This paper examines the growing role of technological collaboration tools in modern business environments, where remote work and virtual teams are increasingly common. It explores how organizations — ranging from small businesses to large, globally dispersed enterprises — can evaluate and select appropriate collaboration systems. The paper identifies five key factors that shape these decisions: time, place, richness, tasks, and adoption. For each factor, it considers what types of tools encourage or discourage effective collaboration. The paper concludes that technology alone is insufficient; business culture, management readiness, and organizational support are the decisive factors in whether collaborative tools actually succeed.
Collaboration tools in business settings are becoming increasingly important. About 20% of people who work via technology already report that they have never met their bosses (CNET, 2011). Yet, for the most part, many business and project teams seeking collaboration methods do so without fully understanding the available resources and their implications (Rosen, 2010). Most organizations use such services for virtual meetings or document sharing, rather than for the more complex capabilities these tools offer.
In determining what kinds of collaboration systems are appropriate, it is important to consider the size of one's business and the scope of one's need. Even though fully integrated systems are now coming online, many businesses still likely need only piecemeal elements, though they want those elements to be compatible with future services. In fact, companies tend to place their collaborative activities alongside technologies to more or less observe what happens (Keitt, 2011). Large businesses may be able to draw on a number of levels, using "far-flung" virtual team capabilities. According to Malhotra and Majchrzak (2004), "Far-flung teams are virtual teams that are multi-unit/multi-organizational, multi-functional, globally dispersed and conduct their interdependent activities mainly through electronic media with minimal or no face-to-face interactions." The kinds of services they may need can be extensive.
For smaller or mid-size businesses, the range of options is still broad but usually focused on specific tasks. It could include everything from simple to complex data or voice management, file sharing, real-time posting, conversation, communication, or coordination activities — or even the same types of complex systems used by larger companies (Gould, 2006). It is now possible for even small companies to buy into "cloud-based," or Internet-connected, services with all of the capability levels that a major corporate provider could use. Doing so, however, does not appear to add much value, meaning it may not be a good business investment at this time (Rosen, 2010).
In determining which level of collaboration to consider, there are several factors worth reviewing. Time is one of the most significant for several reasons, as it covers many dimensions of collaborative work. For one, it has to do with the actual hours during which work and collaboration occur. Many "far-flung" group activities that use online technology occur across such diverse locations that participants are not in the same time zone or do not work during the same hours or days. Some may be professionals hired for a particular short-term need. Thus it is possible for people to be working on schedules that do not align well with conventional work timelines. When participants want to communicate with each other or get a response to a question, these issues become particularly relevant.
Time is also related to the duration and complexity of the task at hand. If a particular activity is of short duration and not complicated, some may elect not to use technology because it is easier to complete the task quickly without it. Others may choose technology because a simple email or post can remove that task from a to-do list. In a recent study by CNET (2011) on these issues, researchers found that some people use email for quick responses while others — some 48% — still use handwritten notes. While this relates to richness considerations (that is, how intensive the work is), it also has to do with the time allotted for simple actions. This approach may benefit team-building and collaboration but work against record-keeping, verification, or the full use of complex management software.
The place consideration is related to time but has its own distinct elements. Some people can work in the same physical location as their collaboration partners, while others may be far removed. Far-flung teams arise specifically because talent is available in many locations and there is no need to relocate it. Sometimes these professionals work in the same field but in different locations; however, the place concept could also apply to drawing people in from outside sectors entirely, which is another dimension of the place issue for technology-linked businesses.
"Location and system complexity as collaboration variables"
"Task scope and user adoption challenges for collaboration tools"
"Which tools encourage or discourage effective collaboration"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.