Transcript of "National culture and collaborative work 
April 20, 21:00 UTC (5pm EDT, 2pm PDT) (orientation session at 20:30 UTC) 
Rick Watson, University of Georgia
Site: VMC @ Temple University

The contents of this transcript may be further 
distributed if the complete transcript 
is kept together including this message. The 
contents many not be analyzed, quoted,
reported or otherwise disseminated without the 
explicit permission of the VMC 

This conference was sponsored by the 
ISWorld Net Virtual Meeting Center (VMC)
http://www.isworld.org/vmc

The slides associated with this transcript are the 
full record of this conference. The slides
are available from the VMC web site. 

Participants
Brent Auernheimer, California State University Fresno, brent@csufresno.edu
Barbara Kivowitz, Lotus Institute, Lotus Development Corp, Barbara_Kivowitz@lotus.com
Christoph Meier, dept. of sociology, university of giessen, fed. rep. germany,christoph.meier@sowi.uni-giessen.de
Robert Pearson, Carnegie Mellon University, bp2v@andrew.cmu.edu
William Wood, California State University, Chico, bwood@busipo.csuchico.edu
Joao Albino, UNESP - BAURU,jpalbino@usp.br
Jon Miller, University of Cape Town,jonmil@icon.co.za
Bernard Tan, National University of Singapore, btan@iscs.nus.edu.sg
Mike Chorost, Univ of Texas at Austin, mchorost@mail.utexas.edu
Fergal McGrath, University of Limerick, mcgrathf@ul.ie
Arvind Malhotra,USC,amalhot@bus.usc.edu
Karen Loch, Georgia State University, kloch@gsu.edu
Munir Mandviwalla, Temple University, mandviwm@thunder.ocis.temple.edu
(the people below were sharing Munir's computer)
Prasanna Kumar, Temple University, pjayapal@nimbus.ocis.temple.edu
Richard Webster, Temple University, rwebster@pahosp.com
Melissa de Leon Molina, Temple University, mdeleon@nimbus.ocis.temple.edu
Dorothea Deluca, Temple University, ddeluca@thunder.ocis.temple.edu
Marilyn Wilder, Temple University, momma@thunder.ocis.temple.edu
Ed Irizarry, Temple University, eiriza00@nimbus.temple.edu

ORIENTATION SESSION
4:24:30:Joao Albino:entered the room.
4:26:48:Munir Mandviwalla:entered the room.
4:29:22:Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Joao
4:31:12:Joao Albino:Hi Munir. Is it time to "warm up" the section ?
4:31:58:Rick Watson:entered the room.
4:32:31:Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Rick
4:33:01:Joao Albino:Hello Professor Watson !
4:33:01:Munir Mandviwalla:Joao, I guess we need some heat
4:33:30:Rick Watson:entered the room.
4:34:20:Rick Watson:G'day Joao and Munir
4:34:38:Joao Albino:Ok, letīs start. Itīs the first time I use WebBard.
4:35:40:Munir Mandviwalla:Joao, from now till 5pm (the time you see on the screen) we don't have a formal session planned.
4:36:04:Jon Miller:entered the room.
4:36:07:Munir Mandviwalla:I will be reviewing some usage tips and then it will be over to Rick
4:36:20:Joao Albino:Ok.
4:36:33:Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Jon
4:37:01:Jon Miller:Greetings Rick and All!
4:37:05:Joao Albino:Hello Jon
4:37:55:Joao Albino:I have a question to Munir. What is the default time to refresh in the system ?
4:38:13:Rick Watson:G'day Jon
4:38:15:Barbara Kivowitz:entered the room.
4:38:51:Robert Pearson:entered the room.
4:39:17:Munir Mandviwalla:entered the room.
4:39:48:Munir Mandviwalla:(graphic)
4:39:51:Joao Albino:Hello to Barbara from Brazil,
4:40:05:Munir Mandviwalla:Please make sure you are comfortable with the refresh rate.
4:40:12:Barbara Kivowitz:Hello all
4:40:25:Munir Mandviwalla:The best rate will vary based on your network connection, pc, and so on
4:40:31:Barbara Kivowitz:Bom dia, Joao
4:40:50:Munir Mandviwalla:If you set refresh to zero then you can stop the screen from jumping
4:41:04:Robert Pearson:Hello everyone. Bob Pearson here.
4:41:39:Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Bob, Barbara, just going over some usage tips
4:41:46:Jon Miller:Hi Barbara. So we have Brazil and South Africa now.
4:42:03:Munir Mandviwalla:(graphic)
4:42:17:Joao Albino:Hi Barbara. Do you speak Portuguese?
4:42:26:Munir Mandviwalla:If you run out of space in the default message window, click on compose to send a longer message
4:42:54:Munir Mandviwalla:Click on the cloud next a person's name to send them a private message
4:42:59:Robert Pearson:Is this the proper chat room for the discussion?
4:43:04:Barbara Kivowitz:I pretend I speak Portuguese
4:43:09:Fergal McGrath:entered the room.
4:43:23:Munir Mandviwalla:Yes, we will start formally at , when Rick will take over
4:43:36:Munir Mandviwalla:oops that should have said, start at 5
4:43:39:Mike Chorost:entered the room.
4:44:14:Munir Mandviwalla:We will also be experimenting with a new social protocol (follows)
4:44:16:Mike Chorost:(Mike cracks his knuckles, preparing for an active keyboard session)
4:44:45:Christoph Meier:entered the room.
4:44:53:Munir Mandviwalla:Social Protocol 1. Flow: Please stay within one concept of the issue currently under discussion. For example, the moderator suggests we discuss "how X relates to Y." Points you raise about X, Y, and their relationship will clearly be on topic. In addition, you are also encouraged to bring in for example, "how X relates to A." Expanding the discussion in this manner often leads to new insights and makes for an interesting conversation. However, starting a discussion on "A" by itself or "how A
4:45:31:Munir Mandviwalla:(cont.)However, starting a discussion on "A" by itself or "how A relates to B" will make the session less coherent for everybody.
4:45:43:Mike Chorost:The system says I can't get r to be any less than 10. That's pretty slow.
4:46:14:Jon Miller:left the room.
4:46:20:Munir Mandviwalla:Social Protocol 2. Moderator: Please respect the moderator's wish to move to the next topic. The moderator will use a special color (green) to highlight process messages such as "Lets set aside topic A for now and talk about topic B." If you would like to continue the topic you could try sending a private message to the moderator or inviting a subset of people to join you in one of the breakout rooms.
4:46:29:Brent Auernheimer:entered the room.
4:46:47:Jon Miller:entered the room.
4:47:41:Munir Mandviwalla:Social Protocol 3. Referencing: Please use the phrase "Re topicname" to respond to specific issues or comments or people. For example, "Re topic A" or "Re Munir's point." (thats it)
4:48:37:Munir Mandviwalla:If you are just arriving, please review the technical suggestions. The one about refresh is most important and I will repeat it now.
4:48:52:Munir Mandviwalla:(graphic)
4:49:18:Munir Mandviwalla:Hi Brent
4:49:39:Joao Albino:Hello Brent.
4:50:03:Munir Mandviwalla:If there are no questions on the technical and social tips perhaps we can have Rick tell some jokes?
4:50:03:Joao Albino:Hello Mike.
4:50:19:Brent Auernheimer:Hello - I'm here
4:50:47:Christoph Meier:hi everybody; my first try at this too; is there any way we can have a log of the session - I'm interested in discourse analysis and stuff
4:51:17:Rick Watson:That's putting me on the spot. I don't have any electronic jokes
4:51:56:Fergal McGrath:Munir, the university network is down and i am trying to work from home, its problematic to say the least.
4:52:51:Rick Watson:Welcome Fergal - and clearly we should say the best of Irish luck to you
4:54:09:Barbara Kivowitz:Re (Bad) Joke: a man goes to a doctor with a carrot in his ear, an apple in his eye and a tomato up his nose. "Doctor, what's wrong with me?" he asked. "You're not eating properly," said the doctor.
4:54:31:William Wood:entered the room.
4:55:50:Joao Albino:Hi Fergal and Willian (Bill ?)
4:55:59:Munir Mandviwalla:There will be a log of this session.
4:56:02:Rick Watson:Did he say that because he was a vegetarian?
4:56:35:Arvind Malhotra:entered the room.
4:56:39:William Wood:Hi - just testing - my name is Bill
4:56:43:Christoph Meier:great
4:57:18:Karen Loch:entered the room.
4:57:27:Munir Mandviwalla:Since we have a few minutes I will review (yet again) our new social protocol (with apologies to the people who have already seen it)
4:57:37:Karen Loch:Hello, just testing.
4:57:50:Rick Watson:G'day Karen
4:57:56:Munir Mandviwalla:1. Flow: Please stay within one concept of the issue currently under discussion. For example, the moderator suggests we discuss "how X relates to Y." Points you raise about X, Y, and their relationship will clearly be on topic. In addition, you are also encouraged to bring in for example, "how X relates to A." Expanding the discussion in this manner often leads to new insights and makes for an interesting conversation.
4:58:22:Bernard Tan:entered the room.
4:58:22:Munir Mandviwalla:(cont.) However, starting a discussion on "A" by itself or "how A relates to B" will make the session less coherent for everybody.
4:58:34:Barbara Kivowitz:do we stay right here for the conference?
4:58:57:Munir Mandviwalla:2. Moderator: Please respect the moderator's wish to move to the next topic. The moderator will use a special color (green) to highlight process messages such as "Lets set aside topic A for now and talk about topic B." If you would like to continue the topic you could try sending a private message to the moderator or inviting a subset of people to join you in one of the breakout rooms.
4:59:02:Robert Pearson:Munir, what refresh rate would you recommend?
4:59:51:Munir Mandviwalla:Yes, please stay right here.
5:00:11:Fergal McGrath:Rick, everyone here sends their regards.
5:00:11:Munir Mandviwalla:3. Referencing: Please use the phrase "Re topicname" to respond to specific issues or comments or people. For example, "Re topic A" or "Re Munir's point."
5:00:37:Munir Mandviwalla:Last tip coming up and then it is over to Rick
5:00:44:Karen Loch:Hi Rick, I'm pleased to be a part of the discussion.
5:00:45:Bernard Tan:Folks, it's 5 am in the morning in Singapore. Good morning
5:01:11:Christoph Meier:good morning to you!
5:01:30:Jon Miller:And it's 11pm in South Africa, Bernard
5:01:36:Mike Chorost:Hi. I teach courses in collaborative writing in the University at
5:01:41:Barbara Kivowitz:5am, you get bonus points, greetings
5:02:03:Mike Chorost:Trying again...I teach courses in collaborative writing at the University of Texas at Austin. Hi to all!

MAIN SESSION
5:02:28:Rick Watson:(process)Welcome to the session Here is an agenda for the class. 1. If you have not done so , quickly review the slides and identify points of clarification (refer to slides by number) 2. Why is culture the social scientist's microscope? 3. Address questions on slides 24 and 25. I will indicate when we should proceed from one question to the next.
5:04:14:Fergal McGrath:Mike, the network went down this evening, soory for not getting back.
5:05:01:Robert Pearson:Culture is both the lense through which we observe individuals and organizations as well as the object of social scientists' inquiries (e.g., a microscope under a microscopoe?)
5:05:20:Mike Chorost:Rick, I read the presentation but I don't think it explained terms like "pyramid of people." And regarding slide 25, I'm not sure I understand the point of asking about having a business meeting in a "family"?
5:07:10:Rick Watson:Re Culture as microscope. A microscope enables us to magnify the object of interest. If we want to study power distance in a group, then we select a culture where there are large differences - thus culture is our way of making social effects larger
5:08:03:Barbara Kivowitz:Microscopes see what's invisible to the eye; according the Edgar Schein, htee are 3 levels of culture, and the third, the one with the most enduring impact is the hardest to see and name, particularly by those living within it.
5:09:03:Christoph Meier:re rick on microscope: the trouble is that along with power distance (which ever way we find out about this,) a host of other things changes as well
5:09:08:Fergal McGrath:Rick, i am a little unsure of the family as a type , given the diversity and disfunctional nature, perhaps "clan" ?
5:10:39:Mike Chorost:It was certainly clear how choosing cultures as different as the US and Singapore highlighted the different ways in which people collaborate and make decisions. I thought that was the single most interesting point made by the presentation.
5:10:51:William Wood:A problem with cultural differences is separating these from all the other influences on a group, eg., personality
5:11:08:Rick Watson:Re Pyramid of people This is a culture where the predominant org. structure is hierarchical with large power distance. Anyone from such a culture? The family model applies to societies where the organization treats employees like members of the family. It is common on Chinese cultures. Can you elaborate Bernard
5:12:06:Karen Loch:Rick, I'd like to come back to the comment about selection of a culture for research purposes --
5:13:04:Rick Watson:Re family. Fergal, I am using Hofstede's terms. Clan might also apply as it is larger than a family and members should have the same responsibility to the group. Is there something cultural in your preference for clan
5:14:09:Rick Watson:Re Chris' comment on a host of other things. That's why we do experiments. With random assignment of subjects, we control for these other factors
5:14:19:Bernard Tan:Singapore is a high power distance culture. Seniority in organizations is very much like seniority in a family. For example, I don't address my bosses by their first names.
5:14:46:Fergal McGrath:Rick, the model slide 6, shows family as High power distance, can you help me here?
5:15:04:Rick Watson:OK Karen, what's the question on culture?
5:16:07:Brent Auernheimer:left the room.
5:16:11:Mike Chorost:I would say I'm from the opposite of a power-pyramid family. Academia is very informal, and the power structure tends to be very distributed -- there are only one or two layers of hierarchy. Of course, I'm talking about the official hierarchy. There is probably an informal, less easily codified hierarchy going on as well...but as a doctoral student I don't really get to see it.
5:16:25:Brent Auernheimer:entered the room.
5:17:18:Jon Miller:An interesting feature in South Africa is the strong pyramidal flavour of the old white management hierarchy, maybe transiting to more of a family in the emerging black management culture. A challenge for company decision making.
5:17:36:Karen Loch:It would seem that all cultures have these different components, and the challenge is to determine which dimension(s) via the microscope has the greatest effect in a given culture
5:17:49:Rick Watson:Re high power distance in the family. Fergal see Bernards response.
5:17:50:Rick Watson:Re high power distance in the family. Fergal see Bernards response.
5:18:05:Bernard Tan:At the National University of Singapore, we have a strong hierarchical structure. The Dean and Department Chair has a lot of power and authority... typical high power distance organization
5:18:36:Mike Chorost:In fact, in our classes we emphasize that lack of hierarchy. We value our online chats precisely because they "dethrones" the teacher. We also emphasize that our online chats's goal is NOT to achieve consensus on the meaning of a text, but rather to open up a multiplicity of possible interpretations. This point is well made in Lester Faigley's book "Fragments of Rationality" (he teaches in our department.)
5:19:12:Rick Watson:Re Karen's comment on culture - that's spot on.
5:20:04:Bernard Tan:In Singapore, even online classes would not dethrone the teacher. Even with electronic communication, students are carefully when communicating to teachers.
5:20:21:Karen Loch:bernard, re: university -to what extent do you believe the strong hierarchical structure to be organizational culture and to what extent a reflection of the national cultural?
5:23:06:Rick Watson:Re discussion on electronic class communication - it is clear that culture has a strong effect even when we try to circumvent it with electronic communication.
5:23:52:Robert Pearson:Re: response to Rick's question: CMC can have levelling effects in reducing status cues among participants in a group.
5:24:17:William Wood:I agree with Karen re culture. However, it takes several dimensions to define culture. Eg., in Australia, there are organisations with very high power-distance ratios, and others with small ones. It takes all dimensions to define a national culture, though it is easier to define a culture within an individual organisation meaningfully via a "microscope"
5:24:36:Rick Watson:CMC can level effects, but is this always desirable?
5:24:43:Mike Chorost:Bernard, it would be very interesting to see transcripts of online chats in Singaporean classes. In my experience, the sheer multiplicity of voices -- 20 students to 1 teacher, for example -- usually guarantees that the instructor plays a relatively minor role in the discussion. It may be an influential role, in that students pay careful attention to the teacher's contributions, but the teacher's voice is not the only one. I have experimented with anonymous online chats, where no one knows wh
5:25:15:Mike Chorost:...who is who. (I only get 500 characters?)
5:25:30:Robert Pearson:Whether reducing status differentials "helps" a group at arriving at "good" decisions depends on several factors, however. Info sharing alone ignors differences in vested interests and knowledge.
5:25:41:Karen Loch:Rick, re: desirability of leveling, I believe it depends on what one wants to achieve -- open negotiation and decision, or influencing the group
5:26:16:Bernard Tan:Mike: A big challenge for teachers in the US is to control the class. But the biggest challenge for teachers in Singapore is to get students to talk and to challenge us.
5:26:41:Rick Watson:(process)It is clear to this discussion leader that the class is not taking my powerful, authoritarian character seriously. Will someone please an qeustion 1
5:27:27:Mike Chorost:(scrolls down to question 1)
5:27:29:Christoph Meier:concerning rick's questions (slide 24) I have an issue: can we take the concept of a "business meeting" for granted?
5:28:07:Christoph Meier:it appears to me that before we profitable ask questions like "how might group technology be used to change behavior/the quality of meetings" we should find out just what a meeting means to those participating in it.
5:28:26:Christoph Meier:Laura(?) Miller has written on business meetings in the US and in Japan and has pointed out that they are rather different. While overtly devoted to "decision making" in both cultures, Japanese meetings are more about formally approving decisions that have been reached in prior "nemawashi" activity.
5:29:03:Rick Watson:Re leveling. Look at the slide 26. In the implementation phase we don't want leveling. We want the powerful people to exert authority so that they give resources to a project. Successful projects get resources not votes.
5:29:15:Mike Chorost:"1. If you have not done so , quickly review the slides and identify points of clarification (refer to slides by number)." Could you clarify what question is being asked? I'm not sure I understand what question is being asked there. "Identify points of clarification"?
5:29:37:Karen Loch:I believe the village model will exhibit a open flow of information, ideas, and a sense of freedom from fear of retribution or other negative consequences.
5:29:45:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Richard, I would think people would have more of a vested interest in the community. Each person's action in the market would have an impact on the others.
5:31:12:Rick Watson:Revised question 1 How might a typical group behave in a village market and how can technology change behavior. The US is a good example of a village market culture
5:32:58:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Dorrie. The village markets that I've been in have a lot of negotiations
5:33:03:Joao Albino:Tinking in Brazil. In a village market weīll have a open flow of information and the technology will leverage the flow.
5:33:28:Munir Mandviwalla:How is the U.S. a village market?
5:33:34:Rick Watson:OK. Karen is spot on again. So, what are the shortcomings of meetings in the village market? Karen is becoming the teacher's pet with such great answers. and thanks Karen for the virtual apple
5:33:39:William Wood:If a meeting is face to face, with about 5 participants, I don't believe technology would have much effect.
5:34:43:Karen Loch:Probably the biggest challenge with meetings in the village market is getting to consensus
5:34:46:Joao Albino:But, clearly, we have to pay attention in the number of participants, too.
5:35:03:Barbara Kivowitz:So much of village market economy depends on trust, known rituals, and social networks. Technology can provide an enduring, continuous, shared memory for these practices
5:35:04:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Marilyn. Would the US be a good example since there are different cultures evident in the different geographical areas?
5:35:09:Rick Watson:Why is the US a village market -- because power is lower and risk uncertainty low -- also the market model is most prevalent in the US. We believe in equal opportunity, etc.
5:35:13:Robert Pearson:I believe a village market is defined by geographic proximity and seasonality (in contrast to the global market in which most of us participate in the U.S.) Information technologies encourage the breakdown of these constraints if uniformly available (a big if).
5:35:30:William Wood:Meetings that I have attended in some US organisations do not correspond with Karen's definition of a village market.
5:36:16:Karen Loch:I agree with William, however I wonder if it's not due to organizational culture which will not always match national culture?
5:36:41:Mike Chorost:Could someone clarify for me exactly what a "village market" means? I see on slide 6 that it is contrasted with other kinds of organization, i.e. "well-oiled machine" and "pyramid of people", but it is not clear to me how the US is a "village market." That is its ideal of direct democracy, yes. And it is probably achieved in companies. But the US doesn't have that kind of discourse, not on a national scale, anyway.
5:36:57:William Wood:Are we talking about the state of US society (market model, belief in open opportunity etc) or meetings in US organisations - quite different topics?
5:38:24:Mike Chorost:Does "village market" = marketplace of ideas? Equal opportunity among sellers? Free choice among buyers?
5:38:39:Robert Pearson:left the room.
5:39:33:Rick Watson:Meetings in the village market are great for the exchange of ideas, but often everyone wants to speak -- that's because in a market there are many buyers and sellers. technology can help by creating multiple communication channels instead of one. so we make more airtime available. ANother problem is trying to get people to agree with the decision. This is harder when power distance is low. So, we can use the technology to involve more people and high levels of participation often help to accel
5:39:47:Mike Chorost:William, that's just the question I was trying to ask -- well phrased.
5:41:09:Rick Watson:(process)Ok. Let's try to tackle one more question. Are there cultures that might be more or less receptive to group technology?
5:41:10:William Wood:Surely we are talking about MEETINGS - where all parties are equal, and there is a low avoidance of risk. There are no buyers and sellers as such. Depends on purpose of meeting.
5:42:02:Barbara Kivowitz:Helpful explanation Rick. Also - people may not know what is available to buy, who has what, and where is it. Technology can help with finding objects and expertise
5:42:12:Mike Chorost:Yes, the economic metaphor is perhaps distracting/confusing.
5:42:43:Fergal McGrath:This seems to be moving down to information exchange and dare i say transaction cost models and away from the undefinable "Culture"
5:42:53:Karen Loch:That is almost the question we're posing in the Middle East -- not limited to group technology but IT in general;
5:43:15:Brent Auernheimer:Back to Karen/Bill's question about national vs organizational cultures, one of the most vivid published examples I know of is "Building an Information System for Collaborative Researchers: A Case Study from the Brain-tumor Research Domain, _Software: Practice and Experience_ 27 (3), 1997. The culture clash here was between the software developers implementing the collaboration system and the MDs who (said they were) interested in it. A must read for my software engineering classes! Lots of g
5:43:23:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Dorrie. Is this a trick question? Collectivist societies are more group oriented. (Like East vs West)
5:43:52:Rick Watson:Mike and William -- remember the village market, , etc are metaphor. US organizations are not markets, but there is a much freer exchange of ideas, etc than in other cultural forms. FOr example, in meetings in Singapore, people are reluctant to disagree, even mildly, with their superiors.
5:44:01:Brent Auernheimer:(con't) Lots of good horror stories about meeting styles, expectations, etc ...
5:44:31:Joao Albino:re: cultures more or less receptive to group technology? Yes, I thnik so. When you have a society that is not oriented to group decisions, it is very difficult to make them participate.
5:44:36:Karen Loch:We have found that preference for face-to-face and not willing to violate the 'loyalty group' are significant
5:45:22:William Wood:Depends on who in the society. One experiment with GroupSystems technology with a particular ethnic group with high power distance ratios found that anonymity had the effect of generating high levels of enthusiasm amongst people with low power in the society, and resentment from the power-holders. The question is what would happen if this were adopted on a widespread basis. Would it erode the authority of the elders, and cause a breakdown in that society? Or, would it be a "good thing", however
5:45:48:Rick Watson:Re collectivistic societies - they are more group oriented -- the needs of the group are put before the needs of the individual
5:45:53:Bernard Tan:I'm not sure whether any culture would simply resist group technology. I guess if people do resist, it is because the technology features go against cultural beliefs.
5:45:58:Barbara Kivowitz:Perhaps affinity for groupware has less to do with collectivism vs individualism and more to so with how meaning is made in the culture and whether the form of menaing making can be supported by technology
5:46:47:Karen Loch:I agree with Joao -- in Middle East there is high power distance and a collectivist tendancy, compared to US. So we see high loyalty to the group, but within the group, deference to the power hierarc
5:47:39:Mike Chorost:I know there's been some research on how men and women (surely different "cultures") behave in real-time chat environments. There are fairly clear distinctions in number of questions asked, number of times someone agrees/reinforces, disagrees, changes the subject, and so on. I could dig out a bibliography for anyone interested.
5:47:53:Arvind Malhotra:Barbara makes a good point.. it is cuture driven meaning making
5:48:28:Christoph Meier:re Mike's message: yes, please; I'd be interested
5:48:33:Rick Watson:Re middle east Karen, would group technologies be useful in some situations? Similarly, Joao what about Brazil?
5:49:25:Karen Loch:I think GSS would be very difficult because of the high pdi; they would not be comfortable with the leveling effect.
5:49:49:Munir Mandviwalla:This is richard. In collectivist societies with great power distance is there even a need for group support. Or are a few in the heirarchy going to simply pass on their orders.
5:50:51:Joao Albino:Re: would group technologies be useful in some situations? Yes, Rick, I think so. But here in Brazil we have the difficult to implement and expand newer technologies (big country, infraestructure problems, education of peple, etc.).
5:51:18:Brent Auernheimer:Re: group technologies/cultures/leveling. Because of the ethnic make-up where I live, I've found the following to be very helpful: Mejias, Vogel, Shepherd, GSS Meeting Productivity and Participation Equity: A US and Mexico Cross-cultural field study, Proceedings of HICSS-30, and
5:51:51:Fergal McGrath:The Irish tend to be very individualistic and show no great love of authority, the key issues would be the sharing of valuable content.
5:51:53:Bernard Tan:Singapore is collectivistic and high power distance. If we want to introduce groupware here, we can highlight the ability of groupware to foster consensus... not reduce status differentials.
5:52:39:Brent Auernheimer:(con't) Mejias, Lazeneo, Rico, Torres, Vogel, A Cross-cultural Comparison of GSS and non-GSS COnsensus and Satisfaction Levels WIthin and Betwen the US and Mexico, Proceedings of HICSS-29, IEEE-CS Press.
5:52:56:Fergal McGrath:Joao, with regard to implemenatation the key issue is motivation.
5:53:12:Bernard Tan:I think the Mejias et al. paper appear in JMIS too.
5:53:54:Barbara Kivowitz:If we are thinking of technology in a business meeting context, then my experience, particularly with Fortune 500 companies, has been that very few meetings are uni-cultural, but rather multi- national. That adds extra complexity to the technology adoption questions since multiple cultures with differing traits are represented
5:54:02:Rick Watson:Re need for group support in collectivistic societies. Leaders will have problems collecting accurate data if no one will tell them the truth. They need good data to make sense of the environment. Collectivistics societies may need group support more than the individualistic societies. Are the current Asian problems due to poor environmental sensing?
5:54:11:Karen Loch:I think Bernard hits on a good point - if we wanting to introduce technology, we want to emphasize the desired end result, i.e. consensus, and define the trade-offs i.e. reduce status differentials.
5:54:21:Bernard Tan:Meijas paper... JMIS, 1997, 13(3), 137-161.
5:54:39:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Dorrie. So a collectivist feature list for collaborative system would not not not include anonymity
5:54:59:Joao Albino:Re: In which situations group technologies woul be useful? I believe to foster consensus, highlight participation without fear of authority, and so on.
5:55:13:Mike Chorost:One good source: Wojann, P. "Computer-Mediated Communications: The Great Equalizer Between Men and Women?" Technical Communication Quarterly, 747-752 (1994)
5:56:04:William Wood:Re Richard's point. A meeting might legitimately be held to get enthusiasm for a decision made at a "higher" level. It might be very effective if that is achieved, even though attendees have no input into the decision. GSS could be valuable here, but used in a quite different way to trying to achieve levelling, the "best" solution etc.
5:56:54:Bernard Tan:In high power distance and collectivistic cultures, leaders normally go out and gather public opinions, and then make the final decisions themselves. Groupware is useful for soliciting opinions.
5:56:56:Munir Mandviwalla:Rick, can you elaborate re asian market and environmental sensing
5:57:04:Rick Watson:For Dorrie, no -- I think a collaborative system for a collectivistic society should include anonymity so people can express their thoughts without fear of upsetting the power structure. However, this does not mean they will use anonymity because culture can be so powerful as to override technology.
5:57:18:Mike Chorost:oops: Wojahn, P.
5:58:11:Bernard Tan:Continue: So if we bring groupware into organizations to help managers gather opinions but to replace their decision making power, I'm sure they will accept the technology.
5:58:57:Bernard Tan:Sorry, I omitted the word 'not' before replace their...
5:59:36:Karen Loch:What Bernard then is suggesting is that we make technology culturally appropriate
5:59:37:Munir Mandviwalla:This is richard. Group support might be used (abused) to manipulate people in these situations (Collectivist/high power distance) into feeling like they are part of the process when they are not. It might make participants them feel better.
5:59:49:Rick Watson:Re Asian market and environmental sensing. Some Asian countries are having a tough time handling the present crisis. If the leaders are not getting the true picture because of power distance effects, then appropriate solutions will take longer to emerge. For example, Indonesia is making few relevant changes. Why isn't Suharto getting the message? Maybe is ministers are unwilling to be honest.
6:00:36:Joao Albino:Yes, I agrre with Bernard. The technology will help gather the opinions, BUT, it will help managers to decide.
6:00:49:Munir Mandviwalla:Rick. this is Dorrie. But if the tool uses anonymity then how do they know that the leader is speaking?
6:00:54:Mike Chorost:This is going to sound like a joke, but it really isn't. I've wondered what would happen if Clinton, Saddam, Netanyahu, and Arafat all had Lotus Notes (and could type.) Would they be able to have more productive discussions in such a format? Would the "distance" imposed by the screen be more conductive to communication and problem-solving?
6:01:53:Rick Watson:Is Lotus Notes a whitehouse intern
6:02:09:Mike Chorost:Rick, I wonder if one would even need sophisticated groupware to achieve better "environmental sensing." Perhaps simple email could -- and is -- already having that effect.
6:02:49:Brent Auernheimer:Two more things I have been reading that got me thinking about these issues: Vick, Perspectives on and Problems with Computer-Mediated Teamwork: Current Groupware Issues and Assumptions, to appear (if it hasn't already) in _Journal of Computer Documentation_ May issue (I wrote a probably incoherent commentary for the article), and
6:02:49:Brent Auernheimer:Two more things I have been reading that got me thinking about these issues: Vick, Perspectives on and Problems with Computer-Mediated Teamwork: Current Groupware Issues and Assumptions, to appear (if it hasn't already) in _Journal of Computer Documentation_ May issue (I wrote a probably incoherent commentary for the article), and
6:03:03:Rick Watson:Re dorrie and the leader. We can always set up the system to identify the leader. Anonymity can be switched on and off at the individual level.
6:03:03:Rick Watson:Re dorrie and the leader. We can always set up the system to identify the leader. Anonymity can be switched on and off at the individual level.
6:04:26:Brent Auernheimer:(con't) a wonderful book one of my colleagues wrote recently: Robt Levine, A Geography of Time, Basic Books (1997). Good stuff about that makes me wonder about whether the magnitude of individual differences swamps the cultural differences (someone brought that up earlier), and
6:04:35:William Wood:The problems in countries like Indonesia are more to do with their lack of democracy, which, admittedly, is partly due to culture. In this case, if some kind of groupware were introduced, I doubt if it would have much effect.
6:04:41:Munir Mandviwalla:This is Dorrie: But then that is not anonymity
6:05:09:Karen Loch:Rick, have you or does anyone know of a case where the leader was identifed but everyone but everyone else remained anonymous and what effect do you think / did that have? have?
6:05:56:Rick Watson:So, what is conclusion. Which is more powerful technology or culture? please record your vote
6:06:02:Bernard Tan:People have said that Indonesia runs like a 'family business'. Even if suharto gets the message, he may not want to implement changes because it is bad for his 'family business'.
6:06:31:Brent Auernheimer:whether polychronic people will do well with GSS and monochronic personalities won't
6:06:57:Rick Watson:Re identified leader and anonymous group members. I have not seen such research.
6:07:02:Joao Albino:RE: Which is more powerful technology or culture? I think that culture is more powerfull.
6:07:20:Brent Auernheimer:Vote: I vote for "individual differences"
6:07:27:Munir Mandviwalla:From Temple: We have consensus. All 7 vote for culture (and these are computer geeks)
6:07:28:Bernard Tan:Culture is more powerful. People will normally not change their culture just to use technology. But they will use technology to support their cultural values.
6:08:00:Barbara Kivowitz:RE: culture and technology - Culture rules
6:08:23:Karen Loch:I concur -- culture.
6:08:29:Christoph Meier:well, my personal concusion is that it is rather difficult to carry on a coherent discussion in this way
6:08:33:Fergal McGrath:Technology, just look at the internet.
6:08:37:Arvind Malhotra:Culture all the way
6:08:44:Mike Chorost:Rick, the question is unanswerable: the two are mutually constitutive of each other. But technology does emerge from a "culture" of its own (engineers, programmers, etc. have their own unique interests) and it has an immense impact on the larger culture around them. I'm also thinking of Schumpeter's argument that technology is THE largest driver of economic growth.
6:08:50:William Wood:Re the vote - culture would win, but if technology is designed to fit the culture (eg., to support consensus building where appropriate etc etc, it can be very powerful.
6:10:12:Rick Watson:Well, if maybe everyone is right. Culture could win in the shortrun, but in the long run technology is changing everyone's life (eg the Internet as Fergal points out).
6:10:14:Fergal McGrath:I should say good technology
6:11:09:Karen Loch:I think that technology plays a role in the success of systems shortrun, but overtime there are the downstream effects of economic development and socio-cultural change.
6:11:28:Munir Mandviwalla:Perhaps culture rules only if it impacts deep values wheras technology might impact surface or less ingrained values (our consensus is gone
6:11:37:Rick Watson:I've forgetten whether the class finishes at 6 or 6:30. but I willing to declare victory at this point. Thanks for the interesting discussion.
6:11:58:Mike Chorost:Christoph, it is difficult. CMC discussions tend to diverge rather than converge. But this is the great value of CMC -- that sparking of a multiplicity of ideas. There are other software solutions designed to facilitate consensus; online chat is simply not one of them.
6:12:50:William Wood:I doubt whether the Internet is changing culture very much at this stage (it may in future). Because a lot of people (mainly in Western societies) are using it does not mean it is changing anybody's culture. But, if technology is widened to include the effect of TV etc, I think this form of technology may be having a dramatic effect.
6:13:00:Karen Loch:thanks for leading an interesting discussion; I'd like to engage in an on-going dialogue on how anyone is capturing / measuring cultural values and beliefs.
6:13:38:Munir Mandviwalla:Thanks for coming to Phili -- please provide us with your feedback on http://ww2.cis.temple.edu/isworld/vmc/feedback.htm
6:14:07:Mike Chorost:(is hungry and needs to fetch his laundry. But I'll keep this window open for a while. Thanks for an interesting discussion!)
6:14:11:Barbara Kivowitz:thank you all for a stimulating conversation
6:14:31:Christoph Meier:bye folks, it was in interesting experience!
6:14:58:William Wood:Thanks for an interesting session.
6:15:31:Joao Albino:Thank you to everyone for an interesting discussion and a good conversation to you all !
6:16:04:Bernard Tan:Munir: Are you going to shut this down or can we still hang around for a while more?
6:16:12:Arvind Malhotra:thanx to all
6:16:40:Munir Mandviwalla:If you would like to continue, please feel free to stay or use one of the breakout rooms.
6:17:02:Munir Mandviwalla:I have to attend to my class so I will be leaving but the system will stay on.
6:17:14:Fergal McGrath:Rick and all participating, thanks for the session