Virtual Teams
and
Computer Mediated
Communication Systems
BY: Jordan Shropshire
February 5, 2005
Presentation Topics



Background on virtual teams and
computer mediated communications
systems
A survey of virtual team literature
A survey of computer mediated
communications systems
Food for Thought
Question:

What is the relationship between a
virtual team and a computer mediated
communications system?
Relationship advice
Answer:

Computer mediated communications
system (CMCS) support the
communication activities of virtual
teams.
Food for Thought
Question:

Why cover virtual teams and computer
mediated communications systems
(CMCS) in the same presentation?
Food for Thought
Answer:

Virtual teams and CMCS are both
unique artifacts, and each warrants its
own discussion.
However:
Food for Thought
computer mediated
communication system
rely on
support
virtual team
The reliance of virtual teams on their
communication systems is strong.
Food for Thought
Additionally, the relationship between virtual
teams and their CMCS yields many interesting
questions.
Therefore:
Many research articles have justified discussing
both artifacts simultaneously.
Food for Thought
Question:

Is a discussion of CMCS and virtual
teams a management topic or a MIS
topic?
Answers & Questions
Answer:
The answer depends on who “owns” these artifacts.
Which begs the following question:
Question:
Who owns the virtual team artifact and who owns the
CMCS artifact?
-There is more one method for answering this question.
Artifact Ownership – Method 1

Ownership of an artifact could be
determined by creating a taxonomy
which could trace an artifact back to the
reference discipline of its origin.
Taxonomy

Taxonomy of the virtual team artifact can be
traced to management as the reference
discipline:
Management
Organizational Behavior
Organizations
Teams
Virtual Teams
Taxonomy

The computer mediated communication
system artifact can be traced to MIS as its
reference discipline:
MIS
Information System
Group Support System
CMCS
Taxonomy


In summation, according to the method
which organizes artifact ownership
based on taxonomy, the virtual team
artifact belongs to management, and
the CMCS artifact belongs to MIS.
In this method, ownership is absolute.
Artifact ownership – Method 2


Ownership of an artifact could be
assigned to the discipline which
developed the artifact.
In this method, ownership is not
absolute. More than one discipline can
lay valid claim to some degree of
ownership of the artifact.
Management – MIS continuum

Where would the virtual team artifact and the CMCS
artifact reside on a continuum?
Management – MIS Artifact Ownership Continuum
Management
MIS
Management – MIS Continuum

CMCS, as an artifact, belongs almost completely to
MIS. The virtual team artifact belongs to MIS, but is
shared with management.
Management – MIS Artifact Ownership Continuum
Management
MIS
Virtual teams
Artifact
CMCS
Artifact
Support
Assertion:


CMCS, as an artifact, belongs almost
completely to MIS. The virtual team artifact
belongs to MIS, but is shared with
management.
To affirm this assertion, an test was
conducted.
Researchable Question:
The assertion was operationalized into the
following researchable questions:
Is the virtual team artifact developed more in
MIS literature or management literature?
Is the CMCS artifact is developed in MIS
literature or management literature?
Assumptions:
The research questions are based on the theory
that artifact development is directly related to
artifact ownership. For example:
If a given research discipline develops 90% of the
theory for a particular subject, then that research
discipline is assumed to “own” 90% of the artifact.
Assumptions:


For the purposes of this study, an article which
discussed a given topic was assumed to have
contributed to the state of knowledge for that topic.
Each article is considered to have made an equal
contribution to the development of knowledge of an
artifact.
test



Searches of the top 25 MIS journals and the top 25
management journals were conducted, to identify
articles which discuss virtual teams and articles which
discuss CMCS.
The top 25 MIS journals were taken from
Mylonopoulos et al’s 2001 ranking of journals.
The top 25 management journals were taken from
Johnson et al’s 1994 ranking of journals.
Test results
Virtual Teams CMCS
MIS .75
.25
Management
1.000
.0000
MIS accounted for nearly three quarters of all
contributions to the virtual team artifact, and
all mention of CMCS.
Management - MIS Continuum

According to the test results, the continuum
should actually look like this:
Management – MIS Artifact Ownership Continuum
Management
MIS
Virtual teams
Artifact
74.24%
CMCS
Artifact
100.%
Summary of Methods 1 & 2:

Method 1:
Management claims ownership of the virtual team
artifact, and MIS owns the CMCS artifact.

Method 2:
The virtual team artifact belongs more to MIS than it
does to management. MIS has sole ownership of
CMCS.
Virtual Teams
What is a Virtual Team?
A: A global virtual team is a group of geographically and temporally dispersed individuals
who are assembled via technology to accomplish an organizational task.
B: Virtual teams are composed of coworkers geographically and organizationally linked
through telecommunications and information technologies attempting to achieve
organizational task.
C: A global virtual team is an example of a boundaryless network organization form where
a temporary team is assembled on an as-needed basis for the duration of a task and
staffed by members from different countries.
D: “Virtual teams” are geographically distributed workers who collaborate on a variety of
workplace tasks.
E: Virtual teams are groups of geographically distributed and/or temporally dispersed
individuals brought together via information and telecommunications technologies.
F: Virtual teams are composed of two or more individuals engaged in a lasting
relationship, pursuing a common interest or goal, who influence each other through
social interactions, formal and/or informal structures, and a sense of group
membership.
And the answer is:

They are all correct to a certain extent, but:
Does a virtual team have to be geographically separated?
Does a virtual team have to be temporally separated?
Could three people working toward a common goal, who
work in the same building, at the same time each day,
but only communicate via email be considered a virtual
team?
What is a Virtual Team?

There are many perceptions of what
constitutes a virtual team. A better
question to ask is:
What is the difference between a team
and a virtual team?
Team vs. Virtual Team

An universally accepted definition of a team comes from
Cohen et al (1997*):
A team is a collection of individuals who are
interdependent in their tasks, who share responsibility
for outcomes, who see themselves and who are seen by
others as an intact social entity embedded in one or
more larger social systems, and who manage their
relationship across organizational boundaries.
*At last count, Cohen’s paper was cited over 260 times.
Team vs. Virtual Team
How does a virtual team differ from the
definition of a team? Possible dimensions
include:
- Geographic distribution
- Temporal distribution
- Reliance on information technology for team
communications
The preceding dimensions were adopted from Griffith et al 2003
A State of “Virtualness”

Can one team be more virtual than another?
Traditional – Virtual Continuum
Traditional
Pure Virtual
Some combination of factors which make up the “virtualness”
aspect of a team account for how virtual the team is.
The concept of virtualness is adopted from Griffith et al (2003 MISQ)
A State of “Virtualness”


The pure virtual never meets face to face.
Traditional teams meet only face to face,
and require no telecommunication support
for team communications. (This team is becoming
quite rare.)

A growing majority of work teams are
somewhere between pure virtual and
traditional.
Major Research Areas





This review of virtual team literature covers
the following:
Team Design
Culture Differences
Trust
Performance
The some of the format and contents of this review were borrowed
from Powell et al’s (2004) excellent virtual team literature
review.
Team Design


This aspect of the virtual team artifact is
important because the structure of the virtual
team has great impact on the team’s ability to
share information.
-Traditional teams have been found to
outperform virtual teams in their ability to
efficiently share information and engage in
effective planning, (Galegher & Kraut, 1994).
Team design research has been conducted to
determine methods for designing virtual
teams to avoid such pitfalls.
Team Design


- Structuring the virtual team to include
periodic face to face meetings are
crucial to successful teams. (Demeyer,
1991)
- Ramesh and Dennis, 2002 further
concluded that face to face meetings
early in the virtual team’s life cycle help
define the project definition.
Team Design

- Research has proven that team
building exercises, establishing group
norms, and specifying a clear structure
contribute to virtual team success.
(Kaiser et al, 2000)
Culture Clash


Virtual teams cross functional,
geographic, and temporal boundaries. It
is therefore important to identify and
understand cultural differences.
- Cultural differences can cause
difficulties in coordination, and further
complicate team communications.
(Kayworth et al 2000)
Culture Clash

- Problems associated with cultural
differences can be minimized if team
members make an effort to understand
and accept differences. (Robey et al
2000)
Trust

Trust is a very important virtual team topic.
It is difficult to develop trust without
meeting face to face. Trust is crucial for
completion of team projects. (Jarvenpaa et
all 1999)
Trust

- In 1999 Jarvenpaa et al developed a trust
model known as the Swift Trust Model to
explain the paradigm which occurs when
virtual teams must quickly build trust
relationships:
Team members begin by assuming everybody is
trustworthy, and throughout the course of the
project, the team members seek affirmation of the
trust.
Trust


- Virtual teams which exhibit higher
trust have better social communication,
positive leadership, and less
uncertainty. (Jarvenpaa et al 1999)
- High trust teams may develop through
the use of communication training.
(Warkentin et al, 1999)
Performance


Because virtual teams are a “subspecies”
of teams, comparing their performance
outputs with traditional teams is a wellresearched topic.
-It has been found that virtual teams do
not always outperform as well as
traditional teams.(Warkentin et al 1999)
Performance


- Many research articles have concluded
there is no major difference in
performace with respect to vitual teams
and traditional teams.(Burke et al,
1998)
-Kaiser et al (2000) conducted a study
to determine which factors contribute to
successful virtual team performance.
Computer Mediated
Communications Systems
Question

What is a computer mediated
communication system?
Answer:

-
Computer mediated communications systems
are computer-based systems that enable
entry, storage, processing and distribution of
digitized information.
Rice et al (1990 Social Networks)
Examples of CMCS include:
email and voicemail systems
video conferencing
text retrieval systems
video conferencing systems
Synchronous
vs.
Asynchronous

CMCS are either synchronous or
asynchronous:
Synchronous – communicating at the same time
Instant messaging
Asynchronous – communicating at different times
Email
voicemail
discussion forums
CMCS research

Much research regarding the CMCS artifact is
concerned with the lack of richness in
communications: most notably the absence of
paraverbal and non-verbal communications.
Because of the missing media richness, CMCS
teams have a harder time communicating
than traditional teams. (Mcgrath &
Hollingshead, 1994)
CMCS research

An emerging topic in CMCS literature is structuring
the CMCS to facilitate desired group attributes. For
example:
To foster creativity groups are structured for maximum
anonymity, to enable members to make contributions without
attaching their names.
Another example includes memory. To facilitate memory, all
typed comments are stored, and all members can retrieve these
documents to remind themselves of what others said.
(Examples from Dennis et al MISQ 2003)
Quick Summation
A computer mediated communication
system is an example of a group
support system; supports the needs of
teams who communicate in a nontraditional manner.