Solution Evaluation
A project to evaluate various solutions for a distributed team that needs to communicate, collaborate and share files.
Unit Code IFN612
Unit Title Emerging Technologies for Information Practice
Students DE PALO, Maria Antonia (Toni) (N9915281)
DUNN, Ryan (N9886427)
EYRE, Karen (N9758887)
Due Date Sunday, 10 June 2018
Statement of Originality
By submitting this assignment, we are aware of the University rule that students must not
act in a manner which constitutes academic dishonesty, as stated and explained in the
QUT Manual of Policies and Procedures. We confirm that this work represents our effort;
we have viewed the final version and it does not contain plagiarised material.
Student Number Name Signature
N9915281 DE PALO,Toni
N9886427 DUNN,Ryan
N9758887 EYRE,Karen
Solution Evaluation Page i
Executive Summary
Key Findings
In order to enhance virtual team effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group
projects in offices across Australia, the ATO needs to select a technology which focuses
on communication, file sharing and collaborative and private spaces.
Based upon the identified users, the solution must meet the following organisational and
user requirements:
Organisational Requirements Group conferencing, instant messaging
and private forum platforms.
Shared workspaces, calendars and to-
do lists.
Online meeting tools (visual and
auditory).
Information and content sharing, such
as text, photographs or web displays.
Negotiating, problem solving and team
decision making.
Privacy and security.
User Requirements Simplicity/Intuitiveness
Reliability
Accessibility
Security
Speed and Synchronicity
Real or Near Time Data
Recommendation
RKT Consultants have evaluated eight market-leading communication and collaboration
technologies. Based upon the ATO’s specific needs, it is recommended that Office 365 be selected as the recommended software. Extending the existing Microsoft Office
enterprise installation to Office 365 will provide all required functionally (though additional,
modular applications) at a marginal cost impact. Further, as Microsoft Office software is
already used throughout the ATO, Office 365 will provide a familiar interface with which
users should become quickly accustomed.
Solution Evaluation Page ii
Contents
Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1
Background........................................................................................................................ 2
Context.............................................................................................................................2
Problem Statement..........................................................................................................3
Implications......................................................................................................................4
Organisational Requirements...........................................................................................4
User Requirements..........................................................................................................5
Discussion..........................................................................................................................6
Collaboration....................................................................................................................6
Communication................................................................................................................9
File Sharing....................................................................................................................11
Recommendation.............................................................................................................13
Conclusion........................................................................................................................15
References........................................................................................................................... i
Appendix A: User Persona 1........................................................................................... iv
Appendix B: User Persona 2............................................................................................v
Appendix C: User Persona 3...........................................................................................vi
Solution Evaluation Page iii
Introduction
Norbert Wiener (1988) stated that “we have modified our environment so radically that we
must modify ourselves in order to exist in the new environment.” Technology, talent
acquisition and the emergence of a global economy (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010) has
changed the economic landscape. Globalisation has led to business operations acting as
a homogenous worldwide market (Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood, 2017) with employees for
these businesses no longer being confined to one geographical location. The removal of
these geographic boundaries and the continuous emergence of new technology
supporting this new environment has created new challenges for organisations. Creating
and maintaining an efficient team now requires its own strategy underpinned by
technology (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010).
This report will provide evaluation, comparisons and recommendations about suitable
technology that support the organisation in its daily activities. The report takes into
consideration the dispersed workforce, emerging technologies and the specific areas of
reduced efficiency and, through in-depth analysis, will provide a recommendation that will
focus on:
Communication
File Sharing
Collaborative and Private Spaces
Whilst the report will discuss the analysis and comparison of technology in relation to the
above focus areas, the overall recommendation will look at the most comprehensive and
suitable solutions and compare these against a more singular solution. This report will
provide options for consideration based on best practice, expandability and workforce
capability. Financial conditions were considered in the evaluations however the
organisation did not set a specified limit. Notwithstanding the unlimited budget and
considering the organisation is a government agency, recommendations provided have
considered the short and long term financial implications ensuing the technology
recommended is sustainable and financially viable under public scrutiny.
Solution Evaluation Page 1
Background
Context
RKT Consultants have been briefed to offer an inexpensive technology solution for trial by
the Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”), who want to enhance virtual team effectiveness
and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across Australia.
The project trial group will initially involve a distributed team of three members, located in
Brisbane, Newcastle and Adelaide.
Each team member has their own portfolio of work:
Project Sponsor (located in Newcastle), responsible for high level strategy alignment,
executive presentations, liaison with other dependant areas (IT as infrastructure is
important in this project). Sponsor is also responsible for the management of the
team, its deliverables and its cohesion.
Project Coordinator (located in Brisbane), responsible for the project reporting,
governance and documentation of the project. Secretariat for the Executive Level
working group where all project stakeholders provide input and direction.
Product Owner (located in Adelaide) responsible for working with the business to
understand the problem, develop a set of corporately aligned high level stakeholder
requirements and liaise with developers to build an appropriate solution. The Product
owner refines the stakeholder requirements and in collaboration with multi-functional
delivery teams, provide direction, guidance and governance on the product
development.
RKT Consultants have conducted an initial audit of the group and found the following:
Each member has been provided with a desktop and an iPad by the ATO.
Each member has remote virtual access, virtual private network (VPN) to the system
to enable log in for any device and any location. This network is not always stable
and access may be difficult during peak hours.
Solution Evaluation Page 2
Not every member has web camera on desktop (however, each iPad has a web
camera).
Each member is having many meetings in isolation from the team. As such, there is
currently no effective way to communicate decisions, blockers or areas of concern
that may impact others in the team.
Teams are Agile and thereby adopt the practices and ceremonies of this
methodology and require a visual capture of work on hand and its flow through.
Security is imperative and any cloud based program will not allow tax file numbers or
other client information to be stored.
Software currently provided on company devices is Microsoft Window 10, Yammer
through Office 365, and some areas have Jira and Confluence by Altassian.
Problem Statement
DuFrene & Lehman (2016) found that “workers spend approximately 80 percent of their
time working collaboratively, often across 10 or more virtual teams” (p.8). Whilst the
benefits of this mode of working are cost-saving and enable business to draw upon
specialised labour, distributed teams across the world may face problems regarding
culture and language barriers as well as time zone variations; on a technical level, they
also need technology solutions that can help them collaborate efficiently and effectively.
Efficiency problems may also be faced due to user perceptions about communication
technology; Laitinen & Valo (2018) caution “that team members with high levels of
communication technology anxiety can sometimes participate less, send fewer task-
oriented messages, introduce fewer novel topics, and are even rated more poorly by other
team members” (p.13). As such, it is crucial to understand the wants and needs of the
distributed team members who will be using the communication technology, as well as the
operational goals of the company.
Companies often base their decision making for communication use based on their
immediate needs, what they have heard about (usually from marketing) or are already
familiar with using. Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017, p. 11) caution against rushing into
a communication software solution and note some of the challenges faced when selecting
tools for a distributed environment, being:
Solution Evaluation Page 3
1. Selection of inappropriate communication tools (synchronous and asynchronous).
2. Problems with adopting and adjusting to suitable tools.
3. Lack of coverage of such tools.
4. Lack of data integration among different tools.
5. Security and privacy issues.
6. Lack of familiarity of tools appropriate for GSD environment.
7. Lack of progress tracking.
Implications
Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017) note that for business “in most cases there is no
proper procedure to select the best tool for the project” (p.16). Additionally, teams may be
resistant to change.
RKT Consultants will need to “evaluate technology on the communication trifecta:
simplicity, reliability, and accessibility” (DuFrene & Lehman, 2016; p.26). Further, the
technology solution “should allow teams members to get connected easily without complex
setup time and steep learning curves, enable members to send messages [safely and
securely] to their intended target, and provide accessibility to the entire team regardless of
location and time zone. Collaborative technology must also archive messages for timely
retrieval” (ibid).
Organisational Requirements
Distributed teams need technology solutions for the following communication needs:
1. Group conferencing, instant messaging and private forum platforms.
2. Shared workspaces, calendars and to-do lists.
3. Online meeting tools (visual and auditory).
4. Information and content sharing, such as text, photographs or web displays.
5. Negotiating, problem solving and team decision making.
6. Privacy and security.
Laitinen & Valo, (2018), further note that virtual communication platforms that offer these
solutions assist efficiency and efficacy in a distributed team “because they provide auditory
and/or visual connections between team members” (p.13). Given that team members are
Solution Evaluation Page 4
also working across geographical and time differences, the platform must also provide
options for synchronous and asynchronous communication.
User Requirements
Using three persona profiles (refer to Appendix A, B and C for the Persona Posters of
selected users) that are indicative of the users within the team the following requirements
and preferences will form the basis for the recommendation and drive the evaluation to
find the ‘best fit’:
Simplicity/Intuitiveness
Reliability
Accessibility
Security
Speed and Synchronicity
Real or Near Time Data
Solution Evaluation Page 5
Discussion
Collaboration
According to the Oxford dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2018) collaboration is the
action of working in collaboration with others to produce something. Whilst the definition
remains unaltered the ‘action’ has transformed over the years as organisations turn to
teams with multiple diverse factors including geography, cultural and generational attitudes
(Bjørn & Ngwenyama, 2009) and as such are required to use Information and
Communication Technology (ICT) as the primary mode for interaction (Chuboda et. al.,
2005). This practice reduces a teams’ ability to develop a shared meaning of context, the
notion of common ground and a sense of normality which is usually built over time and
personal interactions (Cramton, 2001 and Bjørn, & Ngwenyama, 2009).
This section of the report will provide an overview of existing technologies which embrace
the collaboration requirements of the virtual team and will look to provide
recommendations that best manage the multi-generational and temporal aspect of the
team. Using the aforementioned personas as a user profile highlighting their needs and
preferences, the following tools have been explored for consideration.
As with any research, it is imperative to understand the problem and address the need.
The problem statement highlighted the need for the team to have the following
collaborative features:
Synchronous collaboration – real time and immediate.
Privacy and security – whole team or individual use.
Visible management – use of Agile practices requires visual ‘kanban’ or work flow
management tool that is viewable, and updatable. Must provide an audit trail.
Accessible – multi device access with individual sign in details for traceability.
Expandable – given the team numbers increase and decrease depending on the
status of work, the need to add and reduce team members from the tool is
imperative.
Intuitive and easy to use –temporal nature of team requires tool to be ‘easy’ to use
and intuitive enough to require limited pre-training.
Solution Evaluation Page 6
Given these specific user requirements and preferences, the following top-rated
collaboration tools were evaluated (Carter, 2017 and Finance Online, 2018, Capterra Inc.
n.d. and GetApp, 2018).
The tables on the next page highlights collaboration that either meet the user requirements
or take into consideration software and licenses already available within the organisation
(denoted with an asterisk). Given that the pilot to implement new and best fit technology is
tailored to the individual needs of a small group, the organisation itself is a large corporate
enterprise. A best practice approach is to work in with natural and existing systems where
possible rather than using bespoke technology to achieve the required future state.
At first glance, the tables would indicate the Same Page as the most suitable technology to
meet all the mandatory criteria needs of the users. This software is available on multiple
devices, is cloud based and thereby portable. It allows for both collaboration through
brainstorming and whiteboard functionality however also provides the users the private
spaces though the audio / video conferencing features accompanied by a chat feature.
The descriptions highlight the ability for expandability in users and there appears to be
adequate support available. Security and privacy requirements would need to be
investigated; however, given that it is a space for collaboration and synchronous
knowledge sharing and not file storage, it meets the overall needs of the users.
Other technologies meet the users brief however there are trade-offs in functionality and
access that will need to be considered in the recommendations. Whilst the appetite of the
team is known, the drivers of the organisation would need to be considered. The above
table does highlight Yammer as not being a suitable option even though it is currently used
by other areas of the organisation. This does highlight and reinforce the need to provide
the team with a tool that specifically promotes group collaboration. A key factor to consider
are the integration points with technology already in use so as to maximise on agreements
such as licensing and subscriptions already in place. Additionally, it can be expected that a
system is already in use all security and privacy requirements have also been considered
and meet the standards of the organisation.
In summary, whilst Same Page may appear to be the most appropriate tool it does not
integrate with some of the organisation’s key applications such as Microsoft Outlook,
Solution Evaluation Page 7
though it does integrate with Jira which is quickly becoming a core application within the
ATO.Table 1: Comparison of Must Have Requirements
Feature
Asa
na
Con
fluen
ce*
Sam
e Pa
ge
Trel
lo*
Go
Mee
ting
Offi
ce 3
65
Yam
mer
*
Cic
so
Spar
k/W
ebE
x*
ScalabilityExpandable to Enterprise
Device and PlatformCloud
Windows
Mac
MobileiOS
Android
FeaturesCooperative Writing
Brainstorming
Synchronous Editing
Discussion Boards
Audio/Video
Chat/Messaging
Integration with Other Apps
Total Number of Apps andSelected Apps used by ATO
138 54 21 187 55 330 71 39
OfficeOneDrive
Jira
OutlookSharePt
JiraTrello
OneDriveJira
JiraGoogle Office OneDrive
SharePt
OfficeOneDriveSharePt
Outlook
SupportPhone
Online
Knowledge Base
Video
Training
Options DocsWebinar
DocsWebinar
DocsWebinarOnline
DocsOnlineOn-Site
All DocsOnline All
SecurityAuthentication Multi Multi Single Multi Unknown Multi Admin Unknown
Solution Evaluation Page 8
Table 2: Comparison of Nice to Have Requirements
Feature
Asa
na
Con
fluen
ce*
Sam
e Pa
ge
Trel
lo*
Go
Mee
ting
Offi
ce 3
65
Yam
mer
*
Cic
so
Spar
k/W
ebE
x*
Document Management
Project Management
Task Management
Content Management
Version Control
Communication
Distributed team communication is predominately technology-mediated, and appropriate
communication technologies as well as ways to use technology are essential for
successful virtual team interaction (Laitinen & Valo, 2018). Röcker, (2012) notes that
contemporary workforces are “communication intensive... [team members] have many,
mostly informal, interactions with multiple individuals during the day in order to scan their
environment, to exchange information, and to request or provide advice... Besides the
goal-oriented exchange of task-related information, communication within the workplace
serves also social purposes... the interpersonal exchange of messages, thoughts, and
feelings, which is a compelling requirement for people working in teams” (p.1). Team
communication can be either formal or informal, which have particular characteristics
(Figure 1) that need to be considered when offering a technology solution.
Figure 1: Communication Types and Characteristics for Consideration (Röcker, 2012)
Both formal and informal communication are integral to collaboration, team efficiency and
achieving task outcomes. Mabon (2017) notes that team efficiency is enhanced with media
Solution Evaluation Page 9
rich communication: “a media’s ability to communicate shared meaning and process
information without distortion. Low richness referred to communication that takes place
without physical presence; lacking social and visual cues such as body language and
gestures” (p.18).
Distributed teams also require both synchronous and asynchronous communication
technology, to accommodate their differences in time and whether their communication
need is formal or informal. Figure 2 outlines the media richness of communication methods
required by the distributed team to ensure their communication is fit for purpose.
Figure 2: Methods for Communication in Virtual Environments
To deliver on this theory, the proposed technology should deliver a communication
solution like chat, voice conversation or video conferencing. In Table 1, communication is
included in the Discussion Boards, Audio/Video and Chat/Messaging features. Of the
selected technologies, only Same Page, Trello and Office 365 provide support for all three.
File Sharing
Whilst briefly considered alongside other ‘must have’ requirements above, the nature of
the work completed at the ATO, combined with the fact the organisation has a large
physical presence in multiple different locations, mean that file sharing is a particularly
Solution Evaluation Page 10
critical functionality which ought to be given more weight when selecting a collaboration
software solution. Accordingly, the following section will look at the file sharing capabilities
of selected software in more details. In the interests of brevity, this section will only
evaluate those solutions which substantially meet the ‘must have’ requirements presented
above; solutions which fail to deliver two or more mandatory features will be excluded.
Additionally, as the ATO recognises the importance of collaboration (considered in more
detail above), potential solutions which cannot provide synchronous editing will also be
excluded. Based on the analysis summarised in Table 1, the discussion here will therefore
be limited to the Asana, Same Page and Office 365 platforms.
At this point it is also useful to recall that the ATO, like most enterprises, operates a
corporate network which already provides authenticated users access to file storage.
Each user is provided networked hard-drive capacity for private use, as well as access to a
common ‘shared’ drive. Both the user’s private and shared drives are accessible from any
terminal connected to the network, either physically (in the office) or (remotely) via the
VPN. The folder structure of the shared network storage device closely mirrors the
organisational structure, with folder permissions strictly controlled by a user’s approved
access group. These groups tend to be hierarchical rather than functional, meaning that
sharing documents between cross-functional team is encumbered. Finally, due to the
cascading nature of access groups (which if not carefully managed, may inadvertently give
a user access to sensitive content beyond what was intended), the security protocols
mean that project teams often find it tedious and difficult to navigate the IT requirements to
established a ‘shared’ space for project work (not to mention that file sharing with an ad-
hoc team is near impossible!). The ATO accordingly need a different solution to support
file sharing between cross-functional, project teams.
Table 3, on the following page, evaluates the file sharing functionality of each potential
solution.
Table 3: File SharingFunctionality of Different Technologies
Functionality Asana Same Page
Office 365
User Interface OS Integration
Web-Based Access
Drag-and-Drop
Solution Evaluation Page 11
Functionality Asana Same Page
Office 365
Folder Upload
Document ManagementCommenting/Mark-Up
Version History
Data Recovery
Sharing OptionsShare-by-Link
Read and Read/Write
Folder Permissions
Document Permissions
MiscellaneousDashboard Statistics
Note: Asana and Same Page do not provide file sharing functionality as a native feature
of the software; file sharing is facilitated via integration with other applications such as
Google Docs or Dropbox.
From the table, it is clear that Office 365 is the only technology which provides a native file
sharing solution, though both Asana and Same Page can be integrated with other file
sharing facilities. Given this, all three solutions can provide adequate functionality to meet
ATO business requirements – though the native functionality of Office 365 is an
advantage. Any decision should also be based on user requirements. Here the majority
of user concerns are objective (i.e. reliability, security, synchronicity etc), with all offerings
returning similar results. However, for the subjective/personal user requirements
(specifically, simplicity/intuitiveness), comparing the different solutions with each other is
difficult. However, RKT Consultants note that ATO staff are already familiar with Microsoft
Office applications, thus giving the Office 365 solution a slight advantage in regards to
user-friendliness.
Solution Evaluation Page 12
Recommendation
Following from the discussion above, RKT Consultants recommends the selection of the
Office 365 suite of applications to further support team communication and collaboration.
With this solution, the ATO will gain access to a modular software suite, allowing the
disparate business areas and diverse project teams to select the solution which is
appropriate for their given requirements. Adoption of Office 365 will provide the ATO with
the following products:
Email Solutions (Outlook or Exchange)
Document Creation (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Sway, Publisher, Visio)
Database Tools (Access, SharePoint)
Productivity Tools (Planner, Project, To-Do)
File Storage (OneDrive)
File Sharing (SharePoint)
Communication (Teams, Yammer, Skype)
Reporting (MyAnalytics)
The wide, and at times, overlapping, range of products will provide ATO project teams with
options for various needs. For example, in the collaboration space, it may be sufficient for
a team to provide informal revisions to a document via the ‘Review’ feature native to Word,
or it may be necessary to move to full version control option similar to that provided by
SharePoint. Similarly, the teams’ communication need may be that a video enabled
meeting is required (via Skype), a troubleshooting Wiki page or discussion board be
created (on SharePoint) or that wider stakeholder engagement and involvement be
solicited (via Yammer). The power of Office 365 as a solution is that it offers multiple
applications, providing different project teams flexibility to select the option which is
appropriate for their specific need.
From an organisational perspective, Office 365 also brings benefits. First, the user
interface for each application is built around the familiar Ribbon menu. It is expected that
the similar application design will empower users to quickly adapt to the new tools,
improving take-up across the organisation. This familiar design will also enable Office 365
solutions to be adopted with minimal training. The lower costs is also the second major
Solution Evaluation Page 13
benefit of Office 365. Table 4, on the right, summarises the monthly user licence fee for
the considered solutions. In addition to the lower user monthly licence fee, the actual cost
to the ATO may be further mitigated by migrating existing Microsoft Office licences to
Office 365.
Solution Evaluation Page 14
Conclusion
To assist the ATO enhance virtual team
effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across
Australia, RKT Consultants have completed an in-depth analysis of organisational and
user requirements.
Our analysis started with an overview of the operational requirements of the ATO. We
then introduced a theoretical understanding of group-work and collaboration needs to
inform the key organisational requirements of any technology solution. Next, we
referenced user preferences (as documented in key Persona Posters prepared by the
ATO) to identify user requirements. Then, in the discussion section of this report, RKT
Consultants considered a number of leading technology solutions across the themes of
communication, collaboration and file-sharing. A range of market-leading software options
were evaluated against the functionality required. This then informed the
recommendations made in the final section of the report.
The proposed solution, Office 365, will provide the ATO with a modular solution, with
different applications to target specific needs. Built with the familiar office ribbon style
menu, users will also benefit from a familiar, easy-to-use interface – cutting down on
training requirements, and improving take-up rate. Finally, by migrating existing Microsoft
Office licences to the Office 365 product, the implementation costs can be minimised.
RKT Consultants would like to thank the Australian Tax Office
for the opportunity to prepare this report. We trust the analysis
and recommendations provided by our team has added value
to your organisation, and kindly ask you to consider our
consulting service for future information projects.
Solution Evaluation Page 15
Table 4: Monthly User Licence Costs
Asana Same Page Office 365
$8.33 $7.00 $6.00
References
Bjorn, P., & Ngwenyama, O. (2009). Virtual team collaboration: building shared meaning,
resolving breakdowns and creating translucence. Information Systems Journal,
19(3), 227-253.
Carter, Beth. (2017). Online Collaboration tools for virtual teams. Clariant Creative.
Retrieved from: https://www.clariantcreative.com/blog/online-collaboration-tools-for-
virtual-teams
Chudoba, K., Wynn, E., Lu, M., & Watson‐Manheim, M. (2005). How virtual are we?
Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization.
Information Systems Journal, 15(4), 279–306. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00200.x
Cramton, Catherine (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for
dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371. Retrieved from
https://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=https://search-proquest-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/213835456?accountid=13380
D’Angelo, M. (2018). Microsoft Teams Vs. Slack: Which Is Right For Your Business?
Business News Daily. Retrieved from https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/9653-
microsoft-teams-vs-slack.html
Duffy, J. (2018). The Best Business Messaging Apps of 2018. PC Mag Australia.
Retrieved from http://au.pcmag.com/software/50247/guide/the-best-business-
messaging-apps-of-2018
DuFrene, D. D., & Lehman, C. M. (2016). Managing Virtual Teams, Second Edition. New
York, New York [222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017]: Business Expert Press.
Farley, J. (2017). Microsoft Teams: The Good, The Bad, The ‘Is It Ready?’ CMS Wire.
Retrieved from https://www.cmswire.com/digital-workplace/microsoft-teams-the-
good-the-bad-the-is-it-ready/
Solution Evaluation Page i
Finance Online (2018). Top 15 online collaboration tools virtual teams.
https://financesonline.com/top-15-online-collaboration-tools-virtual-teams/
GetApp (2018). GetApp Compare. Retrieved from: https://www.getapp.com/collaboration-
software/a/yammer/compare/gotomeeting-vs-jira-vs-microsoft-office-365/
Heath, N. (2018). Microsoft Teams: A Cheat Sheet. Tech Republic. Retrieved from
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsoft-teams-the-smart-persons-guide/
Laitinen, K., & Valo, M. (2018). Meanings of communication technology in virtual team
meetings: Framing technology-related interaction. International Journal of Human -
Computer Studies, 111, 12–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.10.012
Lepsinger, R., & DeRosa, D. (2010). Virtual team success: a practical guide for working
and leading from a distance. Retrieved from
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/qut/detail.action?docID=589145
Mabon, A. (2017, January 1). A Systematic Literature Review to Identify Best Practices for
Communication in Virtual Teams. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/2016101208/
Oxford University Press (2018). Collaboration. Retrieved from:
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/collaboration
Röcker, C. (2012). Informal Communication and Awareness in Virtual Teams.
Communications in Information Science and Management Engineering, 2(5), 1-15.
Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/17ef/c075fe3086364b7e5f62df01c5fd8b840963.pdf
Usmani, N., Hassan, R., & Mahmood, W. (2017). Impediments to requirement engineering
in distributed team. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic
Business, 9(6), 10.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/10.5815/ijieeb.2017.06.02
Solution Evaluation Page ii
Wiener, N. (1988). The human use of human beings : cybernetics and society. New York,
N.Y: Da Capo Press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.com.au/books?
id=DydKDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=on
epage&q&f=false
Solution Evaluation Page iii
Appendix A: User Persona 1
Solution Evaluation Page iv
Appendix B: User Persona 2
Solution Evaluation Page v
Appendix C: User Persona 3
Solution Evaluation Page vi