This special thematic section of the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication brings together seven articles that consider what it takes to collaborate around and through information and communication technologies. The authors consider how processes co-evolve between practices and technical systems, how knowledge is shared across organizational, cultural and geographic boundaries, how conversation via the informal medium of Instant Messaging is being adopted into organizational practices, what motivates participation in large distributed computing projects, and how computer media can change the nature of interactivity in classrooms. The articles cover a range of applications and settings; as a collection, they draw our attention to the broad interpretation that can be giving to the meaning of collaboration.
Computer-mediated collaboration has become an important issue due to several trends that change how we go about organizational and academic work. First, the increased use of computer media for daily communication leads to more online activity even with local colleagues. Communication via computer media is also complemented by multiple forms of data repository, including databases, digital libraries, and information stored and disseminated via the web. The combined use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) and information technologies (IT) presents new challenges in work practice, including adopting new forms of interpersonal interaction (e.g., email and instant messaging), new information exchange practices (e.g., packaging information to fit database fields, and depositing information online), and new timings of work interaction (e.g., working asynchronously via CMC).
Second, the reach of the Internet opens up and drives collaborations between people separated by geographic distance. As work expands globally, so do differences in the culture, language, background, and work practices of those who are collaborating. Working across these divides is a challenge when they are evident, but many times collaborators are unprepared for such differences. In developing their joint work practices, they are first discovering differences and then learning and adopting ways of working with these differences (Haythornthwaite, 2004; Haythornthwaite, Lunsford, Bowker & Bruce, in press; Haythornthwaite, Lunsford, Kazmer, Robins & Nazarova, 2003).
Third, many new kinds of research and organizational practice require combining expertise across divisions of labor, academic disciplinary practices, and communities of practice. Bridging job classifications, disciplines and communities involves pooling and sharing knowledge about others' work practices, as well as creating common knowledge (Haythornthwaite, Lunsford, Bowker & Bruce, in press; Orlikowski, 2002). The need to cross such divisions has drawn attention to the issues of knowledge transfer, including how to make tacit knowledge explicit (e.g., Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995), and how we work with the knowledge we have, testing it against the "facilities and frustrations" of the world (Cook & Brown, 1999, p. 389).
Challenges for this kind of work involve creating a "third space" (Oldenburg, 1989; see also Gutiérrez, Baquedano-Lopez & Tejeda, 2000) where new vocabularies and shared meanings are determined. Such spaces also allow other kinds of learning, e.g., about "who knows what" (Hollingshead, 2001; Moreland, 1999). They also allow practices to be developed and shared, partly by design and partly by the interaction of co-workers with the "facilities and frustrations" of each others' viewpoints, the technology they work with, and the problems they are dealing with. This is not a one-off, static process, but a continuous evolution of practices as people interact with work, learning, and knowledge demands and balance these with who and what resources they work with and through.
The articles in this thematic collection address the evolutionary nature of collaboration with and through computer media, and with other people both local and remotely located. The issue of understanding the evolution of new practices, based on computer media and confounded with distributions in geography, culture and knowledge, is at the heart of each of the articles presented here. The examination of computer-mediated collaborative practices builds on work in many areas, including computer-mediated communication, social informatics, computer-supported cooperative work, and knowledge management, but is characterized by attention to interactive processes that lead to shared and emergent knowledge and practices. The articles were chosen for the breadth of issues they address as well as for their discussion of fundamental issues in sharing knowledge, creating common understanding, and developing effective, shared work practices mediated through computer technologies.
In the first article of this collection, Factors Influencing the Co-Evolution of Computer-Mediated Collaborative Practices and Systems: A Museum Case Study, author Paul Marty suggests that to understand computer-mediated collaborative systems, it is important, if not essential, to look at how collaborative workers use simple computer-mediated technologies to support the co-evolution of systems and practices. This article introduces us to the difficult, but vital need to consider the co-evolution of systems and user needs. Supported by a comprehensive review of key points and literature in the area, and an in-depth longitudinal study of work practices, Marty present us with a rich description of the co-evolution of practices and information systems that supported the inventory management, packing, and shipping of museum artifacts during a move from old to new facilities. Marty suggests that by examining systems where the "normally transparent differences between systems and practice become visible," it is possible to come to understand co-evolution and apply this knowledge toward new paradigms of system design.
From packing, we turn to conversing, but remain with the evolution of practices. Anabel Quan-Haase, Joseph Cothrel and Barry Wellman, in their article Instant Messaging for Collaboration: A Case Study of a High-Tech Firm, examine how Instant Messaging (IM) is being appropriated in work settings. This is a theme revisited later in the article by Cho et al. As Quan-Haase et al. find, this technology, with its rapid access and continuous visibility, becomes a way to collaborate, but also a means of monitoring. Quan-Haase et al. find that co-workers collect in "local virtualities" where people who are co-located nonetheless create networks of collaboration supported via computer media. At the same time, the technology that affords connectivity with co-workers also enables strategies for individuals to distance themselves from others, e.g., from their superiors. Overall the authors find that the three factors of visibility, awareness, and accountability are important in describing how IM plays out in the organization they studied.
The article by Susan Gasson, The Dynamics of Sensemaking, Knowledge and Expertise in Collaborative, Boundary-Spanning Design, gives us a detailed examination of issues of knowledge sharing during the collaborative process. In an in-depth qualitative study, Gasson explores the nature of collaboration, its component knowledge and how boundaries are crossed. The article presents a case study of cross-boundary collaboration as managers worked together to improve a customer bid response process. Again we see the way the process of knowledge co-construction evolves. Gasson finds that these managers engage in four stages of sensemaking, which shows how different knowledge and skills are valued at different times by the group. These stages include: focus on defining shared goals; acknowledging and sharing tacit knowledge about organizational practice; identifying external influences; and explicit knowledge generation. Her results reveal tensions between pooling expertise and collective learning, and between elicitation and sharing of knowledge internal and external to the group. Overall, Gasson found the groups produced a shared concept space, created through "co-construction of a socially-situated, organizational 'knowledge-world' between multiple communities of practice."
In her article Knowledge Transfer and Collaboration in Distributed US-Thai Teams, Saonee Sarker tackles an issue of increasing relevance as we work across national boundaries: how cultural differences affect our ability to collaborate. In an experimental setting, Sarker tests the impact of four factors on collaboration: capability, credibility, communication, and culture of the source. The study compares collaborations in teams distributed both geographically and culturally between the U.S. and Thailand, in which members were engaged in an information systems development task. Results indicate that individuals are perceived to be effective at knowledge transfer if they communicate frequently (in this case via electronic means), and are perceived as credible by exhibiting both trustworthy behaviors and high performance with respect to the systems design process. The culture of the source affected perceptions of the amount of knowledge transferred for the distributed teams, with an unexpected result that transfer was more from those considered to belong to an individualist culture (U.S.) than a collectivist culture (Thai).
Anne Holohan and Anurag Garg, in their article Collaboration Online: The Example of Distributed Computing, turn their attention to yet another aspect of online collaboration, that of participation in large distributed computing projects. The authors explore what motivates such collaboration, which involves altruistic donation of spare computer cycles to the accomplishment of other's work. As the authors explain, the technical challenge is to slice a problem into distributable pieces, but there is also the social challenge of finding and encouraging people to allow these applications to run on their computers. Through a survey and interviews, the authors examine motivations for participation, and explore how the network organization form is sustained in such projects. They find that what primarily drives participation is a desire to contribute to scientific research. This is augmented by a feeling that their contribution is important and unique when they view statistical tables about contribution available through the Internet. Overall the article ties the network organization form to issues of collaborative practice.
The collection concludes with two articles that examine collaboration using new kinds of visualizations to show the kinds of complex phenomena that exist and need to be considered when exploring collaborative practices.
Hee-Kyung Cho, Matthias Trier, and Eunhee Kim, in their article The Use of Instant Messaging in Working Relationship Development: A Case Study, further the examination of Instant Messaging in work settings begun in the article by Quan-Haase et al. The authors examine the effectiveness of IM in improving work relations and ask whether the "spontaneous and informal conversation of IM can be used in more formal work environments." They find it can, and that both within and across departments, employees of a Korean tire manufacturing organization felt IM improved working relations, although usage was greater within departments. Results of an employee survey are followed by an in-depth look at communication and IM use by two employees with different and distinct job roles. One is a member of an eight-person marketing strategy team, and the other a member of a five-person computing system development and support team. These two employees' communications are presented in compelling visual images of their egocentric networks. The study suggests what kind of information can be derived from such examinations as well as presenting ways of sharing that information with readers, and potentially with organization members.
Last but not least, Mia Lobel, Michael Neubauer and Randy Swedburg explore how collaboration and interactivity are affected in the context of online learning by differences in what media allow in terms of turn taking. Their article Comparing How Students Collaborate to Learn About the Self and Relationships in a Real-Time Non-Turn-Taking Online and Turn-Taking Face-to-Face Environment compares a face-to-face and online class taught by the same instructor on the same topic. Like Cho et al., Lobel et al. use visualizations to demonstrate aspects of interaction that contribute to collaborative practices. Using the GUIDATA program developed by two of the authors, they present a number of aspects of online interaction that would otherwise be invisible to participants and invite us to consider these aspects when exploring online collaborations in an online learning setting.
Together, these articles on computer-mediated collaborative practices show the interactions among the evolution of practice, the exchange of knowledge, and the use of computer media. Each article highlights the invisible work (Star & Strauss, 1999) of computer-mediated collaboration, i.e., the work of learning how to collaborate via computer media and evolve shared work and communication practices around and through information and communication technologies. Future work should extend and continue the evolution of computer-mediated collaborative practices, providing more cases on the interaction of people, practice and technology, extending the principles that underpin this kind of interaction, and demonstrating the impact of these practices through new approaches to measuring, collecting and communicating data on distributed practices.
Cook, S. D. N., & Brow, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10 (4), 381-400.
Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejeda, C. (2000). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, & Activity: An International Journal, 6 (4), 286-303.
Haythornthwaite, C. (May 2004). Communicating knowledge: Articulating divides in distributed knowledge practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
Haythornthwaite, C., Lunsford, K. J., Bowker, G. C., & Bruce, B. (in press). Challenges for research and practice in distributed, interdisciplinary, collaboration. To appear in C. Hine, (Ed.), New infrastructures for science knowledge production. Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Haythornthwaite, C., Lunsford, K. J., Kazmer, M. M., Robins, J., & Nazarova, M. (2003). The generative dance in pursuit of generative knowledge. Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
Hollingshead, A. (2001). Cognitive interdependence and convergent expectations in transactive memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (6), 1080-1089.
Moreland, R. (1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In L. Thompson, J. Levine, & D. Messick (Eds.), Shared Cognition in Organizations (pp. 3-31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nonaka, H., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. London: Oxford University Press.
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place: Cafés, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. NY: Paragon House.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13 (3), 249-273.
Star, S. L. & Strauss, A. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8 (1-2), 9-30.
is Associate Professor at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her research examines how the Internet and computer media support work and social interactions among members of online learning and work communities. Books include The Internet in Everyday Life (co-edited with Barry Wellman, Blackwells, 2002); Learning, Culture and Community in Online Education: Research and Practice (co-edited with Michelle M. Kazmer, Peter Lang, 2004); and she is working on a Handbook of Elearning Research (with Richard Andrews, Sage, 2007).
Address: Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 501 East Daniel St., Champaign, IL, 61820 USA