In this thesis I inquire how an interdependent relationship is perceived to affect virtual team member’s interaction and the process of developing knowledge in the team. In order to explore these issues a qualitative case study was conducted and data gathered through the subjective experiences of team members constituting a virtual team in Statoil through the following research question: How is the interdependent relationship between virtual team members perceived to affect interaction and the process of developing knowledge in the team? In this thesis an interdependent relationship is understood as team members relating to each other as individuals that are mutually dependent on and responsible for the team’s actions. This interdependent relationship is the fundament for interaction in which team members build on and refine each other’s ideas and knowledge in order to reach their common goals and objectives. Principles from dialogue techniques, by the concepts of perspective making and perspective taking, are elaborated as a means to support interdependent interaction and knowledge creation in the virtual team. The empirical findings in this particular case study suggest that the informants perceive their interdependent and technologically mediated relationship to represent both challenges and possibilities in relation to their interaction and the process of developing knowledge within the team. Further, acknowledging this interdependent relationship and having the capacity to take the other’s perspective, seems decisive in order to develop shared understanding, complementary knowledge and high-quality decisions in the virtual team. The main findings in this study are: The interdependent relationship between the virtual team members is perceived characterized by involvement, vulnerability, power and shared responsibility Trust is seen as a vital precondition for interaction between the interdependent virtual team members Developing a shared situational understanding through listening to other’s perspectives seems crucial in order to utilize the potential for developing knowledge in the virtual team

We find ourselves, as interpreters and listeners, living, discerning, prioritizing, asking, and answering questions in and through particular communal and theological traditions. As the discerning and prioritizing process is inevitable, we suggest to move the question about prioritizing from the context of ‘privileged access or interpretation' to the context of the ‘preferences' of the believing communities. We imply by this ‘relocation' the interdependent relationships between believing communities and their beliefs and practices. We propose, following Maturana's epistemology, three steps to argue about the dynamic and interdependent relationships among believers, communities, and their beliefs and practices. We affirm, first, that whenever we engage in the discerning process we have before us two paths of explanations. These two paths place the believers in a central place in their task for deciding for one of the options. The recognition about the interpreters' active participation suggests the crucial role of the believers and their preferences. The crucial point in the process of discerning and deciding for one of the paths is the type of believing communities that we would like to promote and conserve. We suggest, second, that the proposal of answers and the acceptation of those answers as explanations imply the active participation of both interpreters and listeners. We propose the interdependence relationships between our existence in particular believing communities and those questions and answers that we prioritize, ignore, and conserve. We claim, third, that in language or in and through our dialogical spaces we distinguish and coordinate the many and possible dimensions of our existence and relationships. As believers, in and through the contexts of our believing communities we discern, prioritize, and conserve the accents of our beliefs and practices. We stress the crucial role of the preferences as the believing communities prioritize and conserve the ‘nature' and ‘course' of their particular communities.