Collocation blindness in partially distributed groups: is there a downside to being collocated?

Under what circumstances might a group member be better off as a long-distance participant rather than collocated? We ran a set of experiments to study how partially-distributed groups collaborate when skill sets are unequally distributed. Partially distributed groups are those where some collaborators work together in the same space (collocated) and some work remotely using computer-mediated communications. Previous experiments had shown that these groups tend to form semi-autonomous 'in-groups'. In this set of experiments the configuration was changed so that some player skills were located only in the collocated space, and some were located only remotely, creating local surplus of some skills and local scarcity of others in the collocated room. Players whose skills were locally in surplus performed significantly worse. They experienced 'collocation blindness' and failed to pay enough attention to collaborators outside of the room. In contrast, the remote players whose skills were scarce inside the collocated room did particularly well because they charged a high price for their skills.

[1]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Rapid Software Development through Team Collocation , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[2]  S. Hsi,et al.  Productive Discussion in Science: Gender Equity Through Electronic Discourse , 1997 .

[3]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration , 1990, CSCW '88.

[4]  F. Belanger,et al.  Communication patterns in distributed work groups: a network analysis , 1999 .

[5]  Audris Mockus,et al.  Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration , 2000, CSCW '00.

[6]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[7]  N. Sadat Shami,et al.  In-group/out-group effects in distributed teams: an experimental simulation , 2004, CSCW.

[8]  Jonathan Pool,et al.  Coalition formation in small groups with incomplete communication networks. , 1976 .

[9]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development , 2002, CHI.

[10]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work , 1990 .

[11]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[12]  Raymond R. Panko,et al.  Project teams: profiles and member perceptions-implications for group support system research and products , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[13]  Shelly Farnham,et al.  Decreasing online 'bad' behavior , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[14]  Michelle LaBrosse,et al.  Managing virtual teams , 2008 .