𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Distributed teamwork: The impact of communication media on influence and decision quality

✍ Scribed by Citera, Maryalice


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1998
Tongue
English
Weight
74 KB
Volume
49
Category
Article
ISSN
0002-8231

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Differences in individual influence and decision quality another. Organizations are relying more and more on disacross communication media were examined. Two comtributed work teams to adapt to rapidly changing environpeting hypotheses were contrasted. One hypothesis ments (increased global competition, technological adsuggested that changes in influence across media may vances, managing multinational concerns). Distributed be due to a reduction in evaluation apprehension. If the work teams are those that are physically separated by evaluation apprehension hypothesis is correct, participants who dominate face-to-face conversations would distance, but still share responsibility for achieving their maintain their level of influence across media conditions, group's goals or mission. while less dominating individuals would exert greater in-Physical proximity plays an important role in collabofluence over less immediate types of media (telephone, ration and coordination of work teams. When team memcomputer) than face-to-face. Alternatively, changes in influence may be due to a free riding effect. If the free bers are physically located near each other, the frequency riding hypothesis was true, dominating members would of communication increases, amount of informal contact reduce their level of influence over less immediate meis greater, and the potential for chance meeting in the dia, while less dominating members would maintain their halls increases (Kraut, Egido, & Galegher, 1990). In an level of influence across media conditions. Decision investigation of scientific collaboration, Kraut et al. quality was predicted to depend on the effect of communication media on influence. Sixty-four introductory psy-(1990) found that scientists were more likely to collabochology students, grouped in pairs, performed 3 survival rate with other scientists whose offices were located on tasks on 3 different communication media (i.e., facethe same corridor and floor, as compared to those with to-face, telephone, computer). The results showed that offices on different floors or in other buildings. Physical influence for dominating participants remained stable across the 3 media conditions. Less dominating partici-proximity was shown to have independent effects on colpants, on the other hand, had higher levels of influence laboration above those explained by organizational proxin the telephone and computer conditions than in the imity (i.e., being in the same department) or by similarity face-to-face condition. Influence for less dominating of research interests. Their results also showed that the participants, however, did not differ between telephone frequency of communication during both the planning and computer-mediated conditions. Furthermore, quality of decision did not differ across communication meand writing stages of the project was related to physical dia. These findings indicate that media differences may proximity. The closer two collaborators' offices were, the be more complex than previous models suggest. more frequent was their communication. The lack of physical proximity poses some potential problems for distributed work teams: (a) Less frequent interaction, (b)