Effects of social identity processes on coordination and knowledge sharing in geographically distributed software teams

Journal of Information and Knowledge Management

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 281-296

  Gokakkar, Raghavendra ^a  

^a Citi Markets and Banking Technology   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

coordination and knowledge sharing; distributed work; In group; out group; social categorisation; social identity; virtual teams

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861665917     PISSN: 02196492     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S0219649207001858     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abrams, D (1996). Social identity, self as structure and self as process. In Social Groups and Identities, WP Robinson (ed.), (pp. 143-168) Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
2. Alavi, M and A Tiwana (2001). Knowledge integration in virtual teams: The potential role of KMS. Goizueta Business School Paper Series, Atlanta, GA: Emory University.
3. Ashforth, BE and F Mael (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.
4. Balaji, S, MK Ahuja et al. (2006). Offshore software projects: Assessing the effect of knowledge transfer requirements and ISD capability. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE.
5. Bartel, C (2001). Social comparisons in boundary spanning work: Effects of community outreach on memebers' organizational identity and identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(3), 379-413. (Pubitemid 33385890)
6. Berntsen, K, J Sampson et al. (2005). Interpretive research methods in computer science. In Proceedings of the 28th Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, 6-9 August 2005, Kristiansand, Norway.
7. Bettencourt, BA, KE Dill et al. (1997). Evaluations of ingroup and outgroup members: The role of categorybased expectancy violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 244-275.
8. Bos, N, NS Shami et al. (2004). In-group/out-group effects in distributed teams: An experimental simulation. In Proceedings of CSCW'04, 6-10 November 2004, Chicago, IL, USA.
9. Clark, H and C Marshall (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Elements of Discourse Understanding, AK Joshi, BL Webber and IA Sag (eds.), pp. 10-63. NY: Cambridge University Press.
10. Cooper, WW and ML Muench (1997). Virtual organizations: Practice and the literature. Working paper, University of Texas at Austin.
11. Cramton, CD (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.
12. Creswell, JW (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
13. Ellemers, N, R Spears et al. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: Ingroup identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 617-627.
14. Espinosa, JA and C Pickering (2006). The effect of time separation on coordination processes and outcomes: A case study. In Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
15. Faraj, S and L Sproull (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46(12), 1554-1568. (Pubitemid 32138391)
16. Fiske, ST and SL Neuberg (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, MP Zanna (ed.), p. 23. San Diago, CA: Academy Press.
17. Ford, TE and GR Tonander (1998). The role of differentiation between groups and social identity in stereotype formation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(4), 372-384. (Pubitemid 128376891)
18. Fox, S and H Giles (1996). Let the wheelchair through! An intergroup approach to interability communication. In Social Groups and Identities, WP Robinson (ed.), pp. 215-248. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
19. Gaertner, SL, JF Dovidio et al. (1996). Revisiting the contact hypothesis: The induction of a common ingroup identity. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20(3), 271-290. (Pubitemid 126174845)
20. Hildreth, P, C Kimble and P Wright (2000). Communities of practice in the distributed International environment. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(1), 27-38.
21. Hindess, B (1989). Political Choice and Social Strucutre. Aldershot: Edward-Elgar.
22. Hinds, PJ and DE Bailey (2003). Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed team. Organization Science, 14(6), 615-632.
23. Hogg, MA and DJ Terry (2001). Social identity and selfcategorization processes in organizational contexts. In The Academy of Management Review, MA Hogg and DJ Terry (eds.), pp. 1-12. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
24. Hogg, M (1996). Intragroup processes, group structure and social identity. In Social Groups and Identities, WP Robinson (ed.), pp. 65-94. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
25. Howard, A (2002). Rapid application development: Rough and dirty or value-for-money engineering Communications of the ACM, 45(10), 27-29.
26. Huang, H and R Ocker (2006). Preliminary insights into the in-group/out-group effect in partially distributed teams: An analysis of participant reflections. In SIGMIS-CPR'06, pp. 264-272. (Pubitemid 44032486)
27. Huddy, L (2002). Context and meaning in social identity theory: A response to oakes. Political Psychology, 23(4), 825-838. (Pubitemid 36016539)
28. Jarvenpaa, S and D Leidner (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.
29. Kennedy, MM (1979). Generalizing from single case studies. Evaluation Quarterly, 3, 661-678.
30. Kling, R (1991). Cooperation, coordination and control in comupter-supported cooperative work. Communications of the ACM, 34(12), 83-88.
31. Knoll, K and S Jarvenpaa (1995). Learning to work in distributed global teams. In Proceedings of the 28th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
32. Larsson, A (2003). Making sense of collaboration: The challenge of thinking together in global design teams. In Proceedings of GROUP'03, November 9-12, 2003, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA, ACM.
33. Lau, D and K Murnighan (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 325-340.
34. Lave, J and E Wenger (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35. Maki-Komsi, S, P Poyry et al. (2005). Learning and knowledge building in distributed work environment. Journal of Organizational Virtualness, 7. http://www.ejov.org/[14 July 2007].
36. Malone, T, J Yates et al. (1987). Electronic markets and hierarchies. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 484-497.
37. Nelson, RE (1989). The strength of social ties: Social networks and intergroup conflict in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 377-401.
38. Oakes, PJ, SA Haslam et al. (1995). Becoming an in-group: Reexamining the impact of familiarity on perceptions on group homogeneity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(1), 52-60.
39. Orlikowski,WJ and JJ Baroudi (1991). Studying information technology in organizations: Research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2, 1-28.
40. Pan, SL and DE Leidner (2003). Bridging communities of practice with information technology in pursuit of global knowledge sharing. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 12(1), 71-88.
41. Pather, S and D Remenyi (2004). Some of the philosophical issues underpinning research in information systems: From positivism to critical realism. In Proceedings of the 2004 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries, Stellenbosch, Western Cape, South Africa.
42. Polzer, J (2004). How subgroup interests and reputations moderate the effect of organizational identification on cooperation. Journal of Management.
43. Postmes, T, R Spears et al. (1999). Social identity, normative content, and 'deindividuation' in computermediated groups. In Social Identity. N. Ellemers, R. Spears and B. Doosje. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers: 164-183.
44. Preston, MG (1948). Concerning an essential condition of cooperative work. Philosophy of Science, 15(2), 96-99.
45. Rockart, JF and JE Short (1991). The networked organization and management of interdependence. In The Corporation of the 1990s, pp. 189-219. New York: Oxford University Press.
46. Sarker, S (2005). Knowledge transfer and collaboration in distributed U.S.-Thai teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(4).
47. Sharma, R and S Krishna (2003). Structuring coordination and communication in global software work. IS Perspectives & Challenges in the Context of Globalization.
48. Sole, D and L Applegate (2000). Knowledge sharing practices and technology use norms in dispersed development teams. In Proceedings of the Twenty First International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 581-587.
49. Sole, D and A Edmondson (2002). Bridging knowledge gaps: Learning in geographically dispersed crossfunctional teams. In Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, MCW Choo and N Bontis (eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.
50. Stets, JE and PJ Burke (2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), 224-237.
51. Tajfel, H (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
52. Toth, J (1994). The effects of interactive graphics and text on social influence in computer-mediated small groups. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 299-310.
53. Walsham, G (1995). The Emergence of interpretivism in IS research. Information Systems Research, 6(4), 376-394. (Pubitemid 126102972)
54. Wenger, E (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225-246.
55. Yin, RK (1981). The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 58-65.