Interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary projects are becoming an important part of academic life. Research questions are becoming more complex and sophisticated, requiring a team approach to address (Newell et al., 2000, Hara et al., 2003). At the same time, funding agencies are also encouraging these types of projects through their granting programs. One result of this increased level of research collaboration is that teams have members located at other institutions, whether nationally or internationally. Digital Humanities as a community is becoming increasingly international in focus. For example, the Digging into Data Challenge was jointly sponsored by Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the British Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the American National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and National Science Foundation (NSF) and required each research team to have membership from at least two of the participating countries (Office of Digital Humanities, 2010). Further, the Digital Humanities Summer Institute at the University of Victoria has had participants from every continent, except the Antarctic. Finally, the Text Encoding Initiative Consortium has members and users from around the world, with a growing number of projects based in Asia (Siemens, 2008c). These collaborations are possible given the advances in computers and telecommunications. The recruitment of the right person is no longer limited by geography (Cramton et al., 2005).
However, these types of teams encounter the general challenges associated with collaborative work, but also with more specific ones relating to the geographical distribution of members. Despite this increasing use of research teams, protocols to prepare individual researchers to work as part of a team, particularly within those groups which cross language, culture, and country lines, are not widely developed. Our work is designed to identify effective work patterns and intra-team relationships and describe the support and research preparation that is required to develop international research collaborations. The results will enable those who work in such teams to recognize those factors that tend to predispose them to success, and perhaps more importantly, to avoid those that may lead to problematic interactions, and thus make the project less successful than it might have otherwise been.
While there is a growing knowledge base of the benefits and challenges inherent in academic research teams (See, for example: Bracken et al., 2006, Choi et al., 2007, Fiore, 2008, Kraut et al., 1987), little knowledge exists about the ways in which teams with memberships across universities and disciplines work together (Garland et al., 2006), much less about teams with members from multiple country, culture and language groups (Setlock et al., 2004, Shore et al., 2005).
At a practical level, geography presents relatively simple challenges. As time zones increase, the flexibility in scheduling meetings decreases while the cost of face-to-face interactions increases. Technology may not always be capable of overcoming these challenges. Distance between team members limits the amount of interaction needed for creativity and innovation (Cummings et al., 2005, Lawrence, 2006). Further, some technologies and software may not be available in some countries due to infrastructure gaps or government policy (for example, the Great Firewall of China).
At a more complex level, differences in culture and language may impact on various aspects of team work such as structure, management, communication, conflict expression and resolution, decision making, and appropriate team behaviour and may be further complicated by professional and academic cultural differences (Dafoulas, 2002, Setlock et al., 2004, Shachaf et al., 2007, Fry et al., 2007, Lee-Kelley et al., 2008, Dekker et al., 2008). At a very basic level, teams must decide a working language, a decision that may be political in nature (Butler, 1998, Deepwell et al., 2009, Bournois et al., 1998). And even with a common language, members may find that they must still translate terms. For example, institutions in different countries define a research assistant (RA) in a variety of ways. In Canada, an RA is generally a graduate student who works on a research project on a part-time basis while in the United Kingdom, an RA is a post-doctoral fellow who is on a full-time contract for a specified period of time. As a result, confusion can occur among team members when they use common terms in different ways.
Research suggests several factors that may minimize the impact of the above challenges. First, education and training may mitigate the impact of cultural differences because team members may share professional norms. University education is fairly similar across countries (Dafoulas, 2002, Lee-Kelley et al., 2008, Nason et al., 1998). Teams may also find it beneficial to spend time in members’ cultures to create understanding of differences and similarities (Nason et al., 1998, Bagshaw et al., 2007). Finally, teams may also consider creating a cultural profile, both by country and professional/discipline culture (Dafoulas, 2002, Zakaria et al., 2008). This profile can be combined with team norms to express understandings of time, deadlines, language, communication channels, conflict resolution mechanisms, and other issues (Saunders et al., 2004). However, more research is needed to understand the supports and research preparation that is needed to ensure effective collaborations in teams with memberships from many countries, cultures, and language groups.
This paper is part of a larger project examining research teams with multi-country, culture and language representation, led by a team based in Canada, United Kingdom and Germany (For more details, see Siemens, 2010). The larger study uses a combination of data collection methods including an ethnomethodological approach with diary/log studies of research teams in the midst of their collaboration (Garfinkel, 1984) and semi-structured interviews with individuals who have experiences in the types of teams under investigation (Marshall et al., 1999). This paper will report on the findings from the interviews.
Digital Humanities community will serve as an exemplar case study population given the community’s international focus and collaborative networks. To achieve their objectives, and because of the variety of skills and expertise that these projects require, DH researchers must work collaboratively both within their institutions and with others nationally and internationally and often across disciplines. Team members include humanities, social science and computer science scholars, undergraduate and graduate students, research assistants, computer programmers and developers, librarians, and others. At present, several research projects involving national and international teams with funding ranging from thousands to millions of dollars are already in place with others in development. In addition, several DH research centres have faculty and research staff drawn from several countries, creating a mix of languages and cultures.
This research project builds on earlier work on DH research teams presented at previous digital humanities conferences (Siemens, 2008a, Siemens, 2008b, Siemens et al., 2009a, Siemens et al., 2010).
At the time of writing this proposal, interviews are being conducted and data analysis completed.
The benefits to the Digital Humanities community will be several. First, the study contributes to an explicit description of the community’s work patterns and relationships, particularly as the Digital Humanities community continues to become international in focus (Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations, 2010, Tei-C, 2010). This research demonstrates that much of digital humanities research is accomplished within interdisciplinary research teams, which are developing tools and processes to facilitate this collaboration. One particular issue highlighted in this research relates to challenges experienced within teams with members from various countries and cultures (Siemens et al., 2009b). Second, it is designed to enable those who work in such teams to recognise factors that tend to predispose them to success, and perhaps more importantly, to avoid those that may lead to problematic interactions, and thus make the project less successful than it might otherwise have been.
Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations (2010). About., accessed September 26, 2010 (link)
Bagshaw, D., Lepp, M. & Zorn, C. R. 2007 “International Research Collaboration: Building Teams and Managing Conflicts., ” Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Vol 24, No 4 433-446
Bournois, F. & Chevalier, F. 1998 “Doing research with foreign colleagues: a project-life cycle approach., ” Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol 13, No 3/4 206-213
Bracken, L. J. & Oughton, E. A. 2006 “'What do you mean?' The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research., ” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol 31, No 3 371-382
Butler, M. C. 1998 “An integrating perspective on interdisciplinary, cross-cultural research., ” Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol 13, No 3/4 199-205
Choi, B. C. K. & Pak, A. W. P. 2007 “Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 2. Promotors, barriers, and strategies of enhancement., ” Clinical & Investigative Medicine, Vol 30, No E224-E232
Cramton, C. D. & Webber, S. S. 2005 “Relationships among Geographic Dispersion, Team Processes, and Effectiveness in Software Development Work Teams., ” Journal of Business Research, Vol 58, No 6 758-765
Cummings, J. N. & Kiesler, S. 2005 “Collaborative Research Across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries., ” Social Studies of Science, Vol 35, No 5 703-722
Dafoulas, G. 2002 “Investigating Cultural Differences in Virtual Software Teams., ” Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries, Vol 7, No 1-14
Deepwell, F. & King, V. 2009 “E-Research Collaboration, Conflict and Compromise., ” Handbook of Research on Electronic Collaboration and Organizational Synergy, Salmons, J. & Wilson, L. IGI Global Hershey, Pennsylvania
Dekker, D. M., Rutte, C. G. & Van Den Berg, P. T. 2008 “Cultural differences in the perception of critical interaction behaviors in global virtual teams., ” International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol 32, No 5 441-452
Fiore, S. M. 2008 “Interdisciplinarity as Teamwork: How the Science of Teams can Inform Team Science., ” Small Group Research, Vol 39, No 3 251-277
Fry, J. & Talja, S. 2007 “The intellectual and social organization of academic fields and the shaping of digital resources., ” Journal of Information Science, Vol 33, No 2 115-133
Garfinkel, H. 1984 Studies in Ethnomethodology, Polity Press/Blackwell Publishing Malden, MA
Garland, D. R., O'connor, M. K., Wolfer, T. A., et al. 2006 “Team-based Research: Notes from the Field., ” Qualitative Social Work, Vol 5, No 1 93-109
Hara, N., Solomon, P., Kim, S.-L., et al. 2003 “An Emerging View of Scientific Collaboration: Scientists' Perspectives on Collaboration and Factors that Impact Collaboration., ” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol 54, No 10 952-965
Kraut, R. E., Galegher, J. & Egido, C. 1987 “Relationships and Tasks in Scientific Research Collaboration., ” Human-Computer Interaction, Vol 3, No 1 31-58
Lawrence, K. A. 2006 “Walking the Tightrope: The Balancing Acts of a Large e-Research Project., ” Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, Vol 15, No 4 385-411
Lee-Kelley, L. & Sankey, T. 2008 “Global virtual teams for value creation and project success: A case study., ” International Journal of Project Management, Vol 26, No 1 51-62
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. 1999 Designing Qualitative Research, SAGE Publications Thousand Oaks, CA
Nason, S. W. & Pillutla, M. M. 1998 “Towards a Model of International Research Teams., ” Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol 13, No 3/4 156-166
Newell, S. & Swan, J. 2000 “Trust and Inter-organizational Networking., ” Human Relations, Vol 53, No 10 1287-1328
Office of Digital Humanities 2010 Digging into Data Challenge., accessed September 26 2010 (link)
Saunders, C., Van Slyke, C. & Vogel, D. R. 2004 “My time or yours? Managing time visions in global virtual teams., ” Academy of Management Executive, Vol 18, No 1 19-31
Setlock, L. D., Fussell, S. R. & Neuwirth, C. 2004 “Taking it out of context: collaborating within and across cultures in face-to-face settings and via instant messaging., ” Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, IL,
Shachaf, P. & Hara, N. 2007 “Behavioral complexity theory of media selection: a proposed theory for global virtual teams., ” Journal of Information Science, Vol 33, No 1 63-75
Shore, B. & Cross, B. J. 2005 “Exploring the role of national culture in the management of large-scale international science projects., ” International Journal of Project Management, Vol 23, No 1 55-64
Siemens, L. 2008 “The Balance between On-line and In-person Interactions: Methods for the Development of Digital Humanities Collaboration., ” SDH-SEMI 2008, Vancouver, BC,
Siemens, L. 2008 “"It’s a team if you use ‘reply all’”: An Exploration of Research Teams in Digital Humanities Environments., ” Digital Humanities 2008, Oulu, Finland,
Siemens, L. 2008 “Understanding the TEI-C Community: A Study in Breadth and Depth, Toward Membership and Recruitment., ” TEI Annual Conference, London, UK,
Siemens, L. 2010 “Understanding Academic Research Teams: Implications of Multi-Country, Multi-Language, and Multi-Culture Team Membership., ” European Summer School, Leipzig, Germany,
Siemens, L., Cunningham, R., Duff, W., et al. 2009 ““More minds are brought to bear on a problem”: Methods of Interaction and Collaboration within Digital Humanities Research Teams., ” Society for Digital Humanities/Société pour l'étude des médias interactifs, Ottawa, Ontario,
Siemens, L., Cunningham, R., Duff, W., et al. 2010 “A Tale of Two Cities: Implications of the Similarities and Differences in Collaborative Approaches within the Digital Libraries and Digital Humanities Communities., ” Digital Humanities 2010, London, UK,
Siemens, L., Duff, W., Warwick, C., et al. 2009 ““It challenges members to think of their work through another kind of specialist's eyes”: Exploration of the Benefits and Challenges of Diversity in Digital Project Teams. Thriving on Diversity - Information Opportunities in a Pluralistic World, ” ASIS&T 2009 Annual Meeting, Vancouver, British Columbia,
Tei-C 2010 Current TEI Members., accessed October 12, 2010 (link)
Zakaria, N., Amelinckx, A. & Wilemon, D. 2008 “Navigating Across Culture and Distance: Understanding the Determinants of Global Virtual Team Performance., ” Work Group Learning: Understanding, Improving & Assessing How Groups Learn in Organizations, Sessa, V. I. & London, M. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates New York, NY