Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:06:21.328Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing Typical Challenges Affecting Idea Sharing in Distributed Design Teams Today

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2022

E. A. Dekoninck  and
C. Brenninkmeijer
E. A. Dekoninck*
Affiliation:
University of Bath, United Kingdom
C. Brenninkmeijer
Affiliation:
University of Bath, United Kingdom
*
[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The aim of this study was to compare behaviours in distributed design teams today to the existing literature to see if previously identified challenges faced by distributed teams have been overcome. Recordings of teams’ online idea sharing sessions were transcribed and split into idea sharing instances (units). A scoring system analysed the effectiveness of each unit. Having a clear structure with formal idea discussion, an assertive leader, and no time limits led to higher scores. Whilst instances of informal speaking and the wide variety of tools used had no link to the unit scores.

Keywords

design teamsdistributed designcollaborative designidea sharingchallenges of remote collaboration
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 2: DESIGN2022 , May 2022 , pp. 131 - 140
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2022.

References

Alnuaimi, O.A., Robert, L.P., & Maruping, L.M., (2010). Team Size, Dispersion, and Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Teams: A Perspective on the Theory of Moral Disengagement. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(1), pp.203–230.Google Scholar
Berry, G.R., (2011). Enhancing Effectiveness on Virtual Teams. Journal of Business Communication, 48(2), pp.186–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blessing, L.T.M., & Chakrabarti, A., (2009). DRM, a Design Research Methodology. London: Springer Verlag London Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewer, P.E., (2015). International Virtual Teams: Engineering Global Success. New Jersey: IEEE Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cash, P., Dekoninck, E.A., & Ahmed-Kristensen, S., (2017). Supporting the development of shared understanding in distributed design teams. Journal of Engineering Design, 28(3), pp.147–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, A., (2007). The enactment of design through language. Design studies, 28(1), pp.5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, G., & Tatsa, D., (2005). How good are good ideas? Correlates of design creativity. Design studies, 26(6), pp.593–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatcher, G., Ion, W., & Maclachlan, R., (2018). Using linkography to compare creative methods for group ideation. Design Studies, 58, pp.127–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C.B., Tesluk, P.E., & McPheison, S.O., (2002). Five Challenges to Virtual Team Success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. The Academy of Management executive, 16(3), pp.67–79.Google Scholar
Qu, Y., & Hansen, D.L., (2008). Building Shared Understanding in Collaborative Sensemaking. Proceedings of the workshop on sensemaking at the conference on human factors in computing systems, 6th April 2008, Florence, Italy.Google Scholar
Rosen, B., Furst, S., & Blackburn, R., (2007). Overcoming Barriers to Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams. Organizational Dynamics, 36(3), pp.259–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J.J., & Vargas-Hernandez, N., (2003). Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness. Design studies, 24(2), pp.111–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonalkar, N., (2012). A Visual Representation To Characterize Moment-to-Moment Concept Generation Through Interpersonal Interactions in Engineering Design Teams. Thesis (Ph.D). Stanford University.Google Scholar
Sosa, M.E., & Eppinger, S.D., (2002). Factors That Influence Technical Communication in Distributed Product Development: An Empirical Study in the Telecommunications Industry. IEEE transactions on engineering management, 49(1), pp.45–58.Google Scholar
Stempfle, J., & Badke-Schaub, P., (2002). Thinking in design teams - an analysis of team communication. Design Studies, 23(5), pp.473–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suchan, J., (2001). The Communication Characteristics of Virtual Teams: A Case Study. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 44(3), pp.174–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Lugt, R., (2005). How sketching can affect the idea generation process in design group meetings. Design studies, 26(2), pp.101–122.Google Scholar