* Olson, G.M., and Olson, J.S. "Distance Matters," Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 15, 2001, pp. 139-179.
A more recent, less comprehensive study than Allen:1984 with similar results.
* Teasley, S., Covi, L., Krishnan, M.S., Olson, J.S. "How Does Radical Collocation Help a Team Succeed?," CSCW’00, December 2-6, 2000, Philadelphia, PA. (Also found here.)
- A field study of six teams in warrooms.
Our study of six teams that experienced radical collocation showed that in this setting they produced remarkable productivity improvements. Although the teammates were not looking forward to working in close quarters, over time they realized the benefits of having people at hand, both for coordination, problem solving and learning.
Teams in these warrooms showed a doubling of productivity
* Allen, T., Managing the Flow of Technology, MIT Press, Boston, 1984.
A study of communication and information flow in multiple R&D organizations. Lots of data, graphs, etc. Ends with design of a team room.
* An Empirical Study of Speed and Communication in Globally Distributed Software Development
One key finding is that distributed work items appear to take about two and one-half times as long to complete as similar items where all the work is colocated
* Team Knowledge and Coordination in Geographically Distributed Software Development
Our findings reveal that: software developers have different types of coordination needs; coordination across sites is more challenging than within a site; team knowledge helps members coordinate, but more so when they are separated by geographic distance; and the effect of different types of team knowledge on coordination effectiveness differs between co-located and geographically dispersed collaborators.
* An empirical study of global software development: distance and speed
Our results show that, compared to same-site work, cross-site work takes much longer and requires more people for work of equal size and complexity. We also report a strong relationship between delay in cross-site work and the degree to which remote colleagues are perceived to help out when workloads are heavy
* RE challenges in multi-site software development organisations
Based on the empirical evidence, we have constructed a model of how remote communication and knowledge management, cultural diversity and time differences negatively impact requirements gathering, negotiations and specifications. Findings reveal that aspects such as a lack of a common understanding of requirements, together with a reduced awareness of a working local context, a trust level and an ability to share work artefacts significantly challenge the effective collaboration of remote stakeholders in negotiating a set of requirements that satisfies geographically distributed customers
* CSCW 2008 Workshop: Supporting Distributed Team Work
It doesn't take much distance before a team feels the negative effects of distribution - the effectiveness of collaboration degrades rapidly with physical distance. People located closer in a building are more likely to collaborate (Kraut, Egido & Galegher 1990). Even at short distances, 3 feet vs. 20 feet, there is an effect (Sensenig & Reed 1972). A distance of 100 feet may be no better than several miles (Allen 1977). A field study of radically collocated software development teams, i.e. where the teammates share a large open-plan room, showed significantly higher productivity and satisfaction than industry benchmarks and past projects within the firm (Teasley et al., 2002). Another field study compared interruptions in paired, radically-collocated and traditional, cube-dwelling software development teams, and found that in the former interruptions were greater in number but shorter in duration and more on-task (Chong and Siino 2006). Close proximity improves productivity in all cases.