Collaboration through digital technologies

The development of society and changes in science and technology mean that it is impossible to be competitive in an interconnected world if we cannot work together openly. Globalization leads to closer integration, and working together appears to be a critical skill. Interestingly, school is a place where individuality is evaluated much more than teamwork.    

One of the features of cyberspace is space-time compression - people are closer, there is a lower level of social stratification among them, it is straightforward to communicate with someone hundreds of kilometers away from us. It might seem that Skype, Facebook, and others have helped create something described as a global village. We have cooperation with anyone connected to the Internet within reach. In the section dedicated to communication, we mentioned that the Internet allows you to connect people from different cultures and contexts, which can be challenging in choosing a suitable communication strategy or form.

At the same time, the cooperation of physical and virtual teams differs in many ways - from the path of communication through records to work with motivation. It also happens that virtual teams are created in a situation where people are far apart, but colleagues can share one virtual work environment from one table. Working with a spatially inhomogeneous team (where some people share physical space and communication with other people is solved using technology) is highly demanding.        

Building such communities that share a project or a common interest in general that they want to pursue can be seen as one of the critical concepts of the information society. It would certainly be a shame to be voluntarily excluded from such an environment.

Therefore, the availability of teams through technology requires specific work and management procedures aimed at achieving set metrics. Three important determinants need to be kept in mind here. The first is the time shift - however trivial it may sound, in large communities, the time shift can play an essential role in finding a suitable time for synchronous communication. If possible, it is advisable to look for a compromise solution that suits everyone, rather than emphasizing the majority's interests over the specific legitimate demands of individuals. This approach has a broader impact on online teams and is vital for team cohesion.    

The second determinant is related to the fact that communication takes place through technology - it is an environment different from the physical one, which results in the need to use other methods and options for recording the fulfillment of tasks or their registration. For virtual teams, it is more than appropriate to use some groupware. 

The third is that the community is genuinely multicultural, not just linguistically or geographically. Each participant may have specific needs for cooperation, days or times when they do not want to be disturbed and need to be respected. One of the most significant risks of working in virtual teams is the loss of working time. Whether a person is studying or working, they are online, i.e. they have access to contact with their community and receive alerts, tasks, etc. The result can be continuous working hours, which quickly leads to exhaustion, stress, or burnout. It is necessary to look for ways to support the productivity of teamwork and at the same time to emphasize the importance of rest for team members.      

This requirement is mostly at odds with how collaborative environments work. Because a person can typically perform their tasks as they need, there is a continuous flow of activities and information. Even a tiny inquiry or a short consultation can result in a severe overload of the person.

We want to mention another exciting element, namely productivity, or the phenomenon referred to as the productivity paradox. It says that with increasing investment in ICT, labor productivity does not increase. One has only a relatively limited amount of energy that one can invest in work. It is, therefore, necessary to look for forms of online cooperation that will be meaningful and effective on the one hand and will not be associated with burnout or overload on the other.  

There are two interaction concepts – collaboration and cooperation. Their critical differentiation is essential not primarily due to the relationship to theory but for the appropriate setting and perception of team structures, dynamics, and proper tools.     

In the case of cooperation, each project participant has a unique, clearly defined, and irreplaceable role. The absence of a single member thus usually has fatal consequences. In terms of team organization, less emphasis is placed on the interaction of participants. Everyone performs their task relatively independently, and the interaction with the environment is given only by taking over or passing on some outputs. An example of such a form of cooperation can work on a book, in which one person writes, and the other types. The third makes corrections while others ensure publication, arrange marketing, etc.

Another approach is offered by a collaborative method that tries to be based on ​​intensive teamwork. The author of the product here is not an individual but a team. It doesn't even matter who made which part, which work, or who gets involved. In such a work system, it is possible to talk about the responsibility of the whole collaborative group, but not about the share of individuals - someone can only have the role of facilitator, someone can be a theoretical expert who puts everything into contexts, etc. The practitioner can then, in many respects, be a completely average member of such a group. 

Brdička states that, in principle, four fundamental differences can be identified between collaborative and cooperative cooperation, which must be considered in the area of ​​proposing a suitable solution in the form of a platform for collaboration.

The autonomy of individual subjects is the first characteristic variable. While in the case of cooperation, each entity is strongly autonomous, and supervision is usually performed by a direct superior or manager, who must continuously evaluate the activities of individuals. In collaboration, the whole group is autonomous. The individual must focus his needs, requirements and performance on it. In choosing a platform for cooperation, it is necessary, for example, to monitor the possibilities of analyzing the behavior and fulfillment of the tasks of each individual. It is a more common model of cooperation in traditional organizations. 

An important feature is also the question of homogeneity or heterogeneity of the group. While in cooperative projects, diversity does not manifest itself uniquely and is usually not required (maximally in the division of roles, i.e. what one knows and enjoys). In collaboration, the presumption of considerable internal heterogeneity is evident, which should be stimulating for work. 

In the case of collaboration, the dimension of identification with the group is essential. There is a fundamental difference between members and non-members. In this case, the collaboration platform should work with community elements, offering the opportunity to deepen social ties and sharing. On the contrary, the cooperative concept is much more open, meaning that anyone can quickly and easily enter. It is good to consider which cooperation strategy the organization wants to follow and so choose communication channels, documentation procedures, and the external communication of projects, etc. 

The degree of interactivity is the last significant difference to keep in mind. While only marginal interaction is required in cooperation, and it is more necessary to ensure data flows within the project, collaboration is a space for less limited activities of individuals. Personal pages or boxes are not so important in this case, although they are a completely fundamental issue in cooperation. 

As previously mentioned, the cooperation of virtual teams takes place over groupware (although the possibilities are, of course, wider) - a particular environment that is used for remote collaboration. When choosing groupware, it is necessary to think about several essential parameters, which we will outline. We will also mention some components that appear in groupware applications.    

The first important aspect is the needs and experience of the users. If at all possible, it usually pays to reach for a tool that team members are familiar with. The critical problem in implementing an environment is that users bypass it and do not use it. So if there is a tool that they use and works, it usually pays to choose it. In the case of searching for something new, it is advisable to keep in mind the technical prowess and maturity of users, but also, for example, whether they want to access the environment through mobile devices (then it is necessary applications for the operating system), or through something else.   

An analysis of needs is also critical - what the environment should be used for and why. There is no need to use Basecamp to agree on a joint review of a film. On the contrary, managing a multi-year project with dozens of people through a mass chat on Facebook is also not an ideal option. It is, therefore, appropriate to carry out a needs analysis and find suitable tools based on it. Price is also an essential parameter - groupware applications are often quite expensive. However, almost all of them allow you to try the demo version, which we also recommend.    

The individual tools differ in many ways, so finding a generally accepted list of components is not easy. Still, we will try to point out at least some features that are important for online team management: