The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration

References

• Arthur M., Rousseau D. A new career lexicon for the 21st century. Acad. Management Executive (1996) 10(4):28–39Google Scholar
• Armstrong D., Cole P., Jackson S., Ruderman M. Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. Diversity in Work Teams (1995) (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC) 187–216Google Scholar
• Blakar R. An experimental method for inquiring into communication. European J. Social Psych. (1973) 3:415–425Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blakar R.Communication: A Social Perspective on Clinical Issues (1984) (Columbia, New York) Google Scholar
• Blakar R., Giles H., Clair R. St. Towards a theory of communication in terms of preconditions: A conceptual framework and some empirical explorations. Recent Advances in Language, Communication, and Social Psychology (1985) (Lawrence Erlbaum, London, U.K.) 10–40Google Scholar
• Bowen M.Family Therapy in Clinical Practice (1985) (Jason Aronson, Northvale NJ) Google Scholar
• Boudreau M., Loch K., Robey D., Straud D. Going global: Using information technology to advance the competitiveness of the virtual transnational organization. Acad. Management Executive (1998) 12(4):120–128Google Scholar
• Brennan S., Fussell S., Kreuz R. The grounding problem in conversations with and through computers. Social and Cognitive Approaches to Interpersonal Communication (1998) (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ) 210–225Google Scholar
• Brewer M., Worchel W., Austin W. The role of ethnocentrism in intergroup conflict. Psychology of Intergroup Relations (1986) (Nelson, Chicago, IL) 88–102Google Scholar
• Clark H.Using Language (1996) (Cambridge University Press, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark H., Carlson T., Smith N. Speech acts and hearer's beliefs. Mutual Knowledge (1982) (Academic Press, New York) 1–36Google Scholar
• Clark H., Marshall C., Joshi A., Sag I., Webber B. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. Elements of Discourse Understanding (1981) (Cambridge University Press, New York) 10–63Google Scholar
• Coulam R., Smith R., Coulam R., Smith R. Introduction. Advances in Information Processing in Organizations (1985) 2(JAI Press, Stamford, CT) 1–19Google Scholar
• Dennis A. Information exchange and use in small group decision making. Small Group Res. (1996) 27(4):532–549Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dennis A., Pootheri S., Natarajan V. (1996) . Available from: http://tcbworks.cba.uga.edu/Google Scholar
• DeSanctis G., Poole M. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organ. Sci. (1994) 5(2):121–147Link, Google Scholar
• DeSanctis G., Poole M. Transitions in teamwork in new organizational forms. Advances in Group Processes (1997) 14(JAI Press, Stamford, CT) 157–176Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt K. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Management Rev. (1989) 14(4):532–550Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsbach K., Sutton R. Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Acad. Management J. (1992) 35:699–738Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fussell S., Krauss R. Coordination of knowledge in communication: Effects of speakers' assumptions about what others know. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1992) 62(3):378–391Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gersick C. Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Acad. Management J. (1988) 31:9–41Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert D., Hixon J. The trouble with thinking: Activation and application of stereotypic beliefs. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1991) 60(4):509–517Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert D., Osborne R. Thinking backward: Some curable and incurable consequences of cognitive busyness. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1989) 57(6):940–949Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert D., Pelham B., Krull D. On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1988) 54(5):733–740Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goodman P., Wilson J., Kochan T. The changing nature and role of teams. Negotiations and Change: From Work-place to Society(in press)Google Scholar
• Handy C. Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1995) 73(May-June):40–50Google Scholar
• Heider F.The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (1958) (Wiley, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hightower R., Sayeed L. The impact of computer-mediated communication systems on biased group discussion. Computers in Organizational Behavior (1995) 11(1):33–44Google Scholar
• Hightower R., Sayeed L. Effects of communication mode and prediscussion information distribution characteristics on information exchange in groups. Inform. Systems Res. (1996) 7(4):451–465Link, Google Scholar
• Hollingshead A. Information suppression and status persistence in group decision making: The effects of communication media. Human Commun. Res. (1996) 23(2):193–219Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hultberg M., Alve S., Blakar R., Blakar R. Patterns of attribution of communication difficulties in couples with a ‘borderline,’ a ‘schizophrenic,’ or a ‘normal’ offspring. Studies of Familial Communication and Psychopathology: A Social-Developmental Approach to Deviant Behavior (1980) (Columbia University Press, New York) 66–104Google Scholar
• Jackson J., Steiner D., Fishbein M. Structural characteristics of norms. Current Studies in Social Psychology (1965) (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York) Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S., Knoll K., Leidner D. Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. J. Management Inform. Systems (1998) 14(4):29–64Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa S., Leidner D. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(6):791–815Link, Google Scholar
• Jones E., Nisbett R., Jones E., Kanouse D., Kelley H., Nisbett R., Valins S., Weiner B. The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior (1972) (General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ) 79–94Google Scholar
• Karakowsky L., Siegel J. The effect of demographic diversity on causal attributions of work group success and failure: A framework for research. M. Martinko, ed. Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective (1995) (St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL) 289–31377Google Scholar
• Kelly H., Michela J. Attribution theory and research. Annual Rev. Psych. (1980) 31:457–501Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kemske F.Workforce (1998) January):47–60HR 2008Google Scholar
• Kiesler S., Siegel J., McGuire T. Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. Amer. Psych. (1984) 39(10):1123–1134Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kiesler S., Sproull L. Group decision making and communication technology. Organ. Behavior and Human Decision Processes (1992) 52:96–123Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kiesler S., Zubrow D., Moses A., Geller V. Affect in computer-mediated communication: An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion. Human Comput. Interaction (1985) 1:77–104Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krauss R., Bricker P. Effects of transmission delay and access delay on the efficiency of verbal communication. J. Acoustical Society (1966) 41:286–292Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krauss R., Fussell S., Galegher J., Kraut R., Egido C. Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness. Intellectual Team-work: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work (1990) (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ) 111–146Google Scholar
• Krauss R., Lewis S., Swezey L. Listener responsiveness and the coordination of conversation. J. Personality and Soc. Psych. (1982) 43(4):718–731Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lea M., Spears R. Computer-mediated communication, de-individuation and group decision-making. Internat. J. Man-Machine Stud. (1991) 34:283–301Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lea M., Spears R. Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. J. Organ. Comput. (1992) 2:321–341Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lea M., Spears R., Wood J., Duck S. Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. Under-studied Relationships (1993) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) 197–233Google Scholar
• Lebie L., Rhoades J., McGrath J. Interaction process in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (1996) 4:127–152Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leonard D., Brands P., Edmondson A., Fenwick J., Bradley S., Nolan R. Virtual teams: Using communications technology to manage geographically dispersed development groups. Sense and Respond: Capturing Value in the Network Era (1998) (Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA) 285–298Google Scholar
• Lipnack J., Stamps J.Virtual Teams: Reaching across Space, Time and Organizations with Technology (1997) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Majchrzak A., Rice R., King N., Malhotra A., Ba S. Computer-mediated inter-organizational knowledge-sharing: Insights from a virtual team innovating using a collaborative tool. Inform. Resources Management J. (2000) 13(Jan-Feb):44–53Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maznevski M., Chudoba K. Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organ. Sci. (2000) 11(5):473–492Link, Google Scholar
• McDonald D., Martinko M. Fixing blame in n-person attributions: A social identity model for attributional processes in newly formed cross-functional groups. Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective (1995) (St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, FL) 273–288Google Scholar
• McGrath J., Hollingshead A.Groups Interacting with Technology (1994) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• McGuire T., Kiesler S., Siegel J. Group and computer-mediated discussion effects in risk decision making. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1987) 52:917–930Crossref, Google Scholar
• McLeod P., Hirokawa R., Poole M. New communication technologies for group decision-making: Toward an integrative framework. Communication and Group Decision Making (1996) 2nd ed.(Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) 426–461Google Scholar
• Miles M., Huberman A.Qualitative Data Analysis (1994) 2nd ed.(Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• Nisbett R., Caputo C., Legant P., Marecek J. Behavior as seen by the actor and as seen by the observer. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1973) 27(2):154–164Crossref, Google Scholar
• O'Hara-Devereaux M., Johansen R.Globalwork: Bridging Distance, Culture and Time (1994) (Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA) Google Scholar
• Redding W.Communication Within the Organization (1972) (Industrial Communication Council, New York) Google Scholar
• Rommetveit R.Words Meanings and Messages (1968) (Academic Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Senge P.The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (1990) (Doubleday/Currency, New York) Google Scholar
• Siegel J., Dubrovsky V., Kiesler S., McGuire T. Group process in computer-mediated communication. Organ. Behavior and Human Decision Processes (1986) 37:157–187Crossref, Google Scholar
• Snow C., Snell S., Davison S., Hambrick D. Use transnational teams to globalize your company. Organ. Dynam. (1996) 24(4):50–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sproull L., Kiesler S. Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Sci. (1986) 32(11):1492–1512Link, Google Scholar
• Stasser G., Stewart D. The discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1992) 63:426–434Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G., Stewart D., Wittenbaum G. Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. J. Experiment. Social Psych. (1995) 31:244–265Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G., Titus W. Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1985) 48:1467–1478Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G., Titus W. Effects of information load and percentages of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. J. Personality and Social Psych. (1987) 53:81–93Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sterman J. Modeling managerial behavior: Misperceptions of feedback in a dynamic decision making experiment. Management Sci. (1989) 35(3):321–339Link, Google Scholar
• Straus S. Technology, group process, and group outcomes: Testing the connections in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Human-Computer Interaction (1997) 12:227–266Crossref, Google Scholar
• Straus S., McGrath J. Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. J. Appl. Psych. (1994) 79(2):87–97Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tannen D.Talking from 9 to 5 (1994) (William Morrow, New York) Google Scholar
• Townsend A., DeMarie S., Hendrickson A. Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Acad. Management Executive (1998) 12(3):17–29Google Scholar
• Walther J. Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Commun. Res. (1992) 19(1):52–90Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walther J. Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediated collaboration. Human Commun. Res. (1997) 23(3):342–369Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walther J., Burgoon J. Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Commun. Res. (1992) 19(1):50–88Crossref, Google Scholar
• Warkentin M., Sayeed L., Hightower R. Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: An exploratory study of a web-based conference system. Decision Sci. (1997) 28(4):975–996Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weisband S. Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups. Organ. Behavior and Human Decision Processes (1992) 53:352–380Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yin R.Case Study Research (1994) 2nd ed.(Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) Google Scholar
• Yngve V. On getting a word in edgewise. Papers from the Sixth Regional Meeting Chicago LinguisticsCircle. (1970) (Chicago Linguistics Circle, Chicago, IL) Google Scholar