No abstract

No abstract

A FRAMEWORK TO ANALYZE KNOWLEDGE WORK IN DISTRIBUTED TEAMSThis paper presents a framework to analyze knowledge work in the changing context of new ways of working. Knowledge work increasingly takes place as collaboration from different and changing workplaces due to mobility, multi-locational, and geographical distribution of participants. We define the framework based on five key factors that pose challenges to the performance and productivity of knowledge work performed in distributed teams. The framework extends and integrates traditional performance models of task, team structure, and work process, with context factors like workplace, organization policy and ICT infrastructure. The framework is applied in a qualitative comparative cross-case analysis to eight globally distributed teams in two Fortune 100 high-tech companies. We conclude with a series of specific challenges for each factor when studying distributed knowledge work. It is shown that due to changing contexts knowledge workers, teams, and organizations need to constantly adapt, readjust, and re-align according to the five factors.Keywords: knowledge work, distributed collaboration, task, team structure, team work processes, workplace, organization context. This paper identifies key factors that impact the performance and productivity of teams of knowledge workers collaborating in distributed and multi-locational work settings.Knowledge work (KW) is defined as the creation, distribution or application of knowledge by highly skilled and autonomous workers using tools and theoretical concepts to produce complex, intangible and tangible results (Antikainen & Lönnqvist, 2005;Davenport, Thomas & Cantrell, 2002;Drucker, 1999;Harrison, Wheeler & Whitehead, 2004;Pyöriä, 2005;Schultze, 2000). We view knowledge as a fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual information, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences (Davenport & Prusak, 1995). Knowledge workers are defined primarily by the nature of their work, which is relatively unstructured, non-routine, complex and 3 situation-specific (Antikainen & Lönnqvist, 2005;Davenport, Jarvenpaa & Beers, 1996;Heerwagen, Kampschroer, Powell, & Loftness, 2004;Scott, 2005). However, in practice, KW is usually not an individual task, but is performed in cooperation with others working in teams on complex tasks, which individuals cannot perform alone (Han & Williams, 2008;Pyöriä, 2005).KW is increasingly performed in a changing context by team members who are mobile and globally distributed using multiple places and contexts for their work (e.g., BoschSijtsema, Ruohomäki & Vartiainen, 2009;Lin, 2010). In these settings members can move from one location to the other -multi-location, or are working on a remote location locally, nationally, or globally, we define this as distributed collaboration. In this article we focus on knowledge work that is performed in distributed collaborative teams. Distributed teams are often closely imbedded in a social system having fl...

Citation: . An ethnographic study of design knowledge reuse in the architecture, engineering and construction industry. Research in Engineering Design, 16(4), pp,[184][185][186][187][188][189][190][191][192][193][194][195] Additional Information:• AbstractThis paper presents an ethnographic study of knowledge reuse in the architecture/engineering/construction industry. It is observed that reuse occurs largely through social knowledge networks. Even when reuse from an external repository occurs, a human expert is usually needed to provide proactive input on what to reuse and contextual information about the designs being reused. Both of these observations are attributed to the effectiveness of internal knowledge reuse, the reuse of knowledge from one's personal experiences. Internal knowledge reuse is effective because the designer can find items to reuse, and can recall the context of these items and can therefore understand them. This ethnographic study was used to develop a corporate memory, a rich, detailed repository of knowledge in context. The corporate memory will support finding and understanding. Understanding can be brought about by enabling the designer to explore the project context and evolution history of the found item. These explorations will also help the designer to manage the tradeoff between productivity and creativity in deciding what to reuse, by facilitating reuse at the appropriate levels of granularity and abstraction. KeywordsEthnography, engineering design, design reuse, knowledge management Introduction This paper presents the results of an ethnographic study of practitioners in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry. The objective of this study was to investigate the process of knowledge reuse by AEC practitioners as a precursor to designing a computer system that would support this reuse. For a discussion of the use of ethnographic methods for design, see Blomberg et al. (1993). Lloyd et al. (1998) conducted a similar study of a small manufacturing and design organization, looking specifically at design overuse. Bucciarelli (1994) uses ethnographic methods to study collaborative design in three engineering design firms.

No abstract