Relational_Scaffolding_Model_of_Hybrid_Communication

Slide 1: Lucerne School of Business A Relational Scaffolding Model of Hybrid Communication Jens Meissner, Lucerne School of Business Harald Tuckermann, University of St. Gallen 3rd International Conference on Communities & Technologies Michigan, June 2007 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 2: 2 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 3: Epistemology: Relationships as Wording: Scaffolding as a sources of shared meaning and powerful metaphor (Woerner, social reality (Gergen, Hosking, Orlikowski, Yates, 2005) Dachler,…) A Relational Scaffolding Model of Hybrid Communication Interest: Opposed to isolated research of Computer-mediated Communication (e.g. Griffith, Sawyer, Neele 2003) 3 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 4: Research Question Literature implicates that face-to-face- interaction and virtual communications are increasingly blended together. But how does that take place in practice? Which typical relational patterns in organizations occur when cooperation takes place in hybrid work settings? 4 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 5: Theoretical perspective • Communication: Reciprocal process, deeply rooted in social relationships • Technology: Socially constructed, usually not-yet stabilized • Both (C&T) are embedded in cultural and organizational contexts 5 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 6: Relational Scaffolding Model Content Dimension I. II. Relationship Dimension IV. III. Technology Dimension Organizational / Cultural Context(s) I. Contextualization of content by personal relationships II. Shaping of relationships by content III. Technological enabling of human communication in CMC IV. Social construction of technology by human communication 6 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 7: Findings Eight typical patterns: - Social Awareness - Activation of Hierarchy - Committing on Ground Rules - People Placements - Explification Spiral - Superior Orientation - Communication Code of Conduct - Consciousness About the Documenting Effect 7 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 8: „Social Awareness“ A communication professional working in an insurance company, organized as a top-down hierarchy: “[In our daily coffee breaks] we care for this interaction but they are not formal settings – they are informal talks. But we do care for business issues, too. Well, it’s a platform where we meet once or twice a day. One comes along the floor [he is pointing on the open door] - “Coffee!” and then we know now comes a phase of relaxation and to talk about things beyond the garden fence. We can deal with private issues – “my cat’s sickness” and such things. And I think, that is very important.” (Communication professional, B228) 8 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 9: „Activation of Hierarchy“ A communication manager of the same company: “For instance in Belgium: Even if you dial the direct number of anyone … you get anywhere except for the person you want to talk with. Within ten minutes this person is sick, on vacation or in a meeting. There I have to ask: Let they negate themselves or do they not know their business? When I really need information from a person I have no choice than to escalate the whole thing to the upper levels. To ask the CEO. Because I need the information for doing my work.” (Communication Manager, B138) 9 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 10: „Committing on Ground Rules“ An HR Executive in a pharmaceuticals company, organized in a matrix organization: “[There are] simply certain physical limitations how much you can realize the personal get-together. Either you pull all people together or – as a leader – you visit them at the site. There are definitely certain limitations and a compromise has to be found. But this also means that other rules have to be defined. We named them “groundrules”. For example, we imposed on us different groundrules depending on whether we work with video conferencing, NetMeeting or Shareweb. Especially the rules have to be changed about how we deal with issues in interpersonal communication.” (HR Executive, C147) 10 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 11: Pattern „People Placements“ “I looked for possibilities to place my people in projects of my colleagues in other locations of the company. On first glance, most of the people said: “Why should I work on a project in Geneva when my office is in Zurich?” But it’s a fact that the efficiency is massively increased by this measure.” (mainly company A, project oriented) 11 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 12: Other Patterns… • Explification Spiral • Superior Orientation • Communication Code of Conduct • Consciousness About the Documenting Effect of CMC (Hancock et al. 2004: Recordability) 12 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 13: Organizational Scaffolding Practices Social Processes / Influences Patterns • I. Contextualization of Message Content People Placements • Social Awareness • II. Shaping Relationships Committing on Groundrules • Communication Code of Conduct • III. Technological Enabling of Explification Spiral Communication • IV. Social Constructing of Technology Creating Consciousness About the Documenting Effect of CMC • V. Organizational / Cultural Context(s) Activation of Hierarchy • Superior Orientation • Communication Code of Conduct 13 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 14: Conclusions • Towards relational scaffolding in hybrid communication: – CMC seems to be complementary to face-to-face communication, not substitutive – In organizing people are actively and continuously balancing face-to-face- communication and CMC – When CMC does not work remarkable efforts are undertaken to sustain the relationship basis 14 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 15: Conclusions • Relationship Scaffolding Model proved helpful as heuristics to investigate hybrid communication – The relationship dimension can be understood as an anchor point for hybrid communication – Artefacts can mean different things to different social groups within the same company – Elaborating on the relationship dimension leads to a clearer media use and to less misunderstandings in hybrid communication 15 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business

Slide 16: Thank you! This research was part of the project “Social capital in digital context (D-90)” granted by the WWZ- Forum of Basel University. Lucerne School of Business Jens O. Meissner Harald Tuckermann Lucerne School of Business University of St. Gallen Institute of Management Institute of Management and Regional Economics jens.meissner@hsw.fhz.ch harald.tuckermann@unisg.ch 16 Jens O. Meissner & Harald Tuckermann // Communities & Technologies 2007 // Michigan Lucerne School of Business