Our research purpose is twofold and comprises theoretical and empirical purposes. The purpose of our research results in the following research question: How do employees experience virtual inter-team collaboration within a large, multi-team project?
Many scholars have investigated team collaboration, either without specifically differentiating intra- and inter-team collaboration or focusing only on intra-team collaboration. Intra-team collaboration means collaboration taking place within the context of one team, whereas inter-team collaboration describes the interaction process between several teams. Thus, in the field of organizational research, we need to advance our knowledge on inter-team collaboration, as it is a way of working that becomes more and more popular and widespread. Our practical aim is to understand collaboration in such emerging business contexts. With more resources available, including technological tools, for individual actors and teams, new ways of collaboration become apparent. We want to contribute to a better understanding of collaboration in the modern sense by investigating how inter-team collaboration is experienced by employees working in the same organization. We especially want to highlight that although the individuals under study are separated into different teams, they still belong to the same organization and work towards a common goal. We believe that being assigned to different teams while still being part of the same organization is especially interesting to investigate.
We do this by studying the collaboration between different teams in a large, financial services company called Beneal Bank (the company name has been changed). The studied organization resembles one of the previously illustrated new organizational designs. More than 80 interdependent teams, including geographically dispersed team members, work on an intra-organizational project to develop a new core-banking system. Thus, our study site has certain characteristics that justify it as a site in which new organizational designs are applied and in which new ways of collaboration are required. Firstly, the organization employs an Agile Methodology, implying that close and continuous collaboration is needed between different, interdependent teams.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Background of Study
1.2 Research Purpose and Research Question
1.3 Thesis Outline
2 Literature Review
2.1 Collaboration in Organizations
2.2 On Virtual Teamwork
2.3 On Virtual Inter-Team Collaboration
2.3.1 Shared Meaning
2.3.2 Trust
2.3.3 Boundary Objects and Team Boundary Spanning
2.4 Summary of Literature and Research Gap
3 Methodology
3.1 Research Context
3.2 Research Philosophy
3.3 Data Collection
3.3.1 Semi-Structured Interviews
3.3.2 Observations
3.4 Limitations and Creation of Quality
3.5 Data Analysis
4 Presentation of Empirical Data
4.1 Collaboration as Everything (and Nothing)
4.1.1 Glorification of Collaboration
4.1.2 Importance of Big Picture
4.1.3 Communication as Key
4.2 Inter-Team Collaboration Experienced as Burden
4.2.1 Inter-Team Collaboration as a Challenge
4.2.2 Inter-Team Collaboration Increases Work Pressure
4.2.3 Inter-Team Collaboration Through Representatives
4.3 Inter-Team Collaboration as ‘Us versus Them’
4.3.1 Importance of Trust
4.3.2 Different Priorities
4.4 Summary of Findings
5 Discussion
5.1 Collaboration as an Empty Word
5.1.1 Discourse Detached from Practice
5.1.2 Working Together Is Not Necessarily Collaboration
5.2 Inter-Team Collaboration as Competition
5.2.1 Collaboration Infrastructure as an Enabler of Inter-Team Competition
5.2.2 Boundary Objects as Enablers for Coopetition
5.3 Creation of Subgroups in Inter-team Collaboration
5.3.1 Competing In- and Out-Groups
5.3.2 'Collaboration Spanners' Across Subgroups
6 Conclusion and Outlook
6.1 Brief Study Recap
6.2 Main Findings
6.3 Theorizing Virtual Inter-Team Collaboration
6.4 Practical Contributions
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary goal of this research is to gain a nuanced understanding of how inter-team collaboration is experienced by individual members within a large, virtualized, multi-team project, specifically within the context of a financial services organization. The study investigates how various factors, such as virtual environments and internal organizational dynamics, influence these experiences.
- The ambiguity of the term "collaboration" and its decoupling from actual work practices.
- The perception of inter-team collaboration as an increased work burden rather than an enabler.
- The emergence of "us versus them" dynamics and competitive structures among interdependent teams.
- The role of specific individuals as "collaboration spanners" in bridging team boundaries.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1.1 Glorification of Collaboration
In general, our interviewees regarded collaboration as highly important for the overall project to succeed. We got the impression that collaboration was even ‘glorified’ by our interviewees as they boldly claimed that without collaboration, ‘it is quite impossible to achieve the desired goal’ (Shanta, Test Lead) and that ‘collaboration is vital and it’s everywhere, … our tasks are pure collaboration’ (Michelle, Scrum Master). The employees were aware that collaboration is a relevant aspect of their work environment. This also becomes apparent in the statement of Wiktor (Test Lead):
‘For me collaboration is very important because it is impossible to know everything, and collaboration for me means sharing your knowledge, sharing your problems and sharing ideas, sharing some ways of solving problems, so if I know how to solve it then I can share it with others’.
This awareness of the importance of collaboration might be partly ascribed to the communication of collaboration as one of the company’s core values:
‘We have these Beneal Bank values and collaboration is one of them, so it means that there is a lot of focus on collaboration within the project’ (Oscar, Business Analyst).
Collaboration seemed to be everywhere and is part of basically everything the employees do. However, it was noticeable that the interviewees do not share a common understanding of what collaboration means to them in particular. Our findings indicate that collaboration was perceived as ‘everything and nothing’ simultaneously. The abovementioned statement by Wiktor shows that for him, collaboration meant sharing knowledge, ideas, and solutions to problems with colleagues; for Shanta, collaboration was communicating with each other; and Oscar viewed collaboration as ‘networking with others’. In addition, many interviewees stated that they think that ‘collaboration is great’ (e.g., Michelle, Scrum Master, and Oscar, Business Analyst) without being able to elaborate on what they exactly mean by that.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Introduces the background of organizational collaboration and sets the research purpose regarding virtual, inter-team experiences.
2 Literature Review: Examines theoretical foundations of collaboration, virtual teamwork, and the concepts of trust and boundary spanning.
3 Methodology: Details the qualitative case study approach, the research context at Beneal Bank, and the data collection methods used.
4 Presentation of Empirical Data: Presents findings related to the glorification of collaboration, the burden of inter-team work, and internal competitive dynamics.
5 Discussion: Analyzes how collaboration functions as an empty word, fosters competitive behavior, and leads to the formation of specific subgroups.
6 Conclusion and Outlook: Recaps the study findings and provides theoretical and practical contributions regarding inter-team management.
Keywords
Inter-team collaboration, virtual teamwork, competition, coopetition, boundary spanning, multi-team project, perception, in-groups, out-groups, shared meaning, trust, organizational behavior, Agile Methodology.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The work investigates the perception and experience of virtual inter-team collaboration within a large, complex, multi-team project in a financial services firm.
Which thematic areas are central to the study?
The study centers on three themes: collaboration as an "empty word," the experience of collaboration as a professional burden, and the development of "us versus them" dynamics between teams.
What is the primary research question?
The study aims to answer: "How do employees experience virtual inter-team collaboration within a large, multi-team project?"
What research methodology was applied?
The authors conducted a qualitative study using an abductive approach, utilizing thirteen semi-structured interviews and four observations of inter-team meetings.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers the theoretical review, the specific organizational context of the "Core Banking System" (CBS) program, the presentation of empirical interview data, and a critical discussion of these findings against existing literature.
What are the primary keywords characterizing this work?
Key terms include inter-team collaboration, virtual teamwork, coopetition, boundary spanning, and the concept of "collaboration spanners."
What is meant by the concept of "collaboration spanners"?
The authors define "collaboration spanners" as specific individuals who act as formal or informal links between different teams and subgroups to facilitate the flow of information and balance competitive tensions.
How does the virtual environment impact collaboration according to the findings?
The virtual environment is found to increase the effort required for collaboration, enabling team members to more easily refrain from engaging with other teams, which paradoxically leads to more siloed working.
What conclusion is drawn regarding "alignment meetings"?
The authors conclude that while these meetings are intended to foster collaboration, they are often perceived as a "one-way street" for status updates and frequently serve as a "playing field" for internal competition and blame games.
- Quote paper
- Lisa Frigge (Author), 2018, The Perception of Virtual, Inter-Team Collaboration Within a Large, Multi-Team Project, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/946908
