RESUMEN
Modern crowdsourcing offers the potential to produce solutions for increasingly complex tasks requiring teamwork and collective labor. However, the vast scale of the crowd makes forming project teams an intractable problem to coordinate manually. To date, most crowdsourcing collaborative platforms rely on algorithms to automate team formation based on worker profiling data and task objectives. As a top-down strategy, algorithmic crowd team formation tends to alienate workers causing poor collaboration, interpersonal clashes, and dissatisfaction. In this paper, we investigate different ways that crowd teams can be formed through three team formation models namely bottom-up, top-down, and hybrid. By simulating an open collaboration scenario such as a hackathon, we observe that the bottom-up model forms the most competitive teams with the highest teamwork quality. Furthermore, we note that bottom-up approaches are particularly suitable for populations with high-risk appetites (most workers being lenient toward exploring new team configurations) and high degrees of homophily (most workers preferring to work with similar teammates). Our study highlights the importance of integrating worker agency in algorithm-mediated team formation systems, especially in collaborative/competitive settings, and bears practical implications for large-scale crowdsourcing platforms.
RESUMEN
Critical, time-bounded, and high-stress tasks, like incident response, have often been solved by teams that are cohesive, adaptable, and prepared. Although a fair share of the literature has explored the effect of personality on various other types of teams and tasks, little is known about how it contributes to teamwork when teams of strangers have to cooperate ad-hoc, fast, and efficiently. This study explores the dynamics between 120 crowd participants paired into 60 virtual dyads and their collaboration outcome during the execution of a high-pressure, time-bound task. Results show that the personality trait of Openness to experience may impact team performance with teams with higher minimum levels of Openness more likely to defuse the bomb on time. An analysis of communication patterns suggests that winners made more use of action and response statements. The team role was linked to the individual's preference of certain communication patterns and related to their perception of the collaboration quality. Highly agreeable individuals seemed to cope better with losing, and individuals in teams heterogeneous in Conscientiousness seemed to feel better about collaboration quality. Our results also suggest there may be some impact of gender on performance. As this study was exploratory in nature, follow-on studies are needed to confirm these results. We discuss how these findings can help the development of AI systems to aid the formation and support of crowdsourced remote emergency teams.
