Collaboration Engineering for Interdisciplinary Teams

Many organizations depend on group processes, and collaboration in particular, as a foundation for successful business activities. However, c ollaboration presents its own challenges that can reduce a t eam’s performance, with teams sometimes suffering from disagreements over the team’s purpose and goals, poor communication , or any of a host of other problems. These difficulties are exacerbated when teams are composed of people from diverse academic disci plines. This study examines the background of group processes and collaboration to better understand challenges specific to interdisciplinary groups. It then applies this understanding to engineer a collaborative process for planning interdisciplinary res earch and development initiatives for an exemplar organization that depends heavily on interdisciplinary teams and generalizes the lessons learned from that effort.

[1]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Group Cohesiveness and Quality of Decision Making , 1994 .

[2]  David A. Kravitz,et al.  Ringelmann rediscovered: the original article , 1986 .

[3]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  ELECTRONIC BRAINSTORMING AND GROUP SIZE , 1992 .

[4]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Structuring Time and Task in Electronic Brainstorming , 1999, MIS Q..

[5]  I. Janis.  Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes , 1982 .

[6]  Vincent R. Brown,et al.  Making Group Brainstorming More Effective: Recommendations From an Associative Memory Perspective , 2002 .

[7]  G. Susman,et al.  An Assessment of the Scientific Merits of Action Research. , 1978 .

[8]  J. Valacich,et al.  Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups , 1990 .

[9]  A. H. Schainblatt,et al.  The Researcher and The Manager: A Dialectic of Implementation , 1965 .

[10]  John L. Dettbarn,et al.  Cost Analysis of Inadequate Interoperability in the U.S. Capital Facilities Industry. , 2004 .

[11]  Sharon J. Derry,et al.  Cognitive Processes in Interdisciplinary Groups: Problems and Possibilities , 1997 .

[12]  A. Ingham,et al.  The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and group performance , 1974 .

[13]  Kipling D. Williams,et al.  Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes Social Loafing: a Meta-analytic Review and Theoretical Integration , 2022 .

[14]  E. Salas,et al.  Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. , 1991 .

[15]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Collaboration Engineering with ThinkLets to Pursue Sustained Success with Group Support Systems , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Christopher P. Neck,et al.  Group Decision Fiascoes Continue: Space Shuttle Challenger and a Revised Groupthink Framework , 1991 .

[17]  A. Pinsonneault,et al.  The effects of electronic meetings on group processes and outcomes: An assessment of the empirical research , 1990 .

[18]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  Collaboration Engineering: Designing Repeatable Processes for High-Value Collaborative Tasks , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[19]  Douglas L. Dean,et al.  Making the Collaboration Engineering Investment Decision , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).