Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A classification of Challenges encountered in Complex Teamwork Settings

  • Published:
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments may at times become socio-emotionally tense and pose challenges that may have detrimental effects on mutual trust and shared mental models. Objective. This study aims to examine and classify general teamwork challenges in a novel but authentic CSCL setting (hackathon) to identify challenges that impede the development of key team coordination mechanisms (i.e., mutual trust and shared mental models). Methods. Multimodal data including responses to an adapted questionnaire (AIRE), post-competition interview data, and videos of team interaction were collected during an international hackathon event (N = 48, 71% male, M = 22 years age). Qualitative theory-driven coding and theme development were used to analyze the multimodal dataset (Greeno, 2006; Jarvenoja et al., 2013). Results. Our analyses revealed 16 general challenges that hamper teamwork in a hackathon. A model of team challenges was developed to categorize challenges into macro level themes including cognitive, motivational, emotional and behavioral challenges. We also identified which challenges hindered the development of mutual trust, and which challenges hindered the development of shared mental models. Conclusions. These findings provide important insights for educators and mentors in understanding the types of teamwork challenges that may occur in CSCL settings. The results also inform educators which challenges likely lead to mutual trust breakdown and weaken shared mental model bonds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, D. P., Day, R., & Salas, E. (2006). Teamwork as an essential component of high-reliability organizations. Health Services Research, 41(1), 1576–1598. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00566.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baser, M. (2013). Attitude, gender and achievement in computer programming. Online Submission, 14(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2013.14.2.2007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. T., Brown, S. G., Colaneri, A., & Outland, N. (2018). Team composition and the ABCs of teamwork. American Psychologist, 73(4), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers: From small group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 37–40. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X025008037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosch-Sijtsema, P. (2007). The impact of individual expectations and expectation conflicts on virtual teams. Group & Organization Management, 32(3), 358–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousmalis, K., Mehu, M., & Pantic, M. (2009). Spotting agreement and disagreement: A survey of nonverbal audiovisual cues and tools. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (pp. 1–9). New York, Heidelberg: Springer

  • Brett, J., Behfar, K., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2014). Managing cross-cultural conflicts: A close look at the implication of direct versus indirect confrontation. In A. Ashkanasy, O. Ayoko, & K. A. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of research in conflict management (pp. 136–154). United Kingdom: Edward Edgar Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, G., & Mulligan, C. (2014). The hackathon phenomenon. Retrieved from: http://www.creativeworkslondon.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Digital-InnovationThe-Hackathon-Phenomenon1.pdf

  • Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., Converse, S. A., & Castellan, N. J. (1993). Current issues in individual and group decision making. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. 10.1188/14.ONF.545–547

  • Chanel, G., Avry, S., Molinari, G., Bétrancourt, M., & Pun, T. (2017). Multiple users’ emotion recognition: Improving performance by joint modeling of affective reactions. In the Seventh International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, (pp. 92–97). New York, Heidelberg: Springer

  • Chiocchio, F., & Essiembre, H. (2009). Cohesion and performance. Small Group Research, 40, 382–420. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00239.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Citera, M. (1998). Distributed teamwork: The impact of communication media on influence and decision quality. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(9), 792–800. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199807)49:9<792::AID-ASI4>3.0.CO;2-K

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, K., Siefert, A., & Weinreb, J. (2018). Skills beyond the reading room: Training in innovation and collaboration at a radiology hackathon. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 15(3), 466–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2017.10.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. (2000). Motivation and the ecology of collaborative learning.Rethinking collaborative learning,161–178

  • De Dreu, C., & Weingart, L. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Wit, F., Greer, L., & Jehn, K. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 360–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fransen, J., Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2011). Mediating team effectiveness in the context of collaborative learning: The importance of team and task awareness. Computers in human Behavior, 27(3), 1103–1113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fransen, J., Weinberger, A., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Team effectiveness and team development in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 9–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelfand, M. J., Harrington, J. R., & Leslie, L. M. (2014). Conflict cultures: a new frontier for conflict management research and practice. In O. Ayoko, N. Ashkanasy, & K. Jehn (Eds.), Handbook of conflict management research (pp. 109–135). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 499–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golembiewski, R. T. (2018). Groupthink. In J. Shafritz (Ed.), Defining public administration (pp. 147–150). Springer: Routledge

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G., & Engeström, Y. (2006). Learning in activity. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., Horgan, T. G., & Murphy, N. A. (2019). Nonverbal communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 271–294. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, M. H., Ju, T. L., Yen, C. H., & Chang, C. M. (2007). Knowledge sharing behavior in virtual communities: The relationship between trust, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2020). Applying collaborative cognitive load theory to computer-supported collaborative learning: Towards a research agenda.Educational Technology Research and Development,1–23

  • Järvelä, S., & Järvenoja, H. (2011). Socially constructed self-regulated learning and motivation regulation in collaborative learning groups. Teachers College Record, 113(2), 350–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvenoja, H., & Järvelä, S. (2009). Emotion control in collaborative learning situations: Do students regulate emotions evoked by social challenges? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(3), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909X402811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvenoja, H., Volet, S., & Järvelä, S. (2013). Regulation of emotions in socially challenging learning situations: An instrument to measure the adaptive and social nature of the regulation process. Educational Psychology, 33(1), 31–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2012.742334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvenpaa, S. L., Shaw, T. R., & Staples, D. S. (2004). Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information Systems Research, 15(3), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jassawalla, A., Sashittal, H., & Sashittal, A. (2009). Students’ perceptions of social loafing: Its antecedents and consequences in undergraduate business classroom teams. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2009.37012178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. (2007). Knowledge convergence and collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 35(4), 287–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-9008-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. R., & George, J. M. (1998). The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 531–546. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (2007). Ethical issues in qualitative e-learning research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 6(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690700600204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazemitabar, M., Lajoie, S. P., & Doleck, T. (2019). Examining changes in medical students’ emotion regulation in an online PBL session. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 11(2), 129–157

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D. H. (1998). The link between individual and organizational learning. In D. Klein (Ed.), The strategic management of intellectual capital (pp. 41–62). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2008). Coercing shared knowledge in collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 403–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2013). Toward a Framework for CSCL Research. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.750227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludvigsen, S., & Arnseth, H. C. (2017). Computer-supported collaborative learning. Technology enhanced learning (pp. 47–58). Cham: Springer

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Näykki, P., Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., & Järvenoja, H. (2014). Socio-emotional conflict in collaborative learning—A process-oriented case study in a higher education context. International Journal of Educational Research, 68, 1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., & Salas, E. (2017). Communication in virtual teams: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 575–589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59. https://doi.org/10.5465/256727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McEwan, D., & Beauchamp, M. R. (2014). Teamwork in sport: A theoretical and integrative review. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 7(1), 229–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2014.932423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, R. M., & Salas, E. (1995). Measuring and managing for team performance: Emerging principles from complex environments. In R. Guzzo, & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision-making in organizations (pp. 9–45). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, S., & Dumville, B. C. (2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. (2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36(4), 876–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309356804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mtsweni, J., & Abdullah, H. (2015). Stimulating and maintaining students’ interest in computer science using the hackathon model. The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 10(1), 85–97

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, A. S., Gourevitch, R., Draper, K., Bond, A., & Tirodkar, M. A. (2015). Overcoming challenges to teamwork in patient-centered medical homes: A qualitative study. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(2), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-014-3065-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. S., & Behfar, K. J. (2003). The dynamic relationship between performance feedback, trust, and conflict in groups: A longitudinal study. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92(1), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00090-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raatikainen, M., Komssi, M., Bianco, D., Kindstom, V., K., & Jarvinen, J. (2013). Industrial experiences of organizing a hackathon to assess a device-centric cloud ecosystem. In the 37th annual computer software and applications conference (pp. 790–799). New York: IEEE

  • Robert, L. P., Denis, A. R., & Hung, Y. C. (2009). Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(2), 241–279. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222260210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosé, C. P., & Järvelä, S. (2020). Building community together: towards equitable CSCL practices and processes.International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning,1–7

  • Salas, E., Milham, L. M., & Bowers, C. A. (2003). Training evaluation in the military: Misconceptions, opportunities, and challenges. Military Psychology, 15(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327876MP1501_01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, R., & McDaniel (2018). The science of teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead. American Psychologist, 73(4), 593. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Sims, D. E., & Burke, C. S. (2005). Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Research, 36(5), 555–599. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496405277134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salas, E., Stagl, K. C., Burke, C. S., & Goodwin, G. F. (2007). Fostering team effectiveness in organizations: Toward an integrative theoretical framework. In J. Shuart, W. Spaulding & J. Poland (Eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 185–235). Lincoln: Nebraska University Press

  • Stahl, G. (Ed.). (2009). Studying virtual math teams (11 vol.). Springer Science & Business Media

  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2015). A decade of CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(4), 337–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strachan, R., Peixoto, A., Emembolu, I., & Restivo, M. T. (2018, April). Women in engineering: Addressing the gender gap, exploring trust and our unconscious bias. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 2088–2093). IEEE

  • Tannenbaum, S. I., Traylor, A. M., Thomas, E. J., & Salas, E. (2020). Managing teamwork in the face of pandemic: evidence-based tips. BMJ Quality & Safety

  • Van den Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Segers, M., Woltjer, G., & Kirschner, P. (2010). Team learning: Building shared mental models. Instructional Science, 39(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9128-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsham, G. (2002). Cross-cultural software production and use: a structurational analysis.MIS quarterly,359–380

  • Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, L., & Friendly, M. (2009). The history of the cluster heat map. The American Statistician, 63(2), 179–184. https://doi.org/10.1198/tas.2009.0033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, K. A., Salas, E., Priest, H., & Andrews, D. (2007). Errors in the heat of the battle: Taking a closer look at shared cognition breakdowns through teamwork. Human Factors, 49(2), 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X312478

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC Partnership Grant) and the Fonds de Recherche du Québec – Société et Culture (FRQSC). We confirm that this manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere and we have no conflicts of interest to declare. Raw and processed data from this study are available upon enquiry to corresponding authors. This study is approved by the McGill University ethics board. Written consent was collected from participants to document their voluntary participation. The authors for this manuscript declare consent for the International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to review and evaluate this manuscript for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, McGill University, 3700 McTavish Street, H3A 1Y9, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Maedeh A. Kazemitabar, Susanne P. Lajoie & Tianshu Li

Authors
  1. Maedeh A. Kazemitabar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susanne P. Lajoie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tianshu Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianshu Li.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kazemitabar, M.A., Lajoie, S.P. & Li, T. A classification of Challenges encountered in Complex Teamwork Settings. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn 17, 225–247 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-022-09370-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-022-09370-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation