Through an inductive, multi-method field study at a major design firm, we investigated the helping process in project work and how that process affects the success of a helping episode, as perceived by help-givers and/or -receivers. We used daily diary entries and weekly interviews from four project teams, and a separate sample of critical incident interviews, to induce process models of successful and unsuccessful helping episodes. We found that, in unsuccessful episodes, help-givers and -receivers maintained incongruent expectations and project understandings throughout the episode, which we call diagnostic incongruence. In contrast, the parties in successful episodes engaged in aligning practices that fostered shared expectations and project understandings (i.e., diagnostic congruence). Importantly, aligning practices in successful episodes occurred before or at the beginning of episodes. We also found that people's assessments of unsuccessful episodes were often marked by intense emotionality, which sometimes led them to disregard whether the helping resulted in instrumental progress. We discuss the implications of our process model for theory and practice.Keywords: Helping, Prosocial Behavior, Labor Process, Knowledge Management, Qualitative Methods, Field Study 2 Knowledge work in modern organizations is seldom an individual endeavor; coming up with new ideas and solving difficult problems is increasingly accomplished through collaboration and teamwork (Cohen and Bailey, 1997;Wuchty, Jones, and Uzzi, 2007). However, even when people collaborate to tackle a knowledge-intensive project, they often still need external help to achieve their goals (e.g., Ancona and Caldwell, 1992;Bresman, 2010). Scholars have used the term "helping" to describe a variety of discretionary interpersonal processes by which one party (the giver) allocates time and attention to a second party (the receiver) with the intent to benefit the second party (Bamberger, 2009; Grant and Patil, 2012). Forms of helping include assistance with task completion (e.g., Anderson and Williams, 1996), advice (e.g., Borgatti and Cross, 2003), team coaching (e.g., Hackman and Wageman, 2005), mentoring (e.g., Higgins and Kram, 2001), and socio-emotional support (e.g., Kahn, 1993).Helping can be a crucial driver of collaboration in organizations (Katz and Kahn, 1966).Studies show that helping is associated with better organizational performance (e.g., Podsakoff et al., 2009), team effectiveness (e.g., MacKenzie, Podsakoff and Ahearne, 1998), and collective creativity (e.g., Hargadon and Bechky, 2006;Mueller and Kamdar, 2011). Further, many scholars have conceptualized helping as a fundamental building block of cooperation and teamwork in organizations (Weick, 1979; Flynn, 2006;Schein 2009; Grant and Patil, 2012) and have extolled the virtues of organizations that promote it (Ancona, Bresman, and Caldwell, 2009; Hansen, 2009; Amabile and Kramer, 2011). However, despite its potential benefits, helping can also be costly to the individuals invo...