1. The document discusses using Small Groups As Complex Systems Theory (SGACS) as a theoretical lens to study coordination in interdisciplinary research projects. 2. SGACS provides concepts to analyze group structure, activities, outcomes, and how they are influenced by context. This framework can be used to diagnose issues, compare groups, and predict performance. 3. The document proposes applying SGACS through case studies of research groups at IBBT to gain insights on coordination challenges over time and benefits like improving project evaluations and management.

1. Diversity and representation in coordination of interdisciplinary research projects Using Small Groups As Complex Systems Theory as a practice lens

2. Overview Context Definitions The value of a theoretical lens Why SGACS? Overview of SGACS Examples Proposed case studies Nature of the research Benefits to IBBT

3. Definitions Multidisciplinarity – A mindset that endeavours to study subjects from several academic disciplines in parallel Interdisciplinarity – A mindset that endeavours to combine the tools and theories of several academic disciplines in the study of subjects Transdisciplinarity – A mindset that endeavours to develop theories and tools that are independent of particular academic disciplines

4. The value of theoretical practice lenses Provide constructs used to understand socio-technical system Orlikowski (2000) applied Giddens’ structuration theory to study technology in use Walsham (2002) used structuration theory to study outsourcing practices in software development Wastell (2004) applied Actor Network Theory to the study the role of technology in local government and its effect on power relations Kuuti (1999) developed a framework for using Activity Theory to study IS development and research

5. Why SGACS? Positivist tradition Provides concepts (variables) that can be measured quantitatively Provide a framework of relationships between group structure, activities and outcomes, and the context in which they operate (causal dynamics) This framework can be used to Diagnose pathologies in groups that do not perform as expected Compare groups Predict group performance from its structure and composition

6. Overview of SGACS Multiple levels and changes over time Local, global and contextual dynamics Causal dynamics Changes in the local and contextual dynamics cause changes in the global dynamics and are in turn affected by these changes Group Functions Group goals vs. Member needs Group composition and structure Members, tasks and tools Modes of group life Formation, operation, metamorphosis

7. Coordination networks

8. Example A (qualitative) A case study of a joint crime prevention task force in a London Borough Vehicle crime task group (schools, charities, social services), Police, local council representatives Disagreement over goals Lack of example strategies and best practice guidelines Disagreement over basic definitions Lack of statistics (knowledge) for determining where the hotspots and who the main perpetrators were No agreement over who should provide that knowledge (roles) Poor tool network Lack of communication Lack of useful representations to develop alignment between members from different backgrounds

9. Example B (quantitative) Comparison of four student-project groups in a CSCW course Measurement of local and global variables over time Local: Records of communication network (email, phone, SMS etc.), diaries of member interactions (member network) Local: Questionnaire 11 questions given four time one week apart Global: Happy-o-meter Global: Measure of the outcome (group mark) Looking for differences in local dynamics between groups that could explain differences in global variables

10. Example B cont’d Factor Analysis on questionnaire results uncovered 4 factors Task needs Member compatibility Tool quality Individual Comfort

11. Example B cont’d Dynamics Group A Group B Group C Group D L o c a l Task needs + + + + + + + + + + Member interaction + + + + + + + + + + + + Tools Support + + + + + + + + + + + + Member comfort + + + + + + + + + + + + G l o b a l Project Outcome + +++ ++ ++++ Member Needs + +++ ++ ++++

12. Proposed case studies Study a (small) number of IBBT projects groups over time Projects at different stages Duration 3-5 months One would hope to find, over time, a development in: Group composition and structure Declining diversity Increased coordination of understanding Nature and role of representations and communication Increased coordination of goals Global dynamics Group function Reaching goals Members’ needs

13. Proposed case study cont’d Variables of interest Diversity KSA VBA PCB Boundaries Tools and representations Global variables

14. Methodology Repeated (Semi) Structured Interviews Analysis of representations used (e.g., emails, documents, drawings, etc.) Communication networks Diaries …

15. Threats to validity History Maturation Testing Selection bias Mortality

16. What does IBBT get out of it? Evaluations of individual projects? Awareness of problems that may arise and their probable causes This which would allow project managers to: Avoid problems by setting the conditions that promote productivity Be able to detect early warning signs for problems that may be developing within projects