File sharing is an integral component of modern work. Files can be shared either using Group Information Management (GIM), where collaborators exploit a common repository (e.g., the cloud), or Personal Information Management (PIM), where files are sent via email attachments, and collaborators store files individually in personal collections. Given the recent prevalence of GIM, we compare the effects on retrieval for PIM versus GIM collections. We examine the effects of various theoretically motivated factors relating to collection size, properties of the target file, and user workload. In our study, 289 participants accessed 1,557 of their own shared files in a naturalistic setting. Results indicate that factors relating to collection size, file versions, and user workload negatively affect the retrieval of GIM more than PIM files, indicating that PIM is more scalable than GIM. Testing a very different population, we confirm previous findings that failure percentages of GIM are approximately double those of PIM. We discuss possible theoretical explanations, specifically how factors that hinder retrieval exacerbate the general GIM problem of retrieving files organized by other people. Overall, PIM's greater scalability has practical implications for fast‐growing organizations such as startups when choosing their sharing policies.

中文翻译：

---

不同文件共享方法的可扩展性

文件共享是现代工作不可或缺的组成部分。可以使用组信息管理 (GIM) 共享文件，其中协作者利用公共存储库（例如，云）或个人信息管理 (PIM)，其中文件通过电子邮件附件发送，并且协作者将文件单独存储在个人收藏中. 鉴于最近 GIM 的流行，我们比较了 PIM 与 GIM 集合对检索的影响。我们检查了与集合大小、目标文件的属性和用户工作负载相关的各种理论上的驱动因素的影响。在我们的研究中，289 名参与者在自然环境中访问了他们自己的 1,557 个共享文件。结果表明，与集合大小、文件版本和用户工作量相关的因素对 GIM 检索的负面影响大于 PIM 文件，表明 PIM 比 GIM 更具可扩展性。测试一个非常不同的群体，我们证实了先前的发现，即 GIM 的失败百分比大约是 PIM 的两倍。我们讨论了可能的理论解释，特别是阻碍检索的因素如何加剧检索其他人组织的文件的一般 GIM 问题。总体而言，PIM 更大的可扩展性对于快速增长的组织（例如初创公司）在选择共享策略时具有实际意义。