Skip to main content
Humanities LibreTexts

4.3: Collaborative Writing

  • Page ID
    131959
  • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    ( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)

    You have likely had at least one opportunity to work and write collaboratively with others, as this is an increasingly common way to work, both in school and in the workplace. The engineering design process, at least in part, entails working collaboratively to gather, organize, manage and disseminate information.[1] This information is often carefully analyzed and used to make important decisions, so it is critical that team members collaborate effectively in managing these communications tasks.

    Engineers report spending a considerable amount of their time writing, and they frequently engage in collaborative writing (CW). A recent survey asked various professionals what portion of their work week was devoted to writing, collaborative writing, and international communications.[2] The results shown in Table 4.3.1 indicate that collaborative writing makes up a significant portion of overall writing tasks.

    TABLE 4.3.1 Percentage of total work week that engineers and programmers report spending on communications tasks
      Engineers Programmers
    Time spent writing 35 25
    Time spent planning and writing documents collaboratively 19 12
    Time spent communicating internationally (across national borders) 14 18

    Research has also shown that “writing in general and CW in particular have been recognized to be fundamental to most professional and academic practices in engineering.”[3] Figure 4.3.1 shows that engineers rate writing skills as extremely important to career advancement.[4]

    37%=Extremely important; 36%=very important; 20%=moderately important; 5%=slightly important; 2%=not at all important
    Figure 4.3.1 The importance of writing for career advancement for surveyed engineers. [5]

    Like any kind of teamwork, collaborative writing requires the entire team to be focused on a common objective; according to Lowry et al., an effective team “negotiates, coordinates, and communicates during the creation of a common document.”[6] The collaborative writing process, like the Tuckman team formation model, is iterative and social, meaning the team works together and moves back and forth throughout the process.

    Successful collaborative writing is made easier when you understand the different strategies you can apply, how best to control the document, and the different roles people can assume. Figure 4.3.2 outlines the various activities involved at various stages of the collaborating writing process.

    Four collaborative writing stages. Image description available.
    Figure 4.3.2 Collaborative writing stages [Image description]

    Collaborative writing strategies are methods a team uses to coordinate the writing of a collaborative document. There are five main strategies (see Table 4.3.2), each with their advantages and disadvantages. Can you think of any other benefits or limitations?

    TABLE 4.3.2 Collaborative writing strategies[7]
    [Skip Table]
    Writing Strategy When to Use Pros Cons
    Single-author

    One member writes for the entire group

    For simple tasks; when little buy-in is needed; for small groups

    Efficient; consistent style

    May not clearly represent group’s intentions; less consensus produced

    Sequential

    Each member is in charge of writing a specific part and write in sequence

    For asynchronous work with poor coordination; when it’s hard to meet often; for straightforward writing tasks; small groups

    Easy to organize; simplifies planning

    Can lose sense of group; subsequent writers may invalidate previous work; lack of consensus; version control issues

    Parallel Writing: Horizontal Division

    Members are in charge of writing a specific part but write in parallel. Segments are distributed randomly.

    When high volume of rapid output is needed; when software can support this strategy; for easily segmented, mildly complex writing tasks; for groups with good structure and coordination; small to large groups

    Efficient; high volume of output

    Redundant work can be produced; writers can be blind to each other’s work; stylistic differences; doesn’t recognize individual talents well

    Parallel Writing: Stratified Division

    Members are in charge of writing a specific part but write in parallel. Segments are distributed based on talents or skills.

    For high volume rapid output; with supporting software; for complicated, difficult to segment tasks; when people have different talents/skills; for groups with good structure and coordination; small to large groups

    Efficient; high volume of quality output; better use of individual talent

    Redundant work can be produced; writers can be blind to each other’s work; stylistic differences; potential information overload

    Reactive Writing

    Members create a document in real time, while others review, react, and adjust to each other’s changes and addition without much pre-planning or explicit coordination

    Small groups; high levels of creativity; high levels of consensus on process and content

    Can build creativity and consensus

    Very hard to coordinate; version control issues

    Document management reflects the approaches used to maintain version control of the document and describe who is responsible for it. Four main control modes are listed in Table 4.3.3, along with their pros and cons. Can you think of any more, based on your experience?

    TABLE 4.3.3 Document control modes
    Mode Description Pros Cons
    Centralized When one person controls the document throughout the process. Can be useful for maintaining group focus and when working toward a strict deadline Non-controlling members may feel a lack of ownership or control of what goes into the document
    Relay When one person at a time is in charge but the control changes in the group Democratic Less efficient
    Independent When person maintains control of his/her assigned portion Useful for remote teams working on distinct parts Often requires an editor to pull it together; can reflect a group that lacks agreement.
    Shared When everyone has simultaneous and equal privileges Can be highly effective; non-threatening; good for groups working F2F, who meet frequently, who have high levels of trust Can lead to conflict, especially in remote or less functional groups

    Roles refer to the different hats participants might wear, depending on the activity. Table 4.3.4 describes several roles within a collaborative writing team. Which role(s) have you had in a group project? Are there ones you always seem to do? Ones that you prefer, dislike, or would like to try?

    TABLE 4.3.4 Collaborative writing roles
    Role Description
    Writer A person who is responsible for writing a portion of the content
    Consultant A person who is external to the project and has no ownership or responsibility for producing content but who offers content and process-related feedback (peer reviewers outside the team; instructor)
    Editor A person who is responsible for the overall content production of the writers, and can make both style and content changes; typically has ownership of the content production
    Reviewer A person, internal or external, who provides specific content feedback but is not responsible for making changes
    Team Leader A person who is part of the team and may fully participate in authoring and reviewing the content, but who also leads the team through the processes, planning, rewarding, and motivating.
    Facilitator A person external to the team who leads the team through processes but doesn’t give content related feedback.

    Exercise \(\PageIndex{1}\): Follow up and reflect

    Refer back to the warm-up at the start of this section. Using the tables above, analyze your example to determine the writing strategy and mode that best describes your experience, and what role(s) you took on.

    How effective was the strategy that you used? Would another strategy have been more effective?

    Image description

    Figure 4.3.2 image description:

    Four stages of collaborative writing

    1. Team Formation
      • Team introductions, getting to know each others’ skill sets
      • Team bonding, building trust
      • Operating agreements, setting expectations
    2. Team Planning
      • Review tasks to be done and roles of each team mate, create a work plan
      • Set team goals and objectives: milestones, deliverables, due dates
      • Determine processes for workflow and decision making
    3. Document Production
      • Plan the document: research, brainstorm, outline the document format and content
      • Compose a draft of the document
      • Revise: iterative revisions, consider using an outside peer reviewer
    4. Wind Up
      • Final document review to edit and approve content, organization, and style
      • Final document processing (proofreading and submitting)
      • External approval

    [Return to Figure 4.3.2]


    1. S. McCahan, P. Anderson, M. Kortschot, P. E. Weiss, and K. A. Woodhouse, “Introduction to teamwork,” in Designing Engineers: An Introductory Text, Hoboken, NY: Wiley, 2015, p. 14.
    2. J. Swartz, S. Pigg, J. Larsen, J. Helo Gonzalez, R. De Haas, and E. Wagner, "Communication in the workplace: What can NC State students expect?" Report from the Professional Writing Program, North Carolina State University, 2018.
    3. J. Gimenez and J. Thondhlana, “Collaborative writing in Engineering: Perspectives from research and implications for undergraduate education,” European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 37, no. 5, 2012, 471-487. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.714356
    4. J. Swartz, et al.
    5. J. Swartz, et al. CC-BY 4.0.
    6. P.B. Lowry, A. Curtis, and M.R. Lowry, “Building a taxonomy and nomenclature of collaborative writing to improve interdisciplinary research and practice,” Journal of Business Communication, vol. 41, 2004, pp. 66-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943603259363
    7. (adapted from Lowry et al. [4])

    This page titled 4.3: Collaborative Writing is shared under a not declared license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Suzan Last (BC Campus) .

    • Was this article helpful?