Week 09: Virtual Teams

CMGT 500 Week 9: Virtual teams:

This week we learned the challenges and value of teamwork and the benefits it can bring an organization when the team is highly functional.  Often times teams fracture and some of the blame can be placed at the feet of rookie managers who favor one employee to the exclusion of the others (Hill, 1995) or when a team is neglected by senior management and end up working in seclusion and don’t seek help when mistakes begin (Paul, 2001). Contrary goals must both be met to guarantee a functional team such as embracing the individual while stressing the group’s goals (Hill, 1995).  Those group dynamics can become even more stressed when the group is spread out geographically and cultural differences lead to misunderstandings (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).  The authors found that when these groups found common ground in the tasks assigned to them as well as a willingness to communicate beyond scheduled conference times, those faultlines can be mitigated.  Teams that are spread across time zones, even continents become what Stough, Eom, and Buckenmyer call virtual teams and when done right, these teams can really propel an organization forward(2000).

Stough, Eom, and Buckenmyer saw virtual teams as groups of workers who were scattered across locations, time zones, and functions to capitalize on individual skills and the organization’s information technology.  Virtual teams were especially valuable in international organizations as well as domestic companies that were horizontally structured.  In this context, a manager can move from division to division building contacts among these teams and that would pay off when the next crisis hit.

 To drive their idea home, the authors cited Sun Microsystems as a case study of how virtual teams can effectively meet customer demands while creating a leaner organization.  One in particular, “the SunExpress’ Customer Order Cycle Team” (p. 375) had members in four states and another two in other countries.  This group would turnaround orders from major customers in three days.  The team never met face-to-face but instead relied on weekly conference calls.  The authors found a few virtual teams inside Sun Microsystems that became dysfunctional (without exploring why) but they found a great majority of the virtual teams enjoyed similar success as the Customer Order Cycle Team.  

Virtual teams are not a guarantee of success and demand manager attention (Stough et. al, 2000). Not every workers is mentally wired to work on their own, some need the office culture to function (Stough et. al, 2000).  But the conclusion of the authors was that globalization provided opportunities for companies to “mobilize hidden manpower” (p. 377) by developing virtual teams.  Echoing Hinds and Mortensen, the authors found the teams can be high functioning when they communicate often. Communication builds trust and even in a virtual world, trust remains the foundation of a strong team.  

References

 Hill, L. (1995). Managing your team. Harvard Business School. (pp. 1-22).

Hinds, P. H., & Mortensen, M. (2005) Understanding conflict in geographically distributed

     teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context and spontaneous

      communication. Organization Science, 16. 290-307.

Levy, Paul. (2001). The Nut Island effect: When good teams go wrong. Harvard Business    

     Review, pp. 5-12.

Stough, S., Eom, S., & Buckenmyer, J. (2000). Virtual teaming: A strategy for moving your

     Organization into the new millennium. Industrial Management & Data Systems 100. 370-378.