© M.B. Watson-Manheim, May 2008 Global Virtual Teams Mary Beth Watson-Manheim Associate Professor Information & Decision Sciences University of Illinois,

© M.B. Watson-Manheim, May 2008

Global Virtual Teams

Mary Beth Watson-ManheimAssociate Professor

Information & Decision SciencesUniversity of Illinois, Chicago

[email protected]


Agenda

Framework for Documenting Virtuality and Effects on PerformanceBoundariesDiscontinuities and Continuities

Virtuality Index at Intel Corporation

Implications for Management and IT


Work is Changing: Becoming More Virtual

Increase in work in multiple teams distributed over different geographical locations, major time zone differences, internal business units, and national cultures Dependent on extensive use of ICT

Benefits: Access to more expertise, skills regardless of location More flexibility – teams can be formed and disbanded

with little cost Dynamic team membership Reduced costs – people can change jobs without

changing location


Challenges of VirtualityCommunication often becomes more difficult, performance suffers Loss of face-to-face synergies Lack of trust Greater concern with predictability and reliability Lack of social interaction

But this is not always the case Some teams are very productive, Some relationships thrive

How to get it right?


What Do We Mean by “Virtual”?Language is imprecise Shorthand for many different situations, e.g.,

telecommuting, globally distributed teams

Difficult to document & measure different conditions Does virtual mean supporting ability to work at home – an

HR concern? Does virtual mean supporting an interorganizational

alliance for new product development – a more strategic concern?

Difficult to understand effects of virtuality on performance and how to manage


Virtual = Spanning Boundaries

Virtual is work that spans one or more boundaries

Examples of boundaries Geographic Work Location (most common) Time Zone Work Group Membership Organizational Affiliation Functional Area, e.g., marketing, finance, etc. National/Cultural Backgrounds

Distributed organizational team may involve members spread across US while inter-organizational alliance may cross many boundaries


Role of ICT

Both facilitates and creates new challengesVirtual teams dependent on use for ICTHowever, use of ICT provides platform for teams to span more boundaries Access to more expertise, additional flexibility But also new challenges – stretched thin?

ICT enables connections but the nature of these connections is changing ICT solutions may not provide adequate support


Virtuality and PerformanceThere is often increased effort to accomplish work at the boundary Adding a distant colleague to work group –

increases cost of scheduling meeting If distant colleague is from different nationality –

scheduling meeting is even more difficult + misunderstandings more likely

Team performance may suffer

But spanning boundaries does not always lead to performance difficulties


DiscontinuityDiscontinuity is “jump in the marginal costs of physical flows of products and information across space” where the jump indicates existence of a

border


DiscontinuitiesA boundary can be objectively noted as being present Such as individuals cross a boundary of time when

they work in different time zones

Discontinuities are elements of virtual environment that create a break or gap in the work context, or create lack of continuity A discontinuity exists when the boundary is an

impediment to information and communication flows or reduces performance


Continuity

Continuities: methods to compensate for or mitigate effort – reducing difficulties spanning boundaries


Example of Continuities

Adding a distant colleague to work group – increases cost of scheduling meetingIf distant colleague is from different nationality – scheduling meeting is even more difficult + misunderstandings more likely To avoid communication problems – team members often

talk more slowly avoid colloquialisms To avoid continual scheduling problems – team members

may agree on regularly scheduled meetings

Team performance can increase Cost of work at boundary is reduced


Virtuality at Intel

Large global corporation with multiple US and international sitesStrategic dependence on virtual work Employees not required to change location if job

responsibilities change Sharp reduction in travel budgets Remote reporting relationships common (13%

overall, much higher in some areas)

IT planners question efficacy of current collaboration tools for this environment


Data Collection

Web-based survey of 2100 employees 700 from each of 3 regions – Americas, Greater

Asia (GAR), Greater Europe (GER) All job categories represented (including factory

floor)

1269 responses (62%) Reflected overall regional and job stratification

Except: 1) manuf floor under-represented - 37% population, 21% of sample; 2) mgt over-represented, <1% population, 3% of sample


Development of Virtuality Index

Eighteen questions on frequency of aspects of virtuality (boundaries) found in collaboration Each of the aspects can be credibly measured and

reported, i.e., employees can reliably say whether they work with people at a physical distance, across organizations or national cultures, and how often they experience the boundary

Frequency measured on 6-point scale Never, yearly, quarterly, monthly, weekly, daily

Performance metrics based on “Intel values” Known to all employees through performance reviews


Components of VirtualityDimensions of Virtuality different than expectedTeam distribution Degree to which people work on teams with people

distributed over different geographies and time zones, relying upon Intel’s basic collaboration technologies

Workplace mobility Degree to which employees work in environments other

than regular offices.

Variety of practices degree to which employees experience cultural and work

process diversity in collaboration


How Virtual is Intel:Team distribution

61

69

70

71

0 20 40 60 80 100

Work via Internet-basedconferencing tools

Collaborate with people indifferent time zones

Collaborate without meetingface-to-face

Collaborate with people whospeak different languages

Chudoba, Wynn, Lu, Watson-Manheim, M.B., “How Virtual Are We? Measuring Virtuality and Understanding Its Impact in a Global Organization,” Information Systems Journal,Vol. 15 (4), 279-306, 2005


How Virtual is Intel:Variety of Practices

44

55

64

0 20 40 60 80 100

Work on projects that have changingteam members

Work with people that use differenttechnologies

Work with teams that have differentways to track their work



How Virtual is Intel:Workplace mobility

16

17

38

49

55

0 20 40 60 80 100

Work at different Intel sites

Work while traveling, forexample, at airports or hotels

Have professional interactionswith people outside Intel

Work at home during normalbusiness days

Work with mobile devices



Multi-teaming64% on 3+ teams , half of those on 5+ teams

36 33

156 2

5

0

20

40

60

80

100P

erce

nt

1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 > 10

Number of current teams



Findings: Virtuality IndexTeam Distribution does not have negative effect on performanceNew Discontinuities - Variety of work practices and Mobile work do have negative effect on performanceMulti-teaming seems to be new discontinuity Many formed opportunistically rather than by

assignment Increase in multi-tasking during meetings


Implications

New Discontinuity - Multi-TeamingMost prior work assumes one intact teamOrganizing principle for current tools is

‘within-group,’ membership in more than one group means

multiples sites, repositories, etc. Difficult to have unified view of work Changing teams leads to increased transactions

cost, e.g., different norms of communication, use of technologies within teams, etc.


ImplicationsDiscontinuity - Variety of Practices Rate at which multi-teaming occurs and the number of

differences that people face contribute to lack of cohesion Increased cultural and work process diversity Working with different tools and processes has the most

negative impactPeople with established and predictable procedures and processes have better perceptions of team performance Management policies could introduce continuities, e.g.,

consistent usage of tools within the organization, establishment of repeatable processes

Develop team etiquette for virtual work


Implications

Discontinuity - Mobile Work Describes how much employees move

around from home, to different offices, and travel locations

Many employees face challenges commonly associated with sales and marketing

Tool Design Tools will need to provide a form of

continuity that parallels that of workers who stay at one desktop (home or office.)


IT Solution AreasTools need expressivity to accommodate sociability & cultural differences Sociability relates positively to productivity Cultural differences have some negative impact

Add level of consistency to platform For example, reduce overhead of shifting documents

from one team repository to another, maintaining versions, and rolling up three to five team milestones into a single individual timeline

BUT also need for increased expressivity (flexibility in expression)

People combining media to get increased expressivity

Multi-teaming suggests new organizational model for designers IT tools designed to address network not hierarchy Web 2.0, social networking tools may be appropriate


ConclusionDiscontinuity/Continuity Framework Helps identify problematic areas and ways to reduce

problems Gives insight into process of working virtually In addition to individual and team strategies, other higher

level continuities include professional culture, organizational culture and norms

Use of Virtuality Index Quantify aspects of virtuality in the organization or work unit

and link to performance Identify problematic areas, management and IT solutions Organizational culture and existing processes likely to

influence results (Intel)

Documents

© M.B. Watson-Manheim, May 2008 Global Virtual Teams Mary Beth Watson-Manheim Associate Professor Information & Decision Sciences University of Illinois,