Challenges in Virtual Collaboration

This 130-page report provides information on how the processes and outcomes of virtual, or mediated, collaborations are affected by the communication medium (videoconferencing (VC), audioconferencing (AC), or computer-mediated conferencing). "Virtual collaboration" can be defined as collaboration in which the people working together are interdependent in their tasks, share responsibility for outcomes, are geographically dispersed, and rely on mediated, rather than face-to-face (FTF), communication to produce an outcome. This paper seeks to summarise research literature that demonstrates how the processes and outcomes of virtual collaborations are affected by the communication medium. It also addresses how problems in such collaboration can be mitigated and suggests a strategy for choosing the most effective medium as a function of task and context.

One of the challenges described in this report is the fact that research on mediated communication started almost 40 years ago when AC became increasingly common in the workplace. VC came along somewhat later. Now it is easy to find that all technologies are better, and various hybrid forms of communication are common. The paper seeks to evaluate communication mediums in a highly evolving environment.

The report focuses mostly on identifying differences between mediated and FTF communications however it also covers some of the advantages found in using Group Support Software (GSS). Based on field studies, GSS is described as significantly improving "the quality and timeliness of a variety of team outcomes." Further, moving problem-solving from the individual to the group level introduces "process losses (such as socializing, domination, conformance pressure, etc.).

The authors suggest that "certain task types lend themselves better than others to computer-mediated communication (CMC). Further they describe that information exchange "seems to be almost as effective in CMC as in FTF encounters and brainstorming is improved with CMC. Conversely, FTF seems best for tasks requiring interpersonal exchange, such as when the decision requires complex thinking or negotiations, or when problems are ill defined." According to the authors, since FTF meetings are in person and improve cohesiveness, they are probably best for generating and checking commitment to a course of action.

Overall, according to the report, "the large number of study conditions, technology states, task types, group and individual variables, and mediating factors makes general conclusions about mediated communication difficult. For instance, research in FTF communication as well as CMC shows that group size affects participation and outcome. Researchers tend to use many small groups to maximize statistical power for results where the group is the unit of analysis."

Research carried out in this report is the product of the United States-based RAND Corporation and is conducted by the RAND National Defense Research Institute (a federally funded research and development centre supported by the Office of the Secretary of Defense), the Joint Staff, the unified commands, and the defense agencies. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organisation providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world.

Click here for ordering information.