Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
article

Understanding technology use in global virtual teams: Research methodologies and methods

Published: 01 September 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Context: The globalisation of activities associated with software development and use has introduced many challenges in practice, and also (therefore) many for research. While the predominant approach to research in software engineering has followed a positivist science model, this approach may be sub-optimal when addressing problems with a dominant social or cultural dimension, such as those frequently encountered when studying work practices in a globally distributed team setting. The investigation of such a team reported in this paper provides one example of an alternative approach to research in a global context, through a longitudinal interpretive field study seeking to understand how global virtual teams mediated the use of technology. The study involved a large collective of faculty and support staff plus student members based in the geographically and temporally distant locations of New Zealand, the United States of America and Sweden. Objective: Our focus in this paper is on the conduct of research in the context of global software activities, and in particular, as applied to the actions and interactions of global virtual teams. We consider the appropriateness of various methodologies and methods in enabling such issues to be addressed. Method: We describe how we undertook a substantial field study of global virtual teams, and highlight how the adopted structuration theory, action research and grounded theory methodologies applied to the analysis of email data, enabled us to deliver effectively against our goals. Results: We believe that the approach taken suited a research context in which situated practices were occurring over time in a highly complex domain, ensuring that our results were both strongly grounded and relevant to practice. It has resulted in the generation of substantive theory and techniques that have been adapted and applied on a pilot basis in further field settings. Conclusion: We conclude that globally distributed teamwork presents a complex context which demands new research approaches, beyond the limited set customarily applied by software engineering researchers. We advocate experimenting with different research methodologies and methods so that we have a more rounded repertoire to address the most important and relevant issues in global software development research, with the forms of rigour that suit the chosen approach.

References

[1]
Allan, G., A critique of using grounded theory as a research method. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. v2. 1-10.
[2]
V. Basili, The role of experimentation in software engineering: past, current and future, in: 18th International Conference on Software Engineering, 1996, pp. 442-449.
[3]
Baskerville, R., Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the AIS. v2. 1-32.
[4]
Baskerville, R. and Myers, M., Special issue on action research in information systems: making is research relevant to practice. MIS Quarterly. v28. 329-335.
[5]
A. Begel, N. Nagappan, Global software development: who does it?, in: Third International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE'08), Bangalore, India, 2008, pp. 195-199.
[6]
Bjørn, P. and Ngwenyama, O., Virtual team collaboration: building shared meaning, resolving breakdowns and creating translucence. Information Systems Journal. v19. 227-253.
[7]
í. Cajander, T. Clear, M. Daniels, Introducing an external mentor in an International Open Ended Group Project, in: 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 2009, pp. T1A1-T1A6.
[8]
í. Cajander, T. Clear, M. Daniels, J. Edlund, P. Hamrin, C. Laxer, M. Persson, Students analyzing their collaboration in an International Open Ended Group Project, in: 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 2009, pp. T1A1-T1A6.
[9]
Carr, W. and Kemmis, S., Becoming Critical: Knowing Through Action Research. 1983. Deakin University press, Melbourne.
[10]
Clear, T., Critical Enquiry in Computer Science Education. In: Fincher, S., Petre, M. (Eds.), Computer Science Education Research: The Field and the Endeavour, Routledge Falmer, Taylor & Francis Group, London. pp. 101-125.
[11]
T. Clear, {Invited Presentation} International collaborative learning - the facilitation process, in: ED-MEDIA '99 - World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Seattle, Washington, 1999, pp. 1759-1764.
[12]
T. Clear, Supporting the work of global virtual teams: the role of technology-use mediation, in: Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, 2008, pp. 1-473. <http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/650>.
[13]
T. Clear, D. Kassabova, A course in collaborative computing: collaborative learning and research with a global perspective, in: M. Guzdial, S. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Portland, ACM, Oregon, 2008, pp. 63-67.
[14]
Creswell, J. and Miller, D., Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice. v39. 124-130.
[15]
DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M., Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science. v5. 121-147.
[16]
Dittrich, Y., John, M., Singer, J. and Tessem, B., Editorial: for the special issue on qualitative software engineering research. Information and Software Technology. v49. 531-539.
[17]
Eisenhardt, K., Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review. v14. 532-550.
[18]
Fulk, J., Schmitz, J. and Steinfield, C., A social influence model of technology use. In: Fulk, J., Steinfeld, C. (Eds.), Organizations and Communication Technology, SAGE, Beverley Hills, CA. pp. 117-142.
[19]
Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R. and Vlissides, J., Design Patterns. Reading. 1995. Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts.
[20]
Giddens, A., The Constitution of Society. 1984. Polity Press, Cambridge.
[21]
Glaser, B.G., Emergence vs. Forcing: Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. 1992. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
[22]
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A., The Discovery of Grounded Theory. 1967. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.
[23]
Glass, R., Ramesh, V. and Vessey, I., An analysis of research in computing disciplines. Communications of the ACM. v47. 89-94.
[24]
Glass, R., Vessey, I. and Ramesh, V., Research in software engineering: an analysis of the literature. Information and Software Technology. v44. 491-506.
[25]
Gregor, S., The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly. v30. 611-642.
[26]
Gupta, A., Deriving mutual benefits from offshore outsourcing. Communications of the ACM. v52. 122-126.
[27]
Gupta, A. and Seshasai, S., 24 hour knowledge factory: using internet technology to leverage spatial and temporal separations. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology. v7. 14-22.
[28]
Habermas, J., Knowledge and Human Interests, Theory and Practice, Communication and the Evolution of Society. 1972. Heinemann, London.
[29]
M. Hettinga, Understanding evolutionary use of groupware, in: Telematica Instituut Enschede: Delft University of Technology, 2002, p. 191.
[30]
A. Hofer, W. Tichy, Status of empirical research in software engineering, in: V. Basili, H. Rombach, K. Schneider, B. Kitchenham, D. Pfahl, R. Selby (Eds.), Empirical Software Engineering Issues: Critical Assessment and Future Directions, LNCS, vol. 4336, Berlin Heidelberg Springer-Verlag, 2007, pp. 10-19.
[31]
Kampenes, V.B., Dybå, T., Hannay, J. and Sjøberg, D.I.K., A systematic review of quasi-experiments in software engineering. Information and Software Technology. v51. 71-82.
[32]
V. Kaptelinin, UMEA: translating interaction histories into project contexts, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, ACM, USA, 2003.
[33]
Kitchenham, B.A., Pfleeger, S.L., Pickard, L.M., Jones, P.W., Hoaglin, D.C., Emam, K.E. and Rosenberg, J., Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. v28. 721-734.
[34]
Klein, H., Myers, M. and Set, A., A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly. v23. 67-93.
[35]
Kock, N., McQueen, R. and Scott, J., Can action research be made more rigorous in a positivist sense?. The Contribution of an Iterative Approach, Journal of Systems and Information Technology. v1. 1-23.
[36]
McGrath, J., Validity and the Research Process. 1985. SAGE, Beverly Hills, California.
[37]
McKay, J. and Marshall, P., The dual imperatives of action research. Information Technology and People. v14. 46-59.
[38]
Melrose, M., Maximising the rigour of action research? Why would you want to? How could you?. Field Methods. v13 i2. 160-180.
[39]
Newman, M. and Robey, D., A social process model of user-analyst relationships. MIS Quarterly. v16. 249-266.
[40]
Orlikowski, W., Improvising organisational transformation over time: a situated change perspective. Information Systems Research. v7. 63-92.
[41]
Orlikowski, W. and Baroudi, J., Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research. v2. 1-28.
[42]
Orlikowski, W. and Robey, D., Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Information Systems Research. v2. 143-169.
[43]
Orlikowski, W., Yates, J., Okamura, K. and Fujimoto, M., Shaping electronic communication: the metastructuring of technology in the context of use. Organization Science. v6. 423-444.
[44]
B. Pentland, Narrative methods in collaborative systems research, in: Thirty-Second Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Maui, Hawaii, 1999.
[45]
M.S. Poole, Personal communication, 25 March 2008.
[46]
Poole, M. and DeSanctis, G., Structuration theory in information systems research: methods and controversies. In: Whitman, M., Woszcynski, A. (Eds.), The Handbook of Information Systems Research, Idea Group Publishing, Hershey, PA. pp. 206-249.
[47]
J. Segal, A. Grinyer, H. Sharp, The type of evidence produced by empirical software engineers, in: 2005 Workshop on Realising Evidence-based Software Engineering St. Louis, Missouri, ACM, USA, 2005.
[48]
Seshasai, S. and Gupta, A., The role of information resources in enabling the 24 hour knowledge factory. Information Resource Management Journal. v20. 105-127.
[49]
Stubbe, M., Lane, C., Hilder, J., Vine, E., Vine, B., Marra, M., Holmes, J. and Weatherall, A., Multiple discourse analyses of a workplace interaction. Discourse Studies. v5. 351-389.
[50]
Thomas, D., Bostrom, R. and Gouge, M., Making knowledge work in virtual teams. Communications of the ACM. v50. 85-90.
[51]
Treinen, J. and Miller-Frost, S., Following the sun: case studies in global software development. IBM Systems Journal. v45. 773-783.
[52]
Wainer, J., Barsottini, C., Lacerda, D. and deMar, L., Empirical evaluation in computer science research published by ACM. Information and Software Technology. v51. 1081-1085.
[53]
T. Winograd, F. Flores, Understanding computers and cognition: a new foundation for design, Reprint - originally published by Ablex Corporation, Norwood, NJ, 1986 ed., Addison Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1997.
[54]
R. Wirfs-Brock, Designing Scenarios: Making the Case for a Use Case Framework, The Smalltalk Report 3, November/December 1993.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Information and Software Technology
Information and Software Technology  Volume 53, Issue 9
September, 2011
124 pages

Publisher

Butterworth-Heinemann

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 September 2011

Author Tags

  1. AIT
  2. AST
  3. AUT
  4. CTF
  5. Env
  6. GSD
  7. GVT
  8. Global software development
  9. Global virtual teams
  10. Interpretive field studies
  11. LT
  12. Research method
  13. Research methodology
  14. SE
  15. TUM
  16. TUMAST
  17. Technology-use mediation
  18. UMEA

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 16 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media