!
!
!
CROSS%CULTURAL*PROJECT*
MANAGEMENT*AND*ITS*
VALUE*TO*HUMAN*RESOURCE*
MANAGEMENT**
A!LITERATURE!REVIEW!
)
)
)
Tutorial:)Thursday)10)am)
Task)3a)
Word)count:)1587)
Abstract
The purpose of this literature review is to examine contemporary research on cross-cultural
project management in general, but also the increasing work in global virtual project teams
and what challenges they currently face. Additionally, it is intended to provide findings
connected to human resource management and to identify missing aspects for future research.
The literature suggests similar problems that must be overcome by global virtual teams,
originating in the missing face-to-face interaction as well as spatial and temporal boundaries
given the global distribution of team members. These issues can mostly be applied to human
resource management and lead to a transformation of competencies and experiences required
affecting employee selection and development.
It must be pointed out that the literature is still very broad and misses recent changes in the
labour market. The ideas of work redesign and specific strategies in job training as well as the
consistently changing workforce should increasingly be addressed to suggest solutions in
future research.
Introduction
With globalisation leading to a more and more connected and integrated world, national
borders do not limit companies anymore to stay within their country. Instead, firms are
becoming international, and so is project management, which leads to various changes in the
manner of project team work (Oertig & Buergi 2006). With the development of global virtual
teams, cross-cultural project teams are now collaborating from countries across the world
within different time zones using virtual communication. According to Kloppenborg (2010),
despite virtual project teams having the advantage of autonomy and consist of talents spread
across the world, there are several challenges to be managed. These challenges can be minor
problems easily to be overcome in comparison to comprehensive projects, but their impact
can also be problematic (Valdellon 2014). Human resource management is consequently
changing and emphasis must be directed towards selection and recruitment practices as well
as job training strategies.
This review is aiming to examine the general approach in cultural diversity considering
multicultural and highly diversified workforces. It is additionally intending to provide an
overview of contemporary research on global virtual teams in project management and how
the findings deliver value for human resource management.
Discussion
Understanding national culture
Considering management in multinational companies and therefore organisations with a
workforce from several cultures, specifically project management can be linked to differences
that are originating in national cultures (Hofstede 1983). Hofstede (1983, p.2) defines national
culture as “collective mental programming: it is that part of our conditioning that we share
with other members of our nation, region or group”. Based on research implemented between
1967 and 1978, Hofstede (1983) distinguished national culture by identifying 4 dimensions
(individualism versus collectivism, large versus small power distance, strong versus weak
uncertainty avoidance and masculinity versus femininity).
Workforce diversity
Ely & Thomas (2001) developed three perspectives of cultural diversity that variously
influence multicultural work groups (the integration-and-learning perspective, the access-andlegitimacy perspective, and the discrimination-and-fairness perspective), summarised in
Figure 1 below. Ely and Thomas (2001) state that the critical dimension was particularly the
connection between cultural diversity and work processes, which accounts for the mixed
results in the link between cultural diversity and workgroup outcomes (Barinaga 2007). This
research therefore provides a theory of how work groups utilise cultural diversity for member
development and work processes.
!
Figure 1: Summary of Work Group Diversity Perspectives
Source: Ely & Thomas (2001, p.248)
Barinaga (2007) criticises their research to miss the relevant point that cultural diversity
becomes sensible in multinational work groups as the countries of origin seem to become less
important as opposed to how the organisation itself approaches cultural diversity. Barinaga
(2007) further explains that diversity in culture is no longer a conformity determining
behaviour, but an opportunity that can be integrated as an available resource to understand
actions and processes. Today, workforce diversity is essential for organisational success
reflected in several different aspects (Community Foundations of Canada 2017) and by its
integration, a competitive advantage can be achieved (Johnson 2017).
Challenges of cross-cultural global virtual teams
A consequence of globalisation is the development of global virtual teams (GVT). One
definition of GVT is that they are:
not only separated by time and space, but differ in national, cultural and linguistic
attributes, and use information and communication technologies as their primary
means of communication and work structure (Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon
2004, p.15).
Contemporary research has been conducted for the rising number of GVT that are working in
matrix managed project teams, and their work has generally been summarised to be
reasonably complex (Oertig & Buergi 2006).
Oertig and Buergi (2006) presented an empirical research on a multinational company from
Switzerland (ABC) studying the predominantly occurring difficulties that managers face in
the leadership of cross-cultural virtual project teams in a matrix organisation. According to
this, three major challenges and another four minor sections arose remarkably, the most
important aspects summarised in Table 1 and 2 below.
Table 1: Major challenges in leading cross-cultural virtual project teams
Major challenge
The Leadership Challenge
Important aspects
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
Virtual aspects of
communication
-!
-!
-!
-!
Defining feature: complexity
No real authority over employees
Development of trust and respect essential
Compromising different time zones:
working around the clock to use more of the day
Lacking face-to-face contact:
“office atmosphere”, personal conversations & body language
missing
Different location of project leader and project manager can be ideal
or disruptive depending on distribution of team members
Importance of regular face-to-face meetings by original establishment
of project team
Essential for trust development: Face-to-face contact
Linking a face to a name: crucial for team members to really know
each other
! leads to higher efficiency and better problem solving
Developing trust
-! Built over time
-! High turnover of project leaders, managers and members hinders trust
development
-! Time-consuming for newcomers
Source: Oertig and Buergi (2006, pp.24-26)
Table 2 Minor sections in managing cross-cultural virtual project teams
Minor sections
Explanation
Definition of team operating guidelines
Transparency
Frequent follow-ups to ensure equal level of information
One-to-one contact team leader with key employees
Creating a positive atmosphere
Managing the people
Give positive feedback on performance
How to deal with “challenging” employees?
Difficult to bridge the language and culture gap
Cultural differences in perceiving attitudes mainly between USA and
Managing the language
Europe and between the USA/Europe and Japan
and cultural issues
-! Key issue: recognition and interpretation of different communication
patterns
-! Japan major issue: harmony extremely important
-! Relationship between project teams and line functions
-! Tendency for project team representatives to listen more to the line
Managing the matrix
function management than to the project leader
-! Line functions do not report across to each other
Source: Oertig and Buergi (2006, pp.26-29)
Managing the task
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
-!
Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon (2004) stated similar challenges, but also referred to the
necessity of electronic communication, as technology can potentially fail in critical situations.
To go even further, without electronic devices and the help of technology global virtual teams
can simply not exist (Daim et al. 2012).
Several challenges that have been identified in Oertig and Buergi´s empirical research align
with findings of other authors. The virtual aspect seems to be closely connected to building
relationships, which involves the development of trust as well as misunderstandings.
Concurrently, virtuality is the cause of several major issues.
Not having worked as a team before and then accomplishing a decent amount of work
individually or only with a limited number of other project team members plays a crucial role
in the lack of trust amongst team members (Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon 2004;
Cummings, Espinosa & Pickering 2009). Particularly as trust is one of the main causes for a
project to fail, besides the problem of easily neglecting team members in the process, it is
very important to establish regular face-to-face contact between project team members and
the project manager (Daim et al. 2012).
Adding to Oertig and Buergi, misunderstandings originating in the different communication
strategies and perceptions of cultures can easily increase stress within the team and heighten
conflicts in general, which are in turn solved differently in every ethnicity (Zakaria,
Amelinckx &Wilemon 2004). Because the individual project team members are used to
communicate under different standards and are only familiar with certain behaviours that are
generally accepted in their own culture, building cross-cultural norms and complying with
them can be problematic (Krumm, Terwiel & Hertel 2013; Symonds 2012). Additionally,
English as the business language itself plays a bigger role in miscommunication than
generally assumed and electronic contact intensifies this issue even more given the missing
body language and tone of voice in most ways of interaction (Zakaria, Amelincks & Wilemon
2004; Daim et al. 2012 and Zander, Mockaitis & Butler 2012).
Cummings, Espinosa & Pickering (2009) specifically examined the unavoidable spatial and
temporary limitations that are characteristic of GVT. They came to the result that the issue of
working in different time zones can be problematic if there are no overlapping working hours
to communicate effectively and technology is not always a suitable solution whatsoever.
Implications for Human Resource Management
The challenges for GVT discussed can be transferred to human resource management (HRM)
in cross-cultural project teams in several ways. Prior to the existence of a global team, it must
be created by choosing the right team members, keeping in mind that every team leader and
members have different perceptions of essential characteristics (Zander, Mockaitis & Butler
2012).
Particularly in cross-cultural and virtual project teams, human capital is an important factor to
either hinder or improve the team and abilities required are increasingly employee centric
(Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon 2004; Harvey, Noviceviv & Garrison 2004).
The different topics and phases mostly affected and therefore specifically relevant for HRM in
those teams have been summarised by Hertel, Geister & Konradt (2005) in a lifecycle model,
shown in Figure 2.
!
Figure 2: Key activities in the lifecycle of virtual team management
Source: Hertel, Geister & Konradt (2005, p. 73)
!
Whilst there are several issues that need to be considered in HRM, this review concentrates on
staffing and personnel selection as well as employee training.
Staffing and personnel selection
Facing the issue of finding the right employees to master the challenges of GVT effectively,
several authors recommend comparable strategies. Given the widespread base of
characteristics that is needed to succeed in a highly-diversified project team and the fact that
most of those are underlying traits, the selection process can be quite difficult (Harvey,
Novicevic & Garrison 2004). It is mostly agreed that team members should either possess
cross-cultural capabilities in terms of being able to think, act and communicate globally or
ideally already have experience in working across different cultures (Zakaria, Amelinckx &
Wilemon 2004). Otherwise, it is central, to have at least the motivation to put effort into
gaining those missing competencies (Zander, Mockaitis & Butler 2012). Hence, it is essential
to carefully select the project team members not only based on expertise, but also on
technological and cross-cultural knowledge (Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon 2004). Keeping
these details in mind is a good way to approach the issue of virtual communication.
Krumm, Terwiel & Hertel (2013) consequently suggested a four-dimensional structure
emerging from a large commonly agreed list of KSA´s when the teamwork happens mostly
via technology. Those have been labelled “working conscientiously, coping with stress and
ambiguity, openness and perspective taking and knowledge about other cultures” (p.41). A
slightly different summary of the components of KSA´s in cross-cultural competence has
been made in Figure 3.
!
Figure 3: Components of KSA´s for cross-cultural competencies
Source: Civil-Military Cooperation Centre of Exellence (CCOE) (2016, n.p.)
Whilst the literature goes into detail with things to consider and include in the staffing and
selection practice, it misses clear suggestions and strategies to overcome cross-cultural and
virtual issues.
Employee training
Like the previous aspect discussed, most literature agrees on the importance of employee
training for the work in GVT. Preliminary cross-cultural training as well as coaching and
mentoring is essential in order to prepare for a virtual and multicultural collaboration
(Zakaria, Amelinckx & Wilemon 2004, Zander, Mockaitis & Butler 2012). Daim et al. (2012)
refer to the example of Intel, a multinational company, which sends employees frequently to
other countries. Particularly when establishing a new project, meeting team members
personally and gaining an understanding of culture and different working situations is a usual
practice within Intel given the virtual communication needed in the future (Daim et al. 2012).
According to Oertig and Buergi, permanent investment in language improvement and crosscultural communication practice is highly valuable (2006), emphasising the significance of
employee development even more.
Although several aspects and issues for HRM in GVT are being addressed in the
contemporary literature, systematic research going deeper into important factors and strategies
in HRM that could easily improve the work of GVT is still missing and must prospectively be
concentrated on.
Conclusion
Despite the number of possible opportunities that can be utilised, the literature clearly
focusses on challenges for project management in cross-cultural GVT. While there is the need
to manage these issues in the near term, several aspects have been neglected and require
future research. Particularly in relation to human resource management, cultural and virtual
barriers have the potential to be overcome by adapting recent developments and ideas in the
field of HRM. Effective job training as well job redesign by including flexible working hours
and improved recruitment processes are clearly in need of deeper examination. Considering
the changing capabilities of the younger workforce, valuable staffing might even be possible
by integrating existing knowledge and contemporary ideas into personnel development.
References
Barinaga, E 2007, ‘´Cultural diversity´ at work: ´National culture´ as a discourse organizing
an international project group’, Human Relations, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 315-338, doi:
10.1177/0018726707075883,
Daim T, Ha A, Reutiman S, Hughes B, Pathak U, Bynum W, Bhatla A 2012, ‘Exploring the
communication breakdown in global virtual teams’, International Journal of Project
Management, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 199-212, doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.06.004
Civil-Military Cooperation Centre of Exellence (CCOE) 2016, Cross cultural competence
(CCC): From cultural understanding to cross cultural competence, viewed 30 May 2017,
http://www.cimic-coe.org/products/conceptual-design/cimic-innovation/advanced-culturalcompetence-aac/cross-cultural-competence-ccc/
Community Foundations of Canada: HR Council 2017, Diversity at work, viewed 30 May
2017, http://hrcouncil.ca/hr-toolkit/diversity-workforce-matters.cfm
Cummings J, Espinosa A, Pickering C 2009, ‘Crosisng spatial and temporal boundaries in
global distributed projects: A relational model of coordination delay, Information Systems
Research, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 420-439, doi: 10.1287/isre.1090.0239
Ely R & Thomas D 2001, ‘Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives
on Work Group Processes and Outcomes’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2,
pp. 229-273, doi: 10.2307/2667087
Harvey M, Novicevic M & Garrison G 2004, ‘Challenges to staffing global virtual teams’,
Human Resource Management Review, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 275-294, doi:
10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.06.005
Johnson R 2017, What are the advantages of a diverse workforce?, viewed 30 May 2017,
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-diverse-workforce-18780.html
Henderson L, Stackman R & Lindekilde R 2016, ‘The centrality of communication norm
alignment, role clarity, and trust in global project teams’, International Journal of Project
Management, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1717-1730, doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.09.012
Hertel G, Geister S & Konradt U 2005, ‘Managing virtual teams: A review of current
empirical research’, Human Resource Management Review, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 69-95, doi:
10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002
Hofstede G 1983, ‘Cultural dimensions for project management’, International Journal of
Project Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 41-48, doi: 10.1016/0263-7863(83)90038-8
Kloppenborg T 2012, Contemporary project management: organize, plan, perform, 2nd edn,
South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, Ohio
Krumm S, Terwiel K & Hertel G 2013, ‘Challenges in norm formation and adherence: The
knowledge, skills, and ability requirements of virtual and traditional cross-cultural teams’,
Journal of Personnel Psychology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 33-44, doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000077
Oertig M & Buergi T 2006, ‘The challenges of managing cross-cultural virtual project teams’,
Team Performance Management, vol. 12, no. 1/2, pp. 23-30, doi:
10.1108/13527590610652774
Symonds M 2012, Managing cross-cultural project teams, 8 June 2012, viewed 30 May
2017, http://blog.parallelprojecttraining.com/project-management-articles/managing-crosscultural-project-teams/
Valdellon L 2014, 5 tips for embracing cross-cultural differences on project teams, viewed 30
May 2017, https://www.wrike.com/blog/5-tips-for-embracing-cross-cultural-differences-onproject-teams/
Zakaria N, Amelinckx A & Wilemon D 2004, ‘Working together apart? Building a
knowledge-sharing culture for global virtual teams’, Creativity and Innovation Management,
vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 15-29, doi: 0.1111/j.1467-8691.2004.00290.x
Zander L, Mockaitis A & Butler C 2012, ‘Leading global teams’, Journal of World Business,
vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 592-603, doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2012.01.012