Cohesion and Performance in Virtual Teams: An Empirical Investigation

Work groups are of critical importance to organizational effectiveness. Whether group members can function together cohesively affects the performance of a team. Therefore, the relationship between group cohesion and performance has been the focus of many studies. With advances in information technology, virtual teams have been employed in firms for a variety of tasks. Compared to face-to-face teams, however, virtual teams exhibit different characteristics. How cohesiveness is related to performance in virtual teams then becomes an interesting research question. In this paper, we develop a model of the relationship between cohesion and performance based on a synthesis of the existing literature. We empirically investigate this relationship by studying 22 virtual groups over four months. Our results reveal that in virtual teams, cohesiveness tends to influence performance over time, while performance has a reciprocal impact on cohesion as well.

[1]  Beth H. Jones,et al.  Impact of Communication Medium and Computer Support on Group Perceptions and Performance: A Comparison of Face-to-Face and Dispersed Meetings , 1993, MIS Q..

[2]  Hayward P. Andres.  A comparison of face‐to‐face and virtual software development teams , 2002 .

[3]  F. H. Adler.  Cybernetics, or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. , 1949 .

[4]  P. Hanges,et al.  A control system model of organizational motivation: Theoretical development and applied implications , 1987 .

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

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

[7]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Media and Group Cohesion: Relative Influences on Social Presence, Task Participation, and Group Consensus , 2001, MIS Q..

[8]  Fred Luthans,et al.  Social Desirability Response Effects: Three Alternative Models , 1983 .

[9]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[10]  Michael Ahearne,et al.  Moderating Effects of Goal Acceptance on the Relationship between Group Cohesiveness and Productivity , 1997 .

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

[12]  Mark Shanley,et al.  The Importance of Organizational Context, I: A Conceptual Model of Cohesiveness and Ineffectiveness in Work Groups , 1997 .

[13]  C. Gersick.  Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development , 1988 .

[14]  Claus W. Langfred.  Is Group Cohesiveness a Double-Edged Sword? , 1998 .

[15]  M. Gordon,et al.  The “Science of the Sophomore” Revisited: from Conjecture to Empiricism , 1986 .

[16]  S. Seashore.  Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group , 1955 .

[17]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[18]  Philip M. Podsakoff,et al.  Effects of Feedback Sign on Group Goal Setting, Strategies, and Performance , 1994 .

[19]  H. Klein,et al.  An Integrated Control Theory Model of Work Motivation , 1989 .

[20]  Kregg Aytes,et al.  Media effects on the development of cohesion and process satisfaction in computer-supported workgroups - An analysis of results from two longitudinal studies , 2001, Inf. Technol. People.