Being There Versus Being Wired: The Effect of Colocation on Social Capital in Distributed Teams

Advancement in communication technologies continues to fuel the growth of geographically distributed teams. Managers and team members have expressed concerns about negative impacts when individuals work at a distance from each other since such changes in work structure can affect social interactions among individuals in teams. The social relationships, shared experiences, and ongoing interpersonal interactions that often arise from colocation are recognized as contributing to the social capital of individuals. In this paper, we examine how working in a distributed team, a feature that influences the extent to which team members are colocated, affects the level of individual social capital. We suggest that while social capital has been largely viewed as arising from face-to-face interactions, it can also arise from computer-mediated interactions. We focus on two measures of structural social capital: prominence and information diversity. Data from 254 members in 18 distributed teams shows that while the level of colocation influences social capital derived from face-toface interactions, it has no impact on social capital associated with computer-mediated interactions. Multilevel analysis shows that both individual and team characteristics influence face-to-face and computer-mediated social capital. These results emphasize that staff and managers in distributed teams must work together in order to create social capital that will benefit both individuals and teams.

[1]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Changing patterns or patterns of change: the effects of a change in technology on social network str , 1990 .

[2]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Taking Stock of Networks and Organizations: A Multilevel Perspective , 2004 .

[3]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  The Place of Face-to-Face Communication in Distributed Work , 2002 .

[4]  Linda L. Putnam,et al.  The New Handbook of Organizational Communication , 2001 .

[5]  L. Festinger.  Social pressures in informal groups : a study of human factors in housing / by Leon Festinger, Stanley Schachter and Kurt Back , 1950 .

[6]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[7]  Ezra W. Zuckerman,et al.  Networks, Diversity, and Productivity: The Social Capital of Corporate R&D Teams , 2001 .

[8]  G. V. D. Vegt,et al.  Informational Dissimilarity and Organizational Citizenship Behavior: The Role of Intrateam Interdependence and Team Identification , 2003 .

[9]  Norah E. Dunbar,et al.  Testing the Interactivity Principle: Effects of Mediation, Propinquity, and Verbal and Nonverbal Modalities in Interpersonal Interaction , 2002 .

[10]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Coordination in software development , 1995, CACM.

[11]  R. Burt.  The Network Structure Of Social Capital , 2000 .

[12]  E. Rosenthal,et al.  Social networks and team performance , 1997 .

[13]  Raymond T. Sparrowe,et al.  Social Networks and the Performance of Individuals and Groups , 2001 .

[14]  Dennis F. Galletta,et al.  Individual Centrality and Performance in Virtual R&D Groups: An Empirical Study , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[15]  Tora K. Bikson,et al.  The interplay of work group structures and computer support , 1990 .

[16]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  --Understanding Effects of Proximity on Collaboration : Implications for Technologies to Support Remote Collaborative Work , 2001 .

[17]  J. Gabarro.  The development of working relationships , 1990 .

[18]  Steven B. Andrews,et al.  Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition , 1995, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[19]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Distributed Work , 2002 .

[20]  Ray Reagans,et al.  Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range , 2003 .

[21]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[22]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  Electronic Groups at Work. , 1990 .

[23]  Balaji R. Koka,et al.  Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view , 2002 .

[24]  Terri L. Griffith,et al.  Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and virtual teams: From nascent knowledge to transactive memory , 1999 .

[25]  B. Pentland.  Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work , 1993 .

[26]  Thomas J. Allen,et al.  Managing the flow of technology: technology transfer and the dissemination of technological informat , 1977 .

[27]  R. Burt,et al.  Applied Network Analysis: A Methodological Introduction , 1983 .

[28]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , 1986 .

[29]  Peter R. Monge,et al.  Theories of Communication Networks , 2003 .

[30]  R. Rice,et al.  New Media and Organizational Structuring , 2001 .

[31]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Understanding Effects of Proximity on Collaboration: Implications for Technologies to Support Remote Collaborative Work , 2002 .

[32]  J. Coleman,et al.  Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital , 1988, American Journal of Sociology.

[33]  G. Lawrence Zahn,et al.  Face-to-Face Communication in an Office Setting , 1991 .

[34]  Daniel J. Brass.  Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization. , 1984 .

[35]  Bonnie A. Nardi and Steve Whittaker.  The Place of Face-to-Face Communication in Distributed Work , 2002 .

[36]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[37]  C. Cramton.  The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[38]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  What Do We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research , 2002 .