We Are in the Same Boat: The Effect of Social Interdependences on Knowledge Boundary Spanning in Interdisciplinary Collaboration

同舟共濟：多重學域合作中社會互賴關係對知識疆界跨越之影響

朱彩馨(Tsai-Hsin Chu)；邱于慈(Yu-Tzu Chiu)

interdisciplinary collaboration ； social interdependence ； knowledge boundary spanning ； project performance ； e-learning content development ； 多重學域合作 ； 社會互賴 ； 知識疆界跨越 ； 專案績效 ； 數位學習內容開發

資訊管理學報

24卷3期（2017 / 07 / 31）

307 - 340

英文

Purpose － As organizations emphasize cross-functional team to leverage knowledge across disciplines for providing better services to customers, it is important to note the challenge due to knowledge boundaries within the collaboration among members who are trained by different disciplines. Knowledge is like a double-edged knife that can drive innovative solutions as well can hinder knowledge creation across functions because of its tacit and stickiness nature. The different assumptions, interpretations, and value schemes embedded in individual discipline make the team members have inconsistent interpretations and interests even when they use common terminologies. The raising misunderstandings and conflicts highlight an important issue called knowledge boundary problem. Design/methodology/approach－This study investigates knowledge boundary spanning by perceived goal, task and reward social interdependences under the interdisciplinary collaborative context where members have different professional backgrounds. Taking e-learning content development that engages different professions as an example, this study conducted a survey to empirically examine how social interdependences facilitate the effectiveness of knowledge boundary spanning, and subsequently influenced the project performance. In a project level, we collected totally 70 pair of data, each of which was represented by the answers of two team members with different professional backgrounds. Findings－Applying the Partial Least Squares (PLS) analysis, our findings highlighted that effective knowledge boundary spanning could predict product and process qualities. The findings also showed that perceived goal and task interdependences had significant and positive impacts on the effectiveness of knowledge boundary spanning, but perceived reward interdependence did not. Research limitations/implications－This study contributes current research by demonstrating the importance of knowledge boundary spanning for making a successful interdisciplinary collaboration. This study also extends previous research findings by showing the way where effective knowledge boundary spanning can be proactively managed through social interdependences perceived by team members who have different professions. Practical implications－To practice, our findings provide a solution to manage knowledge boundary problems that might rise problems and conflicts across professions. For effectively applying the tacit, sticky and localized practical knowledge constructed by members from other discipline, team members have to extensively concentrate on the effectiveness of lexicons transfer, interpretations translation, and interests transformation. When working on an interdisciplinary collaboration project, managers can increase the perceived goal interdependence by designing a share goal which can be accomplished when the subgroups pressure their individual goals. And, manager can make the task intertwined to increase the perceived task interdependence. Originality/value－Our findings highlight knowledge boundary issue in a collaboration evolved with members who have different professions. Our finding contributes service science and knowledge management research by making aware of the impact of knowledge boundary spanning, as well as by suggesting a way for managing knowledge boundary spanning proactively.

當組織組成跨領域團隊並期望藉助多重學域的知識來提供顧客更好的服務時，我們必需留意由於成員各自相異的專業知識而形成的合作障礙。知識就像是個雙面刃；它雖然可能促成創新的解法，但也由於知識具備高度的內隱與情境黏著性，它也可能使得跨領域的知識創造失靈。在此，即使團隊成員使用同一個術語，但由於各個專業領域所內嵌的假設、詮釋與價值觀各異，使得成員們可能對此術語產生不一致的解釋與關注重點，進而產生許多誤解與衝突。此種因為知識而產生的合作障礙，即為知識疆界問題。本研究探討在多重學域合作的情境中，團隊成員所感知的社會互賴關係（social interdependences）如何影響知識疆界的跨越。社會互賴關係提供成員橋接知識疆界的動機，好讓彼此能達成各自的目標、完成自己的工作、並獲得獎賞。以數位學習內容開發專案（其本質上需要不同專業領域的成員合作）為例，本研究調查社會互賴關係如何促進有效的知識疆界跨越並進而提高專案績效。以專案為資料分析的基礎，本研究收集了70 組資料，每一組資料皆由二位具有不同專業背景的成員填寫。運用Partial Least Squares（PLS）分析，我們發現有效的知識疆界跨越可以提昇專案產出與過程的品質。而在社會互賴關係中，當成員們感知到目標與任務的互賴將可促成知識疆界跨越，但感知獎賞互賴則無此效應。我們於文後也討論此研究發現對學術與實務可能帶來的意涵。

1. eLQSC. (2013), Elearning courseware quality checklist., available at http://www.ecotw. com.tw/elq/teaching002.php ( accessed 6 April 2015).
2. Abdel-Hamid, T.,Sengupta, K.,Hardebeck, M.(2000).The effect of reward structures on allocating shared staff resources among interdependent software projects: an experimental investigation.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,41(2),115-125.
3. Akkerman, S.F.,Bakker, A.(2011).Boundary crossing and boundary objects.eview of Educational Research,81(2),132-169.
4. Aladwani, A.M.,Rai, A.,Ramaprasad, A.(2000).Formal participation and performance of the system development group: The role of group heterogeneity and group-based rewards.SIGMIS Database,31(4),25-40.
5. Alavi, M.,Leidner, D.E.(2001).Research commentary: Technology-mediated learning-a call for greater depth and breadth of research.Information System Research,12,1-10.
6. Allen, B.,Sargent, L.D.,Bradley, L.M.(2003).Differential effects of task and reward interdependence on perceived helping behavior, effort, and group performance.Small Group Research,34(6),716-740.
7. Amason, A.C.,Schweiger, D.(1997).The effects of conflict on strategic decision making effectiveness and organizational performance.International Journal of Conflict Management,5(3),239-253.
8. Andres, H.P.,Zmud, R.W.(2001).A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination.Journal of Management Information Systems,18(3),41-71.
9. Bourdieu, P.(1990).The logic of practice.Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
10. Brown, J.S.,Duguid, P.(2001).Knowledge and organization: A social practice perspective.Organizational Science,12(2),198-213.
11. Brown, T.(2008).Design thinking.Harvard Business Review,86(6),84-92.
12. Carlile, P.R.(2002).A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development.Organization Science,13(4),442-455.
13. Carlile, P.R.(2004).Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries.ORGANIZATION SCIENCE,15(5),555-568.
14. Curtis, B.,Krasner, H.,Iscoe, N.(1998).A field study of the software design process for large systems.Communications of the ACM,31(11),1268-1287.
15. Daley, D.M.(2009).Interdisciplinary Problems and Agency Boundaries: Exploring Effective Cross-Agency Collaboration.Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory,19(3),477-493.
16. Davenport, T.H.,Prusak, L.(1998).Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know.Boston, MA:Harvard Business School Press.
17. Diamantopoulos, A.,Winklhofer, H.M.(2001).Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development.Journal of Marketing Research,38(2),269-277.
18. Du, W.,Pan, S.L.(2013).Boundary spanning by design: toward aligning boundary-spanning capacity and strategy in IT outsourcing.IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,60(1),59-76.
19. Evans, S.,Scarbrough, H.(2014).Supporting knowledge translation through collaborative translational research initiatives: 'Bridging' versus 'blurring' boundary-spanning approaches in the UK CLAHRC initiative.Social Science & Medicine,106,119-127.
20. Gagné, M.(2009).A model of knowledge-sharing motivation.Human Resource Management,48(4),571-589.
21. Garman, A.N.,Leach, D.C.,Spector, N.(2006).Worldviews in collision: conflict and collaboration across professional lines.Journal of Organizational Behavior,27(7),829-849.
22. Ghobadi, S.,D'Ambra, J.(2011).Coopetitive knowledge sharing: An analytical review of literature.Journal of Knowledge Management,9(4),307-317.
23. Gupta, A.K.,Govindarajan, V.(2000).Knowledge flow within multimedia corporations.Strategic Management Journal,21,473-496.
24. Hackman, J.R.(1987).The design of work teams.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
25. Hair, J.F.,Hult, G.T.M.,Ringle, C.M.,Sarstedt, M.(2014).A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SME).CA, CA:SAGE Publications.
26. Haythornthwaite, C.(2006).Learning and knowledge networks in interdisciplinary collaborations.Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology,57(8),1079-1092.
27. Hsu, J.S.-C.,Chu, T.-H.,Lin, T.-C.,Lo, C.-F.(2014).Coping knowledge boundaries between information system and business disciplines: An intellectual capital perspective.Information & Management,51(2),283-295.
28. Huang, E.Y.,Huang, T.K.(2013).Exploring the effect of boundary objects on knowledge interaction.Decision Support Systems,56,140-147.
29. Humphreys, T.,Leung, L.,Weakley, A.(2008).Embedding expert users in the interaction design process: A case study.Design Studies,29(6),603-622.
30. Hustad, E.(2007).Managing structural diversity: the case of boundary spanning networks.Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management,5(4),399-410.
31. Johnson, D.W.,Johnson, R.T.(2005).New developments in social interdependence theory.Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs,131(4),285-358.
32. Kruck, S.E.,Teer, F.P.(2009).Interdisciplinary Student Teams Projects: A Case Study.Journal of Information Systems Education,20(3),325-330.
33. Lave, J.(1988).Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life.Cambridge University Press.
34. Laxton, R.,Applebee, A.C.(2010).Developing communities of practice around e-Learning and project management.Journal of Distance Education,24(1),123-142.
35. Lay, J.,Mol, A.(2002).Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices.Durham, NC:Duke University Press.
36. Leonard-Barton, D.(1995).Well Springs of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Sources of Innovation.Boston, MA.:Harvard Business School Press.
37. Li, W.(2010).Virtual knowledge sharing in a cross-cultural context.Journal of Knowledge Management,14(1),38-50.
38. Lin, J.-Y.(2014).Department of Information Management, National Sun Yat-sen University.
39. Lynch, M.M.,Roecker, J.(2007).Project managing e-learning: a habdbook for successful design, delivery and management.New York, NY:Routledge.
40. Mennecke, B.E.,Valacich, J.S.(1998).Information is what you make of it- the influence of group history and computer support on information sharing, decision quality, and member perceptions.Journal of Management Information Systems,15(2),173-198.
41. Misra, R.B.(2004).Global IT outsourcing: metrics for success of all parties.Journal of Information Technology Cases and Applications,6(3),21-34.
42. Nelson, K.M.,Cooprider, J.G.(1996).The contribution of shared knowledge to is group performance.MIS Quarterly,20(4),409-432.
43. Nicholson, A.Y.W.,Ngai, J.Y.K.(1996).Managing the development and production of interactive multimedia courseware in education.Australisn Journal of Educational Technology,12(1)
44. Nonaka, I.(1994).A dynamic theory of organization knowledge creation.Organization Science,5(1),14-37.
45. Oborn, E.,Dawson, S.(2010).Learning across Communities of Practice: An Examination of Multidisciplinary Work E. Oborn and S. Dawson Learning across communities of practice.British Journal of Management,21(4),843-858.
46. Pee, L.G.,Kankanhalli, A.,Kim, H.-W.(2010).Knowledge sharing in information systems development: A social interdependence perspective.Journal of Association for Information Systems,11(10),550-575.
47. Roberts, T.L.,Cheney, P.H.,Sweeney, P.D.,Hightower, R.T.(2004).The effects of information technology project complexity on group interaction.Journal of Management Information Systems,21(3),223-247.
48. Sanner, S.J.,Deis, M.H.(2009).How can interdisciplinary collaboration between schools promote culturally diverse students' success.Academy of Educational Leadership Journal,13(4),19-34.
49. Sharp, H.,Rogers, Y.,Preece, J.(2006).Interaction Design: Beyond Human- Computer Interaction.Taipei, Taiwan:John Wiley and Sons, Inc..
50. Siemsen, E.,Balasubramanian, S.,Roth, A.V.(2007).Incentives That Induce Task- Related Effort, Helping, and Knowledge Sharing in Workgroups.Management Science,53(10),1533-1550.
51. Star, S.L.,Griesemer, J.R.(1989).Institutional ecology, 'translations' and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1970-39.Social Studies of Science,19(3),387-420.
52. Szulanski, G.(1996).Exploring external stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm.Strategic Management Journal,17,27-43.
53. Vegt, G.S.V.D.,Vliert, E.V.D.(2005).Effects of perceived skill dissimilarity and task interdependence on helping in work teams.Journal of Management,31(1),73-89.
54. Wageman, R.(1995).Interdependence and group effectiveness.Administrative Science Quarterly,40,145-180.
55. Wageman, R.,Baker, G.(1997).Incentives and cooperation: The joint effects of task and reward interdependence on group performance.Journal of Organizational Behavior,18,139-158.
56. Wallace, L.,Keil, M.,Rai, A.(2004).How software project risk affects project performance: an investigation of the dimensions of risk and an exploratory model.Decision Sciences,35(2),289-321.
57. Wang, C.-M.(2011).Instructional design for cross-cultural online collaboration: grouping strategies and assignment design.Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,27(2),243-258.
58. Weldon, E.,Weingart, L.R.(1993).Group goals and group performance.British Journal of Social Psychology,32(4),307-334.
59. Yanow, D.(2004).Translating local knowledge to organizational peripheries.British Journal of Management,15,S29-S25.
60. Yuanyue, F.,Ye, H.,Pan, S. L.(2010).Delivering knowledge across boundaries: A process model of knowledge delivery in offshoring projects.Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems,3(3),57-79.
61. Yusoff, N.A.M.,Salim, S.S.(2012).Investigating cognitive task difficulties and expert skills in e-Learning storyboards using a cognitive task analysis technique.Computers & Education,58(1),652-665.
62. Zhuge, H.(2002).knowledge flow within multimedia corporations.Expert Systems with Applications,22,313-320.