远程办公“导致群体迷思以及错失合作机会”

一份首创先河的研究预计,面对面互动的缺席阻碍了创新,因为学者倾向于与已经认识的人交流

八月 23, 2022
Source: Alamy

点击阅读英文原文


一项新研究表明,疫情期间人们转向远程办公阻碍了学术合作,因为研究人员错过在工作场所偶遇并与他人建立联系的机会。

美国麻省理工学院(Massachusetts Institute of Technology) “可感知城市实验室”(Senseable City Laboratory)的研究人员检查了同事在2019年12月至2021年11月间发送的近3000封匿名电子邮件,以一种更实证的方法了解仅在线办公所带来的影响。

基于对这些信息的分析,他们得出结论:每位学者在疫情封锁期间平均错过与两位同事建立联系的机会(研究针对该机构的4800名员工);而由于缺乏与他人的现实接触,现有社交网络也变得“停滞不前”。

这项发表于《自然计算科学》(Nature Computational Science)的研究称:“不在同一地点工作的员工不太可能建立联系,这削弱了信息在工作网络中的传播。”

该研究的共同主要作者丹尼尔· 卡莫迪(Daniel Carmody)和玛蒂娜·马萨雷(Martina Mazzarello)均为麻省理工学院的博士后研究员。他们警告说,鉴于研究团队的规模一般较小,只进行在线办公会增加“群体迷思”(groupthink)的风险,因为学者们往往只与他们已经认识的人交流,不能接触到新想法和新的合作潜力。

卡莫迪博士告诉泰晤士高等教育:“同事们更多地与以前的合作者联系,这可能会造成交流的闭环,而不是与新的潜在合作者联系,但后者才使激发研究和创新的关键交流成为可能。”

这些结论建立在同样由麻省理工学院在疫情前进行的一项研究的工作基础之上。此前的研究发现,与彼此相距400米的同事而言,同一工作场所中的研究人员合作共同撰写论文的可能性是前者的3倍多,在专利方面进行合作的可能性是前者的两倍多。

随着防疫措施的放松,该大学转向了一种偏混合型的工作模式。与此同时,“弱关系”(指为没有共同联系的同事建立联系)的数量部分恢复,作者表示这可能显示出面对面和远程工作的平衡可以解决一些已被发现的问题。

然而,缺乏潜在社交互动仍是一个影响因素,因为学者们被鼓励在咖啡馆等公共区域保持距离,而这些区域以前被认为是建立新联系的沃土

研究作者们说,在重新设计工作实践时,校园领导者应确定保障产生新想法和创新所需的“最少”面对面工作量。

然而,他们补充说,仅仅返回办公室可能不会立即恢复已丧失的社交联系,需要建立新的方式来促进线上和线下空间中的协作。

卡莫迪博士说:“在设计混合工作模式时,组织应考虑需要多少基于办公室的互动来维持整个机构的创意文化。”

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com

本文由Liu Jing为泰晤士高等教育翻译。

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.

Reader's comments (4)

Nowt to do with the rather large shift to newer technologies than email over the last two years in workplaces, such as Teams/Zoom/Slack etc then? Rather a large leap to suggest changes observed solely in the MIT email network led to 'missed collaborations and groupthink'?
The continuing 'hybrid working' experiment is proving to be problematic in many Universities, especially when a rapid response from the Professional Health and Safety team/line managers is required, still the savings in heating and lighting costs passed on to home workers may go some way into paying any fines levied by the HSE/courts...
Thanks for the comment ResearchDweller. That's an important question, and one we considered while doing the research. The paper – which can be found here https://www.nature.com/articles/s43588-022-00296-z – goes into more detail on this. In figure 1 (and supplementary figure 30 panel c) the amount of email activity in the daily email networks did not significantly change. In fact many properties of the daily email networks remained unchanged through the pandemic, which is evidence that email was used in similar ways before and after the pandemic. It is of course possible that the content of emails changed (perhaps pre-pandemic emails were more informative while post-pandemic emails involved more scheduling), but we don't have access to that sort of information. While taking into account confidentiality issues, it would be interesting to investigate this aspect further.
To do collaboration and groupthink there are many kinds of software and online services. On the other hand, there are many valuable benefits for remote working i.e. decreasing fossil fuel consumption (like petrol) which is critical for saving the climate and its effect on increasing rainfall.