization science, Vol. 14, 3 (2003), 283--296.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Catherine Durnell Cramton. 2002. Attribution in Distributed Work Groups. Distributed Work (2002), 191--212.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Matthew A Cronin, Laurie R Weingart, and Gergana Todorova. 2011. Dynamics in Groups: Are We There Yet? Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 5, 1 (2011), 571--612.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Michael A Cusumano. 1997. How Microsoft Makes Large Teams Work Like Small Teams. MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 39, 1 (1997), 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Leslie A DeChurch and Stephen J Zaccaro. 2010. Perspectives: Teams Won't Solve This Problem. Human Factors, Vol. 52, 2 (2010), 329--334.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Leslie A DeChurch and Stephen J Zaccaro. 2013. Innovation in Scientific Multiteam Systems: Confluent and Countervailing Forces. In National Academy of Sciences Workshop on Science Team Dynamics and Effectiveness, Washington, DC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Gerardine DeSanctis and Brad M Jackson. 1994. Coordination of Information Technology Management: Team Based Structures and Computer Based Communication Systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 10, 4 (1994), 85--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Deborah Dougherty. 1992. Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms. Organization Science, Vol. 3, 2 (1992), 179--202. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.2.179Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Casey Fiesler, Shannon Morrison, and Amy S Bruckman. 2016. An Archive of Their Own: A Case Study of Feminist HCI and Values in Design. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2574--2585.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Robert M Fuller and Alan R Dennis. 2009. Does Fit Matter? The Impact of Task-Technology Fit and Appropriation on Team Performance in Repeated Tasks. Information Systems Research, Vol. 20, 1 (2009), 2--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Katie Z Gach, Casey Fiesler, and Jed R Brubaker. 2017. ?Control Your Emotions, Potter" An Analysis of Grief Policing on Facebook in Response to Celebrity Death. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 1, CSCW (2017), 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Tom Gross, Chris Stary, and Alex Totter. 2005. User-Centered Awareness in Computer-Supported Cooperative Work-Systems: Structured Embedding of Findings from Social Sciences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 18, 3 (2005), 323--360.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Jonathan Grudin. 1994. Groupware and Social Dynamics: Eight Challenges for Developers. Commun. ACM, Vol. 37, 1 (1994), 92--105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Jonathan Grudin and M Lynne Markus. 1997. Organizational Issues in Development and Implementation of Interactive Systems. In Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier, 1457--1474.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Tomas Gustavsson. 2017. Assigned Roles for Inter-team Coordination in Large-Scale Agile Development: a Literature Review. In Proceedings of the XP2017 Scientific Workshops. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. J. Richard Hackman and Nancy Katz. 2010. Group Behavior and Performance. Vol. 5th ed. Wiley, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. J Richard Hackman and Neil Vidmar. 1970. Effects of Size and Task Type on Group Performance and Member Reactions. Sociometry (1970), 37--54.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. A. Paul Hare. 1976. Handbook of Small Group Research .Free Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Rebecca M. Henderson and Kim B. Clark. 1990. Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of Established Firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, 1 (1990), 9--30. http://links.jstor.org/sici'sici=0001--8392%28199003%2935%3A1%3C9%3AAITROE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-UGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Pamela J Hinds and Diane E Bailey. 2003. Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams. Organization Science, Vol. 14, 6 (2003), 615--632.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Pamela J Hinds and Mark Mortensen. 2005. Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization Science, Vol. 16, 3 (2005), 290--307.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Jim Hollan and Scott Stornetta. 1992. Beyond Being There. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 119--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. John Hughes, Val King, Tom Rodden, and Hans Andersen. 1994. Moving out from the Control Room: Ethnography in System Design. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 429--439.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Ruthanne Huising. 2019. Moving off the Map: How Knowledge of Organizational Operations Empowers and Alienates. Organization Science, Vol. 30, 5 (2019), 1054--1075. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2018.1277Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Rodi Jolak, Andreas Wortmann, Michel Chaudron, and Bernhard Rumpe. 2018. Does Distance Still Matter? Revisiting Collaborative Distributed Software Design. IEEE Software, Vol. 35, 6 (2018), 40--47.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Rodi Jolak, Andreas Wortmann, Grischa Liebel, Eric Umuhoza, and Michel RV Chaudron. 2020. The Design Thinking of Co-located vs. Distributed Software Developers: Distance Strikes Again!. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Global Software Engineering. 106--116.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. A. Joshi, N. Pandey, and G. H. Han. 2009. Bracketing Team Boundary Spanning: an Examination of Task-Based, Team-Level, and Contextual Antecedents. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 30, 6 (2009), 731--759. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.567Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. David R Karger, Karun Bakshi, David Huynh, Dennis Quan, and Vineet Sinha. 2005. Haystack: A Customizable General-Purpose Information Management Tool for End Users of Semistructured Data. In Proc. of the CIDR Conf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Katherine C Kellogg. 2009. Operating Room: Relational Spaces and Microinstitutional Change in Surgery. Amer. J. Sociology, Vol. 115, 3 (2009), 657--711.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Katherine C. Kellogg, Wanda J. Orlikowski, and JoAnne Yates. 2006. Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations. Organization Science, Vol. 17, 1 (2006), 22--44. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0157Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Ryan Kelly, Daniel Gooch, Bhagyashree Patil, and Leon Watts. 2017. Demanding by Design: Supporting Effortful Communication Practices in Close Personal Relationships. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. 70--83.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Dominic Kent. 2021. How to Communicate with Businesses that use a Different Chat App. https://zapier.com/blog/communicate-across-slack-and-teams/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Michaela J. Kerrissey, Patricia Satterstrom, and Amy C. Edmondson. 2020. Into the Fray: Adaptive Approaches to Studying Novel Teamwork Forms. Organizational Psychology Review, Vol. 10, 2 (2020), 62--86. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620912833Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Robert E Kraut, Susan R Fussell, Susan E Brennan, and Jane Siegel. 2002. Understanding Effects of Proximity on Collaboration: Implications for Technologies to Support Remote Collaborative Work. Distributed Work (2002), 137--162.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Lindsay Larson and Leslie A DeChurch. 2020. Leading Teams in the Digital Age: Four Perspectives on Technology and What They Mean for Leading Teams. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 31, 1 (2020), 101377.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Amanda Lazar, Hilaire J Thompson, Shih-Yin Lin, and George Demiris. 2018. Negotiating Relation Work with Telehealth Home Care Companionship Technologies That Support Aging in Place. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 2, CSCW (2018), 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Christopher A Le Dantec and W Keith Edwards. 2008. The view from the trenches: Organization, power, and technology at two nonprofit homeless outreach centers. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 589--598.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Min Kyung Lee, Nathaniel Fruchter, and Laura Dabbish. 2015. Making Decisions from a Distance: The Impact of Technological Mediation on Riskiness and Dehumanization. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 1576--1589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. S Leigh Star and K Ruhleder. 1994. Steps Towards an Ecology of Infrastructure: Complex Problems in Design and Access for Large-Scale Collaborative Systems. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer supported cooperative work. 253--264.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Paul M Leonardi, Jeffrey W Treem, and Michele H Jackson. 2010. The Connectivity Paradox: Using Technology to Both Decrease and Increase Perceptions of Distance in Distributed Work Arrangements. Journal of Applied Communication Research, Vol. 38, 1 (2010), 85--105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. K. Lewis, M. Belliveau, B. Herndon, and J. Keller. 2007. Group Cognition, Membership Change, and Performance: Investigating the Benefits and Detriments of Collective Knowledge. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 103, 2 (2007), 159--178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.01.005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Elizabethc A Mannix, Terri Griffith, and Magaret A Neale. 2002. The Phenomenology of Conflict in Distributed Work Teams. Distributed Work (2002), 213--233.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Andrew Mao, Winter Mason, Siddharth Suri, and Duncan J Watts. 2016. An Experimental Study of Team Size and Performance on a Complex Task. PloS one, Vol. 11, 4 (2016), e0153048.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  62. Yaoli Mao, Dakuo Wang, Michael Muller, Kush R Varshney, Ioana Baldini, Casey Dugan, and Aleksandra Mojsilović. 2019. How Data Scientists Work Together With Domain Experts in Scientific Collaborations: To Find The Right Answer Or To Ask The Right Question? Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 3, GROUP (2019), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Michelle A Marks, Leslie A DeChurch, John E Mathieu, Frederick J Panzer, and Alexander Alonso. 2005. Teamwork in Multiteam Systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, 5 (2005), 964.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Christina Maslach, Susan E Jackson, Michael P Leiter, Wilmar B Schaufeli, and Richard L Schwab. 1986. Maslach Burnout Inventory. Vol. 21. Consulting Psychologists Press Palo Alto, CA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Nora McDonald, Sarita Schoenebeck, and Andrea Forte. 2019. Reliability and Inter-rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: Norms and Guidelines for CSCW and HCI Practice. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 3, CSCW (2019), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Anca Metiu. 2006. Owning the Code: Status Closure in Distributed Groups. Organization Science, Vol. 17, 4 (2006), 418--435. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0195Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Matthew B Miles and A Michael Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook .Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. David R Millen. 2000. Rapid Ethnography: Time Deepening Strategies for HCI Field Research. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques. 280--286.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. Claire C Miller. 2021. Do Chance Meetings at the Office Boost Innovation? There's No Evidence of It. https://www.newyorktimes.com/2021/06/23/upshot/remote-work-innovation-office.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Mark Mortensen. 2014. Constructing the Team: The Antecedents and Effects of Membership Model Divergence. Organization Science, Vol. 25, 3 (2014), 909--931. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0881Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Michael Muller, Casey Dugan, Aabhas Sharma, Werner Geyer, and Thomas Erickson. 2017. A Stick with a Handle at Each End: Socially Implicated Work Objects for Design of Collaborative Systems. In Proceedings of 15th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work-Exploratory Papers. European Society for Socially Embedded Technologies (EUSSET).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Bonnie A Nardi and Steve Whittaker. 2002. The Place of Face-to-face Communication in Distributed Work. Distributed Work (2002), 112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Tsedal Neeley. 2021. Remote Work Revolution: Succeeding from Anywhere. (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Michael B. O'Leary, Mark Mortensen, and Anita W. Woolley. 2011. Multiple Team Membership: A Theoretical Model of its Effects on Productivity and Learning for Individuals and Teams. Academy of Management Review (2011). http://ssrn.com/paper=1474336Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Gary Olson and Judith Olson. 2003. Mitigating the Effects of Distance on Collaborative Intellectual Work. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 12, 1 (2003), 27--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  76. Gary M Olson and Judith S Olson. 1997. Research on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (1997), 1433--1456.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Gary M Olson and Judith S Olson. 2000. Distance Matters. Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 15, 2--3 (2000), 139--178.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Gary M Olson and Judith S Olson. 2012. Collaboration Technologies. Human Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications, (2012), 549--564.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Judith S Olson, Erik C Hofer, Nathan Bos, Ann Zimmerman, Gary M Olson, Daniel Cooney, and Ixchel Faniel. 2008. A Theory of Remote Scientific Collaboration. Scientific Collaboration on the Internet (2008), 73--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  80. Judith S Olson and Gary M Olson. 2013. Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, Vol. 6, 5 (2013), 1--151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. Wanda J Orlikowski. 1995. Learning from Notes: Organizational Issues in Groupware Implementation. In Readings in Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier, 197--204.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Wanda J. Orlikowski and C. Suzanne Iacono. 2001. Research Commentary: Desperately Seeking the "IT" in IT Research-A Call to Theorizing the IT Artifact. Information Systems Research, Vol. 12, 2 (2001), 121--134. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.12.2.121.9700Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  83. Maria Paasivaara, Casper Lassenius, and Ville T Heikkil"a. 2012. Inter-Team Coordination in Large-Scale Globally Distributed Scrum: Do Scrum-of-Scrums Really Work?. In Proceedings of the ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement. 235--238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Jeffrey Pfeffer and G. Salancik. 1974. Organizational Decision-Making as a Political Process - the Case of a University Budget. Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 19, 2 (1974), 135.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. Jeffrey Pfeffer and Gerald R. Salancik. 1978. The External Control of Organizations : A Resource Dependence Perspective .Harper & Row, New York. xiii, 300 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  86. Rafael Prikladnicki, Marcelo Perin, and Sabrina Marczak. 2016. Virtual Team Configurations that Promote Better Product Quality. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. Sumita Raghuram, N Sharon Hill, Jennifer L Gibbs, and Likoebe M Maruping. 2019. Virtual Work: Bridging Research Clusters. Academy of Management Annals, Vol. 13, 1 (2019), 308--341.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Joan R Rentsch and Richard Klimoski. 2001. Why Do 'Great Minds' Think Alike?: Antecedents of Team Member Schema Agreement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 22 (2001), 107--120. http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/ 10.1002/job.81Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  89. Jennifer Rhymer. 2020. Location Independent Organizations: Designing Work across Space and Time. Ph.D. Dissertation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Mark Rouncefield, John A Hughes, Tom Rodden, and Stephen Viller. 1994. Working with “Constant Interruption”: CSCW and the Small Office. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. 275--286.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. Eduardo Salas, Nancy J Cooke, and Michael A Rosen. 2008. On Teams, Teamwork, and Team Performance: Discoveries and Developments. Human factors, Vol. 50, 3 (2008), 540--547.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  92. Paul Scerri, Yang Xu, Elizabeth Liao, Justin Lai, and Katia Sycara. 2004. Scaling Teamwork to Very Large Teams. In Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, International Joint Conference on, Vol. 3. IEEE Computer Society, 888--895.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. Muzafer Sherif, O.J. Harvey, Jack White, William R. Hood, and Carolyn W. Sherif. 1961. Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment. Vol. 10. University Book Exchange Norman, OK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. Abhishek Shukla and Rajeev Srivastava. 2016. Development of Short Questionnaire to Measure an Extended Set of Role Expectation Conflict, Coworker Support and Work-life Balance: The New Job Stress Scale. Cogent Business & Management, Vol. 3, 1 (2016), 1134034.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  95. Manuel E. Sosa, Steven D. Eppinger, and Craig M. Rowles. 2004. The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development. Management Science, Vol. 50, 12 (2004), 1674--1689. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0289Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  96. Aaron Tabor, Scott Bateman, Erik Scheme, David R Flatla, and Kathrin Gerling. 2017. Designing Game-based Myoelectric Prosthesis Training. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1352--1363.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  97. John C Tang, Clemens Drews, Mark Smith, Fei Wu, Alison Sue, and Tessa Lau. 2007. Exploring Patterns of Social Commonality Among File Directories at Work. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 951--960.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  98. Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein. 2021. Nudge: The Final Edition .Penguin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  99. Anita L. Tucker and Amy C. Edmondson. 2003. Why Hospitals Don't Learn from Failures: Organizational and Psychological Dynamics that Inhibit System Chnage. California Management Review, Vol. 45, 2 (2003), 55--72.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  100. Melissa A. Valentine. 2017. Renegotiating Spheres of Obligation: The Role of Hierarchy in Organizational Learning. Administrative Science Quarterly (2017), 0001839217718547. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217718547Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Melissa A Valentine, Daniela Retelny, Alexandra To, Negar Rahmati, Tulsee Doshi, and Michael S Bernstein. 2017. Flash Organizations: Crowdsourcing Complex Work by Structuring Crowds as Organizations. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3523--3537.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  102. Ruth Wageman, Heidi Gardner, and Mark Mortensen. 2012. The Changing Ecology of Teams: New Directions for Teams Research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 33, 3 (2012), 301--315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1775Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  103. Dakuo Wang, Michael Muller, Qian Yang, Zijun Wang, Ming Tan, and Stacy Hobson. 2021. Organizational Distance Also Matters: A Case Study of Distributed Research Teams and their Paper Productivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.01028 (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  104. Sara Waring, Laurence Alison, Grace Carter, Chloe Barrett-Pink, Michael Humann, Lauren Swan, and Tomas Zilinsky. 2018. Information Sharing in Interteam Responses to Disaster. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 91, 3 (2018), 591--619.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  105. Jeffrey Warshaw, Steve Whittaker, Tara Matthews, and Barton A Smith. 2016. When Distance Doesn't Really Matter: Effects of Geographic Dispersion on Participation in Online Enterprise Communities. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 335--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  106. Timo Wolf, Thanh Nguyen, and Daniela Damian. 2008. Does Distance Still Matter? Software Process: Improvement and Practice, Vol. 13, 6 (2008), 493--510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  107. Stephen J Zaccaro, Samantha Dubrow, Elisa M Torres, and Lauren NP Campbell. 2020. Multiteam Systems: An Integrated Review and Comparison of Different Forms. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7 (2020), 479--503.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  108. Amy X Zhang, Michael Muller, and Dakuo Wang. 2020. How Do Data Science Workers Collaborate? Roles, Workflows, and Tools. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 4, CSCW1 (2020), 1--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A "Distance Matters" Paradox: Facilitating Intra-Team Collaboration Can Harm Inter-Team Collaboration

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
      Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 6, Issue CSCW1
      CSCW1
      April 2022
      2511 pages
      EISSN:2573-0142
      DOI:10.1145/3530837
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 April 2022
      Published in pacmhci Volume 6, Issue CSCW1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader