Overcoming impediments to virtual team effectiveness

The term virtual team denotes an organizational team whose members rarely meet face to face but who nevertheless perform interdependent tasks in pursuit of collective goals. This article identifies the unique aspects of virtual teams that generate major barriers to their effectiveness, and suggests ways in which these may be either overcome or mitigated. A process-oriented model of virtual team effectiveness is presented, identifying issues associated with the development of transactive memory systems, work engagement, and collective efficacy as major challenges to virtual team effectiveness. These issues are illustrated with reference to the experience of virtual teams within a minerals processing firm. Finally, the authors discuss aspects of virtual team leadership and team climate that may help overcome some of the potential process losses associated with virtual teamwork. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Jennifer L. Gibbs,et al.  Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of , 2022 .

[2]  Douglas R. May,et al.  The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work , 2004 .

[3]  Jonathan A. Rhoades,et al.  The empowering leadership questionnaire: the construction and validation of a new scale for measuring leader behaviors , 2000 .

[4]  William A. Kahn.  Psychological Conditions of Personal Engagement and Disengagement at Work , 1990 .

[5]  C. Gibson,et al.  Virtual teams that work : creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness , 2003 .

[6]  A. Majchrzak,et al.  Leading Virtual Teams , 2007 .

[7]  A. Bakker,et al.  The job demands-resources model of burnout. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[8]  R. Moreland,et al.  Group Versus Individual Training and Group Performance: The Mediating Role of Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[9]  James K. Harter,et al.  Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: a meta-analysis. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[10]  D. Wegner.  A Computer Network Model of Human Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[11]  Guido Hertel,et al.  Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research , 2005 .

[12]  C. Gibson.  Do they do what they Believe they can? Group Efficacy and Group Effectiveness Across Tasks and Cultures , 1999 .

[13]  Kyle Lewis,et al.  Knowledge and Performance in Knowledge-Worker Teams: A Longitudinal Study of Transactive Memory Systems , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[14]  M. West.  Sparkling Fountains or Stagnant Ponds: An Integrative Model of Creativity and Innovation Implementation in Work Groups , 2002 .

[15]  Kara A. Incalcaterra,et al.  A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[16]  K. M. Bartol,et al.  Empowering Leadership in Management Teams: Effects on Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, And Performance , 2006 .

[17]  Linda Argote,et al.  Socially shared cognition at work: Transactive memory and group performance. , 1996 .

[18]  D. Wegner.  Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[19]  J. Mathieu,et al.  Empowerment and team effectiveness: an empirical test of an integrated model. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[20]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. , 2002 .

[21]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  A Typology of Virtual Teams , 2002 .

[22]  A. Edmondson.  Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams , 1999 .

[23]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  DEVELOPMENTS OF TRANSACTIVE MEMORY SYSTEMS AND COLLECTIVE MIND IN VIRTUAL TEAMS , 2001 .

[24]  Benson Rosen,et al.  Training for virtual teams: An investigation of current practices and future needs , 2006 .

[25]  A. Hollingshead.  Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems , 1998 .

[26]  Andrea B. Hollingshead,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems in Organizations: Matching Tasks, Expertise, and People , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[27]  A. Bakker,et al.  The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire , 2006 .

[28]  Aleksander P. J. Ellis.  System Breakdown: The Role of Mental Models and Transactive Memory in the Relationship between Acute Stress and Team Performance , 2006 .

[29]  D. Wegner,et al.  Transactive memory in close relationships. , 1991 .

[30]  J. Peiró,et al.  Linking organizational resources and work engagement to employee performance and customer loyalty: the mediation of service climate. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[31]  A. Bakker,et al.  Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi‐sample study , 2004 .

[32]  R. Moreland,et al.  Exploring the Performance Benefits of Group Training: Transactive Memory or Improved Communication? , 2000 .

[33]  Kyle Lewis,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems, Learning, and Learning Transfer , 2005, Organ. Sci..

[34]  B. Rosen,et al.  Overcoming Barriers to Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams , 2007 .

[35]  P. Paulus,et al.  Idea Generation in Groups : A Basis for Creativity in Organizations , 1994 .

[36]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  The role of participation and control in the effects of computer monitoring on fairness perceptions, task satisfaction, and performance. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[37]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  TEAMS EMBEDDED IN ORGANIZATIONS : SOME IMPLICATIONS , 1999 .

[38]  Daniel J. Brass,et al.  Efficacy-Performing Spirals: A Multilevel Perspective , 1995 .

[39]  John R. Austin.  Transactive memory in organizational groups: the effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[40]  Kyle Lewis.  Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[41]  M. Frese,et al.  Organizational error management culture and its impact on performance: a two-study replication. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[42]  Henry Moon,et al.  The cultural mosaic: a metatheory for understanding the complexity of culture. , 2005, The Journal of applied psychology.

[43]  Ned Kock,et al.  Trust and leadership in virtual teamwork: A media naturalness perspective , 2004 .

[44]  R. Wood.  Task complexity: Definition of the construct , 1986 .