This paper proposes that maintaining "mutual knowledge" is a central problem of geographically dispersed collaboration and traces the consequences of failure to do so. It presents a model of these processes which is grounded in study of thirteen geographically dispersed teams. Five types of problems constituting failures of mutual knowledge are identified: failure to communicate and retain contextual information, unevenly distributed information, difficulty communicating and understanding the salience of information, differences in speed of access to information, and difficulty interpreting the meaning of silence. The frequency of occurrence and severity of each problem in the teams are analyzed. Attribution theory, the concept of cognitive load, and feedback dynamics are harnessed to explain how dispersed partners are likely to interpret failures of mutual knowledge and the consequences of these interpretations for the integrity of the effort. In particular, it is suggested that unrecognized differences in the situations, contexts, and constraints of dispersed collaborators constitute "hidden profiles" that can increase the likelihood of dispositional rather than situational attribution, with consequences for cohesion and learning. Moderators and accelerators of these dynamics are identified, and implications for both dispersed and collocated collaboration are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

T his research examines the process through which globally distributed work teams attempt to adapt to cross-cultural differences while being constrained by the local contexts in which they are embedded. We conducted an in-depth field study of nine software development teams that included 132 ethnographic initial interviews, periods of team observation, 19 follow-up interviews, and team meetings. Inductive analysis of the data led us to develop an embedded model of cultural adaptation in global teams to describe the process we observed as teams attempted to cope with important differences in interpersonal communication styles, preferred approaches to organizational control and authority relations, and workrelated knowledge and problem-solving approaches. We show how local embeddedness and interdependence across sites together drive cultural adaptation dialectics as actors attempt to resolve rippling tensions within and across nested social structures. The model of cultural adaptation that we developed as an outcome of our research challenges literature that assumes adaptation can be contained within a team and is distinctive in incorporating a dynamic systems view of culture. We build on and develop theory concerning multilevel structuration dynamics. Our work may have implications for other types of boundary-spanning collaborations such as strategic alliances and multinational corporations.