VIRTUAL TEAMS
It is inevitable that organizations are becoming more and more virtual due to our neverending technological advances. In earlier research, virtual teams have been defined quite rigidly, strictly focusing on groups in which members communicate solely using technology and who are usually geographically dispersed (DeSanctis & Monge, 1999; Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999). More recent research discusses the “virtuality” level of any team within an organization.
Simply put, they describe how much group members work together online versus face-to-face (Peñarroja, Orengo, Zornoza & Hernández, 2013). Kirkman and Mathieu (2007) describe “team virtuality” as “the extent to which team members use virtual tools to coordinate and execute team processes” (p. 702). The notion of “virtuality” becomes a continuum and a characteristic of any group. Martins, Gilson, and Maynard’s (2004) define virtual teams as “teams whose members use technology to varying degrees in working across locational, temporal, and relational boundaries to accomplish an interdependent task” (p. 808).
Over ten years ago, when I started working with semi-virtual teams and newly formed fully virtual organizations (no physical offices) helped me become sensitive to the challenges and opportunities presented by different virtuality levels. The challenge in building trust online with a virtual client system lies in the fact that there are only a few instances, if any, where the consultant and the client system meet face-to-face. In addition, it is difficult to feel a sense of ownership in a project where most of the communication and team are only visible virtually. People do not act the same online, even with their cameras on. Miscommunication, lack of visible cues, and body language are often challenges of online communication. Nonetheless, consultants are getting more and more experienced in navigating through those challenges and have successfully helped virtual teams foster trusting relationships online and in person. The more we learn to work online outside of the pandemic crisis, the more used to it we will get.
Featured Case Study: SPEAKout Organization For the Arts and Community Awareness
Based in: Toronto, Canada
Length of the mandate: 7 months in 2013 (no Zoom back then!)
Summary: SPEAKout is a non-profit arts-based non-profit virtual organization that has hosted some of the most prestigious spoken word art events in North America. Their impact has reached thousands of poets and young artists worldwide. We designed a process to help their team along with key members of their extended community co-create their Manifesto statement and get feedback on their strategic directions.
For a detailed case study about this mandate, please contact me.
References:
DeSanctis, G., & Monge, P. (1999). Introduction to the special issue: Communication
processes for virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6), 693-703.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual
teams. Organization Science, 10, 791-815.
Kirkman, B., & Mathieu, J. (2007). The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31(5), 700-718.
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L., & Maynard, M. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805-835.
Peñarroja, V., Orengo V., Zornoza, A., and Hernández, A. (2013). The effects of virtuality level on task-related collaborative behaviors: The mediating role of team trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 967-974.
