Title: Facilitating Virtual Team Relationships via Internet and Conventional Communication Channels

All correspondences to the 1st author

David Pauleen is a lecturer at the School of Information Management at Victoria University of Wellington. Current research interests include virtual teams and related issues, particularly information and communication technologies, intercultural communication and cultural biases in the development of communications technologies, team leadership and facilitation, and knowledge management of team processes and outcomes. e-mail: david.pauleen@vuw.ac.nz Pak Yoong (PhD, Victoria University of Wellington) is a senior lecturer and foundation director of the masters programme in information systems at the School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. His current research interests are in computer support for groups and teams, the facilitation of distributed meetings, telework, virtual teams and end user support. His work has appeared in Journal of Information Technology and People, Informing Science and Internet Research - Electronic Networking Applications and Policy Citation PAULEEN, D. & YOONG, P. (2001). “FACIL ITATING VIRTUAL TEAM RELATIONSHIPS V IA INTERNET AND CONVENTIONAL COMMUNICATION CHANNELS.” INTERNET RESEARCH: ELECTRONIC NETWORKING APPLICATIONS AND POLICIES 11(3 ) , 190-202.

AWARDED MOST “OUTST ANDING PAPER” IN 2001 VOLUME.

1

Facilitating Virtual Team Relationships via Internet and Conventional Communication Channels

Key Words Virtual teams, facilitation, Internet communication, relationship-building

Abstract

The development of personal relationships between team members is

recognised as an important factor in enhancing effective working relationships among

members of both co-located and virtual teams. However, little has been written on

how to build these online relationships among virtual team members. This paper

reports part of a qualitative research study on how facilitators of virtual teams build

and maintain online relationships. In particular, the paper examines how virtual team

facilitators use Internet-based and conventional electronic communication channels to

build relationships with their virtual team members. The findings suggest that some

electronic communication channels are more effective than others in building online

relationships. The paper concludes by suggesting that facilitators need to strategically

use the channels available to them to effectively build online relationships

Introduction

This paper seeks to contribute to the general field of virtual teams by looking

at how virtual team facilitators use Internet-based and conventional electronic

communication channels to build and manage relationships with their team members.

Virtual teams are a relatively new phenomenon and Jarvenpaa and Leidner (1999)

define them as temporary, culturally diverse, geographically dispersed, electronically

communicating workgroups. Virtual teams may communicate and work

synchronously or asynchronously through such technologies as electronic mail,

2

3

bulletin boards, audio/video/data conferencing, automated workflow, electronic

voting and collaborative writing (Coleman, 1997). Virtual teams are playing an

increasingly important role in organisational life and offer organisations the flexibility

to remain competitive (Mowshowitz, 1997). According to Grenier and Metes (1995),

virtual teams will form the nuclei of 21st century organisations.

Successful virtual team facilitators must be able to manage the whole spectrum

of communication strategies via new technologies, as well as human and social

processes, and often do it across cultures. O’Hara-Devereaux and Johanson (1994)

place process facilitation skills as some of the most crucial for managing and leading

global teams. Facilitation aims at clarifying all aspects of communication including

the unspoken interpersonal issues. O’Hara-Devereaux and Johanson (1994) define

facilitation as…

… the art of helping people navigate the processes that lead to agreed-upon

objectives in a way that encourages universal participation and productivity.

Most of the extant research on virtual teams has been anecdotal and

descriptive with little in the way of systematic, empirical research (Furst et al, 1999).

This is particularly true when virtual team facilitators are the main focus of study.

Although the importance of facilitators in virtual teams is noted in the literature

(Davenport and Pearlson 1998; Kimball, 2000; O’Hara-Devereaux and Johanson,

1994), and suggestions for facilitating virtual teams are enumerated, no systematic

research where the facilitator of virtual teams is the primary focus of study has been

located. Nunamaker et al (1999, p. 27) state that, "little research has yet been

undertaken to understand and improve the process of distributed facilitation."

Warkentin and Beranek (1999) in the conclusion to their study on virtual team

communication call for a further evaluation of the role of leadership in effective

virtual teams that perform tasks well. This paper seeks to address some of these gaps.

4

Communication Channels in Virtual Teams

Electronic communication channels available to virtual team facilitators are

varied, and include a variety of synchronous and asynchronous channels. Often these

technologies are formally linked together to form groupware, an umbrella term used

to describe "electronic technology and group processes that support teams and

organisations as they work together" (O’Hara-Devereaux and Johanson, 1994, p. 78).

Electronic communication channels are used by organisations to cope in the current

dynamic environment of diverse business pressures that are caused by ever changing

technologies and the globalisation of business. Many organisations have attempted to

meet the challenges of distributed offices using groupware tools (Davenport and

Pearlson, 1998). Electronic communication channels make it possible to meet across

geographic and cultural boundaries without the massive stress and cost of travel, but

also require a more considered approach to selection and use (Schwartz, 1999).

Technological infrastructure can strongly impact virtual team effectiveness in

ways that a facilitator may or may not be able to effectively manage. For example,

software and hardware compatibility among team members can affect the choice of

communication channels. For the smaller organisations, financial limitations often

play a significant part in the communication resources virtual teams have at their

disposal (Boutieller et al, 1998). In some developing countries, their global virtual

teams may experience significant problems with access to technology due to

underdeveloped national infrastructure or the high cost of broadband internet

connections.

However, while electronic communication channels support the networked

organisation by providing tools to solve collaboration oriented problems, Coleman

(1997) warns that focussing only on technical issues can lead to expensive failures,

while focussing on the people and organisational issues dramatically increases the

5

probability of success. Organisational policies or the lack of them can impact the

effectiveness of virtual teams. Many companies have no formal company or HR

policies on virtual teams. Virtual teams are often formed on an as-needed, ad-hoc

basis. Another issue that can be a factor is team member competence in using various

technologies. This may be an organisational training issue, but in some cases it may

be a member-selection issue (Jarvenpaa et al, 1998) as some people may have a

psychological dislike for certain communication channels. Another one of these

important "people" issues is relationship building (Warkentin et al; 1997).

The link between team effectiveness and team member relationships is an

important area of study in virtual teams. Stronger relational links have been associated

with higher task performance (Warkentin and Beranek, 1999) and the effectiveness of

information exchange (Warkentin et al., 1997). According to Lau et al. (2000),

effective communication is the key to successful virtual teams, and one of the keys to

effective communication is how well team members are able to build and maintain

their personal relationships. Kimball (2000) states, "the purpose of building and

maintaining relationships in teams is to ensure that individuals develop at least

enough harmony to be able to get their group work done" (p. 4). Building

relationships with virtual team members is clearly of fundamental importance to a

virtual team facilitator.

According to Walther and Burgoon (1992), strong relational links are

associated with enhanced creativity, motivation, increased morale, better decisions

and fewer process losses. Research shows it is easier to complete relationship-

building activities in a face-to-face context than in a strictly virtual one (Warkentin et

al., 1997). This may in part be explained by media richness theory, which explains

that the lack of contextual cues and timeliness of feedback inherent in computer-

mediated communication can negatively affect the building of relationship links (Daft

et al., 1987).

6

While face to face meetings are the preferred way to build relationships and in

general deal with sensitive and complex situations, it is possible with the skillful and

thoughtful application of virtual communication channels to facilitate a completely

virtual team. Research has found that computer-mediated teams do share relational

information and are likely to develop relational links over time (Walther, 1997;

Chidambaram, 1966; Warkentin et al. 1997). However, since many virtual teams are

project or deadline driven, there may not be the opportunity to allow relationships to

develop over time. The idea of "swift trust" was put forth by Jarvenpaa et al. (1998) to

describe how virtual team members may be able to accomplish tasks without first

having developed relationships. This rational perspective centers on the view of

"calculus of self interest", which weigh the cost and benefits of certain courses of

action between team members. If a team member feels confident there will be a

"payoff" for co-operating with and trusting virtual team member than they will do so.

However, such trust appears to be very fragile and temporary.

The role of the team facilitator is to move the team towards its objectives by

encouraging collaboration. This is done through a sustained process of relationship

building, idea generation, prioritisation and selection. The particular challenge to

virtual team facilitators is to manage this process through electronically-mediated

interactions (Kimball, 2000)

In the following section, a methodology that generated data relevant to the

question of how virtual team facilitators develop relationships with their team

members is discussed.

Methodology

This research looks at one of the central issues confronting facilitators as they

initiate and facilitate virtual teams - how to use electronic communication channels to

build relationships with team members. Because virtual teams are a new form of

highly dynamic and ambiguous collaborative interactions, a major challenge of this

7

study was the need to generate relevant data and analyse it in an appropriate manner.

To achieve this, a research framework involving a training program format was

instituted loosely based on methods already developed in Participatory Action

Research (PAR), with data collection and analysis based on grounded theory

methodology (Glaser and Strauss, 1967; Strauss and Corbin, 1990). PAR is

particularly suited for research in areas that require participant-driven discoveries in

creating insight, understanding and new possibilities about their social world (Yoong

and Gallupe, 2001), while grounded theory allows for the collection and analysis of

data in such a new, dynamic and ambiguous environment (Lau et al.; 2000). This

linking of these two research methodologies has been called grounded action research

(Baskerville and Pries-Heje, 1999). The next three subsections provide a brief

description of PAR, grounded theory and grounded action research respectively.

Participatory action research

The participatory nature of the development of the training sessions, the

ongoing consultations between researcher and participant and the opportunity for data

collection lend themselves to the methods already developed in Participative Action

Research (PAR). PAR is a context-bound research methodology that supports the

creation of new knowledge in active collaboration with the people working within a

specific context. These "collaborators" (researchers and participants) become co-

learners in a process that seeks to produce solutions to local problems (Elden and

Levin, 1991). PAR, a variation of Action Research (AR) provided the framework for

engaging participants in a program with which they have little experience and then

using their experience to generate data.

PAR evolved out of three streams of intellectual development and action: 1)

social research methodology, 2) participation in decision making by low-ranking

people in organisations and communities and 3) sociotechnical systems (STS)

8

thinking regarding organisational behaviour (Whyte, 1991). Of particular relevance to

this study of virtual teams is PAR's inclusion of both teams and technology in its

methodology. Historically associated with political and liberation movements, PAR

methodology has been applied by other practitioners to Western organisations and is

now used in wide ranging contexts including organisational research such as declining

organisational competitiveness (Pace and Argona, 1991), and organisational change

(Santos, 1991). Koch (1997) points out, that AR and PAR are being increasingly used

in the IS field in recognition that a social system can be more deeply understood if the

researcher is part of the sociotechnical system being studied. And by applying

positivist intervention on the system, cooperation between the participants and the

researcher is fostered improving information exchange and research quality (Koch,

1997).

Grounded theory

The grounded theory approach used in this study is based on the work of

Glaser and Strauss (1967). The authors provide an overall grounded theory strategy

for examining the human experience of participants in an intensive study which

involved developmental processes of change over a sustained period of time and

requires the researcher to be close to the participants to capture these experiences as

they happened. As Sarker et al. (1999) suggested that given the current lack of

knowledge regarding virtual teams, an inductive methodology such as grounded

theory is an appropriate approach to developing theories on the facilitation of virtual

teams.

Essentially, the grounded theory method assumes that the processes of data

collection, coding, analysis, and theorising to be simultaneous, iterative, and

progressive. For example, as data are collected, they are coded into categories (as

9

many as possible) so that subsequent coding either confirms these categories or will

refine, extend, and modify them to fit the new data. New categories may also emerge

at this stage. This data collection procedure is governed by a process known as

'theoretical sampling' where the coding and analysis done at the initial stages

determines the subsequent data to be collected. As the research study progresses, data

collection and coding subside and analysis and theory building become more

dominant. Concepts that emerge from the data and from literature are compared and

contrasted to establish hypotheses, which are then refined and elaborated to develop

theory.

Grounded action research

Baskerville and Pries-Heje (1999) argue that the ‘theory development’

component of action research can be made more rigorous by using theory

development methodologies such as grounded theory. This combination of the two

methods, known as grounded action research, is essentially an integration of certain

grounded theory techniques in the different stages of action research. The authors

suggest that this integration could be done in two ways: (1) using grounded theory

notations, such as memos and diagrams, to illustrate the relationship between

emergent theory and the raw data and (2) utilising grounded theory coding techniques

“for the evaluating, learning and diagnosis phases of action research” (p. 8).

Data collection and analysis

The PAR-based ‘virtual team facilitation’ training program used in this study

was designed to achieve the following three goals: to generate interest and incentive

for would-be participants, to give participants information and skills to initiate and

facilitate their own virtual teams, and to generate data for analysis. After being

recruited, participants were broadly interviewed to determine their prior experience

10

with virtual teams and their perceived needs and concerns in implementing and

facilitating their own virtual team. The researcher then developed a ten-week training

program (see Appendix 1 for an outline of the training program) to meet these needs.

A pilot program and two subsequent training programs were held.

During the training programs, each participant planned for, or actually

initiated and facilitated a virtual team within their own organisational context. Every

two weeks the participants met with the researcher to investigate issues related to

initiating and facilitating virtual teams and to discuss issues that were arising in their

own virtual teams.

In all seven participants from a variety of New Zealand organisations took part

in the study. The seven participants form a diverse group, from the managing director

of a one-man, global virtual organisation who worked exclusively in global virtual

team settings to a self-employed consultant managing a local virtual work team (see

Table 1). The participants were in various stages of their virtual team lifecycle, from

planning through initiation to full-scale facilitation and evaluation of a just-completed

virtual team project. The participants' virtual team project tasks ranged from

managing a political campaign on the other side of the world to developing and

running a national web-based academic assessment center.

take in Table 1

A unique feature of this study is that it involves organisational professionals as

opposed to students. Bordia (1997) pointed out that although most computer-

mediated communication research focuses on its application to organisational and

social functions, the applicability of results is "jeopardised" because most of the

research is done on student subjects. The findings below should provide rich data in

the area of facilitating virtual teams relevant to the "real world".

11

Data was collected from face to face and telephone interviews, group

discussions and e-mail correspondences. Data collection extended to several months

beyond the end of the training sessions. Using grounded theory techniques, the data

was analyzed using "a general method of (constant) comparative analysis" (Glaser and

Strauss, 1967, p. vii). Data was collected and coded simultaneously over the course of

the training sessions, with subsequent coding confirming, refining, extending and

modify the data. Some of the most significant concepts and their relationships to

emerge from the data revolve around how facilitators use electronic communication

channels to build relationships with their virtual team members. Some of these

findings are reported in the next section.

The Research Findings

Although the range of participants, their organisational contexts, virtual team

lifecycles and virtual team tasks were varied, the data revealed a common concern

among the facilitators as they went about the initiation and facilitation of their virtual

teams. This concern has to do with building and managing virtual team relationships

using Internet-based and conventional electronic communication channels. According

to the facilitators, the development of personal relationships between themselves and

team members is an important prerequisite in establishing and maintaining virtual

working relationships. Below are descriptions of how the facilitators used the

communication channels available to them to build relationships with their virtual

team members. The communication channels are grouped as (a) face-to-face, (b)

conventional and (c) Internet-based.

(a) Face-to-face communication channels

Although face-to-face communication is clearly not an electronic

communication channel, most of the facilitators in this study believe that face to face

meetings, preferably at the formation of the virtual team, are the most effective way to

12

build personal relationships. Why they feel this way is instructive, because in many

cases they are seeking to emulate the relationship building processes and results of

face to face meetings in their electronic communications. According to the

participants, face to face meetings give facilitators the opportunity to understand

individual team member communication styles and personal and professional

motivations, making it easier to then move into virtual working relationships. Here is

an example of what one participant said:

You can find out what motivates them, what makes them tick. That's what I think forms part of my thoughts on why you need to meet face to face. You may get a much richer sense of what is important to the person. I would find it much easier to say over a beer what is important to me then in a chat room.

Face to face meetings also allow a deeper kind of rapport, or trust to develop.

Another participant, who was facilitating across organisations and ethnic cultures,

explained how rapport was developed between team members:

They actually came down and had a face-to-face meetings with us one after the other when really none was required. I guess they just wanted to meet with us. They reported on what they had been up to and asked a few questions and things. It was more than was required and more than what any other groups had done. But it built up some sort of rapport, which provided the foundation for later dealing with difficult last-minute issues by telephone and conference calls.

For some of the facilitators, relationship building is a prerequisite to a working

relationship, and face-to-face contact is an essential part of relationship building. In

these cases facilitators can only use electronic communication channels after they

have developed personal relationships. However, the facilitators working exclusively

through electronic communication channels had to strategize ways to build

relationships through the electronic channels they had available to them. An example

of these strategies is provided in a latter section.

(b) Conventional electronic communication channels

13

Telephone

According to the facilitators who could not meet face-to-face, telephones are

probably the most important relationship-building communication channel they have

at their disposal. Because it has been around so long and people are very familiar with

it, its use is second nature, so in a sense it doesn't carry the "aura or the baggage of

new technology." Phone calls are often used at the formation of a virtual team in

order to get know some one quickly. One facilitator found these initial phone calls

useful for "groundbreaking types of conversations". She explained:

I have found that there are sticking points when I am not tuned into a person. At least with a phone call I can get a feeling for them and they can get a feeling for me.

This same facilitator was one of the more experienced virtual team facilitators

in this study. She was facilitating a highly deadline-driven global virtual team with

members in Southeast Asia, New Zealand and Australia and she made a conscious

and determined effort to get to know all her key team members at the beginning of the

project cycle. In this case she picked up the phone, called the team members and told

them:

I'm probably going to pester you, but initially it's really important for me to understand how you work as individuals so I can like think inside your head.

The facilitator explained how this strategy made facilitating her working

relationships via virtual communication channels more effective:

This made it easier for me to e-mail the people. It's quite interesting, I have looked at my e-mails that I have sent to the different people in that project and I actually adopted quite different styles for different people.

14

Picking up the phone may seem the obvious solution in getting to know team

members when working virtually, but for some of the facilitators it is problematic.

Another facilitator, who owns a global consulting company, has found international

telephone calls a major expense. He has resisted using them as a means to build

relationships with clients and consultants, although he realised that he needs to do

something to strengthen team relationships. He generally used phone calls to initiate

business relationships. But as he explained, taking the time and expense to use phone

calls to build relationships is not practical:

The business is so small that international phone calls to have telephone conversations to have "water cooler" type of discussions are a bit out of the question with 40 people. I tend to call them to initiate projects and to discuss all the fine detail, which would take me too long to do by e-mail.

The same facilitator feels quite awkward calling people he is involved with

professionally to "chat about life the universe and everything." He explained these are

busy people and when you use virtual communication it is expected that you will "get

down to business":

They tend to be very focused discussions and I still don't get a very real sense of the person at the other end. It's all very businesslike.

However, this particular facilitator, who relied heavily on e-mail and

synchronous text chat programs to communicate with his team, experienced a number

of miscommunications with a team member that he attributed to a lack of prior

relationship building. He realized he is going to have to make a serious effort in the

future to get to get to know his team members better before settling into work

relationships. Although his organisation is in tight financial circumstances he is now

willing to invest in some ‘upfront’ phone calls as an 'investment’ in relationship

building. He explained:

15

I'm going to have to try, I guess, to budget in some general team talk kind of stuff I suppose.

(c) Internet-based communication channels

E-mail

In this study, e-mail is found to be the most commonly used virtual

communication channel. In some cases, due to financial limitations, it is the only

channel available. As Fulk and DeSanctis (1995, cited in Schwartz, 1999) suggest

the use of e-mail can have both positive and negative results, and in this study a

number of its advantages and disadvantages in building online relationships emerged

from the data. According to the facilitators it is a universal platform, cost effective,

generally accessible, and easily learned and used by most team members. Its

advantages include fast, succinct messaging with the added benefit of being able to

send attachments quickly and efficiently.

However, according to the facilitators, many of these apparent benefits often

carry a down side that on several occasions threatened to derail the facilitation of

these virtual teams. One facilitator, who did not make any special effort to build a

personal relationship with his team members before commencing virtual teamwork,

relied almost totally on e-mail in his communications with team members. Because

this facilitator is very comfortable using e-mail, he made the assumption that his team

members were as well. This led to some serious miscommunications. In one instance

he made an ironic comment (complete with a supportive emoticon) in an e-mail that

gave great offense to the team member (who was also the client).

In another e-mail the team member "buried" a serious concern in the message

with a dozen other points. The facilitator overlooked the point, the significance of

which became apparent only at the end of the team project. This led the facilitator to

16

conclude that some e-mail protocols may need to be introduced into his future teams,

along the lines of "one –email message, one appropriate subject heading, one

message." The problem also concerns the low context text-based nature of e-mail,

which requires the writer to clearly articulate the intended message (Barnes and

Greller, 1994). If the client had mentioned his concern in a face to face meeting, the

facilitator would have picked it up. The facilitator explained:

He did mention his misgivings in the first instance, but he did not put it out there very strongly and I dismissed it. If he had said that in a face-to-face situation I would have picked up the nonverbal cues how stressed he was about the whole thing. But as a throwaway line in an e-mail on 10 different subjects….

An important issue in virtual teams is the timely response of team members to

internal communications. Kettinger and Grover (1997) noted that a significant feature

of e-mail is that both the sender and recipient can control the timing of their portion of

the communication. The facilitators in this study have clear expectations that e-mail,

as well as other communication messages such as voice mail, will be replied to in a

prompt manner. They believe that a lack of timeliness can lead to poor

communication, the creation of ill will, and an undermining of relationships. Two

facilitators sometimes felt a loss of control when using e-mail. They felt they were at

the "mercy" of the recipient. When e-mail went unanswered for some time, they had

to fall back on telephone calls to try and establish a direct link. The facilitator in the

previous example vividly recalled what it is like when virtual team communications

stop:

When you're working virtually, you are really flying blind. You are dependent on other people for keeping you up to date with what's happening on their side. Because we're without all the sensory cues in face-to-face communication, you really have to let people know what's going on. And when you are actually on the other side of the world it's not part of your environment, so all you can go on is what was agreed on. So you have to be

17

much more aware of the others I think. You need to be pro-active, because if something changes you have to let the people know.

This facilitator believed that careful team member selection and virtual team

training could be an effective way to minimise this sort of problem. Warkentin, et al.

(1997, p. 989) point out that an important factor in creating effective virtual teams is

“the psychological profile and personal characteristics of team members”. Different

skill sets are required by virtual teams to maintain a strong sense of "teamness" and

effective communication, socialization and collaboration (Jarvenpaa et al, 1998).

Training to develop familiarity and proficiency with virtual communication channels

to assist in task and social interactions is a necessary condition for effective virtual

teamwork (Warkentin et al., 1997). According to a facilitator in this study, one goal

of training should be to learn how to "replace nods and smiles" with protocols.

Another facilitator explained how timely virtual responses contribute to

developing and maintaining virtual relationships:

When we sent an e-mail to her she always send back a response, even just one line, saying got it thanks. Small things like that really help in a virtual environment. That's part of building a virtual relationship.

Synchronous Chat and Messaging Programs

One facilitator, also because of a lack of financial resources, relied very

heavily on synchronous text-based chat programs to hold meetings with virtual team

members. Besides often being freely available, another benefit of these programs is

they provide a transcript of the meeting, which can be stored for later reference.

However, using them to run a virtual team meeting can be a trying experience,

particularly with a lot of participants. The facilitator explained:

The difficulty I find increases exponentially with the number of participants. It is extremely difficult not to have side issues going on. And many times

18

you'll see two people having a conversation and the screen will clear before you see a reply or the response come, so then people try to use different color text. I don't know how they cope quite honestly.

Although synchronous text-based chat programs may not always be suitable

for formal meetings, two facilitators looked to ICQ to build personal relationships in

their teams. ICQ is a free software that allows its users to know when (in this case)

virtual team members anywhere in the world are connected to the internet. It then

allows one member to contact another directly and to open up a chat box to hold

synchronous typed conversations. By its nature, ICQ can lead to spontaneous,

informal conversations between team members that the facilitators believed can help

to strengthen relationships. One facilitator actively encouraged the downloading of

ICQ as one of his first actions in the initiation of his virtual team. He explained his

motives:

The idea of ICQ was not as a group meeting thing, but to get some conversations going between the people in the group. And if they were using ICQ properly they would know when anybody else in the group was online. In fact the few conversations with people I had who were on line at the time were more time of day conversations, how are you type, not about anything substantial. But the thought was and it may well bear fruit in the longer term, was that if everybody was on ICQ and if we kept going with this process than the opportunity was there for people to talk privately. And I felt the ICQ thing could provide the corridor type of relationship where tasks can progress without the use of planned meetings.

The facilitator saw ICQ as a valuable free flowing adjunct channel to the

moderated, more "reactive" e-mail channel. He explained:

ICQ is providing a crosslink. It's a way for people to have a cross conversation, the corridor conversation model, the chance conversation.

For this facilitator, with no opportunity for face-to-face meetings, the

informality and spontaneity engendered by the use of ICQ was an important

19

relationship building channel, which complemented the more task-oriented e-mail

channel.

Desktop Video Conferencing

Videoconferencing has been in use since the early 1960's (Perey, 1997). In the

past it was expensive and the quality was not very good. For the most part only large

companies could afford it. Certainly it is a valuable adjunct to other communication

channels. These days new technology has improved the quality of transmission, but

the cost of a dedicated videoconferencing facility is still high. However new internet-

based desktop videoconferencing technology is bringing the cost down. The down

side is that the quality is, especially without broadband, often very poor and

unreliable. Netmeeting, a free software program by Microsoft, is one of the most

common desktop applications.

Most of the facilitators were very interested in incorporating Netmeeting into

their virtual teams and some experimented with it during the training program

sessions. In desktop videoconferencing, they saw a low-cost virtual communication

channel that could provide a workable alternative to face to face meetings.

Netmeeting, for example, allows two people anywhere in the world to see and hear

each other. It also allows team members to work on shared documents. For those

facilitators working with global teams and tight financial budgets, a free desktop

video conferencing software program like Netmeeting holds a lot of promise as a

relationship building communication channel.

At least two facilitators felt this technology would have definite advantages for

virtual teamwork, believing team members need to see each other to build

relationships and to work together effectively. One facilitator believed that setting up

an internet-based video conferencing communication channel with an overseas branch

20

office would build personal relationships resulting in greater personal trust between

geographically separated organisational members thus strengthening the organisation

as a whole. As he explained:

I don't mean trust in a professional level of trust, but just getting to know the person, building a relationship with Graham in Melbourne. To my mind, that's the key output or objective of a lot of this.

Another advantage of desktop videoconferencing is that it can help make this

manager and the branch office feel a part of the organisation and help keep the "flavor

of the culture" of the parent organisation and preventing him from going off on his

own tangent.

In summary, the selective use of communication channels is found to be one

strategy used by the facilitators to build and enhance online relationships among

virtual team members. What is not clear is the set of criteria they have used in the

selection of the type of communication channels and under which circumstances. The

authors are conducting further research in this area.

Discussion

Successful virtual teams often use different technologies to enhance the

breadth and depth of their communication (Lau et al., 2000). Nunamaker et al. (1991)

described the benefits and barriers of electronic communication as 'process gains and

losses'. Facilitators in this study realised that for the most part they would have been

unable to operate virtual teams and accomplish their project tasks without electronic

communication channels. At the same time they understood that the use of these

channels as the main working communication channels in their virtual teams would be

problematic, without having first established personal relationships with team

members. The development of personal relationships, according to one facilitator,

21

would make the building of a team "culture of cooperation" more likely. In order to

build relationships, facilitators need to strategically use the communication channels

they have available to them.

The facilitators considered e-mail as the basis of their virtual teams,

effectively linking their distributed teams (Kettinger and Grover, 1997). However,

they are unlikely to agree with Finholt's and Sproull's (1990) contention that e-mail

can enable a team to create and sustain its identity without a shared physical setting, at

least not by itself. Although, e-mail is one of the basic communication channels in

their virtual teams, the facilitators saw it as a channel more suitable for

communicating information and coordinating projects than for building relationships.

This view seems to support those held by some researchers who have theorised that e-

mail is less likely to be effective in communication tasks that require greater social

interaction or social presence, such as getting to know someone (Kettinger and

Grover, 1997). Perhaps, new systems such as kMail (Schwartz and Te'eni, 2000),

which seek to contextualize e-mail messages with personal information will be helpful

in this regard.

The telephone seems to be the old reliable standby for facilitators when it

comes to building relationships with virtual team members. It is apparently more

comfortable to use this channel when getting to know people. With the use of the

phone being second nature, the facilitators feel that they can pick up paralinguistic

clues from their team members, which can assist in relationship building (Perey,

1997). The telephone is also the backup channel of choice when other channels such

as e-mail fail or when sensitive issues need to be discussed

The facilitators in this study saw great promise in desktop videoconferencing

as an affordable alternative to face-to-face meetings. They believed that "eyeing"

people is an important part of relationship building, particularly when the only

alternative is e-mail or synchronous text-based meetings. Lau et al. (2000) argue

22

videoconferencing can enhance social relationships by putting a face to the name.

Perey (1997) states conscious and unconscious communications supported by two-

way video can build and nurture relationships.

However, a recent study looking of the effects of desktop videoconferencing

on improving trust relations in virtual teamworking projects suggest information and

communication technologies, such as Netmeeting, appear to be inadequate for

building "trust relations", primarily because they do not support 'backstage' access,

normally found in face-to-face environments (Nandakuhmar, 2000). In any case, the

use of internet-based video conferencing communication is still problematic as access

to sufficient and reliable bandwidth is a significant barrier to many potential users.

One of the most interesting findings in this study was the way facilitators used

internet-based messaging and chat programs such as ICQ to set up opportunities for

informal, spontaneous communication between facilitators and team members. This

use of ICQ mirrors suggestions made by Kraut et al. (1993) that informal encounters

create a common context and perspective that support group work. They explain

informal communication often occurs spontaneously between random participants and

results in richer content. Without informal exchanges, "collaboration is less likely to

start and (be) less productive if it does occur" (Kraut et al., 1993; p.313). ICQ may

facilitate socialization processes that allow team members and facilitators to

participate in activities happening at the 'backstage' where they can exchange feelings

and emotions (Goffman, 1990). This approach facilitates building and maintaining

relationships and minimizing feelings of isolation that can lead to reduced intrinsic

involvement in the team (Finholt and Sproull, 1990).

23

Conclusion

This study finds that when face-to-face meetings are not an option, virtual

team facilitators can effectively use electronic communication channels, particularly

some of the more familiar, or higher-context virtual channels such as the telephone or

desktop video conferencing to build relationships with team members. ICQ also

seems to hold some promise as an "backdoor" channel that may encourage informal

communication and relationship building. The key challenge for virtual team

facilitators is to make a conscious and concerted effort, which can be termed

facilitator strategies, to develop personal relationships with team members through the

use of available communication channels.

Facilitator strategies will include the selection and use of appropriate

communication channels and appropriate message content. The level of relationship

between the facilitator and team members necessary to accomplish the team's task is

one of the key determining factors in creating a facilitator's strategy. Other important

factors in determining facilitator strategies, some of which are alluded to in this paper,

include issues concerning team member selection and training, organisational and HR

policies, as well as the team's desired task outcomes and biases toward

communication channels particularly in global virtual teams.

Notes

(1) Examples of Internet-based communication channels include e-mail, synchronous chat programs, ICQ and desktop video-conferencing systems. Examples of conventional electronic communication channels include the desktop telephone, mobile phone and fax machines.

(2) The first author is the participant researcher for this study and he conducted the training programs, collected and analysed the data. The second author provided advice and support during the study.

24

REFERENCES Barnes, S., & Greller, L.M. (1994). “Computer-mediated communication in the organization.” Communication Education 43(2): 129-142. Baskerville, R. and Pries-Heje, J. (1999). “Grounded action research: a method for understanding IT in practice.” Accounting Management and Information Technologies 9: 1-23. Bordia, P. (1997). “Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication: A synthesis of the experimental literature.” The Journal of Business Communication 34(1): 99-120. Boutellier, R., Gassman, O., Macho, H. and Roux, M (1998). “Management of dispersed product development teams: The role of information technologies.” R and D Management 28: 13-26. Chidambaram, L. (1996). “Relational development in computer supported groups.” Management Information Systems Quarterly 20: 142-165. Coleman, D. (1997). Groupware: Collaborative Strategies for Corporate LANS and Intranets. Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall. Davenport, T. and Pearlson, K. (1998). "Two cheers for the virtual office." Sloan Management Review, 130, (4): 51 –66. Daft, R. L., Lengel, R.H. and Trevino, L.K. (1987). “Message equivocality, media selection and manager performance.” Management Information Systems Quarterly 11: 335-368. Elden , M. and Levin., M. (1991). Cogenerative Learning: Bringing Participation into Action Research. Participatory Action Research. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Finholt, T. and Sproull, L.S. (1990). “Electronic groups at work.” Organizational Science 1: 41-61. Fulk, J. and DeSanctis, G (1995). “Electronic communications and changing organisational forms.” Organizational Science, 6: 338-349. Furst, S., Blackburn, R and Rosen, B (1999). “Virtual team effectiveness: a proposed research agenda.” Information Systems Journal 9(4): 249-269. Glaser, B. and. Strauss., A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York, Aldine De Gruyter. Goffman, E. (1990). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London, Penguin. Grenier, R. and Metes, G. (1995). Going Virtual: Moving your organization into the 21st century. Prentice Hall PTR. Jarvenpaa, S. L. and Leidner, D.E. (1999). “Communication and trust in global virtual teams.” Organizational Science 10(6): 761-815.

25

Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D.E. (1998). “Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams,.” Journal of Management Information Systems 14(4): 29-64. Kettinger, W. J. and Grover, V. (1997). “The use of computer-mediated communication in an interorganizational context.” Decision Sciences 28(3): 513-555. Kimball, L. (2000). Boundaryless Facilitation [web page] http://www.tmn.com/~lisa/bnd2.htm, date accessed 26 October, 2000. Kock, N. F., Jr., McQueen, R.J. & Scott, J.L. (1997). “ Can action research be made more rigorous in a positivist sense? The contribution of an iterative approach.” Journal of Systems and Information Technology 1(1): 1-24. Kraut, R. E., Fish, R.S., Root, R.W., & Chalfonte, B.L. (1993). Information Communication in Organizations: Form, Function, and Technology. Readings in Groupware and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. R. M. Baeker. San Mateo, CA, Morgan Kaufamann: 287-314. Lau F, Sarker S and Sahay S. On managing virtual teams. Healthcare Information Management Communications, Canada Vol 14(2):46-53; May 2000. Lewis, R. (1998). “Membership and management of a 'virtual' team: the perspective of a research manager.” R & D Management 28(1): 5-12. Moshowitz, A. (1997). “Virtual organization.” Communications of the ACM 40(9): 30-37. Nandhakumar, J. (1999). Virtual Teams and Lost Proximity: Consequences on Trust Relationships. Virtual Working: Social and Organizational Dynamics. P. Jackson. London, Routledge. Nunamaker, J., Briggs, R, Mittleman, D and Vogel, D (1999). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: a discussion of lab and field findings [web page] http://www.ventana.com/dozen.pdf. Ventana Corporation. Date accessed 26 October, 2000. Nunamaker, J. F., Dennis, A.R., Valacich, J.S., Vogel, D.R. and George, J.F. (1991). “Electronic meeting systems to support group work.” Communications of the ACM 34(7): 40-61. O’Hara-Devereaux, M. and Johansen, R. (1994). Global Work: Bridging distance, culture and time. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Pace, L.A. and Argona, D. R. (1991). Participatory Action Research: A View from Xerox. Participatory Action Research. W. F. Whyte. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Perey, C. (1997). Desktop Videoconferencing. Groupware: Collaborative Strategies for Corporate LANS and Intranets. D. Coleman. Upper Saddle River,, Prentice Hall. Sarker, S., Lau, F. and Sahay, S. (1999). Building an Inductive Theory of Collaboration in Virtual Teams: An Adapted Grounded Theory Approach. Hawaii International Conference in Systems Science, Hawaii.

26

Santos, J. L. G. (1991). Participatory Action Research: A View from FAGOR. Participatory Action Research. W. F. Whyte. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Schwartz, D.G., (1999). When e-mail meets organisazational memories: addressing threats to communication in a learning organization. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 51: 599-614. Schwartz, D.G., and Te'eni, D. (2000). Tying knowledge to action with kMail. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 6: 338-349. Strauss, A. L. and Corbin., J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, Sage Publications. Walther, J. B. (1997). “Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediate collaboration.” Human Communications Research 23(3): 342-369. Walther, J. and Burgoon, J.K. (1992). “Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction.” Human Communication Research 19: 50-88. Warkentin, M., and Beranek, P.M. (1999). “Training to improve virtual team communication.” Information Systems Journal 9: 271-289. Warkentin, M. E., Sayeed,L., and Hightower, R. (1997). “Virtual teams versus face-to-face teams: an exploratory study of a web-based conference system.” Decision Sciences 28: 975-996. Whyte, William Foote, editor.(1991). "Participatory Action Research". Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications. Yoong, P. and Gallupe, B. (2001). Action learning and groupware technologies: A case study in GSS facilitation research. Journal of Information Technology and People 14 (1), 78-90.

27

Participant/Positions

Organisation Previous experience

Project Team Participant's role

Team stage

DW Managing Director

New Zealand-based advertising company - part of an international partnership

very familiar with use of virtual communication channels

initiate a project within the international partnership

global, CEO membership, volunteer

team initiator and facilitator

initiation

BC Senior Policy Analyst

New Zealand Government Department

familiar with use of virtual communication channels

treaty negotiation between government and indigenous group

representatives from government departments and claimant group

facilitator on-going to conclusion

SC Independent contractor

New Zealand educational consulting company

familiar with use of virtual communication channels

construct web page, followed by management of web-based assessment center

local, Wellington (NZ) based, independent contractors

facilitator ongoing

RB General Manager

New Zealand software and business development consulting company

familiar with use of virtual communication channels and underlying technology

initiate virtual communication channels with branch office

members in New Zealand and Australia-

project initiator

initiation

RW Managing Director

New Zealand-based political consultancy operating worldwide as a virtual organisation

very familiar with use of virtual communication channels and experience facilitating virtual teams

manage a political campaign in California

members in New Zealand and California

facilititator initiation through conclusion

AR Project Manager

New Zealand office of international consulting company

very familiar with use of virtual communication channels and experience facilitating virtual teams

develop and write a strategic plan for Southeast Asian government ministry

members in Southeast Asia. Australia and New Zealand

facilitator evaluation of completed project

JJ Project Analyst

Austral Asian trading company

some experience as a student with use of virtual communication channels

open and organize a branch office in Vietnam

members in China, New Zealand and Australia

facilitator initiation

Table 1: Summary of the study's participants, organisations, project and teams

28

Appendix 1 Virtual Team Action Training Program Session One Virtual Team Implementation and Project Planning Session Two Developing Virtual Team Purpose, Communication Strategies and Protocols, and Technology Session Three Developing Team Identity, Building Relationships and Intercultural Communication Issues Session Four Preparing for and Facilitating Virtual Meetings Session Five Concluding a Virtual Team and Other Training Issues. Virtual Teams in the Organisation