How Do Virtual Teams Work Efficiently: A Social Relationship View

Virtual teams are groups of members collaborating in the execution of a specific task from disperse locations. Increasing use of virtual teams has highlighted the need for organizations to focus on ways to improve their performance. The key issues of concern include both technical and social dimensions, and this research study addresses the latter. Hence, this study derives a social relationship model from a comprehensive literature review and conducts an experiment to validate this through SEM (structural equation modeling). The results reveal: (1) communication has a direct positive impact on relationship building, but indirect positive effects on performance and satisfaction; (2) relationship building impacts directly with strong and positive impacts on cohesion and trust, but indirectly with strong impacts on performance and satisfaction; (3) cohesion has a direct, strong, and positive impact on performance, but a strong indirect impact on satisfaction; (4) trust has a positive direct impact on performance, but an indirect positive impact on satisfaction; and (5) performance has a strong and positive impact on satisfaction. In addition, this study confirms that relationship building is a vital mediator in the social relationship model. Managerial implications and future research directions are identified.

[1]  R. Sitgreaves.  Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[2]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Do mediated contexts differ in information richness? A comparison of collocated and dispersed meetings , 1996, Proceedings of HICSS-29: 29th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[3]  Michelle LaBrosse,et al.  Managing virtual teams , 2008 .

[4]  P. Bentler,et al.  Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis : Conventional criteria versus new alternatives , 1999 .

[5]  Artemis Chang,et al.  A Multidimensional Approach to the Group Cohesion-Group Performance Relationship , 2001 .

[6]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[7]  Charles Møller,et al.  Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology , 2005 .

[8]  C. R. Evans,et al.  The Structure of Group Cohesion , 1995 .

[9]  C. Cramton.  The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[10]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Implementing Electronic Meeting Systems at IBM: Lessons Learned and Success Factors , 1990, MIS Q..

[11]  J. Pennings,et al.  A typology of organizational control and its metaphors , 1989 .

[12]  Mahesh S. Raisinghani,et al.  An empirical study of best practices in virtual teams , 2001, Inf. Manag..

[13]  S. R. Hiltz,et al.  Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. , 1986 .

[14]  E. Salas,et al.  Virtual Teams: Effects of Technological Mediation on Team Performance , 2003 .

[15]  F. Anderson,et al.  The impact of netcentricity on virtual teams: the new performance challenge , 2002 .

[16]  Steve Sawyer,et al.  Software Development: Processes and Performance , 1998, IBM Syst. J..

[17]  Roderick M. Kramer,et al.  Swift trust and temporary groups. , 1996 .

[18]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[19]  Wan,et al.  LISREL analyses of interaction effects in multiple regression , 1996 .

[20]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System* , 1997 .

[21]  Jeffrey A. Miles,et al.  The effects of videoconference, telephone, and face-to-face media on interviewer and applicant judgments in employment interviews , 2001 .

[22]  Lee Sproull,et al.  Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication , 1986 .

[23]  A. Hollingshead.  Communication, Learning, and Retrieval in Transactive Memory Systems☆☆☆ , 1998 .

[24]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[25]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[26]  A. P. Chan,et al.  Coordination and Virtualization: the Role of Electronic Networks and Personal Relationships , 1999 .

[27]  K. Bollen,et al.  Perceived Cohesion: A Conceptual and Empirical Examination , 1990 .

[28]  Bradley L. Kirkman,et al.  The Impact of Team Empowerment on Virtual Team Performance: The Moderating Role of Face-to-Face Interaction , 2004 .

[29]  R. Baumeister,et al.  The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. , 1995, Psychological bulletin.

[30]  Mehdi Khosrowpour,et al.  Annals of Cases on Information Technology , 2002 .

[31]  Ramiro Montealegre,et al.  E*Trade Securities, Inc., Pioneer On-Line Trader, Struggles to Stay on Top , 2001 .

[32]  David J. Pauleen,et al.  An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[33]  H. Guetzkow,et al.  A social psychology of group processes for decision-making , 1964 .

[34]  Anthony R. Hendrickson,et al.  Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future , 1998 .

[35]  C. Slyke,et al.  Information Communication Technologies: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications , 2008 .

[36]  A. Lott,et al.  Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: a review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[37]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgments: Participant and observer perceptions of intimacy, dominance, composure, and formality , 1999 .

[38]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[39]  M. Feldman,et al.  Electronic Mail and Organizational Communication: Does Saying Hi Really Matter? , 1998 .

[40]  Suprateek Sarker,et al.  Systems development by virtual project teams: a comparative study of four cases , 2003 .

[41]  Qing Peng,et al.  Asynchronous team support: Perceptions of the group problem solving process when using a CyberCollaboratory , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[42]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Getting a Clue , 1996 .

[43]  Michael Bieber,et al.  Collaborative examinations for asynchronous learning networks: evaluation results , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[44]  Li Lin,et al.  A Project Task Coordination Model for Team Organization in Concurrent Engineering , 2002, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl..

[45]  H. Gemünden,et al.  The impact of information technology deployment on trust, commitment and value creation in business relationships , 2004 .

[46]  R E Smith,et al.  Examination of the factorial validity of the Group Environment Questionnaire. , 1994, Research quarterly for exercise and sport.

[47]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  Computer-mediated and face-to-face groups: who makes riskier decisions? , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[48]  Jamie A. Dyce,et al.  Factorial Validity of the Group Environment Questionnaire Among Musicians , 1996 .

[49]  R. Kelly Rainer,et al.  Impact of User Satisfaction and Trust on Virtual Team Members , 2002, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[50]  F. Erdem,et al.  Cognitive and affective dimensions of trust in developing team performance , 2003 .

[51]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  On the evaluation of structural equation models , 1988 .

[52]  J. Walther.  Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time , 1995 .

[53]  R. P. McDonald,et al.  Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[54]  Penelope Sue Greenberg,et al.  Creating and Sustaining Trust in Virtual Teams , 2007 .

[55]  Rosalie J. Ocker,et al.  The mediating effect of group development on satisfaction in a virtual and mixed-mode environment , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[56]  David G. Novick,et al.  Conversational effectiveness in multimedia communications , 1995, Inf. Technol. People.

[57]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  Lisrel 8: Structural Equation Modeling With the Simplis Command Language , 1993 .

[58]  Dezhi Wu,et al.  Understanding Time and its Relationship to Individual Time Management , 2010 .

[59]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  The Impact of Knowledge Coordination on Virtual Team Performance Over Time , 2007, MIS Q..

[60]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. ALN-mediated teamwork , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[61]  S. Carless,et al.  Cohesion : Conceptual and measurement issues. Author's reply , 2000 .

[62]  Sue Newell,et al.  An Analysis of Trust Among Globally Distributed Work Teams in an Organizational Setting , 2007 .

[63]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Technology, Group Process, and Group Outcomes: Testing the Connections in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Groups , 1997, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[64]  J. McGrath.  Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP) , 1991 .

[65]  Arthur Tatnall.  Web Portal Research Issues , 2009 .

[66]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  Perceived Cohesion in Small Groups , 1999 .

[67]  Merrill Warkentin,et al.  Training to improve virtual team communication , 1999, Inf. Syst. J..

[68]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  The Impacts of Emoticons on Message Interpretation in Computer-Mediated Communication , 2001 .

[69]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams , 2000 .

[70]  Chris Sauer.  Changing the old order: sequencing organizational and information technology change to achieve successful organizational transformation , 1997 .

[71]  Benjamin H. Detenber,et al.  Getting to Know You: Exploring the Development of Relational Intimacy in Computer-mediated Communication , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[72]  Jolene Galegher,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication for Intellectual Teamwork: An Experiment in Group Writing , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[73]  Richard Baskerville,et al.  Durability of online teamworking: patterns of trust , 2006, Inf. Technol. People.

[74]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999 .

[75]  A. Carrón,et al.  The Development of an Instrument to Assess Cohesion in Sport Teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire , 1985 .

[76]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research: a note of caution , 1995 .

[77]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[78]  T.C.E. Cheng,et al.  On Some Issues of Information Resource Management in the 1990s , 1992 .

[79]  Albert V. Carron,et al.  Cohesion: Conceptual and Measurement Issues , 2000 .

[80]  Russell Spears,et al.  COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION, DEINDIVIDUATION AND GROUP DECISION-MAKING , 1991 .

[81]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[82]  Sajda Qureshi,et al.  Adaptiveness in Virtual Teams: Organisational Challenges and Research Directions , 2001 .

[83]  Raymond E. Levitt,et al.  Interpersonal trust in cross-functional, geographically distributed work: A longitudinal study , 2004, Inf. Organ..

[84]  Blake Ives,et al.  Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research , 2004, DATB.

[85]  Russell Spears,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication, De-Individuation and Group Decision-Making , 1991, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

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

[87]  Daniel J. McAllister.  Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations , 1995 .

[88]  Lyman W. Porter,et al.  Managerial attitudes and performance , 1968 .