NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... Johansen). For teams that have a greater degree of spatial distance separating them (as with a transnational team), the likelihood of members seeing one another may be smaller than for those for which the distance is smaller. However, merely seeing the faces of other team members has been shown to have a positive effect on the salience of team identity (Shapiro et al. ).
If the team is a global one there may be less opportunity for virtual team members to meet one another face-to-face, particularly if the teams lifespan is predetermined and of a relatively short period. The results of these qualities of a temporary team may mean the virtual team member places less emphasis or importance on their relationship or workings with fellow virtual team members. Computer Mediated Communication Factors In using CMC as its primary form of interaction, the virtual team encounters different challenges in communication among its members. Gone are nonverbal cues and nuances, and feedback is delayed almost without exception (McGrath). Gestures, social influence indicators, symbolic content and contextual signals are eliminated when virtual teams must use CMC as their primary form of interaction (Montoya-Weiss, Massey, & Song).
In a virtual team that interacts primarily via CMC, team members may be separated by boundaries of both space and time. Without live face-to-face interaction, those in a virtual team may find it tempting, perhaps even easy, to delay fulfillment of requests made by fellow virtual team members who are not co-located. When a target is many miles away and operating in a time zone contrasted with that of the agent, the target may temporarily set aside requests from the target simply because they may feel less pressure given their lack of proximity to the agent. Shapiro et al.
noted that the inability to communicate face-to-face with ones team members often means that the frequency with which a member receives timely assistance is low. Furthermore, simply seeing other virtual team members faces has been shown to increase the salience of team identity (Shapiro et al. ). Therefore, without the face-to-face communication that is often infrequent if not nonexistent in virtual teams, particularly global ones, virtual team members are more apt to experience low team identity and perceive their team members as outgrown members. Temporarily Factors The temporary nature of a virtual team is one of its core benefits. The ability to rearrange components or members of a virtual team is one of the key advantages in that it allows the organization or team to better meet market demands, to coordinate via formal and informal contracts, to define boundaries of the firm differently over time or for different customers or constituencies (DeSanctis & More 694). The flexibility of the virtual team is an important benefit of this type of team structure.
Very often virtual teams are formed for a specific task or objective. Consequently, the team may have a more defined lifespan than the traditional team, functioning for a predetermined or proposed period of time. Therefore, the members that make up the virtual team may be acutely aware of its temporarily. This can have numerous implications for the functioning of the team among its members. For a team with a short lifespan, the rule of reciprocation may not apply. Reciprocity says that we should try to repay what another person has done for us (Cialdini).
In a team, which is of a highly temporary nature, members may experience fewer opportunities for the rule of reciprocation to come into play, or perceive that this is the case. For instance, if one member provides another with helpful information or assistance with their work, the member providing help may not have the opportunity for their kindness to be reciprocated, given the short lifespan of the team. A temporary teams members may choose not to cooperate with one another and to withhold help from their fellow team members because, due to a teams short lifespan, their perception may be that there is little opportunity for their favor to be returned. The lack of give and take that may characterize a short-lived team may also affect each members identification with the team. In addition, if a team member believes she will only be working with a virtual team member for a finite period of time, she may see little incentive for fostering a close, personal working relationship with her fellow team members. A team which has a lifespan that is known to be very brief may have members who view their work on the team as a one-shot game, not worrying about the repercussions of their actions and interactions with their fellow team members.
Furthermore, if the teams work is viewed as a one-shot game, its members may not be concerned with their own reputation among the teams members. If the team is short-lived, reputation will be of little consequence (Cialdini). Therefore, whether or not the teams lifespan is known to be finite will be a factor in an agents perception of group membership of their virtual team. Similarly, if the team has been in existence of a relatively short period of time, there may be more doubt about the future of its existence than a team with a long history. Cultural Factors In addition to the issues of temporarily, spatial distance and electronic communication that are characteristic of virtual teams, there are also cultural factors that effect the interaction of its members. For some teams that are more global in nature, language and cultural barriers may not be insignificant issues during life of the team.
Shapiro et al. noted that in a transnational team the diversity of the team members cultural values is often associated with a wide array of team member behaviors which may or may not be perceived as desired by the entire team (Shapiro et al. ). Diversity in cultural values may also explain the variance in team processes and practices observed across cultures. However, when team members view their interests as similar to those of the team, team identity is stronger (Ashforth & Mail). Therefore, teams with greater cultural diversity may experience a weaker team identity and perceive a lower level of group membership. Team Identification and Group Membership According to the Power Use Model, an agents choice of tactics in influence attempts on fellow team members may be effected by whether the agent sees the target as an ingroup member or an outgrown member (Bruins).
As noted in Turner et al. , group boundaries are often defined at a psychological level (Turner et al. ). This concept may also apply to virtual teams, where the group, or in this case team, boundaries are more ambiguous than in a traditional team. Given the unique characteristics of a virtual team such as temporarily, spatial distance, and CMC as its primary form of interaction, do virtual team members see one another as i nogroup members or outgrown members? The key to answering this question is to evaluate whether a virtual team member obtains some sense of identity from her membership in the virtual team. Hofstede noted that one of the main characteristics of an ingroup is that it provides its members with this sense of identity (Hofstede). Therefore, if a virtual team member gains some sense of identity from their membership in the virtual team, they may perceive their fellow virtual team members as ingroup members.
However, if little sense of identity is gained from their membership in the virtual team, the team member may view their fellow virtual team members as outgrown members. Other factors may also play a role in whether an agent views their virtual team members as i nogroup or outgrown members. For instance, some agents may view their virtual team members as they would a traditional team member with little distinction between the two types of teams. However, others particularly those who only communicate via CMC and never come face-to-face with fellow team members and who know from their virtual teams inception that the work team is only a temporary one may view their virtual team members quite differently when compared to members of more traditional teams. This may be particularly so in a global virtual team where members are separated by time zones, language barriers, and cultural differences. Whether an agent gets some sense of identity from the virtual team membership and whether they view their membership in a traditional team similar to a virtual team may play a role in their choice of influence tactic based on how they perceive their fellow team members, as ingroup or outgrown members.
Therefore, based on Bruins Power Use Model (Bruins) whether virtual team members view each other an ingroup or outgrown members will affect their choice of tactics when attempting to influence fellow virtual team members. Conclusion The paper indicates that the level of spatial distance as well as the diversity in nationalities and other factors may be significant predictors of group membership perception and team identification. However, contrary to current theory (Shapiro et al. ), meeting team members face-to-face or communicating with them face-to-face may have little impact on a members identification with their team. Although, it may not be the virtuality (computer mediated communication, lack of face-to-face meetings, or lifespan of a team) that poses challenges to a virtual team, but rather its cultural diversity and distance between members.
In addition, these may be issues for teams in general and not just virtual ones. Bibliography Ashforth, B. E. & Mail, F. Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1989): 20 - 39. Bell, Bradford S. , and Kozlowski, Steve W.
A typology of virtual teams: implications for effective leadership. Group and Organization Management, 27 (2002): 14 - 29. Bruins, Jan. Social power and influence tactics: A theoretical introduction.
Journal of Social Issues, 55 (1999): 7 - 14. Cialdini, R. B. Influence: Science and practice (4 th ed. ).
Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2001. Handy, C. 1995. Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 73: 40 - 50.
Hill, S. R. , Johnson, K. , and Tariff, M. Experiments in group decision-making: Communication processes and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13 (1986): 225 - 252. Hofstede, Geert. Culture and organizations: Software of the mind.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991. Jarvenpaa, S. L. , and Ives, B. The global network organization of the future: information management opportunities and challenges.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 10 (1994): 25 - 57. Lipnack, J. , and Stamps, J. Virtual Teams: Reaching across Space, Time, and Organizations with Technology. New York: John Wiley, 1997.
McGrath, J. Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): a theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22 (1991): 147 - 174. Montoya-Weiss, Mitzi M. , Massey, Anne P. , and Song, Michael. Getting it together: temporal coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (2001): 1251 - 1262.
OHara-Devereaux, M. , and Johansen, B. Global Work: Bridging Distance, Culture, and Time. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994. Snow, C. C. , Snell, S.
A. , and Davison, S. C. Use transnational teams to globalize your company. Organizational Dynamics, 24 (1996): 50 - 67.
Shapiro, Debra L. , Furst, Stacie A. , Spreitzer, Gretchen M. , and Von Glinow, Mary Ann. Transnational teams in the electronic age: Are team identity and high performance at risk? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (2002): 455 - 467. Townsend, A. M. , De Marie, S. M. & Hendrickson, A.
R. Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Executive, 12 (1998): 17 - 29. Turner, J.
C. , Hogg, M. A. , Oakes, P. J. , Reached, S. D. , & Wetherell, M. Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Blackwell, 1987.
Zack, M. Interactivity and Communication Mode Choice in Ongoing Management Groups. Information Systems Research, 4 (1993): 207 - 239.
Free research essays on topics related to: cultural diversity, team members, virtual teams, cultural values, cultural factors
Research essay sample on Virtual Teams Team Members
