CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Team Dynamics and PerformanceInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationKnowledge Management and Sharing

Collaboration Structure, Communication Media, and Problems in Scientific Work Teams

Open access
Walsh, John P., Maloney, Nancy G.·2007·Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
DOI 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00346.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article reviews the structural characteristics of work organizations that are likely to increase collaboration problems and tests the relationships between collaboration structure and problems using data from a survey of scientists in four fields (experimental biology, mathematics, physics, and sociology). Two groups of problems are identified: problems of coordination and misunderstandings and problems of cultural differences and information security. Greater coordination problems are associated with size, distance, interdependence, and scientific competition. Problems of culture and security are associated with size, distance, scientific competition, and commercialization. Email use is associated with reporting fewer coordination problems, but not fewer problems of culture and security, while neither phone use nor face-to-face meetings significantly reduces problems. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for designers of collaboration technologies and researchers involved in scientific collaborations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00346.x

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Asynchronous technology lets users take time to ask questions or craft responses, leading to efficient, focused conversations that can be quicker than other communication forms.

    “For example, asynchronous technology (e.g., text-based tools) provide provide the ability to take one's time when asking a question or crafting a response [144,261], which leads to efficient, focused conversations [77,144] that can be quicker than other forms of communication.”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [261]

    In “Communication: Face-to-face and Email,” the paper says asynchronous email gives users time to compose messages. The Conclusion suggests that answering questions without an immediate response can help scientific teams avoid the coordination costs of synchronous communication. It does not establish that taking time to compose messages leads to focused conversations or that those conversations are quicker than other forms of communication. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Geographically distributed teams experience higher levels of conflict.

    “Several researchers have concluded that geographically distributed teams experience higher levels of conflict [8,46,103,108,188,261].”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [261]

    The Conclusion reports that remote scientific collaborations are particularly prone to coordination problems and misunderstandings. That supports a related difficulty associated with geographic distance, but the paper does not report higher levels of conflict specifically. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Virtual teams encounter challenges that explicit management can help reduce.

    “Other studies showed that virtual teams face challenges that could be mitigated with explicit management [83,188,243,261].”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [261]

    The Physical Proximity section says remote scientific collaborations can face coordination, cultural, and information-security problems. The Conclusion suggests that email and tools for sharing progress may help reduce some coordination problems, but the paper does not specifically say that explicit management mitigates the challenges of virtual teams. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 22

  1. [4]4. Baker, W., & Faulkner, R. (1993) The social organization of a conspiracy. American Sociological Review, 58(6), 837-860.
  2. [7]7. Blau, P. (1977). Inequality and Heterogeneity. New York: Free Press.
  3. [23]23. Gladstein, D. (1984). A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 499-517.
  4. [27]27. Hansen, M. (1999). The search-transfer problem. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111.
  5. [29]29. Horne, C. (2001). The enforcement of norms. Social Psychology Quarterly, 64(3), 253-266.
  6. [30]30. Ibarra, H. (1998). Network assessment exercise: MBA version. Harvard Business School Press Reprint Number 9-4797-002.
  7. [33]33. Kraut, R., Egido, C., & Galegher, J. (1990). Communication in scientific research. In J. Galegher, R. Kraut, & C. Egido (Eds.) Intellectual Teamwork (pp. 149-171). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  8. [35]35. March, J. G., & Simon, H. G. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.
  9. [38]38. Owen-Smith, J. (2000). Public Science, Private Science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.
  10. [40]40. Perlow, L. (1999). The time famine. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 57-81.
  11. [41]41. Podolny, J., & Baron, J. (1997). Resources and relationships. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673-693.
  12. [43]43. Rothschild-Whitt, J. (1979). The collectivist organization. American Sociological Review, 44(4), 509-527.
  13. [44]44. Salaff, J. (2002). Where home is the office. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet in Everyday Life (pp. 464-495). Oxford: Blackwell.
  14. [45]45. Schmidt, S., & Kochan, T. (1972). Conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(3), 359-370.
  15. [46]46. Schunn, C., Crowley, K., & Okada, T. (2002). What makes collaborations across a distance succeed? In P. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed Work (pp. 407-430). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  16. [49]49. Sirianni, C. (1993). Learning pluralism. In F. Fischer & C. Sirianni (Eds.), Organization & Bureaucracy (pp. 555-570). Philadelphia: Temple.
  17. [51]51. Smith, A. (1976) [1776]. The Wealth of Nations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  18. [52]52. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  19. [53]53. Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  20. [57]57. Walsh, J., Cho, C., & Cohen, W. (2005). The view from the bench. Science, 309(5743), 2002-2003.
  21. [60]60. Walsh, J., Kucker, S., Maloney, N., & Gabbay, S. (2000). Connecting minds. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(14), 1295-1305.
  22. [61]61. Walsh, J., & Roselle, A. (1999). Computer networks and the virtual college. Science, Technology Industry Review, 24, 49-78.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Walsh, J. P., & Maloney, N. G.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
ORCID
Walsh, John P.
Venue
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2007-01-01
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
712-732
ISSN
1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00346.x
OpenAlex
W2032906242
Semantic Scholar
839b6935720dc9a386d975e45331804f96a1cb77
Cited by
114
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
8.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3165 d)
Locations
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Knowledge Management and Sharing
Keywords
research collaboration, coordination problems, cultural differences, information security, team size, geographic distance, interdependence, scientific competition, commercialization, email use, telephone use, face-to-face meetings, communication media, collaboration technologies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review