Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Benjamin Koehne

dblp:93/7186 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
2 papers
Collaborative and social computing · 100%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Empirical software engineering › developer studies
global software development
0.212013
Globally distributed system developers: their trust expectations and processes · CSCW 2013
Collaborative and social computing
remote work
0.112012
Remote and alone: coping with being the remote member on the team · CSCW 2012
Collaborative and social computing
computer-supported cooperative work
0.122013
Globally distributed system developers: their trust expectations and processes · CSCW 2013
Remote and alone: coping with being the remote member on the team · CSCW 2012
Collaborative and social computing › computer-supported cooperative work
distributed collaboration
0.012013
Globally distributed system developers: their trust expectations and processes · CSCW 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

thematic analysis · 0.3qualitative interview study · 0.3interview study · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Globally distributed system developers: their trust expectations and processes
abstract
Trust remains a challenge in globally distributed development teams. In order to investigate how trust plays out in this context, we conducted a qualitative study of 5 multi-national IT organizations. We interviewed 58 individuals across 10 countries and made two principal findings. First, study participants described trust in terms of their expectations of their colleagues. These expectations fell into one of three dimensions: that socially correct behavior will persist, that team members possess technical competency, and that individuals will demonstrate concern for others. Second, our study participants described trust as a dynamic process, with phases including formation, dissolution, adjustment and restoration. We provide new insights into these dimensions and phases of trust within distributed teams which extend existing literature. Our study also provides guidelines on effective practices within distributed teams in addition to providing implications for the extension of software engineering and collaboration tools.
Ban Al-Ani, Matthew J. Bietz, Yi Wang 0013, Erik H. Trainer, Benjamin Koehne, Sabrina Marczak, David F. Redmiles, Rafael Prikladnicki
CSCW5
2012 Remote and alone: coping with being the remote member on the team
abstract
Geographically distributed work has become a popular way to work. Past CSCW research has shown that remote workers rely on innovative communication platforms but still face challenges being remote. Research has also provided organizational and managerial strategies to bridge the distance gap. Our study in contrast investigates how individuals develop strategies to cope with the daily challenges of working remotely and alone, and what managers can do to help them. We interviewed seventeen individuals involved in remote work about their experiences, identifying unique challenges and their workarounds. Our interview results suggest that, although people may work alone, the process of conducting distributed work is actually very social. Individual remote workers establish a unique kind of work rhythm, visibility management for evaluation, social support infrastructure, and personal connection as a part of their coping strategies to balance their professional and personal lives.
Benjamin Koehne, Patrick C. Shih, Judith S. Olson
CSCW1