Working smarter and greener: Collaborative knowledge sharing in virtual global project teams

Abstract The purpose of this study is to explore how to facilitate the sharing of high-quality knowledge in a virtual global project team context. The most obvious finding from this study is that we can develop social interaction building up trust and share knowledge through online technology platforms without offline social interaction. The design and methodology are case studies of four Scandinavian virtual global project teams with a total of 42 team members. The survey is a longitude study in 2014-16 based upon 168 individual reports and 16 in-depth top leader interviews. Working smarter means using technology platforms for developing trust and knowledge collaboration to deliver business solutions and innovations. Working smarter mean to work in a global project team where the collaboration results develop the team into a high-performance team. Working more intelligent is sharing knowledge to improve innovation and collective and individual competence growth. Understanding that investment in top technology solutions are inexpensive compared to the results delivered by professional human resources. Working greener means to let the team members be aware of green solutions and innovations. Working greener means to travel less using the possibilities given by social technology platforms. The four teams reduced the number of trips by 50–70%. The result is less airline pollution, less stress, and more professional work.

[1]  C. Handy.  Trust and the virtual organization , 1999 .

[2]  Johan Leif Olaisen.  Toward a theory of information seeking behavior among scientists and scholars , 1984 .

[3]  Daniel Z. Levin,et al.  The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[4]  B. Dervin,et al.  Information needs and uses. , 1986 .

[5]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effectsof Interorganizational and Interpersonaltrust on Performance , 1998 .

[6]  Young-Gul Kim,et al.  Do we know what really drives KM performance? , 2007, J. Knowl. Manag..

[7]  Irene Y. L. Chen,et al.  The factors influencing members' continuance intentions in professional virtual communities — a longitudinal study , 2007, J. Inf. Sci..

[8]  M. Alvesson,et al.  Odd Couple: Making Sense of the Curious Concept of Knowledge Management , 2001 .

[9]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[10]  S. Newell,et al.  Managing Knowledge Work and Innovation , 2009 .

[11]  William Paisley,et al.  Improving a field‐based “Eric‐like” information system , 1971 .

[12]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994 .

[13]  I. Nonaka,et al.  How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation , 1995 .

[14]  James D. Thompson.  Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[15]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits , 1999 .

[16]  Eric L. Lesser,et al.  Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks , 2003 .

[17]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[18]  Ann Majchrzak,et al.  Knowledge Collaboration Among Professionals Protecting National Security: Role of Transactive Memories in Ego-Centered Knowledge Networks , 2008, Organ. Sci..

[19]  Tom Rosendahl,et al.  Internal Communication as Value Creation in a Change Process: A Case Study of Norwegian Statoil , 2014 .

[20]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[21]  Andrew Parker,et al.  The Hidden Power of Social Networks: Understanding How Work Really Gets Done in Organizations , 2004 .

[22]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[23]  Wayne F. Cascio,et al.  Managing a virtual workplace , 2000 .

[24]  B. Rosen,et al.  Overcoming Barriers to Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams , 2007 .

[25]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[26]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[27]  G. Krogh.  Care in Knowledge Creation , 1998 .

[28]  Thomas H. Davenport,et al.  Book review:Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Thomas H. Davenport and Laurence Prusak. Harvard Business School Press, 1998. $29.95US. ISBN 0‐87584‐655‐6 , 1998 .

[29]  R. Azarian,et al.  Social Ties , 2010 .

[30]  J. Katzenbach,et al.  The Wisdom of Teams , 2010 .

[31]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[32]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An integrative model of organizational trust, Academy of Management Review, : . , 1995 .

[33]  B. Delahaye,et al.  Influences On Knowledge processes In Organizational Learning: The Psychosocial Filter , 2000 .

[34]  Dong Kyoon Yoo,et al.  Knowledge quality: Antecedents and consequence in project teams , 2011, J. Knowl. Manag..

[35]  Marc H. Anderson.  Social networks and the cognitive motivation to realize network opportunities: a study of managers' information gathering behaviors , 2008 .

[36]  Robin S. Poston,et al.  Effective Use of Knowledge Management Systems: A Process Model of Content Ratings and Credibility Indicators , 2005, MIS Q..