Communication Tools' Impact on Project Communication Efficiency

Communication tools’ impact on project communication efficiency

An evaluation of traditional communication tools and Social Media

Linda Berg

Blekinge Tekniska Högskola, Karlskrona 2017 Master Thesis in Engineering and Industrial Economy

Supervisors Shahiduzzaman Quoreshi, BTH Anders Vinblad, Volvo GTT

[Blanc page]

Abstract While project communication is positively correlated with project performance, little is known about communication tools impact on project communication efficiency. Efficient project communication has shown to improve communication and thereby increase competitiveness. Efficiency is dependent on what criteria are chosen to define efficiency; however, the literature expose some barriers and driving factors towards efficient project communication, such as: project complexity, company culture, and trust within the project team. Social Media has proven higher levels of efficiency compared to traditional communication tools in project, yet few Swedish companies adapt Social Media for internal communication. Thus, this study has investigated what impact the choice of communication tool might have on communication efficiency by performing a case study at Volvo GTT where traditional communication tools are predominately used. The study found that traditional communication tools contribute to decreased efficiency while the attitude towards Social Media is lack of safety issues. Still, high values in trust are generated through traditional tools. Compromising secrecy can be prevented through self-hosted Social Media solutions which is why Volvo should consider to decrease usage of traditional communication tools and instead look for more efficient solutions such as Social Media.

[Blanc page]

Sammanfattning Trots att projektkommunikation är positivt korrelaterat med projektets lönsamhet är förståelsen om kommunikationsverktygs påverkan på projektkommunikationens effektivitet bristfällig. Effektiv projektkommunikation har påvisat förbättrad kommunikationen och därigenom ökad konkurrenskraft. Effektivitet är beroende av vilka kriterier som väljs för att definiera effektivitet, men litteraturen har ändå exponerat ett antal barriärer och förutsättningar för effektiv kommunikation: projektkomplexitet, företagskultur och tillit gentemot projektmedlemmar. Trots att sociala medier har påvisat högre effektivitet jämfört med traditionella kommunikationsverktyg i projekt har få svenska företag implementerat sociala medier för internkommunikation. Denna studie syftar därför till att undersöka vilken påverkan valet av kommunikationsverktyg har på effektiv kommunikation genom att utföra en fallstudie på Volvo GTT där mestadels traditionella verktyg används. Studien visar att traditionella verktyg bidrar till förminskad effektivitet och att sociala medier anses vara bristfälligt gällande säkerhet. Traditionella verktyg genererar däremot höga nivåer av tillit. Säkerhet behöver inte riskeras genom att välja sociala medier där information inte passerar en tredje part. Volvo bör därför överväga att minska användandet av traditionella verktyg och istället söka efter en effektivare lösning såsom sociala medier.

iii

[Blanc page]

Preface There might be only my name on the report; however, I was never alone. To my supervisors both at Volvo and BTH: thank you. Thank you thank you thank you. For all the simple yet brilliant questions only a true master can ask. Those questions made my master thesis possible. I would also like to say a big thank you to all involved from Volvo GTT for your engagement in my thesis work.

To mom, dad and my aunt: thank you for your endless love and tremendous support through my personal journey. I simply would not make it without you.

[Blanc page]

Nomenclature

Notations

Symbol Description

𝑐𝑤 Cost of Waste (SEK)

𝑡𝑟 Time spent on waiting for response (hours)

𝑡𝑠 Time spent on searching for information (hours)

𝑡푚 Time spent on meetings (hours)

𝑞푖 Information quality 푆̅ Average salary paid to project team members

Acronyms

Volvo GTT Volvo Group Trucks Technology IT Information technology

[Blanc page]

TABLE OF CONTENT

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ...... 4 1.2 OBJECTIVE ...... 4 1.3 DELIMITATIONS ...... 5 1.4 THESIS QUESTIONS ...... 5

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 7

2.1 PROJECT COMMUNICATION ...... 7 2.1.1 EFFICIENT PROJECT COMMUNICATION ...... 9 2.2 TOOLS FOR PROJECT COMMUNICATION ...... 13 2.2.1 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – EVALUATION ...... 13 2.2.2 TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS ...... 15 2.2.3 SOCIAL MEDIA ...... 15

3 VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY 22

4 METHOD 25

4.1 DATA COLLECTION ...... 25 4.1.1 CASE STUDY ...... 27 4.2 DATA ANALYSIS ...... 31 4.2.1 CROSS TABLE ...... 32 4.2.2 MEASUREMENTS ...... 32

5 RESULT 34

5.1 THE GENERAL ATTITUDE ABOUT PROJECT COMMUNICATION AT VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY ...... 34 5.2 COMMUNICATION TOOLS USED AT VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY 34 5.2.1 TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS’ EFFICIENCY ...... 36 5.2.2 COST OF WASTE OF TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS ...... 40 5.3 SOCIAL MEDIA ATTITUDE ...... 41

6 DISCUSSION 42

7 CONCLUSION 49

8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE WORK 51

9 REFERENCES 52

9.1 BOOKS ...... 52 9.2 ARTICLES ...... 53 9.3 LINKS ...... 58

APPENDIX A 59

Blanc page

1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the first chapter in this thesis work is to provide the reader with an overview of the subject chosen for the thesis but also to present the objective, thesis questions and delimitations. The thesis is executed at Volvo Group Trucks Technology, which is a part of the Volvo Group organisation.

Project communication is the transmission of data, information and knowledge (Robbins, 1993) between two or several stakeholders (Allen et al., 1980; Katz, 1982) and plays a key role in project success (Jo & Shim, 2005). Projects occur when faster decision making tools and techniques are needed than possible in a normal operation (Munns & Bjeirmi, 1996; Murphy & Ledwith, 2007) and include resources provided by the company in which the project is operated (Remidez & Jones, 2012). As project organisations grow larger and the complexity of the project objective increases, it becomes harder for project teams to manage efficient communication (Remidez & Jones, 2012); project team members representing different knowledge areas need to communicate despite possessing different knowledge backgrounds. Therefore, project teams need to understand and operate efficient project communication. Efficient project communication is achieved when meaning of information sent conform to interpretations of information received (Robbins, 1993); the meaning intended by the transmitter should conform to the interpretation made by the receiver. Furthermore, efficient project communication requires information to travel fast. In contrast, inefficient communication includes waste activities, which are activities with no value for the end customer (Kilczewski, 2004). The objective of performing efficient communication is therefore to minimize waste activities (Liker, 2009) without jeopardizing the understanding and clarity of information. The Cost of Waste activities can be mathematically explained as the relationship between Cost of Waste, 푊, price paid by the buyer of the goods occurred from demand, 푃푑, and price paid by the seller of the goods occurred from supply, 푃𝑠. The formula for this is defined as

푃푑 = 푃𝑠 + 푊 (Sing, 2008; Norton, 1992)

The equation demonstrates that companies want to minimize waste to gain maximal profit from goods or service sold; if Cost of Waste in a project exceeds price paid by seller, the project outcome fails and loses its performance. Hence, Cost of Waste activities determines sensitivity towards competitiveness (Sing, 2008). Difficulties in managing efficient communication are especially seen in large technology companies with hierarchical structure (Steinheider & Al-

Hawamdeh, 2004). Therefore, those companies need tools which enable communication to flow with speed and simplicity (Jo & Shim, 2005) to empower communication efficiency (Grudin & Poltrock, 1989). When tools for communication aren’t sufficient, an increase in waste activities such as response time and search time appear. A tool for communication is recognized as an object that helps to fulfil the objective of project communication. Information technology, IT, is a tool for communication that enables transmission of information between two or several destinations (Sing, 2008) and has proven to reduce Cost of Waste (Norton, 1992; Silva & Ratnadiwakara, 2008). IT-based tools for communication can provide communication channels and platforms where information can be stored and interaction between users can occur (Robbins, 1993). Reduced distance between receiver and provider of the information is especially achieved when higher levels of IT are invested in. The level of IT invested by the firm corresponds to improved project communication (Hinds & Kiesler, 1995). Increased level of IT invested by the firm doesn’t necessarily means improved project communication as more information is transmitted (Blum et al., 2005). Instead, the distance between receiver and provider of the information is reduced and this in turn improves communication efficiency since it reduces response time and search time for information. The ambition of investing in IT is therefore to simplify information transmission between two or several destinations by removing barriers for efficient communication such as project complexity. The success of implementing IT for project communication is dependent on the company culture, which can work as both a barrier and a driving factor for efficient communication. The company culture is an attitude which belongs to the company (Ankrah et al., 2009). The attitude is directed towards a change or events happening in the project and is based on beliefs that determine behaviour of the project team members. These beliefs are created based on employees’ thoughts and experiences. Other driving factors towards efficient communication are trusting relationships as well as shared visions and beliefs, which empowers team performance by working towards a common project objective. These driving factors can be further improved by investing in higher levels of IT (Hinds & Kiesler, 1995).

Tools for communication can be IT-based but also based on physical presence. A typical tool based on physical presence is meetings where project team members meet and work towards a common agenda. Meetings are an example of a traditional communication tools which are well established tools used in the company for communication (Taylor & Perry, 2005). Skype and E- mail are also examples of traditional communication tools. A non-traditional tool for project communication is Social Media which is a relatively low cost information technology that has

proven high levels of communication efficiency (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Social Media emerged as a communication platform in 1997 (Boyd & Ellison, 2008) and is most commonly defined as an online platform through which users can interact and share information (Edosomwan et al., 2011). Social Media has lately been released from being demarcated to private usage and is now utilized by companies for internal communication (Leonardi et al., 2013). Intensity and level of interaction are two characteristics for Social Media and determines channel richness respectively ability for one or multi-dimensional conversations. The prediction of in what extend a communication channel will be used considering company culture relies on Social Media richness; if a Social Media channel enables multi-dimensional conversations, the channel is more likely to be used (D’Urso & Rains, 2008). Compared to traditional communication tools, which diverge from trends and new communication tools, Social Media increase information accessibility and is less time consuming and interruptive (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Social Media diverge from traditional communication tools as it is not an established communication tool. Using Social Media for internal communication in project management can help to reduce Cost of Waste by improving coordination and aggregation (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012) and at the same time increase trust and enable common visions among team members, which are two driving factors towards efficient communication. Despite this knowledge, less than 20 % of Swedish companies are using Social Media for internal communication (SCB, 2013). Further investigation shows a lack of knowledge about Social Media regarding safety, secrecy and functionality (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012). This creates space for fear of implementing Social Media (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). Social Media can also exaggerate the amount of information and thereby create a barrier for efficient communication (Storey et al., 2014) as excess data is generated. However, excess data can also be generated from any IT-based tool for communication. The advantages of a new technology will be underestimated by a factor of 3, while the disadvantages of giving up old technology will be overestimated by a factor of 3 (Zyl, 2009). By increasing information available about a change, project team members are more likely to have a positive attitude towards the implementation (Worley & Doolen, 2006). Change will also not be made until benefits of implementing the change exceed the effort needed to implement the change (Kouzmin & Korac- Kakabadse, 2000). However, it is argued that IT will never be able to completely replace face-to- face conversations occurring in meetings and real time situations (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). Face-to-face conversations are necessary in various extend when solving complex issues and take action.

1.1 BACKGROUND Achieving efficiency in project communication is a direct ambition for all projects since it is positively correlated with project profitability (Kossai, 2014); when efficient communication is accomplished, Cost of Waste is eliminated and resources can be dedicated towards value-adding activities instead. However, project communication efficiency is compromised as companies fail to find adequate communication tools (Grudin & Poltrock, 1989); as existing communication tools cannot manage complexity, space for waste is created and communication efficiency is restricted. Social Media is a relatively low cost information technology that has proven high levels of efficiency, yet few companies are using Social Media for project communication and this might be because of lack of knowledge and fear which give rise to change resistance. Another possible cause can be that traditional communication tools are sufficient for the fulfilment of existing needs in project communication, but traditional communication tools are time consuming and interruptive. (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). However, few studies provide a deeper analysis of traditional communication tools’ impact on efficient communication. Therefore, this study will perform a case study complemented with a survey where traditional communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency will be detected. Traditional communication tools will be evaluated based on criteria defining efficient communication and the attitude towards utilizing Social Media in project communication will be exposed to detect potential change resistance.

1.2 OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to investigate traditional communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency. The study will evaluate traditional communication tools based on criteria defining efficient communication with purpose to detect Cost of Waste but also potential contribution to communication efficiency. The study will also measure the attitude of utilizing Social Media in project communication with purpose to expose potential change resistance towards communication tools which diverge from traditional tools. The general attitude about project communication will be measured to expose company values regarding project communication with purpose to understand the selection of existing communication tools. The objective will be fulfilled by performing a case study at Volvo Group Trucks Technology where traditional communication tools, such as E-mail and Skype, are used for project communication. The case study will be complemented with a survey containing both open-response and closed- response questions.

1.3 DELIMITATIONS Project communication in this thesis will implicate information exchanged, virtually or physically, between two or several project team members. Hence, information exchanged between IT-systems will not concern this thesis work. The study will exclusively cover internal project communication performed by team members located in Gothenburg at Volvo GTT. Internal project communication will be demarcated to communication related to meetings in technique related projects. Furthermore, the study will be concentrated to investigate information exchange regarding coordinating people and resources in project meetings where the function of communication tools will be highlighted. The communication tools that will be evaluated in the study are traditional communication tools and Social Media; other tools are excluded in the study. Majority of the tools studied will be IT-based with few exceptions.

1.4 THESIS QUESTIONS

To fulfil the objective of the thesis, the study will proceed from thesis questions that aim to answer what impact communication tools have on communication efficiency. The primary thesis question is therefore: • What impact do traditional communication tools have on communication efficiency?

To understand why existing tools might be chosen for project communication at Volvo GTT, the company’s values regarding project communication needs to be exposed. Hence, the secondary thesis question is: i What is the general attitude about project communication in the company?

The study will comprehend an evaluation of existing traditional communication tools to detect Cost of Waste but also contribution to communication efficiency. The evaluation process of traditional communication tools will aim to answer following thesis question: ii Are traditional communication tools efficient in projects? iii What is the Cost of Waste when using traditional communication tools in terms of time? The selection of existing communication tools will be further clarified by detecting potential change resistance towards tools which diverge from traditional communication tools. Thus, Social Media’s feasibility in project communication will be explored by answering following thesis questions: iv What is the company’s attitude towards Social Media in project communication? v Can Cost of Waste be reduced with Social Media in project communication?

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

A reflection of existing literature regarding the chosen subject is presented in chapter 2 with purpose to educate and engage the reader in the subject. The chapter will begin with explaining project communication and thereafter explain tools used in project communication.

2.1 PROJECT COMMUNICATION

Communication is the transmission of data, information and knowledge between two or several destinations (Robbins, 1993). While data consists of numbers and facts, information is data related to a situation or scenario and knowledge is created when information is combined with experience gained from practical situations (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Knowledge is based on personal experience possessed by individuals where information is related to facts interconnected with interpretations, observations, and judgments. Thus, knowledge is created from information, which in turn is created from data. Knowledge is responsible for resolving information into tangible assets (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). The objective of communication is to let meaning of information sent conform to interpretations of information received (Robbins, 1993; Shannon & Weaver, 1963); the meaning intended by the transmitter should conform to the interpretation made by the receiver. Also, the information should be expressed in such manner as to be interpretable by the receiver (Alavi & Leidner, 2001; Shannon & Weaver, 1963). As the objective of communication is fulfilled, misunderstanding of information is eliminated. Communication enables conversations to take place, which is information exchange between one or several parties (Robbins, 1993). The content of the conversation represents information exchanged between involved parties.

Communication can be formal or informal. The main difference between formal and informal communication is that formal communication occurs in a controlled environment while informal communication does not (Al Eslami Kandlousi et al., 2010). Formal communication is characterised by its defined structure and its predictability; the agenda is specified, people involved is pre-determined and location is set (Kraut et al., 1990). In contrast, informal communication is unidirectional with un-specified agendas and allows random people to be involved in the conversation (Al Eslami Kandlousi et al., 2010). Informal communication doesn’t occur at a specific date, time or place. Informal communication is based on social relationships and aims to serve private purposes while formal communication aims to serve company purposes. Formal communication has in previous studies been linked to productivity

(Litterst & Eyo, 1982). However, informal communication has also been proven to contribute to productivity as groups in projects coordinates their work by keeping each other updated and solving minor problems (Al Eslami Kandlousi et al., 2010). Compared to formal communication, informal communication is more interactive and spontaneous (Fish et al., 1990). Informal communication stimulates small talk, which is minor conversations between people considering time and content quantity (Pullin, 2010).

In project communication, the destinations between which data, information and knowledge travels are stakeholders involved in the project (Allen et al., 1980; Katz, 1982). A project occurs when faster decision making tools and techniques are needed than possible in a normal operation (Munns & Bjeirmi, 1996; Murphy & Ledwith) and includes resources provided by the company in which the project is operated (Remidez & Jones, 2012). These resources are representatives from knowledge areas needed to fulfil the project objective. Stakeholders are all participants with interests in the project (Bourne & Walker, 2008). Internal stakeholders are employees within the company and external stakeholders are suppliers and customers to the project. Figure 1 shows a generalized picture of the project organisational structure.

Figure 1 a generalized picture of the project organisational structure

The organisation provides the project manager, PM, with resources in terms of team manager functions, TMF, each representing a knowledge area within the organisation (Westerveld, 2002). In large projects, the team manager functions represent and operate their own teams each representing various knowledge areas. The project manager has an assisting team that oversees tasks such as planning and monitoring all resources of the project. The project manager is also involved with external stakeholders such as suppliers, clients and a steering committee who directs the project by allocating resources such as money. These stakeholders are represented by

푆1, 푆2, 푆3… in figure 1. The steering committee can take form as both an external and internal stakeholder (Hobday, 2000). However, figure 1 is a generalized picture and anomalous situations will likely occur.

Project communication is one important tool to perform well to reach project success (Katz, 1982). Project success is commonly associated with the outcome (Munns & Bjeirmi, 1996), which is affected by all processes included in the project. Project communication has significant impact on the project success as poor communication can adversely affect the project performance (Katz, 1982) by directly affecting the outcome. In fact, project communication, among other tools within projects, aims to control the achievement of the project objective (Munns & Bjeirmi, 1996). By eliminating waste in project communication, efficiency can be achieved and greater project success can be accomplished (Silva & Ratnadiwakara, 2008).

2.1.1 EFFICIENT PROJECT COMMUNICATION

What makes a process or activity efficient depends on criteria chosen for defining efficiency (Robbins, 1993). This might be the reason why there’s no definite way to measure efficiency in project communication. However, by diverging from the objective of communication, project success is compromised. As mentioned in chapter 2.1, the objective of communication is to let meaning of information sent conform to interpretations of information received (Robbins, 1993); the meaning intended by the transmitter should conform to the interpretation made by the receiver. In contrast, activities that diverge from the fulfilment of the objective of project communication can be compared to waste activities, which are non-value adding activities for the end customer (Kilczewski, 2004) such as searching for information or waiting for response. Waste activities are a concept within efficiency (Liker, 2009) and are a barrier towards the achievement of efficiency. Therefore, the objective of efficient communication is to minimize waste activities without jeopardizing the understanding and clarity of information. The cost of waste activities can be mathematically explained as the relationship between cost of waste, 푊,

price paid by the buyer of the goods occurred from demand, 푃푑, and price paid by the seller of the goods occurred from supply, 푃𝑠. The formula for this is defined as

푊 = 푃푑 − 푃𝑠 (Sing, 2008; Norton, 1992)

Rewriting this formula results in

푃푑 = 푃𝑠 + 푊

This shows a linear relationship between price paid by buyer and price paid by seller as Cost of Waste are held fixed. The equation demonstrates that companies want to minimize waste to gain maximal profit from goods or service sold; if waste is reduced and becomes approximately zero and price paid by buyer is held constant, additional profit is generated since profit is the difference between income and expenditure (Berk & DeMarzo, 2014). However, the formula does not give space for any profit as waste equals zero, which is inaccurate (Berk & DeMarzo, 2014). If Cost of Waste in a project exceeds price paid by seller, the project outcome fails and loses its performance. Hence, eliminating waste is crucial for project success since it determines sensitivity towards competitiveness; too high Cost of Waste might result in not surviving market competition (Sing, 2008). Waste activities are inevitable; however, methods that achieves to reduce waste activities should be desired as it leads to lowered expenditures (Silva & Ratnadiwakara, 2008) and higher values in profitability.

A barrier for the achievement of efficient communication is project complexity. Project complexity occurs as multiple stakeholders are involved and information is shared across multiple organisational borders (Stead et al., 2009). In this case, the objective of communication becomes hard to accomplish. Project communication faces difficulties as project complexity increase (Cameron, 2007). Project complexity complicates the fulfilment of the project objective and is therefore associated with a risk considering project profitability (Rohrmann, 1992). Communication becomes especially hard in projects by its natural structure (Remidez & Jones, 2012) since multiple knowledge areas possessed by each team member are brought together in a collaborative environment. Besides, the project team needs to inform and update internal and external stakeholders involved in the project, which increase project complexity even further. Project complexity arisen from large project teams can lead to misunderstanding, which in turn can cause tasks not being completed in time (Remidez & Jones, 2012; Cameron 2007). This makes it essential for the team members to be able to share information to other team members with different knowledge backgrounds with clarity and simplicity, which is a skill by nature

(Heaven, 2004) and demands experience. By owning strong communication skills that support team-building, project performance can be improved by maintaining relationships throughout the project (Remidez & Jones, 2012). Technology is the area that carries the largest demand of communication (Blum et al., 2005). In addition, large companies carry greater complications regarding communication than smaller companies (Steinheider & Al-Hawamdeh, 2004). Hence, large technology firms combined will face remarkable difficulties in project communication. Companies with dynamic structure tend to have less complications regarding project communication as they have higher levels of information transmitted (Steinheider & Al- Hawamdeh, 2004). However, efficient communication doesn’t necessarily mean an increased amount of information shared (Blum et al., 2005). Companies with dynamic structure have undefined organisational borders, which allows information to become local rather than centralized. Centralized information means access limitations since information is possessed only by the source itself (McKelvey & Page, 1986). In contract, locally sourced information increases accessibility (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000) as anyone can reach information independent on the information owner. Localising information removes organisational borders and destroys hierarchy. As organisational borders are removed, people can interact and share knowledge simultaneously in a greater extend. This opens up for dynamic conversations (Zyl, 2009), which are of interest in project communication (Cameron, 2007) where multiple stakeholders are involved. Project complexity gives rise to aggregation and coordinating issues as multiple sources of information exist (Rubenstein-Montano et al., 2001). This in combination with centralized information can cause waste activities as search time for information increase (Zyl, 2009). The large amount of information existing in complex projects makes it harder to develop aggregation techniques that make valuable use of information (Przydatek et al., 2003). As project organisations grow larger and the project objective becomes complicated, excess information appears and compromise communication efficiency. Excessive amount of information contributes to confusion (Alvai & Leidner, 2001) gives rise to need of data mining (Agrawal & Srikant, 2000). Considering the large scale of information available and project resource constraints, developing and designing efficient information processing and aggregation techniques is an important challenge to make effective use of data (Przydatek et al., 2003). Whenever information isn’t used and transformed into actions, it is useless (McKelvey & Page, 1986) and becomes a hidden asset.

The culture of the company can either be a barrier or a driving factor towards efficient communication. Company culture is recognized as an attitude which belongs to the company

(Ankrah et al., 2009). The attitude can be directed towards any things or events and is inconstant. Company culture is based on beliefs and determines behaviour of the project team members. Rubenstein-Montano et al. (2001) argues that the company culture can exclusively determine success or failure of the fulfilment of the project objective. Company culture can evoke change resistance as the change diverges from shared beliefs and attitude within the company. Companies are more likely to be open to change in a situation of urgency or crisis or when benefits of the change exceed the effort needed to implement the change (Kouzmin & Korac- Kakabadse, 2000). Understanding the company culture will reduce change resistance and mitigate negative orientations (Ankrah et al., 2009). Poor project communication can be another consequence of company culture and might cause misunderstanding and information scarcity (Ankrah et al., 2009).

A driving factor towards efficient communication is trust (Jo & Shim, 2005). Building trust improves team member performance as satisfaction is stimulated, which in turn improves the fulfilment of the project objective (Jo & Shim, 2005). Besides, trust prevents fear and uncertainty from happening in teams (Pullin, 2010). Communicating teams can build trust as more information is shared and covers potential knowledge gaps existing in project teams where communication is poor. Small talk is an informal way of communicating and can contribute to increased information sharing. Small talk stimulates familiarity and can improve relationships by enabling attachment between team members. Through this, trust among team members is built and expectations are clarified (Pullin, 2010). Small talk is therefore another driving factor towards communication efficiency. Sharing common beliefs among team members also contribute to communication efficiency as this preserves collective decision making, which is of special importance in projects (Remidez & Jones, 2012). Communication animates visions and stimulates acceptance for common objectives, which motivates for change and improves project performance as it builds collaborative teams (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). Aggregating information is supportive towards collective decision making (Feddersen & Pesendorfer, 1997). Access to local information can impact individuals into creating common beliefs among team members since there is a close connection between common knowledge and rational expectations (McKelvey & Page, 1986).

Projects should continuously strive towards minimizing time spent on waste activities since it increases value for the end customer (Womack et al., 2007), which in turn increase competitiveness and improves project performance. Reducing waste activities in communication is also associated with improved operational performance and labour productivity

(Hajmohammad et al., 2013); insufficient operations in projects can be reduced (Remidez & Jones, 2012) as being uninformed or misinformed correlates to poorly operated tasks (Katz, 1982). Furthermore, efficient communication is positively correlated with increased project profitability (Kossai, 2014).

2.2 TOOLS FOR PROJECT COMMUNICATION

Implementing tools for communication contributes to increased project communication efficiency (Grudin & Poltrock, 1989). Communication can occur between physically present people or through IT-based solutions; tools for communication can either be based on physical presence or IT-based. Tools are recognized as an object used to achieve a special objective (Kay, 1995). Thus, project communication tools aim to enable information sharing between two or several stakeholders. Information technology, IT, is the technique that allows information to be transmitted between transmitter and receiver. It can also be described as the electronic processing and storage of information (Sing, 2008). IT-based tools for communication can provide communication channels and platforms. A communication channel is the medium through which information travels and a platform are channels by which information flows (Robbins, 1993). Hence, the communication channel is embedded in the communication platform. Through a communication platform, information can be stored and shared between users and users can search for information. A communication channel enables conversations and instant messaging to take place. Instant messaging is an internet-based synchronous text chat with point-to-point communication between two users (Grinter & Palen, 2002). Instant messaging also supports group chats where multiple users can interact simultaneously and thereby create a dynamic communication environment. These chats often carry informal information and enable fast information exchange (Nardi et al., 2000) yet formal information can still be exchanged through the group chats. Instant messaging stores information shared in chronological order where new information is visible in the chat window. Instant messaging highlights up-to-date information as new information shared replaces former information visible in the chat window. Information in a text chat is organised considering the time it was shared. Therefore, older information becomes harder to find than recently shared information.

2.2.1 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – EVALUATION

Structuring information available in the project by categorizing information and responsibilities helps to decrease risk occurred from project complexity (Stead et al., 2009). This can be done by

implementing higher levels of information technology which helps to aggregate and coordinate information (Müller & Seuring, 2007). Higher levels of implemented IT indicate higher levels of technique used to manage information transmission. If the level of implemented IT is too low it loses its ability to cope with large amount of information (Przydatek et al., 2003). By facilitating information transmission, IT allows receiver and provider of information to be connected and can reduce the distance through which the message travels (Alavi & Leidner, 2001). Through this, time associated with searching for information and waiting for response can be reduced and cost of waste can thereby be reduced (Silva & Ratnadiwakara, 2008). However, Cost of Waste will only be reduced if a low-amount of specific technology is implemented (Müller & Seuring, 2007). Higher levels of technology implemented might even increase waste as excess information is generated and confusion arises. IT localizes information by aggregating multiple sources of information. IT links and facilitates communication between stakeholders as relationships are built (Katz, 1982; Müller & Seuring, 2007). Furthermore, by allowing information to flow with speed between stakeholders (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000), learning capabilities are improved (Sing, 2008).

IT-based communication tools create opportunities for communicating in virtual environments. According to Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1998), trust and safety is especially important in virtual environment, which is contradicted by Reed and Knight (2010) who still suggest that information should be reviewed before transmission but claim that no evidence of correlation between increased risks regarding secrecy and virtual communication environments exists. IT will never be able to completely replace face-to-face conversations available in meetings (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000), which will always be needed in various extend to solve complex issues and take action. Furthermore, it is commonly occurred that IT is expected to solve issues associated with knowledge sharing; however, the people and culture of the company’s impact on project performance is often underestimated. The underlying issue with knowledge sharing isn’t necessarily to address knowledge areas, but to express knowledge in such manner as to be interpretable by the receiver as intended from the provider’s perspective. This, on the other hand, is hard to communicate only through pure IT solutions. Nevertheless, there’s a risk of not incorporating IT; people with less knowledge about IT might end up left out of the conversation because they do not know how to use the new system (Kouzmin & Korac- Kakabadse, 2000). Besides, Pullin (2010) states that low IT infrastructure is one reason why some parts of the world haven’t developed.

2.2.2 TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS

Traditional communication tools are well established tools that have been used in a company for a long period (Taylor & Perry, 2005). However, what makes a communication tool traditional is a subjective estimation and changes as new communication tools becomes well-established in the company. Traditional communication tools diverge from trends which arise from a peak in demand over a short period (Chopra & Meindl, 2016) as well as new communication tools. Traditional communication tools can be based on both physically presence and IT. Traditional IT-based tools support one-way or top-down communication (Zyl, 2009). Examples of typical traditional communication tools are telephone, Skype, E-mail and meetings.

Meetings are a frequently used tool for solving project-related issues (Stefik et al., 1987) and can occur face-to-face, virtually through IT-tools such as Skype or a combination of both. Meetings are gathering people with one or more objectives to be achieved (Kay, 1995). The demand of meetings often arises from the need to generate ideas, share information and to initiate action (Kay, 1995). Successful meetings are performed when the objective for the meeting is achieved, which is possible when criteria for successful meetings are fulfilled. Firstly, participants need to be prepared and updated for the meeting (Pearson et al., 2006) to preserve focus towards the meeting objective. Second, topics brought up during the meeting need to be relevant and contribute to fulfilment of the meeting objective (Stefik et al., 1987). Third and final, a follow up with lessons learned and actions taken needs to be summarized to clarify the outcome of the meeting (Kay, 1995). If needed, upcoming actions towards project-related issues should also be included in the follow up to make sure the project objective will be fulfilled. Aside from criteria defining successful meetings, the project team can also use tools during the meeting to make the fulfilment of the meeting objective easier (Kay, 1995; Stefik et al., 1987). Meetings might be frequently used to solve project-related issues; however, Kay (1995) questions meetings’ ability to solve project-related issues as participants are prevented from working simultaneously with tasks. Kay (1995) further argues that some information gained from the meeting will always be lost since everything communicated cannot be documented. Instead, meetings should be supported with IT-tools through which tasks can be operated simultaneously and information can be saved more frequently.

2.2.3 SOCIAL MEDIA

The pure definition of Social Media is unclear; however, Social Media is most commonly described as an online-based communication platform through which users can interact and share information (Edosomwan et al., 2011). Until recently, the usage of Social Media has been released from being demarcated to private usage and is utilized by companies for internal communication (Leonardi et al., 2013). The first Social Media communication platform was launched in 1997 (Boyd & Ellison, 2008) as a progress of digital communication platforms (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Storey et al., 2014).

Even though there is no systematic way in which Social Media can be categorized, Social Media can be classified against the level of intensity considering self-fulfilment available on each Social Media platform (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The intensity is determined by the degree of social presence or Social Media richness and self-presentation or self-disclosure. To further explain this, a table made by Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) is presented in table 1.

Table 1 Determining Social Media Classification by social presence/media richness and self- presentation/self-disclosure Social presence/Social Media richness

Low Medium High

Virtual game Collaborative Content

- worlds (e.g. Low projects (e.g. communities (e.g. World of Wikipedia) YouTube) Warcraft)

Social network Virtual social disclosure presentation/Self - High Blogs sites (e.g. worlds (e.g.

Self Facebook) Second Life)

As presented in table 2, social presence or Social Media richness is divided into low, medium and high and self-presentation or self-disclosure is divided into low and high. The level of social presence or Social Media richness is influenced by the degree of intimacy, which is described as the visual and physical contact that can be achieved by using the platform. The level of self- presentation or self-disclosure is determined by users’ ability to control the impressions other people form of them (Goffman, 1959); in other words, the ability to contradict a statement.

According to table 2, the most intense Social Media application is virtual social worlds since they enable high levels of social media richness or social presence and, at the same time, high levels of abilities to self-presentation and self-disclosure. The most commonly introduced Social Media in Sweden, Europe and Australia is social network sites (SCB, 2016; Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012), which is of medium-high intense classification. The prediction of channel use behaviour considering company culture relies on Social Media richness (D’Urso & Rains, 2008). To maximize trust building in project teams, a high-intense Social Media platform with high Social Media richness and self-disclosure is needed (Storey et al., 2014).

Social Media can be further classified against level of interaction. The level of interaction responds to the Social Media platform’s ability of having one-to-one, one-to-many or many-to- many conversations (Zyl, 2009). Table 2 summarizes examples of activities most appropriate for each classification and through which Social Media platform these activities can take place.

Table 2 activities most appropriate for each level of interaction in different Social Media platforms

One-to-one One-to-many Many-to-many Type of interaction

Push ideas to a broad Collaborative

Private conversations, audience, share planning, joint confidential or sensitive information, decision making,

Activity information discussion forum knowledge capture

Facebook Messenger Blogs, Web sites Wikis Social Media

As level of Social Media intensity is presented in table 1, the purpose of table 2 is to explain in which Social Media platform a certain number of users can interact simultaneously. In contrast, Social Media intensity considers self-fulfilment and in what extend users can express themselves (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Thus, Social Media intensity and interaction should be treated separately yet combined explain the differences between Social Media platforms. Level of interaction and intensity can be further used to described other communication tools such as traditional ones. The choice of Social Media platform in project communication differs in which interaction each platform intends to serve; if a project manager possesses information that needs

to be sent out to the team functions, a platform that supports one-to-many interactions will be the most appropriate choice (Robbins, 1993). Social Media support many-to-many conversations (Storey et al., 2014), which is desired in project communication because those conversations bring team members and stakeholders closer together (Remidez & Jones, 2012). This will result in reduced distance through which the information travels. Dynamic conversations correspond to many-to-many conversations or high level of interaction. Low levels of interaction correspond to low level of interaction and medium levels of interaction correspond to one-to-many conversations.

Social Media can be self-hosted or hosted by a third party. As a Social Media platform is self- hosted, data is owned and utilized by the creator of the data; self-hosted solutions don’t allow other parties to control or use data (Feller et al., 2006). In practise, this means that all information stored at a self-hosted Social Media platform can be viewed and edited by no one else but the owner of the Social Media platform (Lin & Halavais, 2004). However, companies do not need to create their own Social Media platform to be the owner of information but can instead by a license which allows the company to become the owner of the Social Media platform. In contrast, a Social Media platform that is hosted by a third party allows data to be viewed and, in some cases, edited by a third party, which is the owner of the Social Media platform (Ristenpart et al., 2009). When using a Social Media platform that is third-party hosted, companies risk that sensitive information is reviled. In worst cases, information can be found and used by a competitor which can have serious impact on the company’s performance (Ristenpart et al., 2009). Hence, self-hosted Social Media platforms are more private than if hosted by a third party.

As Social Media is not an established communication tool, Social Media directly diverge from traditional communication tools. Social Media is an evolvement from traditional communication tools since Social Media provides a higher richness in information flow and dynamic. Social Media goes beyond traditional communication tools as communication appears in multiple directions simultaneously (Zyl, 2009). Implementing Social Media as a tool for internal project communication has proved a reduction in Cost of Waste (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012) as it aggregates multiple sources of information and allows project team members to be connected through easy flowing communication channels (Zyl, 2009). Social Media allows parties to communicate in one platform through which users interact in several dimensions instead of having one-way or top-down conversations. This removes barriers in the organisation as information isn’t controlled to hierarchical groups (Zyl, 2009; Storey et al., 2014) and

information can flow easily between organisational borders. This is especially important in hierarchical organisations since knowledge becomes local and more accessible for all employees (Remidez & Jones, 2012) compared to using traditional communication channels such as E-mail and Skype. Furthermore, those traditional communication channels are time consuming and interruptive, which can be the cause of decreased productivity (Zyl, 2009; Storey et al., 2014). Localizing information in Social Media platforms removes dependency of people possessing certain knowledge as the information becomes accessible for all project team members (Remidez & Jones, 2012). This will improve productivity in the project team. By allowing information to be shared with speed in project communication, team members can prevent major damages in crises situations as information is exchanged within seconds through Social Media platforms. In these situations, decisions must occur in a compressed timeframe. Social Media can bring various team members together and localizing information, which prevent major damages from occurring in crises situations (Yates & Paquette, 2011). According to Schultz et al. (2011), the media through which information travels matters more than the message itself in crises communication; bigger consequences such as negative publicity come from sensitive information being spread on a frequently used platform than from publishing sensitive information on a smaller platform. The reason for this is that more people will read the sensitive information in a large platform, while attention will be low in a smaller platform with smaller amount of readers. In project communication, sharing important information or knowledge in a frequently used platform will be most time efficient.

By facilitating interaction, Social Media can increase information sharing (Edosomwan et al., 2011) and close potential knowledge gaps. Social Media aggregates information by allowing only one platform to bear all communication (Zyl, 2009). Through this platform, users can share information and build conversations. Aggregating information improves the condition for better collective decision making (Feddersen & Pesendorfer, 1997). Using only one platform for information also coordinates information and time spent on searching for information can be reduced (Yates & Paquette, 2010) which in turn reduces Cost of Waste (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012). By facilitating the flow of information through aggregation, the distance between receiver and transmitter of the information can be reduced (Pullin, 2010). Through this, Social Media holds great promise for knowledge sharing (Yates & Paquette, 2010) as it facilitates individual learning and expression as well as coordination and collaboration between stakeholders (Storey et al., 2014). Social Media further enables common learning and knowledge sharing (Yates & Paquette, 2011) by supporting communities of practice to arise. Communities of practice arise

when groups of people with common interests and beliefs can interact in a common platform. Through this platform, knowledge can be shared and allows people to evolve in a collaborative environment. Transferring knowledge between stakeholders in projects is an important role of any channel used for communication as it facilitates individual learning as well as coordination and collaboration among team members. (Storey et al., 2014).

Social Media is also able of reducing the distance through which a message travels. Therefore, implementing Social Media as a tool for internal project communication will improve communication efficiency. Despite this fact, less than 20 % of Swedish companies use Social Media for internal exchange of information and knowledge (SCB, 2013) and it isn’t used in a greater extend for that purpose in Europe and Australia (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012). In addition, studies have shown an attitude of fear among workers towards Social Media (Macnamara & Zerfass, 2012) and lack of knowledge about how to use Social Media (Storey et al., 2014; Yates & Paquette, 2011). The fear of using Social Media in businesses arises from concerns regarding secrecy and sensitive information leakage. As mentioned, Social Media allows information to travel fast, which will have a negative impact regarding sensitive information. However, this only concerns companies who store information at and communicate through a third-party hosted Social Media platform. Thus, fear seams not to be a direct consequence of Social Media but lack of knowledge about existing self-hosted Social Media platforms. Fear also arises from concerns regarding privacy and distractions as great amounts of notifications received might be disturbing employees’ work. Lack of knowledge about Social Media usage might correlate with age, experience of using IT and IT knowledge (Storey et al., 2014). Studies have also shown that Social Media can cause a need for data mining as excess data are available in Social Media platforms (Yates & Paquette, 2011; Storey et al., 2014). Excess data might be correlated with project size (Storey et al., 2014) as conversation complexity increase from interacting with multiple stakeholders (Cameron, 2007).

Advantages and disadvantages that arise from implementing Social Media in communication are summarized and listed in table 3.

Table 3 summary and list of advantages and disadvantages of implementing Social Media in project communication Advantages Disadvantages Improved aggregation and coordination of Secrecy issues information and people Knowledge gaps in Social Media usage Increased knowledge exchange among workers Reduced distance through which the message Excess data travels Increased trust

The disadvantages of implementing Social Media for project communication might disturb change and give rise to change resistance. Providing an increased amount of information about the specific change will reduce resistance towards the change (Worley & Doolen, 2006). One of the most important principles in organisational theory is that groups strive towards structure their work environments to reduce the amount of stress they must face by directing their activities towards a more workable and predictable level of certainty and clarity (Katz, 1982). New tools for communication might not be attractive to implement in a project organisation where existing tools are enough to manage communication needs since change is not made if benefits of the change don’t exceed efforts needed to make the change (Kouzmin & Korac-Kakabadse, 2000). On the other hand, the advantages of a new technology will be underestimated by a factor of 3, while the disadvantages of giving up old technology will be overestimated by a factor of three (Zyl, 2009).

3 VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY

In chapter 3, information about the company studied in the case study is provided. Information regarding the Volvo GTT organisation was found at the Intranet. Because of secrecy, references for this information cannot be included in the reference list.

Volvo Group Trucks Technology, Volvo GTT, is a global company within the Volvo Group organisation (Volvo Group, 2017) which is presented in figure 2.

Figure 2 Chart over the Volvo Group organisation

As shown in figure 2, Volvo GTT operates as an assisting function towards the CEO of Volvo Group, which is the owner of Volvo Trucks, UD Trucks, Renault Trucks and several. In addition, Volvo GTT has two assisting teams concerning operations and purchasing. The Volvo GTT organisation is presented in figure 3.

Figure 3 Chart over the Volvo Group Trucks Technology organisation

The functions representing Volvo GTT are technology product project, complete vehicle, powertrain engineering and quality and customer satisfaction combined with the assisting teams such as human resource and several. Volvo GTT is a global organisation with approximately 7000 employees all over the world (Volvo Group, 2017). In Sweden, Volvo GTT is found in Gothenburg where 3200 employees work. As shown in figure 3, project office is a part of Volvo GTT and operates development processes of the trucks. These development processes are mainly performed in projects and concern areas within both hardware and software components, which are cab; electrical and electronics; chassis and vehicle dynamics; engines, transmissions and axles; and controls and software functionalities. The components included in the truck are shown in figure 4.

Figure 4 components included in the development processes operated by Volvo GTT

In other words, projects operated at Volvo GTT concerns areas presented in figure 4. The project process includes several phases but starts most commonly with a new solution processed by a research and development team together with a portfolio management. The projects can also emerge from upcoming law requirements which affect the design of the truck. The portfolio management determine resources in terms of money dedicated to the project. After that, a feasibility study is made to investigate the solution’s feasibility in the market. If the solution is feasible, a concept development is made followed by a solution development process in which the solution is converted to an actual product. When the product is constructed, a final verification is made to prepare for the next phase in the project process, which is industrialisation and commercialisation. As a last stage of the entire project process, a follow up is made to

document findings and difficulties throughout the project process. These documents are saved in the Volvo database with purpose to learn and educate other project processes operated within Volvo GTT. A demonstration of the project process is shown in figure 5.

Figure 5 overview of the general project process in Volvo GTT

As shown in figure 5, all processes included in the projects overlap each other yet separated by deadlines called gates. The gates are represented by the lines drawn between each phases of the project process. To continue to the next phase of the project, the project team needs to fulfil determined criteria determined for each gate. If the criteria are fulfilled, the project team can continue to the next phase of the project. Throughout the entire project process, knowledge gained is meant to be documented in the Follow-Up phase.

4 METHOD

Chapter 4 presents chosen methods to collect data and analysis methods that will be the link between research question and answer. These methods are evaluated and compared against other methods used in project communication.

To determine communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency, the first research approach was to implement a Social Media group chat in one or several project teams where communication efficiency would be measured before and after the implementation. Communication efficiency would be measured against the same criteria before and after the implementation to be compared and evaluated. However, this approach was rejected as secrecy issues appeared; the Social Media group chat, which was carefully selected, was hosted by a third party. In addition, installing the group chat was not possible due to technical issues at Volvo GTT as installing the group chat software would disturb the current system. Instead, the research approach was change to evaluating currently used traditional communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency.

The barriers and driving factors, or criteria, included in the formula for Cost of Waste, found in chapter 4.3, are chosen based on previous literature defining efficient project communication. Since efficiency is dependent on what criteria are chosen to explain efficiency (Aaker et al., 1995), the criteria are subject to literature resources and this method is only one of many potential ways of defining efficiency and calculating Cost of Waste. No definite or tested formula was found in existing literature; the formula used in study is based on project communication literature and previously applied waste formulas within other fields. Hence, the formula used in this study to define efficient communication and Cost of Waste cannot be exclusively used to determine efficient communication; barriers and driving factors not mentioned in this study will likely also have an impact on efficient project communication and Cost of Waste. In conclusion, the method used for defining efficient communication is a roughly simplified method.

4.1 DATA COLLECTION

Data can be collected by using either qualitative or quantitative methods. Qualitative methods emphasise understanding while quantitative methods emphasise testing and verification (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). Qualitative methods are appropriate when studying a social process or event

in an organisation, group or individual (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). The objective of this study will be fulfilled by using qualitative methods since the understanding about tools for project communication will be uncovered and explored with purpose to understand why Social Media isn’t adapted for project communication. Yet, the research will include quantitative elements as Cost of Waste will be estimated and efficient communication will be evaluated against fixed criteria. Thus, the research design will be qualitative but utilize both qualitative and quantitative techniques. The research approach will be explorative and focus on the understanding of people’s behaviour. In explorative research, the research problem is poorly understood and the research therefore aims to seek answers to the research question (Ghauri 2004; Marshan-Piekkari & Welch, 2004). The study will exclusively rely on primary data except for one variable included in measurements which will be collected from an external source. The reason for this is because no secondary data is available at Volvo GTT regarding this subject. Primary data will be collected by performing a case study at Volvo GTT where observations, which is a frequently used method in qualitative research (Miles et al., 2013), will appear. The observations will be complemented with a survey. Qualitative data is mainly expressed in text yet can be quantified into numbers (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). Hence, both qualitative and quantified qualitative data will be used in this study. Qualitative data can be used to draw general conclusions at the conceptual level (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). This is useful when exploring concepts such as communication tools’ impact on efficiency in project communication. Quantitative data, on the other hand, enables measurements and conclusions based on logical reasoning at the operational level.

Regarding ethics, the participants of the study will not be exposed to stress since anonymity will be preserved and participants will be aware the involvement in the research study. The participation will be voluntary and uncomfortable questions will be avoided.

The entire population of this study was Volvo GTT employees whose work is related to projects, which in total consists of 3200 people globally located. The sample size was selected from Volvo GTT since Volvo GTT is a large technology firm in which projects are operated. In these projects, traditional communication tools are dominating. Employees whose work is not related to project management was excluded from the sample size since the study is restricted to project communication. A quota sample was selected and consisted of 47 project team members. These team members had various knowledge backgrounds and responsibility areas as they serve different functions in projects; however, everyone included in the sample size works in technique-related projects with various size in terms of money and team members. Still, all

projects have similar knowledge background considering all projects are related to technique. This will eliminate risks of having different information travelling among project team members and will therefore reduce diversification. The different project areas operated at Volvo GTT can be found in chapter 3. The sample size in the observations diverge from the sample size in the survey; the sample size in the survey was expanded considering a larger sample size could be captured in this case. Besides, allowing more people to respond to the survey provides more data and thereby a more accurate result considering reliability and validity (Chopra & Meindl, 2016). In the observations, the 47 participants correspond to four different projects: three software projects within electronics and IT and one hardware project treating the axis of the truck. Aside from 4 project managers, each participant represented various team function. The projects were chosen with consideration to embrace diversity regarding project area and project size to be representative towards the rest of the firm. However, drawing general conclusions about the entire population from a quota sample might provide misleading results (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). Hence, conclusions made in this study cannot be reliably applied at the general population. The survey was E-mailed to 100 employees out of which 47 of those were included in the sample size used in the observation. The additional 53 employees had connection to the four projects which were observed.

4.1.1 CASE STUDY

The case study was performed at Volvo GTT in Gothenburg where 3200 employees work. A case study is often used in qualitative research with explorative approach yet not restricted to any area (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). As the thesis questions aren’t measurable and hard to answer without studying a natural setting, case studies become especially appropriate as a method to collect data. A case study becomes additionally appropriate as the thesis question has real-life relevance. The case study aims to unfold the unsolved thesis question by allowing the researcher to investigate a natural setting from the inside. This process includes analysis of a group, individual or situation within a definite time frame. If a case study is performed on a group, conclusions does not aim to be drawn from individuals but from the group as a unit. Hence, the case study is performed in a real-time situation where conclusions made concerns the sample size selected.

A common way to collect data in case studies is through interviews, observations and verbal or written reports among others. However, observations have been selected in this case study. While interviews can provide information that the observer did not see, interviews are also

restricted to the respondent’s willingness or even ability to provide information (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). Observations can be more accurate and objective as the observer is the only source of information; interviews can provide the same information in various format as respondents might have different interpretations. On the other hand, information collected through observations relies only on the observer’s knowledge and skills, which can limit the research. (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). No sufficient amounts of verbal or written reports were found to cover the thesis questions, which is also why no such report has been used.

4.1.1.1 OBSERVATIONS

This study will be using human observations and collet data through field observations where the observer is a natural part of the situation being observed, which is also called non-participant observations. In human observations, a person is the object of the observation rather than a camera, which is used in mechanical observations. In the case of human observations, the observer can have an impact on the situation at first since people might be disturbed by the observer’s presence. However, this is expected to disappear as people get used to the observer’s presence.

The purpose of the observation process is to increase the understanding of existing traditional communication tools used at Volvo GTT. Therefore, the operation process will evolve around meetings and IT-based tools associated with meetings. The observation started by participating in meetings and having access to all information shared regarding meetings; access to agenda, meetings notes etc. All four projects had 8 meetings per week in total, which corresponds to 9 hours meeting time in total. Participants of the observation were aware of the purpose of the observations and the observer participated passively in the meeting; no effort but documenting was made by the observer. A summary of focus areas during the observation are presented in table 4.

Table 4 focus areas for the observation process of participating in meetings Focus area Question to be answered Purpose/goal Preparation before the Are participants able to be Identify preparing information meeting prepared for the meeting? for the meeting Topics brought up during What is the reason for the Find out what is causing the the meeting meeting? meeting to occur Tools used for Are tools used Evaluate tools for communication appropriately? communication Follow up What is communicated Identify documentations of after the meeting? findings from the meeting

The focus areas are chosen based on their relation to performing successful meetings, which is described in chapter 2.2.2. Aside from participating in meetings, access to all platforms in which information regarding meetings was provided. These platforms were perused and analysed considering the criteria for efficient communication. Events happening during the observation process were documented in text files.

4.1.1.2 SURVEY

A survey is a complementary data collection method within case studies (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010) and is designed as a questionnaire which aims to accomplish the research objective (Aaker et al., 1995). A survey can be structured as analytical or descriptive. Analytical surveys are appropriate to use when determining causal effect. To design an analytical survey, the research question needs to be well defined but also which dependent and independent variables are included. Descriptive surveys are more explorative as they aim to identify the phenomena whose variance is wished to be explained (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). In this study, the survey will be a combination of being analytical and descriptive; the research question and variables are defined yet not ensured since they can vary among the choice of criteria defining efficiency. Hence, descriptive elements need to be included in the survey to explore the variance of the phenomena (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010).

A survey can contain open-response or closed-response questions (Aaker et al., 1995). Open- response questions enable to provide a larger quantity of data while closed-response questions limit the respondent’s ability to answer by providing one or several options. A survey that contains open-response question can cover more knowledge gaps, which is the main reason for constructing a survey. On the other hand, open-response questions can generate a large amount of qualitative data which is time-consuming and difficult to manage. A survey with closed- response questions enables quantifying data, which can be valuable when comparing results and making measurements. However, closed-response questions limit the respondent’s ability to provide information and might cause information scarcity towards accomplishing the research objective. (Aaker et al., 1995). Based on these arguments, the survey in this study will contain mainly closed-response questions but also include open-response questions in areas where more information is necessary.

To enable the survey to accomplish the research objective, the technical parts of the survey need to be executed well. First, the survey cannot be made until the research question is clearly stated. Furthermore, questions should not be leading or loaded to keep intentions of the survey unknown

for the reader. This will provide decorum and objective results (Aaker et al., 1995). Questions should not be asked twice, meaning two questions with similar outcomes should be shortened into one question. According to Aaker et al. (1995), there are four guidelines to follow when designing a survey:

1. Begin the survey with nonthreatening and easy questions to gain confidence. 2. Transition between topics should be smooth and logic to avoid confusion. 3. In any topic, begin with broad, general questions to then ask more specific questions. This will help to provide more thoughtful answers. 4. Do not put sensitive questions in the beginning of the survey but later when confidence and trust is built for the survey.

Aside from the guidelines, the layout of the survey will also influence the technical parts of the survey. Therefore, the survey should to be simple yet cover all information needed to accomplish the research objective. To make sure that the survey is technically satisfying and answers the research objective, the survey can be tested by allowing three to five people to respond to the survey before release (Aaker et al., 1995; Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010).

The purpose of the survey in this study was to quantify qualitative data and to fulfil the objective of the study, namely why Social Media isn’t adapted in project communication. Quantifying qualitative data enables to measure and compare results generated from the survey. The survey was constructed based on the arguments for a technically satisfying survey and guidelines according to Aaker et al. (1995). The survey contained 22 questions formulated as statements. These statements represent the response variables. The respondent could choose on a scale of 1 to 4 in which degree they agreed to the statement where 1 was strongly disagree and 4 strongly agree (Eslami Kandlousi et al., 2010). When choosing a scale with even numbers, the respondent is forced to make statement (Aaker et al., 1995) which is also the reason why this scale is used. No more than four alternatives on the scale are chosen by the reason of avoiding confusion; the respondent might find it hard to tell the difference between the value of each number when the number of alternatives increase (Aaker et al., 1995). Aside from a scale, the survey contained alternative boxes and was complemented with open-response alternatives to cover more knowledge gaps. The closed-response questions provided quantified qualitative data and the open-response questions provided qualitative data. The survey contained four control variables, which were age, years of experience, number of projects the respondent is active in and appreciated IT knowledge (Storey et al., 2014). The survey was tested by four people with

various knowledge backgrounds before it was released. The test persons gave feedback that led to minor changes in the survey design to in greatest extend possible avoid misinterpretations and thereby increase validity. After testing and altering was done, the survey was sent out to 100 employees working in projects at Volvo GTT by e-mail.

4.2 DATA ANALYSIS

A common mistake when using qualitative methods is to produce extreme masses of data (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). Therefore, qualitative methods often require data reduction before conclusions can be drawn. Conclusions of the research will be drawn through inductive research orientation with deductive elements; conclusion will be mainly based on empirical observations but also through logical reasoning (Ghauri & Grønhaug, 2010). To avoid processing excess data, data will be coded and classified; irrelevant data will fall outside categories relevant for the conclusion drawing. Codifying and classifying will also avoid distortion of data and preserve the richness that naturally comes from qualitative data (Saunders et al., 2003).

Qualitative data was provided mostly from the observations but also in some extend from the survey. Analysis of qualitative data followed Ghauri and Grønhaug’s (2010) procedure of analysing qualitative data, which is presented in figure 6.

data collection

data reduction/display

conslusion: drawing/verifying

Figure 6 the process of analysing qualitative data

After qualitative data was collected in text files, data was coded and classified which is the stage of data displaying. Data was classified against the focus areas chosen for the meetings and all excess data was reduced and removed from the analysis. As a final step in this process, conclusions were drawn with considerations to the thesis questions. Quantified qualitative data provided from the survey was analysed in a cross table and through measurements.

4.2.1 CROSS TABLE

A cross table is a matrix where correlation between variables are analysed and is a frequently used data analysis method used in the field of engineering (Pearson, 1994; Ankrah et al., 2009) as well as project communication (Zyl, 2009; Steinheider & Al-Hawamdeh, 2004). Cross tables enable data to be expressed in correlations, which means correlations between variables can be measured and compared. This can be valuable when evaluating degree of impact certain variables’ have on a specific event.

Table 5 cross table exposing correlation between independent and dependent variables

𝑥1 𝑥2 𝑛𝑦

𝑛𝑦 𝑦1 A B 1 𝑛 𝑦2 C D 𝑦1

𝑛𝑥+𝑦 𝑛𝑥 𝑛𝑥1 𝑛𝑥2

Independent variable, 𝑥 Dependent variable, 𝑦 Number of respondents, 𝑛

Cross tables replaced SPSS, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences, as an analysing method since insignificant results were generated even though several models were tested and data was manipulated considering model fitting. Hence, SPSS has been carefully tested yet couldn’t process data properly and was therefore excluded as an analysing method in this study.

4.2.2 MEASUREMENTS

The Cost of Waste will be measured by using the formula (1), (2) and (3). The formulas derive from Johnston & Mincks’ (1993) linear formula defining Cost of Waste. Johnston & Mincks (1993) defines waste as non-value adding activities.

𝑐𝑤(𝑡𝑟) = 𝑡𝑟 ∗ 푆̅ (1)

𝑐𝑤(𝑡𝑠) = 𝑡𝑠 ∗ 푆̅ (2)

𝑐𝑤(𝑡푚, 𝑞푖) = 𝑡푚 ∗ (1 − 𝑞푖) ∗ 푆̅ (3)

Cost of Waste, 𝑐𝑤

Time spent on waiting for response, 𝑡𝑟

Time spent on searching for information, 𝑡𝑠

Time spent on meetings, 𝑡푚

Information quality, 𝑞푖 Average salary paid to project team members, 푆̅

Average salary paid to project managers located in the county of Västra Götaland, Sweden, with an average work experience of 10,7 years is 38 973 SEK (Lönestatistik, 2017). Based on an average work month of 160 hours, the salary per hour for project managers is 243,6 SEK/hour. Average salary was limited to the sum paid out to employees and excluded additional fees which come from having employees. Information quality was determined based on what proportion of the meetings provide valuable information to the participants. Hence, information quality was expressed in percentage. The variables related to time will be an average appreciation of time spent on each activity. Because of the design of the survey, time spent on meetings was determined from equation (4).

1+2 3+4 5+6 7+8 𝑡 = (% + % + % + % ) ∗ 𝑛 푚 2 2 2 2 (4) 𝑛 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑒𝑠

The Cost of Waste will be estimated with qualitative data, which diverge from testing and verification. Hence, the Cost of Waste will not be definite but instead be a symbol of the Cost of Waste. The formula of Cost of Waste indicates a linear relationship between cost and time. The formula has not been tested in the field of waste in communication but is still used in this study since waste is a general concept within efficiency (Liker, 2009).

5 RESULT

In chapter 5, results from the observations and the survey is presented through methods presented in chapter 4.

This section will answer thesis questions i – iv, which are

i What is the general attitude about project communication in the company? ii Are traditional communication tools efficient in projects? iii What is the Cost of Waste when using traditional communication tools in terms of time? iv What is the company’s attitude towards Social Media in project communication?

The fifth and final thesis question will be answered in chapter 6.

The survey was E-mailed to 100 people of which 64 responded to the survey. However, 7 respondents did not answer all questions included in the survey which was possible because none of the questions were compulsory to answer. The question that received the least response had 60 respondents, which means that results presented below corresponds to maximum 64 respondents and minimum 60 respondents. This also explains the variety in respondents for the survey questions. The respondents had both virtual and physical presence in meetings.

5.1 THE GENERAL ATTITUDE ABOUT PROJECT COMMUNICATION AT VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY Majority of the respondents from the survey consider that project communication requires tools with fast response time and a platform where information can be stored and shared. Trust is important for project communication and more than half of the respondents consider misunderstanding to be the reason for tasks not being completed in time. Categorizing information helps most of the respondents to find what they’re looking for.

5.2 COMMUNICATION TOOLS USED AT VOLVO GROUP TRUCKS TECHNOLOGY In the four projects studied at Volvo GTT, meetings were used for dynamic conversations where complex issues were solved and resource planning occurred. Meetings were mostly utilized for information sharing and follow up with low or medium level of interaction. The meetings had many-to-many conversations, yet some subjects included conversations where a smaller fraction of all participants were involved. Both informal and formal information were exchanged during

the meetings. The agenda was E-mailed to those invited before the meeting occurred. Most meetings were pre-booked from project start and occurred at a weekly basis except some additional meetings that arose from demand. Meetings most commonly lasted between one and two hours and not all participants stayed the entire meeting. As the meetings were finished, notes that were taken were both sent out through E-mail but also shared at a common platform in which project team members had access to. In this platform, all information regarding the project could be found. The platform served low to medium levels of interaction and provided and low intensity. Notes taken from meetings worked as a follow up and included important parts of the meeting. All project team members could read notes from any meeting regardless of participation because they had access to the platform were information was stored. In some cases, upcoming actions needed was included in notes taken during the meeting. Number of participants at the meeting varied between 7 and 15 people out of which some of them were connected through Skype from distance. Skype were mainly used to enable attendance at distance. However, Skype’s chat function was also utilized for informal one-to-one conversations where coordinating issues such as meeting location and time were solved. On rare occasions, the chat function was used as a group chat. The Skype chat was desired when fast response time was required and minor questions needed to be answered. In general, IT-based communication tools were mainly used for formal communication with some exceptions. Aside from meetings, the most frequently used communication tool was E-mail. E-mail supported one-to-one and one-to-many conversations where both informal and formal information were exchanged. E-mail was used for sharing information but also arranging meetings; inviting participants, time and date setting and booking room. In situations where formal information could not sufficiently be expressed through E-mail, people preferred real- time conversations instead. In those cases, information was either shared directly though calls, face-to-face conversations or preserved until next meeting.

An internal platform for each project was used for pure information sharing. In this platform, all existing information regarding the project could be found. Also, additional information could be shared by anyone involved in the project and team members could modify and rewrite existing information. Information at these platforms was categorized into topics. No additional communication opportunities with higher levels of interaction or intensity were provided at this platform.

In general, informal information was a minor part of information shared through the traditional communication tools used in project communication. Instead, informal information was shared through small talk which appeared before and after meetings in various locations.

5.2.1 TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS’ EFFICIENCY

Even though no communication tool was utilized for small talk in a greater extend, trust is not an issue among team members at Volvo GTT; majority of the respondents of the survey have faith in their co-workers’ ability to perform well. No correlation between whether respondents participated virtually or physically in meetings and trust was found. Most respondents were located in Gothenburg yet some of those had team members outside Sweden. Table 6 shows in which degree respondents agreed to the fact that they have faith in their co-workers’ ability to perform well based on work experience. Out of 63 respondents, 3 disagreed to the statement.

Table 6 shows in what degree respondents have faith in their co-workers' ability to perform well correlated with work experience

I have faith in my 1 4 co-workers’ ability Strongly 2 3 Strongly 𝒏 to perform well disagree agree 1-10 2 3 5 11-20 2 16 11 29 21-30 1 4 14 19 Work Work (years) 31-40 5 3 8 experience experience 41-50 1 1 2 𝒏 3 28 32 63

Communication tools used at Volvo GTT neither provide information surplus nor scarcity; responses were evenly distributed over receiving too little or too much information regarding important issues and events happening in projects were equally distributed. Information tend to reach respondents in time, yet 23 out of 62 respondents do not receive information needed in time. In addition, 39 out of 64 respondents have at least once ended up in a situation where they don’t know where to search for certain information or people. As shown in table 7, misunderstanding is a common reason for tasks not being completed in time. Misunderstandings that cause tasks not being completed in time tend to increase by the number of projects respondents participate in.

Table 7 tasks not being completed in time due to misunderstanding correlated with number of projects respondents participate in

Misunderstanding is 1 4 often the reason for Strongly 2 3 Strongly 𝒏 tasks not being disagree agree completed in time 1-5 2 12 17 8 39

6-10 3 3 4 10 in

projects I projects >10 4 6 3 13 Number of Number participate participate 𝒏 2 19 26 15 62

Most respondents agreed to the statement that meetings are an efficient way to solve project related issues, yet less than half of those always gain valuable information from meetings they participate in. This is visualized as a pie chart in figure 7.

Meetings are efficient vs receiving valuable information

Meetings are an efficient way to solve project related issues Meetings are not an efficient way to solve project related issues I always gain valuable information I do not always gain valuable information

Figure 7 proportion of gaining valuable information when agreeing to the statement that meetings are an efficient way to solve project related issues

The more time respondents spend on meetings, the more they tend to disagree to the statement that meetings are an efficient way to solve project related issues. This is further explained by table 8. Most respondents spend 3-4 hours a day on meetings, which corresponds to approximately 2 meetings a day considering most meetings lasted between one and two hours.

Table 8 Appreciated average time spent on meetings per day correlated with stating that meetings are efficient when solving project related issues Meetings are an efficient 1 4 way to solve project Strongly 2 3 Strongly 𝒏 related issues disagree agree

Appreciated 1-2 1 3 2 6 average amount of 3-4 7 18 5 30 time spent on meetings 5-6 6 13 4 23 a day 7-8 1 3 4

𝒏 1 14 37 11 63

Table 9 shows in what extend valuable information is gained from meetings respondents participate in correlated with what type of meeting they most commonly attend. Respondents who attend meetings regarding follow up gain less valuable information; 13 out of 18 respondents does not gain valuable information from meetings regarding follow up. In contrast, respondents who attend meetings regarding decision making gain most valuable information as 5 out of 6 always gain valuable information. In general, half of the respondents does not always gain valuable information from meetings they participate in regardless of the meeting agenda. Respondents most commonly attend meetings regarding information sharing where half of the attenders gain valuable information. Respondents who replied “Other” added that they most commonly attend meetings with a mix of all alternatives except “Not sure”.

Table 9 shows in which degree valuable information is provided correlated with what meeting respondents attend I always gain valuable 1 4 information from meetings I Strongly 2 3 Strongly 𝒏 participate in disagree agree Planning 5 3 8 Deviation/risk 1 1 2 Follow up 1 12 4 1 18 Decision making 1 5 6 Information 1 9 10 20

regarding sharing

attend meetings attend Not sure 1 1 I most commonly commonly I most Other 1 5 3 9 𝒏 2 30 28 4 64

Meetings regarding information sharing and follow up are the two most commonly occurring meetings. The distribution of meeting topics is illustrated in figure 8.

Distribution of what kind of meeting respondents most commonly attend

Planning Deviation/risk Follow up Decision making Information sharing Not sure Other

Figure 8 illustrates distribution of what kind of meeting respondents most commonly attend

As presented in table 10, more than half of the respondents get time do to other tasks during meetings regardless whether subjects brought up are relevant or not. However, more respondents tend to do other tasks when subjects brought up are irrelevant for their work. In the open- response question, a few respondents added that it’s okay to do other tasks during the meeting as not all subjects brought up can be relevant for all attenders. Also, some respondents mentioned that they attend meetings to listen to other project team members’ work to show support but also to avoid missing out important information for their own work.

Table 10 shows in what degree respondents get time to do other tasks during the meeting correlated with in what extend subjects brought up are relevant

I sometimes get time to 1 4 do other tasks during the Strongly 2 3 Strongly 𝒏 meeting disagree agree

1 Strongly 1 2 4 7 work disagree 2 3 12 23 4 42

3 7 4 11

4 3 1 4 Strongly agree up during the meeting are are up the meeting during All subjects that are brought are that All subjects relevant for me and formy me relevant 𝑛 6 20 30 8 64

Even though the agenda is sent to all invited before the meeting starts, 23 out of 64 respondents replied that they are not always updated and prepared for the meetings they participate in. In addition, 22 out of 64 respondents spend less than half an hour a day in average on searching for certain information or people in different platforms and communication channels.

5.2.2 COST OF WASTE OF TRADITIONAL COMMUNICATION TOOLS

The survey contained closed-response questions regarding time spent on waste activities: response time, 𝑡𝑟, search time, 𝑡𝑠, and time spent on meetings, 𝑡푚. The values presented in table 11 are estimated based on average time spent on each waste activity.

Table 11 presents response time, search time and time spent on meetings

𝒕𝒓 (h) 𝒕𝒔 (h) 𝒕𝒎 (h) 𝒉 ⁄𝒏 6,8 1 4,3 𝒏 60 60 64 𝒉 ∗ 𝒏 408 60 275,2

Cost of Waste of each three waste activities are calculated and presented in table 12, where Cost of Waste is estimated per hour. As 50 % of the respondents replied that they don’t always gain valuable information from the meetings they participate in, 𝑞푖 is estimated to 0,5.

Table 12 presents cost of waste for each amount of hour spent on waste activities

풄풘(𝒕𝒓) (SEK) 풄풘(𝒕𝒔) (SEK) 풄풘(𝒕𝒎, 𝒒𝒊) (SEK) Total (SEK) 𝟗𝟗ퟑ𝟖𝟗 14616 33519 147524

5.3 SOCIAL MEDIA ATTITUDE

Most of the respondents were daily users of Social Media, yet few agreed that Social Media is appropriate for project communication and that Social Media can store information safely without potential leakage. Despite this fact, majority of the respondents are willing to try out a group chat even though some never use Social Media. Frequent Social Media usage tend not to be positively correlated with stating that Social Media is appropriate for project communication, yet some added in the open-response question that they did not know what kind of Social Media the survey was aiming for.

Table 13 shows the general attitude about Social Media in relation to Social Media usage Less than I use Social Media Daily Weekly Monthly Never 𝒏 once a month 1

Strongly 11 1 1 4 1 18 disagree 2 20 5 3 1 29 3 9 4 1 14 project project 4 Social Media is Social Media communication appropriate for for appropriate Strongly 1 1 agree 𝒏 41 10 1 7 3 62

1 Strongly 23 2 1 5 3 34 disagree 2 15 8 1 24 3 2 1 3 4 safely without safely Strongly potential leakagepotential Social Media can Social Media store information store agree 𝒏 40 10 1 7 3 61 Yes 34 8 3 3 48

chat I am No 8 2 1 4 15 group try out a try willing to 𝒏 42 10 1 7 3 63

6 DISCUSSION

Chapter 6 will discuss theory and trial, i.e. results generated from observations and the survey. All findings during the thesis will be compared and evaluated with purpose to conclude the thesis question.

For the discussion section, the main question to be answered is if Cost of Waste can be reduced if replacing traditional communication tools with Social Media, which is the fifth and final thesis question. The discussion will proceed from findings of the study combined with theory presented in chapter 2. Hence, the discussion section will combine theory and trial.

Even though most respondents of the survey agreed to the statement that project communication requires tools with fast response time, team members spend on average 6,8 hours a day on waiting for a response with existing traditional communication tools. However, as average meeting time is approximately 4 hours a day, team members do other tasks during the time waiting for response which means less time is wasted. In addition, the survey exposed multitasking during meetings as subjects brought up are irrelevant. A communication tool with even faster response time will reduce Cost of Waste. Fast response time can be achieved through implementing Social Media which has proven to reach a broad audience within short time. Still, questions asked might have a specific target which should be considered when choosing among Social Media alternatives; a one-to-many platform might reach a too broad audience as the message gets lost in the history. Instead, the Social Media platform should be adjusted with considerations to what kind of question is asked in combination to what receiver is intended. This can be achieved through categorization. While the survey exposed that fast response time is required, the survey also showed that team members tend to fear Social Media’s ability to store information safely. Secrecy issues can be avoided by choosing a Social Media platform that isn’t hosted by a third party and fear is removed as team members become informed about secrecy. Aside from providing fast response time, Social Media can also integrate information storage into one unified platform. Project team members agreed to state that these functions of Social Media are necessary for project communication; however, as Social Media is mentioned by name, project team members do not agree that Social Media is appropriate for project communication. This fact expose a company culture in which change resistance arise towards communication tools which diverge from traditional ones. The change resistance can also arise as lack of knowledge is provided about Social Media.

The general attitude about Social Media might explain why Social Media isn’t used for project communication at Volvo GTT; no project manager would accept a communication tool in which information cannot be stored safely. As mentioned, project team members state that a platform and fast response time is needed in project communication. This can also mean that team members perceive that traditional communication tools are sufficient for current needs in project communication. However, traditional communication tools have in previous studies showed to be inferior towards Social Media. In the case of Volvo GTT, traditional communication tools’ performance might be overestimated while new technology’s performance is underestimated. In either case, the change resistance give rise to waste activities that is time consuming. By switching to Social Media communication tools, project communication might become improved as project communication becomes unified into one, common platform. In this platform, project communication appears through information sharing and conversations; all levels of interaction are supported through the channel. If company culture is the barrier towards the change of a more value-providing communication tool, project success becomes jeopardized since successful project communication is a crucial part of project success. If switching to Social Media communication tools, Volvo GTT needs to carefully select those tools considering secrecy issues; regardless of company culture, change will not be made if benefits of the change doesn’t exceed effort needed. Only self-hosted Social Media platforms should be considered.

The total Cost of Waste was estimated to approximately 150 000 SEK per hour for the respondents. In other words, this corresponds to 12,1 hours spent on waste per person in one day. However, this number is not definite as team members tend to do other tasks while waiting for response, which will reduce waste as quality is still generated from tasks completed. The values can still work as an indication of many hours spent on waste; every second hour project team members spend on meetings does not provide valuable information. As no valuable information is gained, waste is generated. Waste in searching for information or people in different forums was relatively low, yet this might be because of poor search functions as team members tend not to always know where to search for information or people. Another possible reason for low search time is that project team members have another source of information; as half of their days are spent in meetings, the need of searching for extra information might not be necessary. Few IT-based communication tools which support informal communication or small talk was found at Volvo GTT, yet high values in trust was shown between project team members. IT- based traditional communication tools through which formal communication was mostly exchanged dominated at Volvo GTT. Out of all traditional communication tools used at Volvo

GTT, project team members spend most time on participating in meetings. In traditional communication tools, informal communication was mostly exchanged in meetings, which concludes that IT-based traditional communication tools don’t provide possibilities for informal communication through which familiarity can be built. Even though traditional communication tools are time consuming and interruptive, incorporating daily meetings tend to enable trustful relationships, which is a contributor to efficient communication. High levels of trust can also be a consequence of having co-workers located close. Furthermore, trust tend to positively correlated with work experience; the more work experience, the more trust in team members. Aside from being time consuming and interruptive, meetings are a relatively high-cost communication tool as high-cost resources such as project managers are demanded. For this reason, IT-tools which support informal communication should tentatively be incorporated to reduce costs associated with communication. To maintain trust as meetings are reduced, a suggested IT-tool for informal communication is a high-intense Social Media platform that provides high Social Media richness with low to high self-disclosure. In platforms where high Social Media richness is provided, users can express them self in a proper manner, which enable small talk. Besides, those Social Media platforms are more likely to be used. IT-tools for informal communication should not jeopardize communication efficiency by providing excess amount of information or decrease the overall quality in information transmission. Instead, the purpose of an IT-based tools for informal communication is to cover a potential gap in trust as time spent on meetings is reduced. The most frequently used tool for informal communication found at Volvo GTT was the Skype chat. As the Skype chat is a high-intense Social Media platform that supports many-to-many conversations, the user-friendliness can be questioned and better options for many-to-many informal conversations might exist. However, the Skype chat can still serve informal communication and enable trust building. A group chat for informal communication should only include information with little or no value in the future as information easily gets lost in the conversation history. If important information is brought up, this information should be immediately stored in the project’s platform where all other important information regarding the project can be found. Maintaining informal communication is important for removing organisational borders as dynamic structure is preserved. A dynamic organisational structure is crucial for facilitating project complexity that arise in large, technique- oriented companies.

Despite spending half of their time in average on meetings in a day, project team members don’t operate successful meetings as few states that all subjects brought up during the meeting are

relevant for them and their work. However, many participants are prepared and updated before the meeting and notes taken from the meeting is sent out to all project team members as a follow up. Even if the agenda is sent out before all meetings, project team members still tend to go to irrelevant meetings. In addition, few meetings involved all participants simultaneously, meaning one-to-one or one-to-many conversations occurred most of the meeting time. Instead of being active in the meeting, participants tend to do other tasks, which might explain why most respondents still state that meetings are an efficient way to solve project-related issues. Project team members might even increase their efficiency by being dedicated towards completing one task at a time. Even though high values in trust are generated from the survey, trust doesn’t prevent misunderstanding that causes tasks not being completed in time. As misunderstanding is a deviation from the objective of communication, communication efficiency is compromised when misunderstandings occur. The more time team members spend on meetings, the more likely they are to not state that meetings are efficient for solving project-related issues. Traditional communication tools tend not to provide excess data since responses were equally distributed between receiving too much and too little information. Hence, data mining does not become necessary when using traditional communication tools and communication efficiency isn’t compromised.

Project team members attend meetings to show support in other team members’ work and to not risk missing out important information. However, since little valuable information is gained from meetings in general, participating in meetings for those reasons will compromise communication efficiency. In addition, approximately one hour a day is spent on searching for information or people in different forums. Project team members also tend to find it hard to know where to search for certain information or people. This indicates a poor platform for information storage is used in projects. It also indicates poor search functions of the platform as project team members don’t always know where to search for certain information or people. By improving the platform where all information regarding the project is stored, project team members might not need to attend meetings regarding information sharing and follow up. Information sharing and follow up are the most frequently occurring meetings. The reason why removing these kinds of meetings is suggested is because information sharing and follow up advocate one-to-one or one-to-many conversations while meetings are for dynamic many-to-many conversations. This means a lower conversation intensity is utilized in tools with capacity for high-intense conversations. The consequence of not fulfilling the dynamic of communication tool chosen is increased Cost of Waste as the tool’s capacity is not fully utilized. Instead, improving the existing platform might

reduce the need of meetings. The existing platform does not necessarily need to be replaced by Social Media if the current platform already supports one-to-one and one-to-many conversations; incorporating another tool that serves the same function might decrease communication efficiency as confusion arise with too high levels of IT implemented. Still, benefits of integration of communication tools might be possible if replacing all existing communication tool with one, unified platform through which information can be stored and conversations can take place. Project team members who most commonly attend meetings regarding information sharing tend to state that they always gain valuable information from meetings they participate in. This indicates that meetings regarding information sharing are the meeting from which most participants gain valuable information. Despite this fact, information sharing still advocate non- dynamic conversations and is therefore not appropriate for meetings. The value gained from those meetings might not be because of the meeting itself but from the actual information provided. Hence, value gained form information sharing meetings can tentatively be preserved in a platform. As project team members tend to find information needed from participating in meetings instead of a platform, information accessibility should be increased in the platform. Increasing accessibility in the platform will distribute control of information to a local source instead of centralizing control of information in meetings. This can prevent major crises to appear as information can reach the destination fast and mitigate damage. Localized information will lead to removed organisational borders and reduced project complexity as well as Cost of Waste. Removed organisational borders will enable dynamic conversations to appear. Project team members receive neither too little or too much information, which suggests all information needed is available at the platform. For this reason, the platform might fail because of insufficient search functions; project team members cannot find desired information within desired time frame. Improving search functions will reduce search time and thereby improve communication efficiency.

Even though meeting time should be reduced to improve communication efficiency at Volvo GTT, meetings should not be excluded as a tool for communication since they enable trustful relationships and dynamic conversations. Dynamic conversations with high level of interaction are necessary when solving complex issues such as planning and preventing deviation. In dynamic conversations, project team members can express their beliefs in a proper way. Common beliefs enable trust, which is especially important in complex environments as it empowers team member performance. Improved team member performance has positive impact on project success. Trust can also unfold uncertainties that arise from being unfamiliar with team

members’ capacity and performance. With improved communication, team members become familiar with each other’s’ capacity. Communicating teams build trust and meetings allow team members to come together and share beliefs through dynamic conversations. In large firms with high project complexity, risk associated with project profitability arise. Misunderstanding is a consequence of complexity; however, by uniting communication into one common platform will reduce distance between receiver and provider of information and can thereby manage project complexity. As communication is increased or improved, misunderstanding is less likely to occur and tasks don’t risk to not be completed in time. As tasks are completed in time, project profitability can increase from reduced waste activities.

IT should never completely replace face-to-face conversations, which will always be needed in various extend to solve complex project-related issues. In the case of a large technology firm like Volvo, risk associated with project complexity becomes especially critical since projects carries lots of resources and money. As explained in chapter 5, tasks fail to be completed in time because of misunderstanding which tend to be more commonly occurring in larger projects. However, risk associated with project complexity can be prevented through properly used communication tools; as existing communication tools are improved by fulfilling the objective of communication, less space is given for misunderstanding to appear as well as waste. Based on theory and trial, reducing meeting time and increasing information technology will reduce Cost of Waste as less resources is used for project communication. Besides, improved information flow will lead to increased knowledge sharing and improved learning capabilities. In large projects, increased levels of implemented IT will reduce project complexity by improving coordination and aggregation of resources. In contrast, poorly managed information, which give rise to misunderstanding, indicates too low IT is implemented in project communication. The risk of not incorporating sufficient amounts of IT is to lose competitiveness as competitors manage to match communication needs with adequate levels of IT; Social Media becomes more adapted in Swedish firms and has proven successful outcomes. Still, implementing more IT will not solve all issues regarding project communication; the function of IT only serves information transmission and is not responsible for knowledge transmission. However, IT can still work as a tool towards increased project profitability. Employees at Volvo GTT seem willing to try out a project group chat regardless of previous experience from Social Media. Still, there’s also a scepticism about Social Media’s ability to store information safely. Therefore, Volvo GTT should tentatively find and educate about one-party hosted Social Media solutions. Through

education, barriers such as fear and uncertainty can be removed and the implementation of a Social Media platform can be successful.

7 CONCLUSION

Chapter 7 will provide the reader with a concentrated version of all findings made from the study. The findings presented will be those of highest interest and value considering the thesis questions.

Traditional communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency is both positive and negative; however, the negative impact tends to exceed the positive impact. While high values in trust are generated in a company where predominately traditional communication tools are used in project communication, time spent on waste activities are higher than it might be with other communication tools such as Social Media. However, meetings should not be excluded as face- to-face conversations always will be needed in some extend. Meetings are still appropriate for solving complex issues that demand dynamic conversations. Social Media is not expected to solve all issues considering project communication; Social Media arise secrecy issues if the platform is hosted by a third party and it is also a platform that can generate excess data. Excess data is a barrier towards efficient project communication as it generates a need for data mining. Despite this fact, Social Media can reduce Cost of Waste by reducing response time and aggregate and coordinate resources into one, unified platform. By improving project communication with adequate levels of intensity and interaction, increased competitiveness can be achieved through improved project communication and project success. The platforms used for communication don’t necessarily need to be replaced but at least improved. These improvements made should be inspired by the functions of Social Media. In general, project team members at Volvo GTT state that project communication requires a tool with fast response time and a platform where all information can be stored. Trustful relationships are considered to enable good project communication and categorize information is easier to find. These functions are characteristic for Social Media, yet few project team members state that Social Media is appropriate in project communication most likely because of secrecy. The attitude towards Social Media might also arise from company culture. Self-hosted, and safe, solutions exist and have in previous studies proven increased project communication efficiency. To overcome these fears towards Social Media, Volvo GTT should be educated in self-hosted solutions and where they can be used in project communication.

Through this study, it is shown that the choice of communication tool in project communication can have an impact on communication efficiency. Because of this, companies should carefully consider what specific tool is appropriate for project communication; what needs exists and what

communication tool can fulfil those needs. As project communication is correlated with project performance, the power of communication tools is substantial. In conclusion, an appropriate choice of communication tools will likely have great impact on project performance as communication tools enable project communication.

8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Based on theory and trial found in this study, chapter 8 will suggest recommendations for future work. The chapter aims to provide an opportunity to extend research made in this study to further investigate communication tools’ impact on communication performance.

This study has contributed to an increased understanding about communication tools’ impact on communication efficiency. The study has been performed at Volvo GTT by analysing traditional communication tools and compare those to Social Media. To provide the literature with an even deeper understanding of communication tools’ impact, a study where Social Media is tested should tentatively be performed. In this study, Social Media should be compared with traditional communication tools based on criteria for efficient communication. A self-hosted Social Media platform should be chosen to avoid sensitive information leakage. By comparing these two communication tools, the efficiency of each tool will be exposed. By exposing communication tools’ efficiency, the impact on communication performance will be further demonstrated.

By elaborating information in this area, projects can improve their competitiveness through choosing the right communication tool. Hence, increased project performance can be reached with relatively less effort and cost.

9 REFERENCES

Chapter 9 provides a reference list of all information that has been utilized in the study. The references are from books, articles and web-sites.

9.1 BOOKS

Aaker A. D., Kumar V. & Day S. G., Marketing Research, 1995, 5th edition, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-471-55254-2, pp 290-320

Berk J. & Demarzo P., Corporate Finance, 2014, Pearson Education, 3rd edition, ISBN 978-0- 13-299247-3

Cameron A.F., Juggling Multiple Conversations with Communication Technology: Towards a Theory of Multi-Communicating Impacts in the Workplace, 2007, Queen’s University Kingston, ISBN: 978-0-494-26605-2

Chopra S. & Meindl P., Supplu Chain Management: Strategy, Planning, and Operation, 2016, 6th edition, Pearson, ISBN: 9780133800609

Fish S. R., Kraut E, R., Chalfonte L. B., The Video Window System in Informal Communication, 1990, ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, ISBN 0-89791-402-3

Ghauri P.N., Designing and Conducting Case Studies in International Businesses Research, 2004, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 109-124

Ghauri P. & Grønhaug K., Research Methods in Business Studies, 2010, 4th edition, Pearson, ISBN: 978-0-273-71204-6

Goffman E., The presentation of self in everyday life, 1959, Doubleday Anchor Books, New York, ISBN 9780385094023

Grinter E. R. & Palen L., Instant Messaging in Teen Life, 2002, ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ISBN 1-58113-560-2, pp 21-30

Liker J., 2009, The Toyota Way – Lean för Världsklass, Liber AB, ISBN 978-91-47-08902-4, pp 28

Marshan-Piekkari R. & Welch C., A Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for International Businesses, 2004, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar

Miles M.B., Huberman A.M., & Saldaña J., Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, 2013, 3rd edition, SAGE Publications, Inc

Nardi A. B., Whittaker S. & Bradner E., Interaction and outer action: instant messaging in action, 2000, ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ISBN 1-58113-222-0, pp 79-88

Przydatek B., Song D. & Perrig A., SIA: Secure Information Aggregation in Sensor Networks, 2003, ACM Digital Library, ISBN 1-58113-707-9, pp 255-265

Robbins P. S., Organizational Behavior, 1993, Prentice Hall international Editions, 6th edition, ISBN 0-13-639048-10, pp 326-354

Rohrmann B., The Evaluation of Risk Communication Effectiveness, 1992, Elsevier, vol. 81 no. 2, pp 169-192

Rubenstein-Montano B., Liebowitz J., Buchwalter J., McCaw D., Newman B. & Rebeck K., A Systems Thinking Framework for Knowledge Management, 2001, Elsevier, vol. 31 no. 1, pp 5-16

Saunders M., Lewis P. & Thornhill A., Research methods for business students, 2003, 3rd edition, Harlow: Financial Times/Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-273-65804-2

Shannon E. C. & Weaver W, The Mathematical Theory of Communication, 1963, 1st edition, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 978-0252725487

Strauss A. & Corbin J., Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, 1990, Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Womack J.P., Jones D.T., Roos D., The Machine that Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production—Toyota’s Secret Weapon in the Global Car Wars that is Now Revolutionizing World Industry, 2007, Free Press, ISBN 978-0743299794

9.2 ARTICLES

Agrawal R. & Srikant R., Privacy-Preserving Data Mining, 2000, ACM Digital Library, vol. 29 no. 2, pp 439-450

Al Eslami Kandlousi S. N., Ali J. A., Abdollahi A., Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Concern of Communication Satisfaction: The Role of the Formal and Informal Communication, 2010, International Journal of Business and Management, vol. 5 no. 10, pp 51-61

Alavi M. & Leidner E. D., Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues, 2001, MIS Quarterly, vol. 25 no. 1, pp 107-136

Allen J. T, Lee S. M. D. Thusman L. M., R&D Performance as a Function of Internal Communication, Project Management, and the Nature of Work, 1980, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. EM-27

Ankrah N.A., Proverbs D., Debrah Y., Factors Influencing the Culture of a Construction Project Organisation – An Empirical Investigation, 2009, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 16 no. 1, pp. 26 – 47

Blum H. R., Raemer B. D., Carroll S. J. & Dufresne L. R., A Method for Measuring the Effectiveness of Simulation-Based Team Training for Improving Communication Skills, 2005, Anesthesia & Analgesia, vol. 100 no. 5, pp 1375-1380

Bourne L. & Walker H.T. D., Project relationship management and the Stakeholder Circle™, 2008, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 1 no. 1, pp. 125 – 130

Boyd M. D., Ellison B. N., Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship, 2008, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, pp 210-230

D’Urso C. S., Rains A. S., Examining the Scope of Channel Expansion: A Test of Channel Expansion Theory with New and Traditional Communication Media, 2008, Sage Publications, vol. 21 no. 4, pp 486-507

Edosomwan S., Prakasan K. S., Kouame D., Watson J. & Seymour T., The History of Social Media and its Impact on Business, 2011, vol. 16 no. 3, pp 79-91

Feddersen T. & Pesendorfer W., Voting Behavior and Information Aggregation in Elections with Private Information, 1997, Econometrica, vol. 65 no. 5, pp. 1029-1058

Feller J., Finnegan P., Kelly D., MacNamara M., Developing Open Source Software: A Community-Based Analysis of Research, 2006, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, vol. 208, pp 261-270

Grudin J. & Poltrock E. S., User Interface Design in Large Corporations: Coordination and Communication Across Disciplines, 1989, ACM Sigchi, vol. 20 no. SI, pp 197-203

Hajmohammad S., Vachon S., Klassen D. R. & Gavronski I., Reprint of Lean Management and Supply Management: Their Role in Green Practices and Performance, 2013, Elsevier, vol. 56 no. 1, pp 86-93

Heaven C., Transfer of Communication Skills Training from Workshop to Workplace: The Impact of Clinical Supervision, 2004, Elsevier, vol. 60 no. 3, pp 313-325

Hinds P. & Kiesler S., Communication Across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies in a Large Organization, 1995, Informs. Pubs. Online, vol. 6 no. 4, pp 373-393

Hobday M., The Project-Based Organisation: An Ideal Form for Managing Complex Products and Systems, 2000, Elsevier, vol. 29 no. 7-8, pp 871-893

Jarvenpaa L. S. & Leidner E. D., Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams, 1998, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 3 no. 4

Jo S. & Shim W. S., Paradigm Shift of Employee Communication: The Effect of Management Communication on Trusting Relationships, 2005, Elsevier, vol. 31 no. 2, pp 277-280

Johnston H. & Mincks R. W., Effective Waste Minimization for the Construction Manager, 1993, Transactions of AACE International, vol. 3, pp 0.2.1-0.2.13

Kaplan M. A. & Haenlein M., Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media, 2010, Elsevier, vol. 53 no. 1, pp 59-68

Katz R., The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance, 1982, Sage Publications, vol. 27 no. 1, pp 81-104

Kay G., Effective meetings through electronic brainstorming, 1995, Journal of Management Development, vol. 14 no. 6, pp 4 – 25

Kilczewski S., 66th Porcelain Enamel Institute Technical Forum, 2004, ISBN: 978-0-470-05154- 2, vol. 25 no. 5, pp 13-15

Kossai M., Adoption of Information and Communication Technology and Firm Profitability: Empirical Evidence from Tunisian SMEs, 2014, Elsevier, vol. 25 no. 1, pp 9-20

Kouzmin A. & Korac-Kakabadse N., Mapping Institutional Impacts of Lean Communication in Lean Agencies, 2000, Sage Journals, vol. 32 no. 1, pp. 29-69

Kraut E. R., Fish S. R., Root W. R., Chalfonte L. B., Informal Communication in Organizations: Form, Function, and Technology, 1990, CA: Sage’s Publications

Leonardi M. P., Huysman M. & Steinfield C., Enterprise Social Media: Definition, History, and Prospects for the Study of Social Technologies in Organizations, 2013, Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, vol. 19 no. 1, pp 1-19

Lin J. & Halavais A., Mapping the Blogosphere in America, 2004 School of Informatics, vol. 6

Litterst J. K., & Eyo B. Gauging the Effectiveness of formal communication programs: a search for the communication- productivity link, 1982, Journal of Business Communication, vol. 19 no. 2, pp 15-26.

Macnamara J. & Zerfass A., Social Media Communication in Organizations: The Challenges of Balancing Openness, Strategy and Management, 2012, International Journal of Strategic Communication, vol. 6 no. 4, pp 287-308

McKelvey D. R. & Page T., Common Knowledge, Consensus and Aggregate Information, 1986, Econometrica, vol. 54 no. 1, pp. 109-127

Müller R. & J. Turner R., The Impact of Principal-Agent Relationship and Contract Type on Communication Between Project Owner and Manager, 2005, Elsevier, vol. 23 no. 5, pp 398-403

Munns A. & Bjeirmi F. B., The Role of Project Management in Achieving Project Success, 1996, Elsevier, vol. 14 no. 2, pp 81-87

Murphy A. & Ledwith A., Project management tools and techniques in high-technology SMEs, 2007, Management Research News, vol. 30 no. 2 pp. 153 – 166

Norton W. S., Transaction Costs, Telecommunications, and the Microeconomics of Macroeconomic Growth, 1992, The University of Chicago, vol. 41 no. 1

Pearson C. J., Child T. J., Kahl H. D., Preparation Meeting Opportunity: How Do College Students Prepare for Public Speeches, 2010, vol. 54 no. 3, pp 351-366

Pearson K., Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution, 1994, F.R.S, Dulau & Co, pp 1-34

Pullin P., Small Talk, Rapport and International Communicative Competence, 2010, Sage Journals, vol. 47 no. 4, pp 455-476

Reed H. A. & Knight V. L., Effect of a Virtual Project Team Environment on Communication- Related Project Risk, 2010, Elsevier, vol. 28 no. 5, pp 422-427

Remidez H. & Jones B. N., Developing a Model for Social Media in Project Management Communications, 2012, International Journal of Business and Social Science, New York, vol. 3 no. 3

Ristenpart T., Tromer E., Shacham H. & Savage S., Hey, You, Get off of My Cloud: Exploring Information Leakage in Third-Party Compute Clouds, 2009, Digital Library, vol. 61, pp 199-212

Schultz F., Utz S. & Göritz A., Is the Medium the Message? Perceptions of and Reactions to Crisis Communication via Twitter, Blogs, and Traditional Media, 2011, Elsevier, vol. 37 no. 1, pp 20-27

Silva H. & Ratnadiwakara D., Using ICT to Reduce Transaction Costs in Agriculture through Better Communication: A Case-Study from Sri Lanka, 2008, LIRNEasia

Sing N., Transaction Costs, Information Technology and Development, 2008, Indian Growth and Development Review, vol. 1 no. 2, pp. 212-236

Stead K., Kumar S., Schultz J. T., Tiver S., Pirone J. C., Adams J. R. & Wareham A. C., Teams Communicating Through STEPPS, 2009, MJA, vol. 190, pp 128-132

Stefik M., Foster G., Bobrow G. D., Kajn K., Lanning S. & Suchman L., Beyond the Chalkboard: Computer Support for Collaboration and Problem Solving in Meetings, 1987, Magazine Communications of the ACM, vol. 30 no. 1, pp 32-47

Steinheider B. & Al-Hawamdeh S., Team Coordination, Communication and Knowledge Sharing in SMEs and Large Organisations, 2004, World Scientific, vol. 3 no. 3, pp 223-232

Storey M.A., Singer L., Cleary B., Filho F. F. & Zagalsky A., The (R)evolution of Social Media in Software Engineering, 2014, ACM Digital Library, pp 100-116

Taylor M., Perry C. D., Diffusion of Traditional and New Media Tactics in Crisis Communication, 2005, Elsevier, pp 209-217

Westerveld E., The Project Excellence Model®: Linking Success Criteria and Critical Success Factors, 2002, Elsevier, vol. 21 no. 6, pp 411-418

Worley J.M. & Doolen T.L., The Role of Communication and Management Support in a Lean Manufacturing Implementation, 2006, Management Decision, vol. 44 no. 2, pp 228-245

Yates D. & Paquette S., Emergency Knowledge Management and Social Media Technologies: A Case Study of the 2010 Haitian Earthquake, 2011, Elsevier, vol. 931 no. 1, pp 6-13

Zyl S. A., The impact of Social Networking 2.0 on Organisations, 2009, The Electronic Library, vol. 27 no. 6, pp.906 – 918

9.3 LINKS

Lönestatistik (2017), http://www.lonestatistik.se/loner.asp/yrke/Projektledare-1041/lan/Vastra- Gotaland-28, 2017-04-13 10:32

Statistiska centralbyrån, SCB, (2013), http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter- amne/naringsverksamhet/naringslivets-struktur/it-anvandning-i-foretag/pong/tabell-och- diagram/andel-foretag-som-anvander-sociala-medier-for-nagot-av-foljande-andamal/, 2017-04- 24 14:57

Statistiska centralbyrån, SCB, (2016), http://www.scb.se/hitta-statistik/statistik-efter- amne/naringsverksamhet/naringslivets-struktur/it-anvandning-i-foretag/pong/tabell-och- diagram/andel-foretag-som-anvander-nagot-av-foljande-sociala-medier/, 2017-04-24 14:58 Volvo Group, (2017), http://www.volvogroup.com/en-en/about-us/organization.html, 2017-05- 16 09:52

APPENDIX A Survey (next page)

20170425 Volvo GTT

Volvo GTT The survey is divided in four parts: Part 1 about the respondent Part 2 project communication Part 3 meetings Part 4 Social Media

1. Age (years)

2. Work experience (years)

3. Number of projects I participate in

4. Appreciate your IT knowledge Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Beginner Expert

Skip to question 5. Project communication

5. Project communication requires communication tools with fast response time Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

6. Project communication requires a platform where all information regarding the project can be stored Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

7. Categorizing information into certain topics helps me to find what I'm looking for Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14mj7AsYJGPnnmW99R0Brui8hk67F2_gPlBvhygLnEg/edit 1/5 20170425 Volvo GTT 8. Trustful relationships enable good project communication Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

9. Regarding issues or events happening in my project, I receive... Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Too little information Too much information

10. I have faith in my project coworkers' ability to perform well Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

11. Misunderstanding is often the reason for tasks not being completed in time Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

12. I receive information needed at the right time Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

13. When I've sent a message in any forum, I get a response within (average) Mark only one oval.

1 hour 4 hours 8 hours more than 1 day never

14. I search for information or people in different forums (Teamplace, Skype, Email, etc.) on average Mark only one oval.

0,5 hours/day or less 1 hour/day 1,5 hours/day 2 hours/day or more

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14mj7AsYJGPnnmW99R0Brui8hk67F2_gPlBvhygLnEg/edit 2/5 20170425 Volvo GTT 15. I never end up in a situation where I don't know where to search for certain information/people Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

16. Other comments

Meetings

17. Appreciate average amount of hours spent on meetings per day Mark only one oval.

12 34 56 78

18. I most commonly attend meetings regarding Mark only one oval.

Planning Deviation/risk Follow up Decision making Information sharing Not sure

Other:

19. Meetings are an efficient way to solve project related issues Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

20. I am always prepared and updated for meetings I participate in Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14mj7AsYJGPnnmW99R0Brui8hk67F2_gPlBvhygLnEg/edit 3/5 20170425 Volvo GTT 21. I always gain valuable information from the meetings I participate in Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

22. All subjects that are brought up during the meeting are relevant for me and my work Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

23. I sometimes get time to do other tasks during the meeting Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

24. Other comments

Skip to question 25. Social Media

25. I use Social Media Mark only one oval.

Daily Weekly Monthly Less than once a month Never

26. Social Media is appropriate for project communication Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14mj7AsYJGPnnmW99R0Brui8hk67F2_gPlBvhygLnEg/edit 4/5 20170425 Volvo GTT 27. Social Media can store information safely without potential leakage Mark only one oval.

1 2 3 4

Strongly disagree Strongly agree

28. I am willing to try out a group chat in my project team Mark only one oval.

Yes No

29. Other comments

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14mj7AsYJGPnnmW99R0Brui8hk67F2_gPlBvhygLnEg/edit 5/5