No abstract

There is increasing interest in topics at the nexus of collaboration and information behavior. A variety of studies conducted in organizational settings have provided us with key insights about the collaborative aspects of seeking, retrieving, and using information. Researchers have used a range of terms, including collaborative information seeking (CIS), collaborative information retrieval (CIR), collaborative search, collaborative sensemaking, and others to describe various pertinent activities. Consequently, we lack conceptual clarity concerning these activities, leading to a tendency to use terms interchangeably when in fact they may be referring to different issues. Here, we offer collaborative information behavior (CIB) as an umbrella term to connote the collaborative aspects of information seeking, retrieval, and use. We provide the contours of a model of CIB synthesized from findings of past studies conducted by our research team as well as other researchers. By reanalyzing and synthesizing the data from those studies, we conceptualize CIB as comprised of a set of constitutive activities, organized into three broad phases—problem formulation, collaborative information seeking, and information use. Some of the activities are specific to a particular phase, whereas others are common to all phases. We explain how those constitutive activities are related to one another. Finally, we discuss the limitations of our model as well as its potential usefulness in advancing CIB research.

Information seeking and management practices are an integral aspect of people's daily work. However, we still have little understanding of collaboration in the information seeking process. Through a survey of collaborative information seeking practices of academic researchers, we found that researchers reported that (1) the lack of expertise is the primary reason that they collaborate when seeking information; (2) traditional methods, including face-to-face, phone, and email are the preferred communication mediums for collaboration; and (3) collaborative information seeking activities are usually successful and more useful than individually seeking information. These results begin to highlight the important role that collaborative information seeking plays in daily work.

Multidisciplinary team members often must work together to find needed information. To identify when team members collaborate, why they collaborate, and how they collaborate during information seeking activities, we conducted a field study of a multidisciplinary patient care team. We found that the unit secretary, a non-clinical team member, had characteristics of various types of gatekeepers identified in previous studies. However, unlike those gatekeepers, the unit secretary also played a particularly active role during information seeking activities. Most medical information systems design focus on supporting collaboration amongst clinical staff. Our study highlights the importance of also supporting non-clinical team members.

CSCW has long been concerned with formal and informal knowledge practices in organizations, examining both the social and technical aspects of how knowledge is sought, shared, and used. In this study, we are interested in examining the set of activities that occur when colocated knowledge workers manage and resolve issues by seeking, sharing, and applying their informal knowledge. Informal knowledge seeking involves more than identifying the expert who has the knowledge or accessing the knowledge through physical artifacts. It also involves working with that expert to identify and apply the appropriate knowledge to the particular situation. However, our understandings of how people collaboratively work together to find, share and apply this knowledge are less well understood. To investigate this phenomenon, we conducted a field study of how professionals in three IT teams of a regional hospital managed and resolved IT issues. These knowledge workers used various collaborative practices such as creation of ad-hoc teams and the use of email to identify, share, and use informal knowledge to resolve IT issues. In addition, particular team practices such as how issues are assigned affected these knowledge activities. Our findings highlight how informal knowledge activities are affected by a variety of implicit and sometimes subtle features of the organization and that organizational knowledge management systems should support informal knowledge seeking activities and collaboration amongst the knowledge sharers.