# Managing Groups and Teams/How Do You Build High-performing Virtual Teams?

## Introduction

"Virtual teams are groups of geographically and/or temporally dispersed
individuals brought together via information and telecommunication
technologies." (Piccoli and Ives, 2003, p365) Virtual teams are
increasingly becoming a key feature of projects in modern organizations,
while the landscape of communication tools continues to change
dramatically. The benefits of virtualization include diversity of
perspectives, large member selection pool, extended hours of
productivity, and reduced transportation costs.

However, many new challenges arise, such as difficulty in performance
monitoring, disappearance of social cues, member isolation and
anonymity, and technology issues. In addition, virtual teams must deal
with cultural, temporal, and geographic barriers. Using a framework
based on Larson and LaFasto's *Teamwork*, conventional team strategies
have been adapted for the virtual context to help virtual team leaders
and members overcome these challenges.

## A Clear and Elevating Goal

Larson and LaFasto (1989) stress the importance of a clear and elevating
goal in the performance of an effective team. They define goal clarity
as "a specific performance objective, phrased in such concrete language
that it is possible to tell, unequivocally, whether or not that
performance objective has been attained" (p28) and elevating as
"personally or collectively" challenging and that it "makes a
difference." (p31) While Larson and LaFasto consider this to possibly be
the most important component of an effectively functioning team, it
appears to be even more critical for a virtual team.

To stress this point, Kirkman and Rosen, et al. (2002) quote a team
member from Sabre, Inc. as saying "virtual teams need to understand much
more so than co-located teams what goal they are working towards because
you are working in such different areas, and in our case, in different
countries. It plays a much stronger role if you know what your ultimate
target is going to be. Everyone is working towards the same thing."
Further work on the performance of virtual teams by Kirkman and Rosen,
et al. (2004) demonstrates a positive correlation between empowerment
and virtual team performance. They define empowerment as having four
dimensions, two of which, potency and impact significantly overlap the
concepts of goal clarity and elevation.

This research therefore supports and elevates the arguments made by
Larson and LaFasto about the importance of a clear and elevating goal
for virtual teams. Virtual team managers should make sure to have a
clear and elevating goal for the group and should make sure to
prominently display the team mission statement on the virtual work
space, team web-site, and other electronic communications to the group.

## Results-Driven Structure

Team structure is a key factor which differentiates successful teams
from unsuccessful ones. Team structure encompasses many aspects such as
tools, processes, communications systems, facilities, and organization
of the team. However, the best structure depends on the objectives and
composition of the team.

Virtual teams tend to be very effective in project development tasks.
However, the lack of face to face contact can be a challenge in building
consensus. For decision-making teams, having the right team composition
can help to overcome this. Collectivistic teams have higher levels of
collaborative conflict management than individualistic teams, and are
motivated more by outcomes which benefit the entire team. (Paul, et al,
2005)

Research has also shown that highly diverse or heterogeneous teams
outperform homogenous teams in many performance measures, though they
take longer to reach consensus. Virtuality can be beneficial for highly
diverse teams since it obfuscates potentially divisive demographic
differences. (Kirkman et al, 2002)

Larson and LaFasto outlined four necessary features of effective team
structure, which apply equally to virtual teams, but become more
challenging.

First, team members must have clear roles and accountabilities. Lack of
visibility may cause virtual team members to feel less accountable for
results, therefore explicit facilitation of teamwork takes on heightened
importance for virtual teams. Temporal coordination mechanisms such as
scheduling deadlines and coordinating the pace of effort are recommended
to increase vigilance and accountability. (Massey, Montoya-Weiss, and
Hung, 2003)

Second, teams require effective communications systems. This is
especially important for virtual teams because geographic and temporal
differences may rule out the most common communication channels. "Many
in our study found e-mail a poor way for teams as a whole to
collaborate." (Majchzak et al, 2004) Individual email conversations
cause others to feel left out, but copying everyone causes email
overload. Sharing documents over email often leads to conflicting
versions. Many successful teams prefer to use virtual work spaces,
online forums, instant messaging, and file repositories. Regardless of
the communication system, team norms and rewards structures should
support use of the systems.

Third, effective teams should monitor individual performance and provide
feedback. Assessment and development of virtual team members is very
limited in the virtual environment. Performance management is an
enormous challenge when employees are out of sight. Managers should
monitor group communication to assess subjective factors such as idea
generation, leadership, and problem-solving skills. (Kirkman et al,
2002) Utilizing peer and customer feedback helps assess contributions to
team effectiveness. Managers should also consider using \"richer\"
communication media (such as video conferencing) to more effectively
deliver evaluation feedback.

Finally, teams must rely on fact-based decision making, for which
information and communication tools are vital. Teams can adapt
decision-making software to facilitate fact-based problem solving and
decision-making. (Kirkman et al, 2002) They might also assign one person
to ensure accurate information is clearly communicated (Piccoli and
Ives, 2003). Rocketdyne, for example, used collaborative technology to
manage knowledge. They allowed all communications to be recorded and all
information to be visible to the team, and even prohibited face to face
discussions. (Malhotra, Majchzak, Carmen, Lott)

## Members

Larson and LaFasto recognize three common features of competent team
members: technical skills and abilities, desire to contribute, and
capability of collaborating effectively. Virtual teams amplify the
importance of using appropriate criteria when selecting people for the
team.

A critical element in high-performance teams is creating functional
diversity among team members, while productively managing resulting task
conflict. Work group studies suggest that "such conflict evidently
fosters a deeper understanding of task issues and an exchange of
information that facilitates problem solving, decision making, and the
generation of ideas." (Pelled, et al, 1999, p22) A best-practice study
of successful virtual teams concludes that diversity among disciplines,
working styles, and problem-solving approaches can be exploited to
produce "solutions instead of acrimony." (Majchrzak, et al, 2004, p133)
Conflict researchers have found that task conflicts can improve team
performance if managed collaboratively. (Weingart and Jehn, 2000)

However, regardless of other qualifications, not everyone can handle the
social isolation of a virtual team. Maintaining this challenging
environment requires selection of team members with interpersonal
skills, self-regulatory skills, a high level of knowledge, and comfort
with technology. (Gibson and Cohen, 2003) This critical balance between
technical and interpersonal skills must include the ability to work with
others to identify, address, and resolve issues.

Managers should consider using behavioral interviewing techniques and
simulations to select team members with unique areas of competence that
will contribute to a high-quality solution. Ideally some members should
have team process backgrounds. Managers should also provide potential
team members with a realistic assessment of virtual team challenges, and
the choice to opt out.

## Unified Commitment

Larson and LaFasto suggest that lack of unified commitment is often the
most important feature of ineffective teams. They identify two key
elements: dedication to the endeavor (commitment) and dedication to the
team (unity).

High-performance teams are distinguished by passionate dedication to
goals, identification and emotional bonding among team members, and a
balance between unity and respect for individual differences. Virtual
teams face the challenge of developing and sustaining unified commitment
in the absence of face-to-face contact. In particular, they must
identify and deal with the most serious threat, competition between
individual and team goals.

Kerber and Buono recommend appointing a strong team leader, willing to
maintain frequent contact with team members, take full advantage of
collaborative technologies, demonstrate a high level of personal
commitment, and deal quickly with self-serving and non-contributing team
members. Larson and LaFasto suggest that commitment can be enhanced by
involving team members in project planning and in defining team
identity, goals, and processes. Virtual team leaders should identify
commonalities among members early on, while focusing the team on
achieving key performance objectives and providing a clear context for
recognizing team success.

Finally, interdependence of goals, tasks, and outcomes among members of
virtual teams can overcome motivational challenges, particularly early
on. (Hertel, et al, 2004) Virtual team managers can create the
experience of connectedness by delegating goal setting, assigning
interdependent tasks, and rewarding both personal contributions and team
performance.

## Collaborative Climate

"Collaboration flourishes in a climate of trust." (Larson and LaFasto,
1989, p. 87) Trust is based on social characteristics (familiarity,
competence), immediate outcomes of interaction processes (reliability,
integrity), and institutions (social norms, policies). Studies have
shown that while trust has little impact on task performance, it can
significantly reduce process losses. (Jarvenpaa, Shaw, Staples, 2004)

Trust affects how we interpret member behavior. "Trust is the lens
through which these factors are interpreted." (Jarvenpaa, Shaw, and
Staples, 2004, p253) Therefore trust plays an important role in virtual
teams where ambiguity is high. Unfortunately, building trust is an
enormous challenge for virtual teams. \"In virtual organizations, trust
requires constant face-to-face interaction---the very activity the
virtual form eliminates.\" (Kirkman et al, 2002) Structured
opportunities for socialization are less satisfying in virtual
environments, and slow development of relational ties.

When a team is formed, expectations about workloads, processes, and
contributions lead to "psychological contracts" which can damage trust
when broken. (Piccoli and Ives, 2003) Reneging and incongruence are
heightened for virtual teams due to the limited ability to communicate.

Studies show that in high-trust teams, structured behavior control
mechanisms (rules, progress reports, explicit assignments) intensify the
negative effects of reneging and incongruence because they increase
salience of member behavior. (Piccoli and Ives, 2003) However, in
low-trust teams strong structures actually mitigate the negative effects
of trust by minimizing the role trust plays in interpreting member
behavior.

Trust is not always dependent on social bonds. Instead, it can be
founded on performance consistency. Task-based trust (vs. interpersonal
trust) may be more achievable for virtual teams, and can be built by
developing norms around communication patterns, ensuring reliable and
rapid responses, and making team interaction timely and consistent.
(Kirkman et al, 2002)

## Standards of Excellence and External Support

Virtual teams are held to the same standards of excellence as
conventional teams, but there are subtle differences. Virtual team
members often function as the point of contact for their immediate
physical group. They often have more autonomy than conventional team
members as their teams may meet according to varying time zones which
may not be understood by their local management. The presence of a true
"invisible team" (Larson and LaFasto, 1989, p109) is also a unique
component of a virtual team. The "invisible team" is the management team
to which each of the members report. The invisible team sets the
standards for each member.

Misunderstandings may arise if the "invisible team" does not align
itself to the same set of expectations. A virtual team leader must
understand the level and kind of support from each contributor. Larson
and LaFasto observe that "loss of morale...decreased belief and
commitment to the team's goal" (p110) result when support is not visible
to the team. The team leader should consider what expectations are
reasonable to ask of members. Virtual teams that span various companies
must create some form of "shared understanding" (Symons, 1997, p427) in
order for members to develop a set of expectations. Failure to establish
understanding may result in standards that are not achievable by all
members.

External support frequently determines how resources, such as incentives
and capital expenses, are contributed by team members. During the
Rocketdyne-Boeing Project, expectations of each member were established
at the outset of the project. (Malhotra, Majchzak, Carmen, Lott)
Resolving how each member would contribute time, resources, and
expertise reduced misunderstandings as the project progressed.

Standards of excellence and external support intersect on many levels.
Time and energy is well spent at the outset of a virtual team to
evaluate the level of excellence the team will achieve. This is
especially true when financial contributions require resources outside
of the control of the virtual team. Managers of virtual teams need to
understand the feasibility of their requests given the context of their
members' management.

## Leadership

Principled Leadership is the final ingredient identified by Larson and
LaFasto (1989) for effective team performance. Pauleen (2004) tells us
"leadership challenges are magnified in a virtual environment" and
stresses the necessity of face-to-face meetings, stating "it is
essential for them (leaders) to build personal relationships with team
members before commencing a virtual working relationship. Strong
relational links are associated with trust, creativity, motivation,
morale, good decisions, and fewer process losses.

However, Majchrzak, et al. (2004) argues that you can lead
high-performing virtual teams without face-to-face meetings and provides
several examples of successful teams whose members never met in person.
This requires intensive communications to build a coherent identity and
hold the team together, and their research found that the leaders of
successful virtual teams "rarely let a day go by when members did not
communicate with one another" and "frequent phone conversations between
the team leader and individual members ...were not unusual." Research by
Kirkman and Rosen, et al (2004) on the performance of virtual teams may
provide a clue for leaders attempting to resolve this dilemma. They
suggest that periodic face-to-face be held to focus on process
improvement, but if this is not feasible "managers need to make extra
efforts to empower virtual teams to deal directly and decisively with
process improvement issues" (p. 188).

Gibson and Cohen (2003) suggest virtual team leaders need to engage the
group in openly discussing cultural differences and similarities to help
develop communication norms. Thompson's (2000) work suggests the leader
of a virtual team must also play a key role in assessing and balancing
team performance levels across the four dimensions: team productivity;
team satisfaction; individual growth; and organizational gains. Pauleen
(2004) states that the leader of a virtual team must: assess team
issues, boundaries, organizational policies, resources, and technology;
target relationship levels necessary for performance; and develop
effective strategies and select and utilize appropriate communication
channels.

## Conclusions

Virtual teams must deal with problems that befall face-to-face teams,
along with some unique challenges. At the same time, they have the
potential to realize additional process gains and deliver high-quality
solutions by bringing together diverse individuals with complementary
knowledge without the limitations of physical, organizational or
cultural boundaries.

Our competitive environment places a premium on the quality and speed of
solutions, and technology is providing increasingly richer collaboration
tools -- advancing from the telephone and the fax machine to video
conferencing and virtual workspaces in a little over a decade.
Organizations that learn to harness the power of virtual teams with
these collaborative technologies will gain significant competitive
advantage.

## References

Duarte, Deborah L. and Nancy Tennant Snyder. Mastering Virtual Teams.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2006.

Gibson, Cristina B. and Susan G. Cohen. Virtual Teams That Work:
Creating Conditions for Virtual Team Effectiveness. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass. 2003. Review in HR Magazine. 2003, Vol. 48 Issue 7, p121.

Guido Hertel, Udo Konradt, and Borris Orlikowski. "Managing Distance by
Interdependence: Goal Setting, Task Interdependence, and Team-based
Rewards in Virtual Teams". European Journal of Work and Organizational
Psychology. 2004, Vol 13, No. 1, p1-28.

Houghton G. Brown, Marshall Scott Poole, and Thomas L. Rodgers.
"Interpersonal Traits, Complementarity, and Trust in Virtual
Collaboration". Journal of Management Information Systems. 2004, Vol.
20, No. 4. p115-137.

Huey, John. "The New Post-Heroic Leadership". Fortune Magazine. February
21, 1994.

Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L., Thomas R. Shaw, and D. Sandy Staples. "Toward
Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual
Teams". Information Systems Research. Informs. 2004.

Kerber, Kenneth W. and Anthony F. Buono. "Leadership Challenges in
Global Virtual Teams: Lessons From the Field." SAM Advanced Management
Journal. Autumn 2004, Vol. 69 Issue 4, p4-10.

Kirkman, Bradley L., Benson Rosen, Paul E. Tesluk, and Cristina B.
Gibson. "The Impact of Team Empowerment on Virtual Team Performance: The
Moderating Role of Face-to-Face Interaction." Academy of Management
Journal. 2004, Vol. 47, No. 2.

Kirkman, Bradley L., Benson Rosen, Paul E. Tesluk, Cristina B. Gibson,
and Simon O. McPherson. "Five challenges to virtual team success:
Lessons from Sabre, Inc." Academy of Management Executive. August 2002,
Vol.16, No.3, p67-79.

Larson, Carl E. and Frank M. J. LaFasto. Teamwork: What must go right,
what can go wrong. Sage, 1989.

Majchrzak, Ann, Arvind Malhotra, Jeffrey Stamps, and Jessica Lipnack.
"Can Absence Make a Team Grow Stronger?" Harvard Business Review. May
2004. Vol.82 Issue 5, p131-137.

Malhotra, Arvind, Ann Majchzak, Robert Carmen, and Vern Lott. "Radical
innovation without Collocation: A case Study at Boeing Rocketdyne". MIS
Quarterly. Vol.25, No.2 p229-249.

Massey, Anne P., Mitzi M. Montoya-Weiss, and Yu-Ting Hung. "Because Time
Matters: Temporal Coordination in Global Virtual Project Teams". Journal
of Management Information Systems. 2003. Vol. 19, No. 4. p129-155.

McMahan, Kevin L. "Manage a Virtual Team". Effective Communication and
Information Sharing in Virtual Teams. Journal of Accountancy. June 2005.

Paul, Souren, Imad M. Samarah, Priya Seetharaman and Peter P. Mykytyn.
"An Empirical Investigation of Collaborative Conflict Management Style
in Group Support System-Based Global Virtual Teams". Journal of
Management Information Systems. Vol. 21 No. 3, Winter 2005 pp. 185 -
222.

Pauleen, David J. "An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated
Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members." Journal of Management
Information Systems. 2004, Vol. 20, No. 3.

Pelled, Lisa Hope, Kathleen M. Eisenhardt, and Katherine R. Xin.
"Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict,
and Performance." Administrative Science Quarterly. March 1999, Vol.44
Issue 1, p1-28.

Piccoli, Gabriele and Blake Ives. "Trust and the Unintended Effects of
Behavior Control in Virtual Teams." MIS Quarterly. Vol.27, No.3.
September 2003.

Symons, Frank. "Virtual departments, power, and location in different
organizational settings." Economic Geography. Vol. 73, No. 4, p427.
October 1997.

Thompson, Leigh. Making the Team: A Guide for Managers. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 2000.

Weingart, Laurie and Karen A. Jehn. "Manage Intra-team Conflict through
Collaboration." Blackwell Handbook of Principles of Organizational
Behavior. 2000. p226-238.

