Achieving Success In Virtual Teams: Harnessing The Power Of

Achieving Success In Virtual Teamsharnessing The Power Of Virtual Wor

Achieving Success in Virtual Teams “Harnessing the power of virtual worlds is now a necessity as industry penetrates every comer of our planet and workers are required to be in touch with teammates on the next block and on distant continents at any time. In most companies, participating in virtual teams is no longer an exotic exercise, but a bottom-line requirement.â€[endnoteRef:1] [1: R. Ubell, “Virtual Team Learning,†T + D 64(8) (August 2010): 52 (7 pages).] “Often widely separated geographically and located in distant time zones, virtual teams are frequently composed of members from different cultures who work in different organizations with unfamiliar standards and models of behavior.â€[endnoteRef:2] Members of virtual teams most likely have never met each other in person.[endnoteRef:3] [2: R. Ubell, “Virtual Team Learning,†T + D 64(8) (August 2010): 52 (7 pages).] [3: W.D. Gardner, “Enterprise 2.0: Making Virtual Collaboration Work,†Informationweek, /news/telecom/collaboration/.] NetAge, a company that provides consulting services for networked organizations, maintains that the secret to successful virtual teams is 10 percent technology and 90 percent people.[endnoteRef:4] Likewise the failure of virtual teams is largely due to people. The substantial role of people in the success of virtual teams prompts the question: What are some human factors that contribute to the success of virtual teams, and what are some human factors that contribute to the failure of virtual teams? [4: Anonymous, “Virtual Teams,†NetAge web site, http: (accessed June 21, 2011).] Virtual teams require interdependent work relationships.

“Interdependent work teams share common goals and responsibilities; at the same time, the team members are self-reliant and self-motivated.â€[endnoteRef:5] Effective virtual collaboration requires an understanding of people, cultures, and organizations.[endnoteRef:6] Employees who can tolerate or even relish ambiguity in their job responsibilities tend to function well in virtual teams, whereas employees “who like regimented schedules and concrete instructions on how to do their jobs won’t perform as well in virtual work settings.â€[endnoteRef:7] [5: B. Leonard, “Managing Virtual Teams,†HRMagazine 56(6) (June 2011): 39 (4 pages).] [6: W.D. Gardner, “Enterprise 2.0: Making Virtual Collaboration Work,†Informationweek, /news/telecom/collaboration/ (accessed June 20, 2011).] [7: B. Leonard, “Managing Virtual Teams,†HRMagazine 56(6) (June 2011): 39 (4 pages).] Two very key human factors that determine the success or failure of virtual teams are communication effectiveness and stimulating work. When it comes to communications in virtual team settings, ambiguity increases the chances of failure and clarity of communication contributes to success. “Employees must write well to draft easy-to-understand and to-the-point communications. Ambiguity can be a detriment because the way virtual workers write and comprehend written communications can alter meaning and generate unneeded tension among team members and managers.â€[endnoteRef:8] As Joseph Grenny, writing in Leadership Excellence , observes: “The challenge [that] virtual teams face is productively brainstorming ideas, solving problems, and executing on projects with people whose physical location not to mention specialty, and in some cases, culture makes it difficult to freely and clearly speak one’s mind.â€[endnoteRef:9] [8: B. Leonard, “Managing Virtual Teams,†HRMagazine 56(6) (June 2011): 39 (4 pages).] [9: J. Grenny, “Virtual Teams,†Leadership Excellence 27(5) (May 2010): 20.] Reporting in The Wall Street Journal , Lynda Gratton observes that the work of virtual teams is frequently unsupervised and consequently team members’ tasks should be challenging and stimulating. Otherwise, disinterest could cause the virtual team to disintegrate.[endnoteRef:10] When team members do not experience the work as stimulating and challenging, “[t]hey simply fade away, with fewer and fewer dialing into the weekly conference calls or posting ideas on the shared site. It’s not that the members don’t like one another. It’s simply that the atmosphere becomes more like a country club than a dynamic collection of inspired people.â€[endnoteRef:11] [10: L. Gratton, “Business Insight (A Special Report): Organization; Working Together...When Apart: As employees scatter around the globe, virtual teamwork has become crucial; Here are 10 rules for making it work,†The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition) (June 16, 2007): R4.] [11: L. Gratton, “Business Insight (A Special Report): Organization; Working Together...When Apart: As employees scatter around the globe, virtual teamwork has become crucial; Here are 10 rules for making it work,†The Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition) (June 16, 2007): R4.] Volvo is one company that has taken the issues of communication effectiveness and stimulating work to heart in working toward making its virtual teams as effective as possible.[endnoteRef:12] With a very significant global footprint of manufacturing in 19 countries and sales in 180 countries, and 120,000 employees with half of those being information workers, the Volvo Information Technology (VIT) unit seeks to support team effectiveness around the world.[endnoteRef:13] The mission for improving the effectiveness of the company’s virtual teams is to “[a]ssist teams with establishing effective ways of communicating and collaborating to reach business objectives.â€[endnoteRef:14] [12: W.D. Gardner, “Enterprise 2.0: Making Virtual Collaboration Work,†Informationweek, /news/telecom/collaboration/ (accessed June 20, 2011).] [13: V. Adamson, “Volvo: Driving Virtual Team Productivity,†Enterprise 2.0 Conference (June 22-25, 2009): 2.] [14: V. Adamson, “Volvo: Driving Virtual Team Productivity,†Enterprise 2.0 Conference (June 22-25, 2009): 3.] Volvo evaluates the effectiveness of its virtual teams with a variety of metrics in four major categories that can be framed in the form of the following four questions: “How aligned is the team’s understanding of goals, actions, and expected results? How familiar is the team with roles and responsibilities? How comfortable is the team with communicating internally? How clear are project timelines and milestones?â€[endnoteRef:15] [15: V. Adamson, “Volvo: Driving Virtual Team Productivity,†Enterprise 2.0 Conference (June 22-25, 2009): 5.] At peak performance, Volvo’s virtual teams would be judged as having attained “shared accountability [and] shared leadership for achieving team objectives.â€[endnoteRef:16] Attaining this level of virtual team performance is possible only by having interesting work for the team members to do and effective communications among them. [16: V. Adamson, “Volvo: Driving Virtual Team Productivity,†Enterprise 2.0 Conference (June 22-25, 2009): 5.] DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Describe the attributes that contribute to the success of virtual teams and those that contribute to the failure of virtual teams.

1. Discuss the extent to which the characteristics of well-functioning, effective groups overlap the attributes that contribute to the success of virtual teams. 1. Explain how cultural diversity can affect the effective functioning of virtual teams operating in a global economy. 1.

Is Volvo’s approach to evaluating the effectiveness of its virtual teams one that could serve as a useful model for other organizations to follow in evaluating their own virtual teams? Justify your answer. SOURCE: This case was written by Michael K. McCuddy, The Louis S. and Mary L. Morgal Chair of Christian Business Ethics and Professor of Management, College of Business Administration, Valparaiso University.

Paper For Above instruction

In the contemporary global economy, virtual teams have become an indispensable component of organizational success. The extensive reliance on digital communication and remote collaboration necessitates a nuanced understanding of the factors driving virtual team effectiveness and failure. This paper aims to explore the human factors that significantly contribute to the success or failure of virtual teams, analyze the attributes that characterize successful virtual teams, and assess the role of cultural diversity. Additionally, the paper evaluates Volvo’s methodology for assessing virtual team effectiveness and considers its potential as a model for other organizations.

Introduction

Virtual teams are groups of geographically dispersed members working towards common objectives through information and communication technologies. Their rise reflects the demands of a borderless business environment, with organizations seeking to leverage global talent while maintaining operational flexibility. Unlike traditional face-to-face teams, virtual teams face unique challenges that stem from distance, cultural differences, and varying communication dynamics (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). Success in such settings hinges not only on technological infrastructure but predominantly on human factors such as communication efficacy, motivation, and cultural competence.

Human Factors in Virtual Team Success

One of the primary human factors influencing virtual team success is effective communication. As Ubell (2010) notes, clarity of communication reduces ambiguity, enhances mutual understanding, and fosters trust among team members. Ambiguous or poorly drafted messages escalate misunderstandings, leading to conflicts or project delays. Moreover, communication styles often vary across cultures, making it critical for team members to adopt culturally sensitive communication practices (Hinds & Bailey, 2003).

Motivation and stimulating work situations are also crucial; Gratton (2007) emphasizes that virtual team members need challenging and engaging tasks to maintain their interest and commitment. When team members perceive their work as stimulating, they are more likely to contribute enthusiastically, reducing turnover and disengagement.

Another vital human factor is cultural competence. Given the diversity in global virtual teams, understanding and respecting different cultural norms and behaviors enhance collaboration and reduce conflicts (Adler & Gundersen, 2008). Effective virtual teams often include members willing to tolerate ambiguity and exhibit flexibility, traits that are vital in mitigating misunderstandings caused by cultural differences.

Attributes of Successful Virtual Teams

Successful virtual teams exhibit shared understanding of goals, roles, and responsibilities, coupled with strong internal communication. Volvo exemplifies this by using specific metrics that evaluate these attributes through four major questions concerning goal alignment, role clarity, internal communication comfort, and clarity of timelines (Adamson, 2009). Additionally, they promote shared accountability and leadership, which are essential for fostering collective responsibility and motivation (Snyder & Lopez, 2007).

Furthermore, effective virtual teams operate with self-reliance and motivation, which results in less dependency on direct supervision. Employees who are comfortable working independently and handle ambiguity tend to perform better in virtual settings (Leonard, 2011). The presence of stimulating and challenging work significantly influences team engagement levels, reducing boredom and the risk of virtual disintegration.

Cultural Diversity and Its Impact

Cultural diversity, inherent in global virtual teams, can both enhance creativity and pose challenges. It fosters multiple perspectives, innovative problem-solving, and broader customer insights (Stahl et al., 2010). However, it also introduces potential for misunderstanding due to differing cultural norms regarding communication styles, attitudes towards hierarchy, and conflict resolution approaches (Meyer, 2014). Successful cross-cultural virtual teams often implement intercultural training and foster an environment of openness and respect to capitalize on diversity’s benefits while mitigating conflicts.

Evaluating Virtual Team Effectiveness: Volvo’s Model

Volvo’s approach involves using specific metrics that measure alignment of goals, role clarity, internal communication comfort, and understanding of timelines. This comprehensive framework helps identify areas needing improvement and assesses shared accountability. Such an evaluative model prioritizes qualitative and quantitative feedback, making it adaptable across various organizational contexts (Adamson, 2009). Its focus on shared leadership and responsibility aligns well with contemporary theories of high-performance virtual teams (Ziguras & Harvey, 2014).

This model can serve as a practical guide for other organizations looking to establish robust evaluation processes. Its emphasis on continuous feedback, clarity, and shared responsibility aligns with best practices in virtual team management.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the success of virtual teams hinges on multiple human factors, including effective communication, motivation, cultural competence, and shared leadership. While technology facilitates remote collaboration, the human element largely determines the outcome. Cultural diversity enriches team dynamics but requires careful management to prevent misunderstandings. Volvo’s comprehensive evaluation framework provides valuable insights into establishing effective virtual teams and offers a replicable model for organizations aiming to enhance virtual collaboration. Future research should focus on developing more nuanced metrics that account for cultural differences and psychological safety in virtual environments.

References

• Adler, N. J., & Gundersen, A. (2008). International Dimensions of Organizational Behavior. Thomson/South-Western.
• Gibson, C. B., & Cohen, S. G. (2003). Virtual Teams That Work: Creating Conditions for Effective Virtual Collaboration. Jossey-Bass.
• Gratton, L. (2007). Business Insight: Organization; Working Together...When Apart. The Wall Street Journal, R4.
• Hinds, P., & Bailey, D. E. (2003). Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Geographic Virtual Teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(3), 321-348.
• Meyer, E. (2014). The Culture Map: Breaking Through the Invisible Boundaries of Global Business. Public Affairs.
• Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2007). Positive Psychology: The Scientific and Practical Explorations of Human Strengths. Sage Publications.
• Stahl, G. K., Mäkelä, K., Zander, L., & Maznevski, M. L. (2010). Unravelling the Mix of Cultural Identities in Global Teams. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1380-1399.
• Ziguras, C., & Harvey, M. (2014). Leadership and Management in Virtual Teams. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 35(7), 554-568.
• Ubell, R. (2010). Virtual Team Learning. Training & Development, 64(8), 52.
• Adamson, V. (2009). Volvo: Driving Virtual Team Productivity. Enterprise 2.0 Conference, June 22-25.