Best Practices for Managing
Collaborative Technologies and Virtual
Teams
University of North Texas
Information Systems Research Center &
Center for the Study of Work Teams
Dr. Jack D. Becker
Dr. Rodger Ballentine
Angelique Lee, Carole Townsley & Karon Tedford
CSWT...
Managing Collaborative Technologies
(CTs) & Virtual Teams (CTs):
The Five (5) Study Questions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
How effective are dispersed teams & what are
the key implementation factors and changes?
What collaborative tools are being used and
which are most successful?
Which tools are used to support which types of
collaborative activities? [… SKIP today]
How do high-performing virtual teaming
organizations align teaming efforts with their
collaborative technologies to maximize their
performance
What are the Best Practices of these highperforming virtual organizations?
1
Survey Sections: Virtual Teams (VT) &
Collaborative Technology (CT)


Glossary of terms; e.g., VT
Demographic Information
• Organizational & Individual




Organization’s Use of & One’s Personal
Involvement in Technology-Supported
Collaborative Tool Use & VT’s
Collaborative Tools/Activities
Management & Support Activities
Future Use
Virtual Team & Collaborative
Technology Survey -- Definitions

Collaborative Work Group (CWG)
A group of individuals that truly share information & work to create a
common understanding in order to accomplish a mutually shared work
objective

Virtual Team (VT)
Groups of people who work closely together for a shared objective
even though they are usually geographically separated by large
distances. Their primary interactions are through a combination of
collaborative technologies instead of face-to-face meetings


18 Collaborative Technology Tools
10 Collaborative Work Activities
2
18 Categories of
Collaborative Tools









E-mail & Electronic
Messaging
Audio Conferencing
Conference Room -- Video
Conferencing
Desktop -- Video
Conferencing
Group Scheduling &
Calendaring
Electronic Whiteboarding
Collaborative Presentation
Document Management
Group Authoring









Project Management
Knowledge Management
Discussion Databases
One-way Bulletin Boards
Work Flow Management
Web Browser
Personal Communication
Tools
Remote Dial-up Access
Group Decision Support
Systems
10 Collaborative Work
Activities





Meeting planning &
management
Sharing information
Creative idea
generation
Collaborative
problem solving &
decision making
Planning & task
coordination





Conflict resolution
Goal setting
Performance
monitoring &
evaluation
Communication for
member/group
support (team/trust
building, coaching)
Group leadership
3
41 Organizations in Sample























Abbott Laboratories (2)
Anderson Consulting (3)
Applied Materials (1)
ARCO (1)
AT&T Wireless Services (1)
AT Plastics (2)
AT&T (1)
Atlanta, City of (1)
BNSF (1)
Boeing, S. CA (1)
BP Exploration (1)
Brink's Inc. (1)
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (2)
Cisco (1)
Computer Aid, Inc. (8)
Consulting Today (2)
Cytec Fiberite, Inc. (2)
Dallas County Administration (1)
Deloitte & Touche LLP (10)
EDS (3)
Enron (1)
Ernst & Young LLP (4)
Enron (1)

ESC Enterprises (10)

First American Financial (10)
Frito-Lay, Inc. (3)
Heidrick & Struggles (1)
MBNA Hallmark Info. Services (3)
MEMC, Inc. (1)
Northrop Grumman (1)
ODR, Inc. (2)
OxyChem (1)
Royal Bank of Canada(1)
Royal Dutch Shell (1)
SC Johnson’s Wax (1)
Shell Oil (10)
Space (1)
Sprint (1)
Stockdales PL (1)
Sun Microsystems (1)
University of Central Florida (10)
University of North Texas (1)
VHA, Inc. (1)


















(Number of surveys sent in paratheses)
46 Usable Responses
Demographics
Responses Based upon:

41% Parent Company, 59% Subunits
Respondents Level in Firm:


22% CIO/VPs
41% Director/Managers
Area of Job Responsibility



51% IT Development/Support
14% CWG Member
6% CWG Technology Support
4
Demographics (continued)
Industries in Sample
Unknown
2%
Communications
4%
Other
20%
Computing/Technolgy
11%
Service/Retail
2%
Consulting
20%
Manufacturing
15%
Finance/Acct
9%
Oil & Gas
11%
Government
2%
Healthcare
4%
Organization & Individual
Virtual Teams Profile
Organization





Individual
5 - 10 VT’s
46% 2 - 5 yrs.
14 people/team
77% collaborate with
people outside
organization

46% multinational




2 - 4 VT’s
40% 2 yrs. or less
9 people/team
60% collaborate with
people outside
organization
34% multinational
5
Study Question #1

In general, how effective are dispersed
teams & what are the key implementation
factors and changes?
How Effective Are Virtual Teams?
Overall ... Modest Effectiveness

Responding to customer requirements [2.9]

Communication, feedback, etc. [2.8]

Planning tasks & setting goals [2.8]

Solving problems & making decisions [2.7]

Resolving conflict [2.2]
[1= Not effective; 2= Somewhat effective; 3= Effective; 4= Very Effective]
6
Most Important Factors for
Increasing VT Effectiveness













Communicating effectively w/o being face-to-face [3.6]
Standard set of usable collaborative tools [3.6]
Plan & manage task completion in a CWG [3.4]
Technology infrastructure [3.4]
Setting goals & assessing performance [3.4]
Problem-solving & decision-making in groups [3.3]
Level of trust among group members [3.3]
Group facilitation & leadership [3.3]
Planning & holding effective group meetings [3.2]
Ease of use of collaborative tools [3.1]
Training in Technology Tools [3.0]
Quality & Availability of Technical Support [3.0]
Training in how to work as a group [2.9]
[1=Not Important; 2=Somewhat Important; 3=Important; 4=Very important]
Typical Training That VT
Members May Receive ...
Only 50% of Organizations Actually
Provided CWG Training!
The most typical types of training provided
included:
• How to use technology tools
• How to collaborate effectively in a work group
• How to use technology infrastructure
• How to plan & hold meetings
• How to plan & manage tasks
7
Most Important VT
Implementation Factors









Supportive climate [3.5]
Technology infrastructure [3.4]
Standard set of tools [3.4]
Training in how to use collaborative tools [3.3]
Quality & availability of technical support [3.3]
Involve the users in CT design [3.2]
Training in how to work in a group [3.2]
Communicating implementation strategy to
users [3.2]
Policies and Procedures supporting integration
of CTs and CWT [3.1]
[1=Not Important; 2=Somewhat Important; 3=Important; 4=Very important]
Organizational System
Changes Which Were Made ...
60% of Firms Noted Organizational Changes

Organizational restructuring for VTs (e.g., Network
Organization) [63%]

Customer/supplier technology connects [63%]

Developing lateral career paths [59%]

New HR Policies and Practices (e.g., Training in technology
& collaboration) [56%]

Senior management participation in VTs [52%]

Assessing CWG performance [52%]

New roles for IT function [52%]

Rewarding collaborative work group performance [44%]
8
Attitude or Performance
Changes Discovered
76% Reponded “Yes”. Of those ...

Improved work performance [64%]

Greater sense of ownership &
commitment [54%]

Longer work day (24-hour day)
[44%]

More job satisfaction [36%]

Increased job stress [28%]
Study Question #2

What collaborative tools are being
used and which are most
successful?
• How frequently are CTs being used and by
what percentage of employees is each tool
being used?
• How successful is each tool perceived to be?
and
9
4=Daily; 3=Wkly; 2=Monthly; 1=Yearly
Frequency of Use
4.0
3.0
2.0
4.0
3.5
2.8
2.8
2.7
2.5
2.1
1.0
1.9
1.6
1.5
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.0
Collaborative Tools
Common Collaborative
Tools

Email
•
•

Audio Conf.
•
•


•
Intel ProShare
•
PictureTel
Collab. Present

NetMeeting
PowerPoint
Doc. Mgmt.
•
•
•
PC Docs
Lotus Notes
MS Word
Desktop Vconf.
•
•

Audio Bridge
Phone Service/Sprint
Conf. Room Vconf.
•
•

Lotus Notes
MS Exchange
Group Calendaring
•
•

SoftBoard
SmartBoard
NetMeeting
Group Authoring
•
•

Lotus Notes
MS Outlook/Schedule
E-Whiteboarding
•
•
•

Intel ProShare
Sprint
NetMeeting
PC Docs
Project Mgmt.
•
MS Project
10
Common Collaborative
Tools

Knowledge Mgmt.
•
•

Discussion Dbase
•
•




Lotus Notes
Web
Lotus Notes
Laptops
Cell Phones
Remote Dial-Up
•
•
•

Netscape
Internet Explorer
Personal Comm.
•
•
Workflow Mgmt.
•
Web Browser
•
•
Lotus Notes
Web/Netscape
One-Way Bboard
•
•

Lotus Notes
PC Docs
Cisco
Apple Talk
PC Anywhere
GDSS
•
•
Cognos Power Play
BPCS
Percent Employee Usage
100%
Percent
75%
50%
25%
0%
Collaborative Tools
11
Frequency & Percent Usage
Combined ==> Pervasiveness
High correlation between
Frequency of use & Percent of
employees actually using tools
 Combined measures as a product:

• FREQ x PERCENT = Technology
Pervasiveness
• Measures “widespread use” of the
tool
Technology Pervasiveness
4=100%Employees Use Daily
4.00
3.48
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.01
2.00
1.78
1.69
1.50
1.30
1.11
1.00
0.80
0.93
0.59
0.50
0.47 0.41
0.58
0.32
0.27 0.18 0.27
0.15 0.10
0.00
Collaborative Tools
12
Success Index
4=Very Successful; 1=Very Unsuccessful
4.0
3.3
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.8
2.9
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.8
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.2
1.9
1.8
1.0
Collaborative Tools
Collaborative Tool Use
4.0
Discussion
Databases
3.0
Collaborative Presentation
Software
GDSS
Knowledge
23%
Mgmt.
27%
36%
Desktop Video
Conf.
22% 26%
E-Whiteboarding
57%
37%
Remote Access
Dial-up
Document
Mgmt.
67%
48%
31%
Audio
Conferencing
38%
Conference Room
Video Conf.
Project Mgmt.
58%
88%
40%
49%
Personal
64% Web Browser
Comm.
Tools
Email
Group Sched. &
Calendaring
One-Way Bulletin Boards
2.0
29%
34%
Workflow Mgmt.
E-Grp. Authoring
1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Frequency of Use (4=Daily); Bubble size = %Employee Usage
13
Collaboration Software and
Knowledge Management
6/13/2000
Study Question #4

How do high-performing virtual
teaming organizations align their
teaming efforts with their
collaborative technologies to
maximize their performance?
14
Benchmarking Technology &
Team Development
A New Model for VT Development

A 2-Dimensional Model
• Collaborative Work Group Formation
• Tuckman’s Teaming Stages Model
• Collaborative Tool Implementation
• Nolan-Norton Stage Model for IT Development

A Unified Stage Model Aligns
Development to Maximize Effectiveness
Virtual Teaming Grid Quadrants

Low Techno-Teaming [LowTech/LowTeam]
• Low Development in both the Collaborative Technology &
Collaborative Work Group Formation Stages

Teaming-Enthusiasm [LowTech/HighTeam]
• Collaborative Work Groups Methods Spreading
Quickly/Modest or No CT Growth

Techno-Enthusiasm [HighTech/LowTeam]
• Rapid CT Growth/Modest or No Team Formation

Virtual Teaming [HighTech/HighTeam]
• Seamless use of CT by Collaborative Work Groups (a.k.a.,
Virtual Teams)
15
Virtual Teaming Grid
VT Grid w/Pervasiveness & Effectivenss
20
Teaming-Enthusiasm
High Virtual Teaming
17.5
III.
16.0
Team-stage Effectiveness
15.2
IV.
15.6
15.2
15.0
13.2
12.8
12.0
12.0
11.2
10
10.0
9.2
6.0
7.2
6.9
6.4
13.2
12.5
11.6
10.0
9.6
8.1
7.8
11.6
11.6
9.3
9.2
9.0
9.0
8.4
8.1
8.4
7.8
7.5
7.2
8.1
6.9
5.4
4.8
4.2
4.8
II.
3.6
I.
Low Techno-Teaming
2.4
0
0.0
0.5
2.2
1.0
2.2
Techno-Enthusiasm
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Tool Pervasiveness
Study Question #5

What are the Best Practices of these
high-performing virtual organizations?
16
Approach Used: Compare High to
Low Virtual Teaming Organizations
Quadrant I - Low-Techo Teaming
Firms [18 organizational units in
sample]
 Quadrant IV -- High VT Firms
[8 organizational units in sample]


Quadrants II & III -- [Each have 10
organizational units in sample]
Best Practices Categories
Identified






Organization Structure &
Characteristics/Demographics
Most Important Factors for Increasing
VT Effectiveness
Training
Critical Success Factors for
Implementation
Organizational Restructuring
Impacts of Technology on Individual
Attitudes and Performance
17
Most High VT Organizations
in Sample are Rather Large!
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Quad 1
Quad 4
<=
25
0
25
0
-1
K
1K
-5
5K K
25 25
K
K
-1
10
0
0K 0K
-2
00
K
>=
20
0K
Count
Quad 1 vs Quad 4 By # of Employees
Employees
Most Important Factors for
Increasing VT Effectiveness

Factors Emphasized
More in High VTs
• CT tool training
• Quality/Availability of
Tech Support
• Ease of CT Use
• Face-to-face Kick-Off
Event

Factor Emphasized
Less in High VTs
• Group facilitation or
Leadership

Factors Noted in Both
High & Low VTs
• Communicating nonface-to-face
• Setting Well Defined
Goals
• Assessing Performance
• Plan & Manage Task
Completion
• Problem Solving & Group
Decision Making
• Standard set of CTs
18
Technology Training of Higher
Importance to High VT Group
Q1 vs Q4
Importance of Training in How To use Collaborative
Technology Tools
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
50%
28%
11%
0%
1
Q4
22%
13%
2
Q1
38%
33%
6%
3
4
0%
no
answ er
Face-to-face Kick-Off Event
Viewed as Very Important
Q1 vs Q4
Importance of Face-to-Face Kick-Off Event
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
50%
50%
Q1
38%
Q4
28%
11%
13%
6%
0%
1
2
3
6%
4
0%
no
answ er
19
Trust Viewed as a Critical
Factor
Q1 vs Q4
Importance of Level of Trust Among Group Members
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
63%
56%
Q1
38%
22%
0% 0%
1
Q4
17%
6%
0%
2
3
4
0%
no
answ er
Group Facilitation Viewed as Slightly
Less Important to High VT Group
Q1 vs Q4
Importance of Group Facilitation and/or Leadership
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
50%
56%
Q1
38%
Q4
22%
6%
11%13%
6%
0%
1
2
3
4
0%
no
answ er
20
Importance of Training

63% of High VT Organizations
received some training in CWG!

Only 28% of the Low TechnoTeaming Organizations received
CWG Training!
Dramatic Difference in “Required”
Training Requirements!
Q1 vs Q4: Training Required in How To Work Effectively as a Collaborative Work
Group
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Ta
s
q1
q4
ag
e
M
ee
an
d
ol
M
H
Pl
a
n
&
&
n
ks
gs
tin
So
lv
e
bl
em
or
at
e
e
at
ic
m
un
om
C
C
ol
la
b
ro
up
G
h
in
s
To
ol
Te
c
Pr
o
Pl
a
Te
ch
In
fr a
st
ru
ct
To
o
ur
e
ls
0%
21
Organizational Restructuring
Seen as Essential to Success
Q1 vs Q4: Organizational Changes Made
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
R
ng
As
se
ss
i
q1
q4
ew
ar
di
ng
Pe
rfo
rm
an
D
ce
ev
el
Pe
op
in
r
f
or
g
m
la
te
an
ra
ce
lp
at
hs
Tr
-c
ai
ni
ar
ng
ee
r
in
Te
ch
/T
ea
O
m
rg
s
R
N
es
ew
tru
I
T
ct
R
ur
ol
ed
es
(N
et
w
or
k
N
C
O
ew
on
rg
ne
)
S
ct
r.
in
M
g
gr
C
R
us
ol
to
es
m
er
s/
Su
pp
lie
rs
0%
Other Organizational Structural
Changes in High VT Firms
100% of High VT Firms have a
designated CWT Coordinator or
Manager
 63% of These Coordinators/
Managers report to a CIO/VP or
CEO

22
Changes in Employee Attitudes
and Performance Surface

100% of High VT Organizations
Experienced Changes in Employee
Attitudes and Performance

Only 60% of Low Techno-Teaming
Organizations Noted Changes
Improved Performance and
Less Stress! A Silver Bullet
Q1 vs Q4: Changes From Using Collaborative Technologies Affecting
Attitudes or Performance
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
ss
Sa
t is
fa
ct
io
M
n
or
e
Jo
b
Le
St
ss
re
ss
Ab
se
nt
/T
ur
no
ve
r
Lo
ng
er
Im
H
pr
ou
ov
rs
ed
Pe
rfo
rm
an
In
ce
cr
ea
se
d
M
or
al
e
St
re
Jo
b
q1
q4
M
or
e
itm
m
om
O
w
ne
rs
hi
p/
C
Le
ss
en
t
0%
23
What Next?

Deeper Statistical Analysis of Data
• Further Examination of Quadrants II & III
• Greater Analysis of CW Activities
Develop Stronger Arguments for
Best Practices: Case Studies
 Determine management practices
needed to evolve from one stage
to another:

• An Alignment Model for VT
Management Practices
24