The virtual environment: the "how-to" of studying collaboration and performance of geographically dispersed teams

Virtual teams are comprised of members who are located in more than one geographic location. This team trait has mandated the need for various forms of computer-conferencing communication (CMC), including video-conferencing systems, collaborative software systems, and internet/intranet systems, in order to coordinate the efforts of each member. The question becomes, given these various CMC's, what is the team members' ability to effectively collaborate internally and to what extent does this ability drive team performance? In this paper, I discuss hypotheses that relate to how variations in internal collaboration and the degree of face-to-face communication can be expected to affect effective communication can be expected to affect effective outcomes such as performance (i.e. quantity, quality, and speed), innovation, and member satisfaction. In addition, a research design is suggested and corresponding measurement scales are developed that can be used to evaluate the significance of the hypotheses.

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

[2]  J. Dutton,et al.  The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis , 1986 .

[3]  G. Graen,et al.  AN EXAMINATION OF LEADERSHIP AND EMPLOYEE CREATIVITY: THE RELEVANCE OF TRAITS AND RELATIONSHIPS , 1999 .

[4]  Russell Spears.  Computer-mediated communication , 1995 .

[5]  L. Adrianson,et al.  Group processes in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication , 1991 .

[6]  Ruth Wageman.  Groups in context , 1999 .

[7]  D. L. Gladstein.  Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. , 1984 .

[8]  J. Oakley,et al.  Leadership Processes in Virtual Teams and Organizations , 1999 .

[9]  J. Utterback,et al.  Uncertainty and Technical Communication Patterns , 1985 .

[10]  John E. Ettlie,et al.  INNOVATIVE ATTITUDES, VALUES, AND INTENTIONS IN ORGANIZATIONS [1] , 1982 .

[11]  M. Schrage.  Shared Minds: The New Technologies of Collaboration , 1990 .

[12]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  The driving forces in the virtual society , 1999, CACM.

[13]  J. Bohn,et al.  Adjustment to work , 1973 .

[14]  Anne P. Massey,et al.  Getting It Together: Temporal Coordination and Conflict Management in Global Virtual Teams , 2001 .

[15]  C. Handy.  Trust and the virtual organization , 1999 .

[16]  N. Ashkanasy,et al.  Communicating trustworthiness and building trust in interorganizational virtual organizations , 2001 .

[17]  J. C. Henderson,et al.  Managing I/S Design Teams: A Control Theories Perspective , 1992 .

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

[19]  Poppy Lauretta McLeod,et al.  An Assessment of the Experimental Literature on Electronic Support of Group Work: Results of a Meta-Analysis , 1992, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[20]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. , 1992 .

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

[22]  J. L. Price,et al.  Handbook of Organizational Measurement , 1975 .

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

[24]  Susan E. Yager,et al.  Everything's coming up virtual , 1997, CROS.

[25]  B. Beersma,et al.  A theory-based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace , 2001 .

[26]  A. H. Brayfield,et al.  AN INDEX OF JOB SATISFACTION , 1951 .

[27]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.

[28]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Group processes in computer-mediated communication☆ , 1986 .