Search results

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the future of social work can be situated as part of a fundamental shift towards co-located, multi-disciplinary practice and networking. It is argued that social work has a key role to play in co-located, multi-disciplinary child welfare practice, and indeed can be a leading profession in this context. Situating social work in this way involves re-conceptualising social work as a network profession, rather than a silo profession. The paper builds on an earlier study of five multi-professional, co-located teams updated with interviews with social workers currently situated in such co-located teams. An exploration of the role of social work in relation to child sexual exploitation is provided.

The first study was an ESRC-funded study and used a multi-method approach to understanding the work of five multi-disciplinary, co-located teams working with children, young people and families (Frost and Robinson, 2016). Four co-located teams with eight social workers participated in the research. This was followed up by a small scale study involving semi-structured interviews with six social workers situated in co-located, multi-disciplinary teams. The focus of the study was on professional identity and working practices with other related professionals.

The ESRC study explored the complexity of co-located, multi-disciplinary professional teams – exploring how they worked together and analysing the challenges they face. Professionals felt that such working enhanced their learning, their skill base and the process of information sharing. Challenges included structural and organisational issues and differences in ideological and explanatory frameworks. The follow up study of six social workers found that they gained satisfaction from being situated in such co-located, multi-disciplinary teams, but also faced some identified challenges. Child sexual exploitation is explored as an example of the work of co-located, multi-disciplinary teams.

Semi-structured interviews with social workers based in co-located, multi-disciplinary teams have provided valuable insights into the operation of social workers in such settings. It is acknowledged that all the interviews are with social workers in co-located settings and that further work is required on the views of other social workers in reference to their experiences and views in relation to multi-disciplinary working.

The paper brings together theoretical positions and policy contextual material with qualitative research data which situate the social worker in wider multi-disciplinary, co-located settings. Drawing on qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 14 social workers in such teams, the paper aims to contribute to an understanding and development of the future of the social work role in these contexts, arguing that this is fundamental to the future of social work.

The purpose of this paper is to increase understanding of the logic of business network formation among the co-located and external actors of a facility.

The research adopts a theory-building approach through developing propositions inductively from the empirical case study on four purposefully sampled modern service station facilities. The focus is on analyzing how a facility and its inherent co-located actors represent an entity that forms a business network with external actors in the facility’s environment.

The findings propose that when co-located with a large number of actors, the facility and its actors represent an entity that is connected to a wide business network of multiple external actors. On the other hand, when co-located with a small number of actors, the facility becomes a part of the overall supply in the surrounding business environment with a differentiated offering for competitive advantage.

The research suggests that an appropriate co-locating strategy, for example, when planning the tenant mix of the facility, can contribute to creating a vivid business network in the external environment, which raises the facility to a role of a central entity in such a network.

The findings explaining how co-location affects the businesses within the facility and within a wider networked environment are novel to the scholarly knowledge on co-location. The research bridges the theories of co-location and business networks that have been treated as separate discourses in previous research.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to develop a typology of co‐located supplier clusters, such as logistics centres or supplier parks, and second, to evaluate the theoretical perspectives at hand to investigate the co‐location phenomenon.

The research encompasses 28 semi‐structured interviews with key operations executives from vehicle manufacturers, component suppliers and logistics service providers at nine co‐located supplier clusters, the findings of which are triangulated with secondary sources.

The investigation yields two main findings: first, a typology is proposed based on two key dimensions “spatial integration and infrastructure” and “local value‐added”. From a theoretical perspective, the paper further concludes that transaction cost economics is less suited for studying dedicated co‐location, and suggests that future investigations should focus on consolidating the contributions on the spatial dimension of sourcing configurations into a novel theoretical framework.

The study is based on an exploratory research design, investigating a selected number of co‐located supplier clusters only. While the research does not claim to provide a comprehensive survey of co‐located supplier clusters, it proposes a general categorisation that aims to provide a structure currently lacking further research into this phenomenon.

A structured overview of the phenomenon of co‐located supplier clusters is provided, extending the existing morphological debate. Furthermore, the discussion of their theoretical foundations provides novel insights into this phenomenon as well as into the operational implications of value chain modifications in general, with the intention of guiding further research in this area.

Global virtual teams are omnipresent entities within the majority of international companies. Ongoing research debate presents multiple open questions on the impact of virtuality. Especially whether virtual teams can be as effective as their co-located counterparts. This paper aims to address the performance aspects of fully and semi-virtual in comparison with co-located teams.

This paper presents quantitative research based on computer logged data sets tracking the behaviour of individuals in multiple virtual, semi-virtual and co-located teams. The analysis features a comparison of key performance indicators and evaluates teamwork results while putting the observations into the context of virtual organisational behaviour.

Findings based on a sample of 42,168 work items from 48 teams of various virtuality levels show that co-located teams still outperform the virtual ones despite technological advances. This comes as an important reminder and practical implication during times of rapid shift towards virtual work in recent years.

Drawn conclusions are valuable, mainly due to the nature of data set extraction (unbiased and error-free source) from a real business environment with a unique combination of various cross-cultural compositions. The sample includes teams from the same company working on similar tasks, allowing control for many factors limiting previously published papers on virtual team performance.

This paper enhances our understanding of how national culture impacts manufacturing performance (assembly speed, consistency between teams, etc.) during a production process move. The authors also investigate the efficacy of co-location as a strategy to enhance knowledge transfer from one organization to another.

To study the impact of national culture on production process moves, the authors develop and employ a team-based behavioral experiment within and between an individualist society (the United States) and a collectivist one (China). The authors also examine the impact of co-location on knowledge transfer effectiveness within and between these two unique cultures.

Interestingly, co-location has little impact on the performance of US recipient teams. Without co-location, Chinese recipient team performance lags significantly behind the US teams. However, firms can overcome these knowledge transfer challenges by co-locating source and recipient team members. These results suggest that firms should assess the national cultural context when considering co-location to manage their production move. There are contexts where co-location may be incredibly useful to facilitate an effective knowledge transfer (e.g. collectivist cultures like China) and contexts where this approach may not be as valuable (e.g. individualistic cultures such as the United States).

This research contributes to the academic literature in several ways. First, while past research demonstrates that national culture can be an essential barrier to information and knowledge sharing, this paper extends these findings showing that co-location may effectively overcome this barrier. After the authors offer and test the merits of co-location, they also establish the boundary conditions of this approach by showing that the effect of co-location on knowledge transfer is contingent on the cultural context. This contribution enhances our understanding of the relationship between national culture and knowledge sharing and has implications for managers developing approaches to transfer knowledge between cultures. Second, the authors develop and execute a novel cross-country experimental design. While cross-country experiments have been done before (e.g. Ozer et al. 2014, Kuwabara et al. 2007, etc.), it is still rare to see such experiments due to them being “technically difficult and costly” (Ozer et al. 2014, p. 2437). This research not only offer insights into how teams of people from individualist and collectivist societies send, receive and comprehend production knowledge. It also documents how these teams convert this knowledge into production results.

This paper examines co-location as an important solution to design workspaces in research and development (R & D). It argues that co-locating R & D units in multi-space environments serves knowledge creation by leveraging knowledge sharing across boundaries.

This study is based on a co-location project of the knowledge-intensive, multi-national company Novartis. To compare communication and collaboration patterns, we interviewed and observed employees before and after co-location into the “co-location pilot” and investigated a control group that was not co-located. The use of data and method triangulation as a research approach underlines the inherent dynamics of the co-location in this study.

The study suggests findings leveraging knowledge sharing in two different ways. Co-location of dispersed project team members increases unplanned face-to-face communication leading to faster and more precise flows of knowledge by transcending knowledge boundaries. Co-location to an open multi-space environment stimulates knowledge creation by enabling socialization, externalization and combination of knowledge.

This study provides managerial implications for implementing co-location to achieve greater knowledge sharing across functions. The design of the work environment provides the framework for successful co-location.

This paper reports the findings of an empirical case study conducted within the “co-location pilot” of the pharmaceutical company Novartis. This study contributes to an in-depth understanding of the phenomena on a qualitative and micro-level.

The adoption of a team approach in new product design, particularly in recent years, has shaped the nature and context of design activities. Concepts of teaming and team building have been around for many decades and are seen as the means for enhancing organizational and individual performance. It is assumed that through teaming, that is, more social interactions, shared focus and physical proximity, the design process and its outcome will be improved. Virtual teaming, a relatively recent phenomenon, is becoming increasingly attractive to organizations due to developments in communication technologies. The implications of a remote distributed working environment, though, are not illustrated or experienced extensively. This paper explores the evolution of virtual co‐location of product design teams within the context of concurrent engineering. It, thus, attempts to highlight paradoxes and dilemmas in setting up physically and virtually co‐located teams. These issues are illustrated in case studies from ongoing pan‐European projects that depict product design and development activities in certain manufacturing organizations. A survey of some manufacturing firms highlights these dilemmas as perceived by participating firms. The paper closes by examining the extent that teaming, as a performance enhancer, can be diffused to other activities than design, and thus the extent that experiences can be shared within the organization.

Which retail services are co-located in space? Is it possible to categorize retail stores of different kinds with respect to their location pattern? Acknowledging the spatial dependency between different and similar kinds of retailing activities, the aim of this paper is to find if and to what extent co-location is present in a retail market and what kind of retailing activities are co-located.

The authors analyse the co-location of different types of retail stores in Sweden by using geo-coded data. The data they use allows them to pinpoint each establishment in Sweden down to a 250 by 250m square in space. First, they identify a measure of co-location for each retail service by utilizing pairwise correlations between the different retail service establishments with respect to the squares in which they are present. Later, by using the finest level of industrial categorization for all physical retailing activities (and limiting their geographical unit to the Stockholm metropolitan market), they perform factor analysis to nest these retailing activities under relevant categories based on their co-location pattern.

In this analysis the authors obtain four major factors for the squares with retail stores, in which several kinds of retail activities are nested. These factors reveal a certain degree of location commonality for the markets in question.

The authors' empirical design is based on a highly disaggregated spatial information and the methodology is novel in a sense that it has not been used to address a similar question. Rather than sampling, the authors use the total population, where they take all physical retailing activities into account to be able to draw a general picture for the co-location phenomena in the entire retail market.

This study aims to demonstrate that the investments in social capital do not always pay off. Although an important function of social capital is its potential for influencing co‐located companies' opportunistic behavior, social capital also has a negative side. This study seeks to examine the negative and positive effects of the social capital dimensions on a company's profitability and on the perception that co‐located firms free ride and shirk.

By including data from 224 firms in 112 true‐paired dyadic relationships, this study provides a unique and valid basis for empirical study within SEM analysis. The ability to link different information sources in the analysis creates a unique data set that controls for the confounding effects of common method biases in the analysis.

Markets with a low degree of collective activity gain less advantage from cognitive social capital, because its primary effect lies in its transparency and ability to detect opportunistic behavior. The effect of relational social capital is more stable because of the positive direct effect on profitability. Structural social capital indicates markets that would benefit from creating private incentives with the intention to transfer collective activities into private payoffs. This reduces the need to follow up the co‐localized businesses.

This study shows that the dimensions of social capital vary regarding whether they reduce or facilitate the perceived withholding efforts by co‐located firms.

To improve flow solutions on meshes with cells/elements which are distorted/ non‐orthogonal.

The cell‐centred finite volume (FV) discretisation method is well established in computational fluid dynamics analysis for modelling physical processes and is typically employed in most commercial tools. This method is computationally efficient, but its accuracy and convergence behaviour may be compromised on meshes which feature cells with non‐orthogonal shapes, as can occur when modelling very complex geometries. A co‐located vertex‐based (VB) discretisation and partially staggered, VB/cell‐centred (CC), discretisation of the hydrodynamic variables are investigated and compared with purely CC solutions on a number of increasingly distorted meshes.

The co‐located CC method fails to produce solutions on all the distorted meshes investigated. Although more expensive computationally, the co‐located VB simulation results always converge whilst its accuracy appears to grace‐fully degrade on all meshes, no matter how extreme the element distortion. Although the hybrid, partially staggered, formulations also allow solutions on all the meshes, the results have larger errors than the co‐located vertex based method and are as expensive computationally; thus, offering no obvious advantage.

Employing the ability of the VB technique to resolve the flow field on a distorted mesh may well enable solutions to be obtained on complex meshes where established CC approaches fail

This paper investigates a range of cell centred, vertex based and hybrid approaches to FV discretisation of the NS hydrodynamic variables, in an effort characterize their capability at generating solutions on meshes with distorted or non‐orthogonal cells/elements.