Groups & Teams Overview
Cindy Clouner
Introduction
Advances in technology have changed the ways teams function. In the late 1990s, organizations began adopting the idea that effective teams could comprise individuals stationed across the country or the globe. These teams, known as virtual teams, were even touted as the “workplace of the future” (Townsend, et al., 1998). Twenty years later, virtual teams are used by nearly half of the global organizations (Minton-Eversole, 2012).
This chapter will explore the characteristics of virtual teams and how they compare to conventional teams, identifying both the strengths of virtual teams and the challenges that they face. Though challenging for all types of teams, virtual teams must approach the issues of goal alignment, motivation, and conflict management differently than their collocated counterparts. Additionally, this chapter will explore the differences between transactional and transformational leadership, the strengths and weaknesses of each style in leading virtual teams, and answer the question, “Is a transactional or transformational leadership style more effective when leading virtual teams?” Finally, the chapter will explore three phases of leading virtual teams and strategies for leading effective virtual teams.
Virtual Teams vs. Conventional Teams
Virtual teams are “groups of geographically and/or organizationally dispersed coworkers assembled using a combination of telecommunications and information technologies to accomplish an organizational task” (Townsend et al., 1998). Bell and Kozlowski (2002) identified two key characteristics that differentiated virtual and conventional teams – spatial distance and information, data, and personal communication.
The distance between virtual team members could be significant or relatively minor. Although distance matters less, Bell and Kozlowski (2002) indicate that how teams interact despite their distance matters most in determining whether a team would be considered “virtual.” A lack of face-to-face interactions due to their spatial distance can be considered a defining characteristic of virtual teams.
Although all teams utilize technology for communication, virtual teams rely more heavily on communication technologies, such as web-based apps for project management, videoconferencing, and schedule management, than conventional teams (Bell and Kozlowski, 2002). Rather than supporting the team’s work, virtual teams rely on communication technologies as a primary means of communication.
Gibson and Gibbs (2006) expanded Bell and Kozlowski’s definition of virtual teams by considering four dimensions: geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity. Although geographic dispersion and electronic dependence are often characteristics of a virtual team, dynamic structure, and national diversity are less often noted.
Dynamic structure relates to the frequently shifting organizational structure of virtual teams. A stud