With so much talk in the industry about organisations being agile, virtual teaming can be seen as an aspect of the agile organisation. Many authors have noted that virtual teams are developed as strategic responses to the increasingly competitive market place (Crossman & Kelly, 2004; Townsend et al, 1998).
Whilst virtual teaming provides benefits like cost saving, quicker responses to market etc, we all know that traditional face-to-face teams will always be there. I am of the opinion that virtual teams should only be used for short-term engagements where the organisation is taking advantage of an opportunity. As someone who has been in 2 virtual teams, I have seen (or should I say experienced) the “side-effects” of virtuality on team members. These effects include feeling isolated, lack of response to urgent queries (it turns out we don’t all have the same sense of urgency – maybe it has to do with culture), communication dynamics (these are exacerbated by language, accent, pronunciation which all lead to various interpretations of what is being communicated) etc. There is a lot of literature on how managers can overcome these effects but perhaps organisations are unaware that leading a virtual team is different from leading a traditional team and therefore leaders are not being effectively equipped for the challenges of this type of team. Furthermore, team members should also be trained on virtual team etiquette – I must look into the development of this.
In the words of Andrew S. Grove (of the Intel Corporation)…Adapt or die…You need to plan the way a fire department plans. It cannot anticipate fires, so it has to shape a flexible organisation that is capable of responding to unpredictable events. It is from this view that I believe organisations should include virtual teams as part of the organisation’s architecture.
This post refereces the following author(s)
Crossman, A. & Lee-Kelly, L. 2004. Trust, commitment and team working: the paradox of virtual organisations. Global Networks. Vol.4 Issue 4
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
The Making or Breaking of a Virtual Team
For a virtual team to be successful the systems and structures in the organisation must be friendly towards it. Furthermore the infrastructural requirements which provide financial and operational incentives should be established (Rad & Levin, 2003)
The systems which need to be established up-front include:
- Team Member Selection,
- Training,
- Rewards Systems,
- Performance Evaluation,
- Establishing ROI metrics.
The structure in a virtual team should have enough discipline to get the project completed with minimal red-tape (Flannes and Levin, 2001).
A virtual team structure should promote the following:
- Task accomplishment;
- Sharing and Processing of Information;
- Leadership;
- Establishment of Social Relationships
Virtual teams are possible only because of recent advances in computer and telecommunications technology. These technologies define the operational environment of the virtual team and thus come together to form the infrastructure of virtual teamwork. (Townsend, DeMarie & Hendrickson, 1998).
There are three categories in which these technologies can be classified, i.e.
- Desktop Video Conferencing Systems - the core system around which the rest of virtual team technologies are built
- Collaborative Software Systems - collaborative software is designed to augment both types of group work activity and to empower teamwork processes
- Internet/Intranet systems - provide an important communicative and informational resource. They allow virtual teams to archive text, visual, audio, and numerical data in a user friendly format.
These three technologies provide an infrastructure, across which the virtual team will interact and provide technological empowerment to the virtual teams' operation (Osterlund, 1997).
It has been interesting learning about the systems, structure and infrastructure requirements of virtual teams. In my opinion the three are interdependant i.e. infrastructure enables the systems and structure which will make or break the virtual team. For organisations to be successful in the implementation of such teams, in my view, this is the information they should give the most attention to.
This post references the following authors:
· Gibson, C.B., & Cohen S.G. 2003. Virtual teams that work: creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness. Jossey.Bass
· Townsend A., DeMarie S.M., Hendrickson A.R. 1998. Virtual Teams: Technology and Workplace of the Future. Academy of Management Executive. Vol 12. No 3
· Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2003. Achieving Project Management Success using Virtual Teams. Florida. J.Ross Publishing.Osterlund, J. 1997. Competence management by informatics in R&D: The corporate level. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol 44 No 2
The systems which need to be established up-front include:
- Team Member Selection,
- Training,
- Rewards Systems,
- Performance Evaluation,
- Establishing ROI metrics.
The structure in a virtual team should have enough discipline to get the project completed with minimal red-tape (Flannes and Levin, 2001).
A virtual team structure should promote the following:
- Task accomplishment;
- Sharing and Processing of Information;
- Leadership;
- Establishment of Social Relationships
Virtual teams are possible only because of recent advances in computer and telecommunications technology. These technologies define the operational environment of the virtual team and thus come together to form the infrastructure of virtual teamwork. (Townsend, DeMarie & Hendrickson, 1998).
There are three categories in which these technologies can be classified, i.e.
- Desktop Video Conferencing Systems - the core system around which the rest of virtual team technologies are built
- Collaborative Software Systems - collaborative software is designed to augment both types of group work activity and to empower teamwork processes
- Internet/Intranet systems - provide an important communicative and informational resource. They allow virtual teams to archive text, visual, audio, and numerical data in a user friendly format.
These three technologies provide an infrastructure, across which the virtual team will interact and provide technological empowerment to the virtual teams' operation (Osterlund, 1997).
It has been interesting learning about the systems, structure and infrastructure requirements of virtual teams. In my opinion the three are interdependant i.e. infrastructure enables the systems and structure which will make or break the virtual team. For organisations to be successful in the implementation of such teams, in my view, this is the information they should give the most attention to.
This post references the following authors:
· Gibson, C.B., & Cohen S.G. 2003. Virtual teams that work: creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness. Jossey.Bass
· Townsend A., DeMarie S.M., Hendrickson A.R. 1998. Virtual Teams: Technology and Workplace of the Future. Academy of Management Executive. Vol 12. No 3
· Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2003. Achieving Project Management Success using Virtual Teams. Florida. J.Ross Publishing.Osterlund, J. 1997. Competence management by informatics in R&D: The corporate level. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol 44 No 2
Saturday, August 22, 2009
This is so exciting...
Check out a reference to my blog by Jessica Linpack, the author of many books and articles on virtual teams and someone who is also considered an expert in virtual teams.
See: http://endlessknots.netage.com/. The post was posted on 18 August 2009.
See: http://endlessknots.netage.com/. The post was posted on 18 August 2009.
IT Does Matter
Virtual Projects are mainly enabled by Information Technology. The rapid development in technology has made it possible for organisations to readily pursue the use of virtual teams (Rad & Levin,2003).
Since technology plays such a central role in virtual teams, a number of factors such as team profile, project type and length, hardware compatibility etc have to be carefully considered before the technology is procured (Machet, 2001). Furthermore, the technology has to be installed, fully functional and the entire team should be proficient in its use
In their book, Mastering Virtual Teams, Duarte and Snyder (1999) identify two categories of technology tools available to virtual teams, i.e. Synchronous and Asynchronous.
Synchronous include:
- Real Time Data Conferencing
- Electronic Meeting Systems
- Electronic Displays
- Video Conferencing
Asynchronous include:
- Email
- Group Calendars
- Blogs
- Workflow Application Software
However one cannot ignore the rise in the use of social network tools (SNT). Virtual project teams can take advantage of these tools not only for project collaboration purposes, but as tools for team development. A real life example of this is a financial institution in South Africa, which has launched its own version on twitter in order to connect employees across all the countries (over 40) in which it has a presence. In addition to this, the organisation has set up a corporate blog which is used by employees to share information. This organisation also has twitter , FaceBook, Youtube and RSS Feeds accounts. So not only is this organisation taking advantage to connect employees across the globe, but it is also connecting with its customers for free through SNT.
This blog references the following authors:
- Duarte, D.L., & Snyder, N.T. 1999. Mastering Virtual Teams. San Francisco. Jossey Bass Publishing
- Machet, R. 2001. An Investigation into the Effectiveness Of Using Virtual Project Teams To Manage Projects Across Borders and Time Zones. A research report submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Witwatersrand.
- Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2003. Achieving Project Management Success using Virtual Teams. Florida. J.Ross Publishing.
Since technology plays such a central role in virtual teams, a number of factors such as team profile, project type and length, hardware compatibility etc have to be carefully considered before the technology is procured (Machet, 2001). Furthermore, the technology has to be installed, fully functional and the entire team should be proficient in its use
In their book, Mastering Virtual Teams, Duarte and Snyder (1999) identify two categories of technology tools available to virtual teams, i.e. Synchronous and Asynchronous.
Synchronous include:
- Real Time Data Conferencing
- Electronic Meeting Systems
- Electronic Displays
- Video Conferencing
Asynchronous include:
- Group Calendars
- Blogs
- Workflow Application Software
However one cannot ignore the rise in the use of social network tools (SNT). Virtual project teams can take advantage of these tools not only for project collaboration purposes, but as tools for team development. A real life example of this is a financial institution in South Africa, which has launched its own version on twitter in order to connect employees across all the countries (over 40) in which it has a presence. In addition to this, the organisation has set up a corporate blog which is used by employees to share information. This organisation also has twitter , FaceBook, Youtube and RSS Feeds accounts. So not only is this organisation taking advantage to connect employees across the globe, but it is also connecting with its customers for free through SNT.
This blog references the following authors:
- Duarte, D.L., & Snyder, N.T. 1999. Mastering Virtual Teams. San Francisco. Jossey Bass Publishing
- Machet, R. 2001. An Investigation into the Effectiveness Of Using Virtual Project Teams To Manage Projects Across Borders and Time Zones. A research report submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, University of Witwatersrand.
- Rad, P. & Levin, G. 2003. Achieving Project Management Success using Virtual Teams. Florida. J.Ross Publishing.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Can a Relationship Survive Long Distance?
Team Member to Team Member Trust
Being in a virtual team can be compared to being in a long distance relationship. To sustain such a relationship, trust is of the utmost importance. The trust issue applies to virtual teams in that, for this type of team to be successful, there is a level of trust is required amongst team members (Crossman & Lee-Kelly 2004,). James and Bowie (1998) point out that a virtual team presents a paradox of structural properties that work against building trust. Trust is built through some form of shared cultural history, however in a virtual team; members may come from different cultures without any previous working relationship. Thus in such a team structure it is harder to assume that the requirements for trust-building behaviour are shared by all team members (Cummings & Bromiley, 1996). Trust building is further exacerbated by the use computer mediated communication (CMM) as this has been shown to be less robust than face-to-face communication.
Project Manager to Team Member Trust
It can be argued that project managers rely on what they can ‘see’ rather than what has been achieved as a determinant of team member’s commitment. The “If I can’t see them, how can I be sure they are working” mentality will not work for a virtual team manager. Research has shown that team members will only behave in a trustworthy manner if they believe that the organisation demonstrates trust towards them (Crossman et al., 2004 ). This means that the virtual project manager has to adopt this stance in order to build trust with team members.
Evidence has shown that trust is a contentious issue within virtual teams, it requires commitment from all team members. Although it may be difficult to develop, it does develop over time.
Being in a virtual team can be compared to being in a long distance relationship. To sustain such a relationship, trust is of the utmost importance. The trust issue applies to virtual teams in that, for this type of team to be successful, there is a level of trust is required amongst team members (Crossman & Lee-Kelly 2004,). James and Bowie (1998) point out that a virtual team presents a paradox of structural properties that work against building trust. Trust is built through some form of shared cultural history, however in a virtual team; members may come from different cultures without any previous working relationship. Thus in such a team structure it is harder to assume that the requirements for trust-building behaviour are shared by all team members (Cummings & Bromiley, 1996). Trust building is further exacerbated by the use computer mediated communication (CMM) as this has been shown to be less robust than face-to-face communication.
Project Manager to Team Member Trust
It can be argued that project managers rely on what they can ‘see’ rather than what has been achieved as a determinant of team member’s commitment. The “If I can’t see them, how can I be sure they are working” mentality will not work for a virtual team manager. Research has shown that team members will only behave in a trustworthy manner if they believe that the organisation demonstrates trust towards them (Crossman et al., 2004 ). This means that the virtual project manager has to adopt this stance in order to build trust with team members.
Evidence has shown that trust is a contentious issue within virtual teams, it requires commitment from all team members. Although it may be difficult to develop, it does develop over time.
This post references:
- Crossman, A. & Lee-Kelly, L. 2004. Trust, commitment and team working: the paradox of virtual organisations. Global Networks. Vol.4 Issue 4
- Cummings, L.L., & Bromiley, P. 1996. The organisational Trust Inventory (OTI) development and validation. In Crossman, A. & Lee-Kelly, L. Trust, commitment and team working: the paradox of virtual organisations. Global Networks. Vol.4 Issue 4
- Jones, T.M., & Bowie, N.E. 1998. ‘Moral Hazards on the road to the virtual corporation, Business Ethics Quarterly. Vol. 8
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Strengthening a Virtual Team
Research has shown that the development of personal relationships between virtual team members is an important factor for working relationships (Pauleen & Yoong, 2001). Stronger relational links have been associated with higher performance (Warkentin & Beranek, 1999). Team building in a virtual team is made complex by technology, differing cultures, languages, time zones as well as distance. In my opinion, the team building of a virtual team should not be the responsibility of the project manager. This role should be fulfilled by a dedicated individual (virtual team change manager) as it is just an important a role as the management of the project will contribute to the team’s success.
According to Pauleen and Yoong (2001), there are at least 3 types of boundaries that a virtual change manager has to facilitate i.e.
Organisational – this type of boundary would occur for instance in a merger. When two organisations become one, it is the fusing of different work styles. Therefore it is the change manager’s role to bridge this gap between the team members and create a cohesive team with a single style of work (which all teams are satisfied with). In this case, change managers have to employ formal methodologies on how this can be achieved.
Cultural and Language – this type of boundary would occur in a global team which spans different countries. Culture has effects on how team members relate to each other. Miscommunication can occur if team members interpret conversations according to their own cultural programming. In this instance, the change manager has to design creative strategies to cross this boundary. An example of how this can be done, is educating the different cultures represented in a team about each other; teaching a word or sentence from each culture etc.
Time and Distance – this is a classic boundary that a virtual team has to overcome. The effect of distance on relationship building strategies is proportional to how far the team members are from each other (Pauline & Yoong, 2001). Since virtual teams rely on technology, this type of boundary would restrict the kinds of communication channels available to the change manager. Thus the change manger has to take into considerations these types of restrictions when building team building strategies.
In my view, team building in a virtual team is not an impossible task, but it is certainly challenging. Virtual team managers have to assess potential obstacles before creating relationship building strategies. With the right technology, training, experience and organizational support, these boundaries can be crossed.
This post references the following authors:
- Pauleen D.J. & Yoong, P. 2001. Relationship building and the use of ICT in boundary-crossing virtual teams: a facilitator’s perspective. Journal of Information Technology. Vol.16
- Warkentin, M. & Beranek, P.M. 1999. Training to Improve Virtual Team Communication. Information Systems Journal. Vol.9
According to Pauleen and Yoong (2001), there are at least 3 types of boundaries that a virtual change manager has to facilitate i.e.
Organisational – this type of boundary would occur for instance in a merger. When two organisations become one, it is the fusing of different work styles. Therefore it is the change manager’s role to bridge this gap between the team members and create a cohesive team with a single style of work (which all teams are satisfied with). In this case, change managers have to employ formal methodologies on how this can be achieved.
Cultural and Language – this type of boundary would occur in a global team which spans different countries. Culture has effects on how team members relate to each other. Miscommunication can occur if team members interpret conversations according to their own cultural programming. In this instance, the change manager has to design creative strategies to cross this boundary. An example of how this can be done, is educating the different cultures represented in a team about each other; teaching a word or sentence from each culture etc.
Time and Distance – this is a classic boundary that a virtual team has to overcome. The effect of distance on relationship building strategies is proportional to how far the team members are from each other (Pauline & Yoong, 2001). Since virtual teams rely on technology, this type of boundary would restrict the kinds of communication channels available to the change manager. Thus the change manger has to take into considerations these types of restrictions when building team building strategies.
In my view, team building in a virtual team is not an impossible task, but it is certainly challenging. Virtual team managers have to assess potential obstacles before creating relationship building strategies. With the right technology, training, experience and organizational support, these boundaries can be crossed.
This post references the following authors:
- Pauleen D.J. & Yoong, P. 2001. Relationship building and the use of ICT in boundary-crossing virtual teams: a facilitator’s perspective. Journal of Information Technology. Vol.16
- Warkentin, M. & Beranek, P.M. 1999. Training to Improve Virtual Team Communication. Information Systems Journal. Vol.9
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Challenges in Virtual Project Management
As I thought about the current project management methodologies, I assumed they would not apply to virtual team project management. But in hindsight (for lack of a better word), they should apply because projects are the same irrespective of the type of team, furthermore, the end goal is the same for all types of projects (virtual or not), i.e. deliver solution/project in time and within budget.
Over and above project planning, stakeholder management, managing risks and budgets, resource planning, project managers of virtual teams face unique challenges which may result delays of projects if not addressed up-front. These are:
- Trust: how does the project manager trust the work of the people s/he has not met? Cultural differences if they exist can further add to this challenge;
- Group Identity: this is a result of having shared experiences with the people you work with, but in the case of virtual team, this is absent;
- Information Sharing: according to Robbins (1994), most individuals define a team as a “group of individuals interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve particular objectives”. The essence of working in a team is the ability to share information, however in a virtual team this can be a challenge. Due to differing time-zones, and the added burden of not having opportunities for informal chats, the project manager for a virtual team has to find other ways to ensure that the entire team is on the same page with regards to the project and the organisation.
- Clear Structures: efficiency in any team is important, in my view it must be one of the top priorities for a project manager who manages a virtual team. To do this, the project manager has to define and communicate the teams’ work structure. This includes roles and responsibilities of team members, meeting formats, frequency etc.
- Managing Cliques: cliques in any type of team are inevitable, but in a virtual team they become particularly difficult to manage as the project manager is not necessarily at the same site as the team members. Therefore team members on the same site are likely to form a clique. Cliques have potential to create antagonism and competition in a team. So on top of managing stakeholders, the project manager has to manage the cliques to ensure they do not jeopardize the project
- Communication: although I have listed this last, it is definitely not the least. It is normally said “less is more”, but this is one of the saying that does not apply to virtual teams. In fact the “more the merrier” is more like it. However the project manager has to guard against information overload, this sounds like a contradiction, but a balance is required between frequency and communication tool.
This post references the following authors:
Roebuck D.B, & Britt A.C. 2002. Virtual Teaming Has Come to Stay—Guidelines and Strategies for Success. Southern Business Review, Fall 2002.
Over and above project planning, stakeholder management, managing risks and budgets, resource planning, project managers of virtual teams face unique challenges which may result delays of projects if not addressed up-front. These are:
- Trust: how does the project manager trust the work of the people s/he has not met? Cultural differences if they exist can further add to this challenge;
- Group Identity: this is a result of having shared experiences with the people you work with, but in the case of virtual team, this is absent;
- Information Sharing: according to Robbins (1994), most individuals define a team as a “group of individuals interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve particular objectives”. The essence of working in a team is the ability to share information, however in a virtual team this can be a challenge. Due to differing time-zones, and the added burden of not having opportunities for informal chats, the project manager for a virtual team has to find other ways to ensure that the entire team is on the same page with regards to the project and the organisation.
- Clear Structures: efficiency in any team is important, in my view it must be one of the top priorities for a project manager who manages a virtual team. To do this, the project manager has to define and communicate the teams’ work structure. This includes roles and responsibilities of team members, meeting formats, frequency etc.
- Managing Cliques: cliques in any type of team are inevitable, but in a virtual team they become particularly difficult to manage as the project manager is not necessarily at the same site as the team members. Therefore team members on the same site are likely to form a clique. Cliques have potential to create antagonism and competition in a team. So on top of managing stakeholders, the project manager has to manage the cliques to ensure they do not jeopardize the project
- Communication: although I have listed this last, it is definitely not the least. It is normally said “less is more”, but this is one of the saying that does not apply to virtual teams. In fact the “more the merrier” is more like it. However the project manager has to guard against information overload, this sounds like a contradiction, but a balance is required between frequency and communication tool.
This post references the following authors:
Roebuck D.B, & Britt A.C. 2002. Virtual Teaming Has Come to Stay—Guidelines and Strategies for Success. Southern Business Review, Fall 2002.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)