Building bridges – identifying generational communication characteristics to facilitate engineering collaboration and knowledge transfer across field-practicing engineers

Pilotte, Mary K.; Evangelou, Demetra

doi:10.1080/19378629.2011.653976

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The salience of spatial and temporal boundaries in cross‐national/cultural engineering work has also been referenced in some of this work. Furthermore, studies focused on gender dynamics in the context of technical work seem to be relatively more prominent in the engineering education literature (e.g., Faulkner, ), and recent research on generational boundaries in the engineering workplace is also worth mentioning (Pilotte & Evangelou, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boundary Spanning and Engineering: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Jesiek

Mazzurco

Buswell

et al. 2018

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Engineers are often expected to span organizational, cultural, stakeholder, geographic, temporal, and other boundaries. Yet, few studies on boundary spanning have appeared in the engineering education literature, suggesting the need for improved theoretical and conceptual foundations to guide empirical studies of boundary spanning in engineering. Purpose To develop a more comprehensive understanding of boundary spanning, this study addresses five research questions: (a) What types of boundaries have been identified as topics of interest? (b) How are boundary spanners and boundary spanning defined? (c) What types of activities and behaviors comprise or have been linked to boundary spanning? (d) What individual competencies and characteristics have been proposed or studied as important for boundary spanning? and (e) What boundary spanning themes are most prominent in studies of engineers and other technical professionals? Scope/Method Using a qualitative systematic review process, we identified and analyzed 72 scholarly papers from multiple disciplines. Multiple reviewers coded each paper using a hybrid deductive‐inductive content analysis process to identify key themes related to boundary spanning. Conclusions The analysis resulted in a framework consisting of six boundary types, three types of roles and definitions, and five types of activities. Discussion of boundary spanning competencies was limited in the collected works, and only seven papers exclusively focused on engineers. We conclude by proposing boundary spanning as an important meta‐attribute for engineers and a promising lens for investigating engineering practice. We also relate our findings to the engineering education literature and suggest directions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boundary Spanning and Engineering: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Jesiek

Mazzurco

Buswell

et al. 2018

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the Web of Knowledge in September 2014, Spitzberg's article has been cited only nine times (Bowman, Westerman, and Claus 2012;Gimenez 2014;Livingstone and Helsper 2010;Ogata et al 2012;Pilotte and Evangelou 2012;Rains and Young 2006;Rubin et al 2011;Sutcliffe et al 2011;Svensson and Westelius 2013) with none of these articles focusing specifically on theory development or testing. Of course, the Web of Science does not include all existing journals, especially not international journals, but compared to the vast body of literature that exists in the general area, it is clear that much work remains to be done on the development and testing of theoretical CMC competence paradigms.…”

Section: Lack Of Theory Developmentmentioning

confidence: 96%

7. Computer-mediated communication competence

Bunz¹,

Montez²

2015

Communication Competence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chapter reviews the historical development of computer-mediated communication competence research, introducing key figures and terminology. Researchers' variations in both conceptualization and operationalization are discussed and early theoretical models are presented. The chapter continues by reviewing ten related concepts (applied skill; cognitive aspects; communication ability; demographics; emotional and psychological factors; methodology; social context; structural resources; technological context; usage experience) and recent research trends within these broader categories. After discussing the limited theory development work in the area compared to the abundance of methodologicallyoriented contributions, the chapter concludes by making recommendations for future work in the area. These include the need for more consistent terminology, as well as for more theory-based research.

show abstract

“…In this study, intergenerational innovation is understood as a shared work-related endeavor between younger and senior adults with an age difference of around 20 years [11,50]. The disparity in years may be a potential source of technological discrepancies that hinder collaboration [50].…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Sociotechnical Design Preferences of Chatbots for Intergenerational Collaborative Innovation: A Q Methodology Study

Nurhas

Jahanbin

Pawlowski

et al. 2022

Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chatbot technology is increasingly emerging as a virtual assistant. Chatbots could allow individuals and organizations to accomplish objectives that are currently not fully optimized for collaboration across an intergenerational context. This paper explores the preferences of chatbots as a companion in intergenerational innovation. The Q methodology was used to investigate different types of collaborators and determine how different choices occur between collaborators that merge the problem and solution domains of chatbots’ design within intergenerational settings. The study’s findings reveal that various chatbot design priorities are more diverse among younger adults than senior adults. Additionally, our research further outlines the principles of chatbot design and how chatbots will support both generations. This research is the first step towards cultivating a deeper understanding of different age groups’ subjective design preferences for chatbots functioning as a companion in the workplace. Moreover, this study demonstrates how the Q methodology can guide technological development by shifting the approach from an age-focused design to a common goal-oriented design within a multigenerational context.

show abstract

Building bridges – identifying generational communication characteristics to facilitate engineering collaboration and knowledge transfer across field-practicing engineers

Cited by 9 publications

References 20 publications

Boundary Spanning and Engineering: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Boundary Spanning and Engineering: A Qualitative Systematic Review

7. Computer-mediated communication competence

Patterns of Sociotechnical Design Preferences of Chatbots for Intergenerational Collaborative Innovation: A Q Methodology Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About