ABSTRACT
HOW HAVE CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IMPACTED VIRTUAL TEAM EFFECTIVENESS: A STUDY OF TEAMS FROM THE UNITED STATES AND
by
Paul Gugel
There is a problem in many business organizations today and that problem is, cultural differences have impacted virtual team effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to better understand the cultural differences that affect virtual team member effectiveness. Analysis of culture differences helps organizations identify the areas of misunderstandings and conflicts between team members, misunderstandings that may cause problems. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge needed to address this problem by determining what cultural difference characteristics affect the effectiveness of virtual teams. The social and culture theory of Kendra Knudtzon will be the theoretical framework that supports this research. The theory acknowledges that technology primarily affects the interaction of people by influencing sociability. This identification helps in determining the techniques to resolve conflicts. The following research questions will guide this study: What types of cultural differences affect virtual team members, what are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment, and how does a business prepare employees for cultural differences. The data will be collected through surveys from a sample of 20 representing a team member and one team leader from each of the following companies Company A, Company B, and Company C. The CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of that business will be the team leader and the team members will be technicians who work under the CEO. The data will be analyzed using ATLAS.ti to determine the variable of each aspect. The variety of themes in three sets can then be narrowed down to the final set of themes for each research question.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………………………………………… viii
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………….. 1
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
Background of the Problem…………………………………………………………………………………… 2
Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Purpose of the Study…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
Significance of the Study………………………………………………………………………………………. 6
Research Questions………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
Theoretical Framework………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7
Nature of the Study………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
Assumptions………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
Scope and Delimitations………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
Limitations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 11
Definition of Terms…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 11
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 12
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………………………….. 14
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
Cultural Diversity……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
Differences in Communication……………………………………………………………………………… 17
Differences in Leadership……………………………………………………………………………………. 18
Management Styles…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
Virtual Teams…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
Theoretical Framework………………………………………………………………………………………… 28
Research Design…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………… 35
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35
Research Design………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 35
Population and Sample……………………………………………………………………………………………… 39
Instrumentation………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 39
Pilot Study…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 40
Role of the Researcher………………………………………………………………………………………… 40
Interview with Team Members……………………………………………………………………………… 41
Interview with the CEO………………………………………………………………………………………. 43
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 45
Validity and Reliability……………………………………………………………………………………….. 45
Role of the Researcher………………………………………………………………………………………… 46
Ethical Considerations…………………………………………………………………………………………. 46
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 47
References……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 49
Appendix A………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 52
APPENDIX B………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 53
appendix c…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 54
CONSENT LETTER……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 54
APPENDIX d………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 55
CONSENT FORM………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 55
appendix e…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 57
AUDIO/VIDEO RECORDING CONSENT FORM………………………………………………………… 57
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Research Questions and Interview Questions for Team Members…………………………… 42
Figure 2: Research Questions and Interview Questions for CEO…………………………………………. 44
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Introduction
Technological innovations and advancement have been the corner stone of economic and political development of countries since the industrial revolution. Technological inventions during this time facilitated mass production, increased industrial efficiency, lowered cost of operation, and consequently increased a firm’s profitability (Chelte, 2005). Since then, technology has been advancing, mainly driven by the market demands and the changing dynamics in product production and the provision of services. In the 21st century, firms are faced with the challenge of producing high quality goods and services to meet the rising demands of their customers while maintaining the firm’s profitability.
Advancements in the telecommunication sector in the 21st century have ushered in different methods of conducting businesses. Among the many such technologies is the adoption of virtual teams in business practices and teleconferencing in addition to the growing impact of the Internet as a mass media, which has shaped global business (Stasi, 2013). Virtual teams involve a group of business team members who conduct their business activities through technological networks from different geographical locations. The incorporation of these technologies in business practices has facilitated effective and efficient management of businesses.
Managers of businesses using virtual teams, where businesses are driven by information, and the growing need for global partnership and networking, have a significant challenge in managing their employees to ensure optimum productivity through maximum cooperation and supervision. Given the high competition in the market, managers are faced with the challenge of producing more in terms of quantity and quality while reducing the cost of operation mainly by maintaining a small work force (Yuksel, 2011). Virtual teams have offered a remedy to this challenge whereby teams can conduct their businesses effectively with members spread across the world. However, developing a proper platform for virtual team technology to ensure maximum productivity is the challenge that faces all managers. Above all, the danger posed by cultural differences is a major problem threatening the operationalization of virtual teams. This chapter will contain the background of the study, problem statement, purpose, significance of the study, research questions, theoretical/conceptual framework, definitions, nature of the study, assumptions, limitations, and scope and delimitations of the study followed by a summary of the chapter.
Background of the Problem
This study aims to investigate the effects of cultural differences on the effectiveness and efficiency of virtual teams. Many studies have been conducted to ascertain the effectiveness of virtual technology and the benefits it brings to firms but little research has been completed to analyze the impacts of cultural differences on virtual teams’ technology and productivity. Given the nature of the virtual team members’ geographical locations, cultural practices have a great impact on the coordination and productivity of virtual team members.
Production of quality goods and services is one of the strategies a firm applies to secure a market for its product. Increasingly, competition among product producers has increased intensely, mainly driven by the expansion in the production sector coupled with the changing customer demands. Producing firms have been forced to undertake reconstruction in the methods and the technologies applied in production so as to obtain a comparable advantage with their competitors (Yuksel, 2011). Optimal production of goods and services demand a proper combination of production factors, mainly labor and capital, to maximize efficiency thereby lowering cost, which translates to increased profitability. The amount and quality of labor at a firm’s disposal is a key element towards the volume and the quality of a firm’s productivity. The acquisition of the correct competencies and capabilities that meet the demands of the job specification is the ultimate goal of any manager (Dyson, 2006). However, many times, discrepancy exists between the labor market and the job demands. To this end, training of employees becomes an integral part of the management process to impact the relevant skills of the employees. Given the dynamism in the technological sector, staff training is inevitable to ensure the employees are up to date with the technology.
Technological improvement and its consequent adoption in the production processes have enabled firms to increase their effectiveness mainly through the management of human capital. By embracing virtual technology in a team’s environment, organizations have experienced an increase in the firm’s efficiency in addition to increased productivity (Dyson, 2006). However, the efficacy and the effectiveness of virtual teams remains a bone of contention. The coordination of virtual teams poses a great challenge to efficiency of the systems given the challenges involved in bringing to one voice a team whose members are in different geographical locations. Proper training and initial face-to-face communication is necessary as a prerequisite to virtual teams’ coordination. This kind of employee team work is the latest technology that has brought a revolution to both the product and service sectors (Chelte, 2005). However, this communication platform is faced with numerous challenges that threaten the usability of virtual team technology.
Firms have undergone numerous structural changes, discarding the traditional methods of production in favor of adoption of modern technology to maintain a competitive edge in the ever-increasing competitive market (Chelte, 2005). There is a positive correlation between a firm’s productivity and employees’ rewards. Employees who are highly compensated tend to be more productive than poorly rewarded and motivated employees. Given the cost of hiring and maintaining highly skilled employees, firms are forced to look for these more productive employees across the world and engage their services without necessarily relocating them from their location, but rather embracing telecommunication (Manuel, 2009). A firm’s productivity is enhanced through proper management of the workforce, mainly through the emphasis and the maintenance of working teams in the job environment. Teams’ efficiency is enhanced by the interpersonal relationship ties that are created through face-to-face conversations and other problem and decision making engagements that the team is experiencing (Stasi, 2013).
Virtual teams have offered an avenue to outsource talents in addition to cutting down cost by engaging the services of these professionals (Yuksel, 2011). The teams are contracted to perform a specific task, which upon completion, terminates their engagement with the firm. However, the effectiveness of these teams is adversely affected by the cultural backgrounds of the team members. In many occasions, a language barrier exists due to dialects and poor command of a foreign language by one or more of the team members. This adversely affects the coordination and the quality of communication among the members, which can result in inefficiencies and conflict. In addition, cultural superiority poses a more challenging situation whereby the superior culture takes the upper hand as the preferred method of communication (Manuel, 2009). This deters proper communication among the team members because members from other cultures feel left out in the process of the team, thereby threatening the work of the virtual teams.
The need for quality skills and competencies by firms has resulted in great cost implications for the firm in the quest to recruit and retain such quality workers. In addition, training packages adopted by firms to improve their workforce are equally expensive, and the outcomes of such staff training do not always result in the development of highly skilled workers. This problem of human capital management forces the management to outsource relevant skill from the labor market on a short-term basis (Manuel, 2009). This outsourcing for talent has created cultural differences within the virtual team and has encouraged the call for adoption of technology to facilitate virtual teams to guarantee access to a pool of competencies at a lesser cost.
Statement of the Problem
There is a problem in many business organizations today. That problem is cultural differences have impacted virtual team effectiveness (Shachaf, 2008). Part of this impact on virtual team effectiveness can be described as “the virtual team environments may also be lacking in critical non-verbal aspects of communication and traditional cues of social interaction such as body language and hand gestures that are lost in even the best teleconferencing and communications systems” (Spotts & Chelte, 2005, p. 127). Cultural differences are the variations in the way of life, beliefs, traditions, and laws between different countries, religions, societies and people. Many people see culture as an all-encompassing overview of large groups of people. However, the word culture can be used to describe the way of life of much smaller groups. This problem impacts many business organizations today that rely on virtual teams because “enterprises are becoming flatter organizations with temporary structures, virtual teams, networking and doing more both in quantity and quality with less people” (Yuksel, 2001, p. 104). This study will contribute to the body of knowledge needed to address this problem by determining what cultural difference characteristics affect the effectiveness of virtual teams.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to better understand the cultural differences that affect virtual team member effectiveness. Analysis of culture differences helps organizations to identify the areas of misunderstandings and conflicts between team members that may cause problems. Further, this identification also helps in identifying the techniques to resolve conflicts (Stasi, 2013). Likewise, it supports intercultural understanding and cooperation among team members.
A company’s best practices should be based on cross-cultural management, in which management can consider that each culture behaves and thinks differently. As many companies operate their business in different cultural environments, it is necessary that its employees understand the different cultural practices to work efficiently at the global level (Stasi, 2013). Cultural training of employees will facilitate bridging the cultural gap in organizations and will facilitate proper and efficient team performance in addition to promoting harmony and ideological convergence among team members and the firm’s employees at large.
Significance of the Study
This study will contribute to the body of knowledge needed to address this problem by determining what cultural difference characteristics affect the effectiveness of virtual teams. This study aims at identifying the factors, such as cultural differences, which threaten the existence and workability of virtual teams. Technological advancement demands adjustments in the process of product production and service provision. Globalization has provided the interconnectivity of firms and organizations throughout the world by the development of efficient platforms of information sharing of technology and other resources. Adoption of the latest technology in the production of goods and services has increased a firm’s efficiency thereby cutting down their cost of operation, which translates to higher returns (Dyson, 2006). These returns have facilitated massive expansion of these firms and increased the competition for the market of their products. To this end, firms are obligated to be ahead technologically to ensure maximum production of goods and services at the lowest cost to remain competitive in the global market characterized by cut-throat competition. This is an example on how technology can potentially affect firms. As technology advances, firms have to make the necessary policy adjustments and train staff on how cultural differences can affect virtual teams.
Research Questions
The following research questions will guide this study:
What types of cultural differences affect team members and their interactions in a virtual team?
What are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment?
What types of training does your Company Do for different types of cultural differences?
Theoretical Framework
Cultural and social aspects are essential in any business. Good social relation with customers and other stakeholders in a business are critical to its productivity. The aspect of culture affects any business both intrinsically and extrinsically. With the development of technology, new platforms for corporate activities have resulted in virtual teams. This paper explores the issue of culture that affects virtual teams. The social and culture theory of Kendra Knudtzon (2002) will be the theoretical framework that supports this research.
Knudtzon’s theory seeks to explain how people relate to others and their environment. The theory acknowledges that technology primarily affects the interaction of people by influencing sociability. Knudtzon (2002) reveals that face-to-face interaction is different from computer sociability. Technology development highly influences communication among people. Communication is an essential aspect of culture and determines the sociability among people. Therefore, with the advent of technology, the human-computer interaction becomes an essential aspect of culture. Yet, cultural differences exist in how different cultures communicate and these differences affect the effectiveness of virtual teams. The advent of the global economy has resulted in the rise of virtual teams as a way of improving business operations. Virtual teams refer to team members who interact primarily through the use of information technology such as emails and VOIP. Virtual team members rarely meet face-to-face. According to Knudtzon (2002), virtual teams can be classified as an online community. Knudtzon argues that the online community is faced with the challenge of destruction of personal social relationship.
Knudtzon (2002) states that these virtual teams also result in the destruction of personal social relationship. This destruction occurs primarily due to interference with communication. In inferring with the influence of this aspect of culture on virtual teams, Knudtzon states that there is a dispute between social theories and computer sociability. This dispute occurs due to interference with communication between different cultures. Communication affects virtual team performance in two various aspects. First, cultural differences affect message interpretation (Huls, Piggott & Zwiers, 2014). Diverse cultures have differences in interpretation of a message making it difficult for members of the virtual teams to understand each other, which may compromise their productivity. The difficulty in understanding each other results from differences in cognition in a team as compared to that at an individual level. Communication misinterpretations are critical aspects of cultural differences, and it can affect the performance of virtual teams.
The second aspect of communication that affects virtual teams is the technological platform used. Differences in cultural preferences of various technological platforms present a challenge to the satisfaction of virtual team’s members. As stated earlier, virtual team members do not meet physically but use technology to converse with each other. Consequently, the sociability of people is affected.
Usually, members of virtual teams are from different cultures and subcultures. Spatial differences in culture prevent the establishment of trust within virtual teams. Huls, Piggott and Zwiers (2014) expound on this issue and claim that it is hard to establish trust within virtual teams due to the deviation from the normal way of sociability in the use of technology. Language is also an essential aspect of virtual teams. Often, virtual teams comprise multilingual members. Such cases result in a communication barrier that may halt operations of virtual teams.
Culture is an essential aspect of business and can affect its operations and productivity. It determines how the corporate community interacts. Cultural differences highly influence the functionality of virtual teams. Trust, communication and language, which are intertwined, are the aspects of culture that affect virtual teams.
The purpose of this study is to better understand the cultural differences that affect virtual team member effectiveness. Analysis of culture differences helps organizations to identify the areas of misunderstandings and conflicts between team members that may cause problems. Further, this identification also helps in identifying the techniques to resolve conflicts (Stasi, 2013). Likewise, it supports intercultural understanding and cooperation among team members.
Nature of the Study
A qualitative case study research design will be used to gather data about the impact of cultural differences with virtual teams. The population will consist of Company A, Company B and Company C which are three businesses associates of the ABC Company located in Marlette, Michigan. The ABC Company’s primary service is rural health for U.S. The three business associates were chosen because they are from different parts of the U.S., because of different employee sizes, and because their different employee sizes imply different cultural characteristics. The sample of 10 will consist of four members from each company. To be part of the sample, an employee needs to have been a team member of the company and worked for the company for at least six months. Such time duration will ensure that the selected participants are well conversant with the various issues regarding virtual teams.
Assumptions
The assumptions of this study include conditions that are taken for granted and are critical to the meaningfulness of the study:
It is assumed that virtual teams fail because of cultural differences amongst the virtual team members, which inhibit coordination and productivity of the virtual teams.
It is assumed that effective communication is the pillar behind effective coordination of teamwork, which affects the level of productivity of virtual teams.
It is assumed that the participants who are interviewed will be truthful about their responses to the interview questions.
Scope and Delimitations
Delimitations of this study are those characteristics that limit the boundaries and scope of the study. This study will take place in New Jersey, Minnesota, and California which will focus research on Company A, Company B, and Company C, that uses virtual team technology. Other factors may affect the effectiveness and efficiency of virtual teams but this study will focus on only one factor, namely, cultural differences of team members.
Limitations
The limitations of the study are those characteristics of design or methodology that may affect the interpretation of the results.
The study will only be carried out in New Jersey, Minnesota, and California; therefore, generalizing for the entire USA may be biased
The study will use only four corporations from New Jersey, Minnesota, and California as the sample space and therefore generalizing the entire USA corporate population from this small sample may be biased
Electronic interviews may only gather limited information
Definition of Terms
These are general definition terms that are used in a virtual team environment. The definitions will eliminate any confusion or misunderstanding.
Centralization: The degree to which formal decision authority is held by a small group of people; typically, those at the top of the organizational hierarchy (Chelte, 2005).
Divisional structure: An organizational structure that groups employees around geographic areas, clients, or outputs (Chelte, 2005).
Formalization: The degree to which organizations standardize behavior through rules, procedures, formal training, and related mechanisms (Chelte, 2005).
Matrix structure: A type of departmentalization that overlays a divisionalized structure (typically a project team) with a functional structure (Chelte, 2005).
Network structure: An alliance of several organizations for the purpose of creating a product or serving a client (Chelte, 2005).
Organic structure: An organizational structure with a wide span of control, little formalization, and decentralized decision making (Chelte, 2005).
Organizational strategy: The way an organization positions itself in its setting in relation to its stakeholders, given the organization’s resources, capabilities, and mission (Chelte, 2005).
Organizational structure: The division of labor and the patterns of coordination, communication, work flow, and formal power that direct organizational activities (Chelte, 2005).
Span of control: The number of people directly reporting to the next level in the organizational hierarchy (Chelte, 2005).
Team-based organization: A type of departmentalization with a flat hierarchy and relatively little formalization, consisting of self-directed work teams responsible for various work processes (Chelte, 2005).
Virtual corporations: Network structures representing several independent companies that form unique partnership teams to provide customized products or services, usually to specific clients, for a limited time (Chelte, 2005).
Summary
Modern organizations face many significant challenges because of turbulent environments and a competitive global economy. Among these challenges are the use of information and communication technology (ICT), a multicultural workforce, and organizational designs that involve global virtual teams. Ad-hoc teams create both opportunities and challenges for organizations and many organizations are trying to understand how the virtual environment affects team effectiveness. In the business world today, many businesses are struggling with virtual teams because of cultural differences. Cultural differences can cause a communication failure, which will affect the efficiency and effectiveness of that virtual team. The purpose of this study will provide the knowledge base about virtual teams and cultural differences, identify common elements that may influence virtual teams, and improve the understanding on how cultural differences can affect virtual teams.
Chapter 2 will include the literature pertaining to the problem, data to be collected, theoretical framework, and research design.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This literature review will explore the problem of cultural diversity in virtual teams. The purpose of this study is to better understand the cultural differences that affect virtual team member effectiveness. Analysis of cultural differences allows organizations to identify the areas of misunderstandings and conflicts between team members that may result in serious problems. Further, this identification also helps in identifying the techniques to resolve conflicts (Stasi, 2013). It also helps in improving intercultural understanding and cooperation among team members.
Cultural differences have impacted virtual team effectiveness (Shachaf, 2008). Part of this impact related to virtual team effectiveness can be described as “the virtual team environments may also be lacking in critical non-verbal aspects of communication and traditional cues of social interaction such as body language and hand gestures that are lost in even the best tele-conferencing and communications systems” (Spotts & Chelte, 2005, p. 127).
These are the sources that were used for this literature review—ProQuest and Google Scholar. This chapter contains a literature review of the following topics: Cultural Diversity, Differences in Communication, Differences in Leadership, Management Styles, Virtual Teams, Theoretical Framework, and Research Design.
Cultural Diversity
Cultural diversity refers to a range of people or societies that bear different origins, traditions or religions, all living while they interact (Ager & Brückner, 2013). While addressing cultural diversity in an organizational context, Cox (1993) describes cultural diversity as a concept rooted in the idea that the unique cultures should neither be ignored nor disregarded, but instead, valued and maintained. This description is in harmony with Day and Brunner’s (2009) description of the concept as a set of behaviors and beliefs that respects and recognizes the presence of every diverse group within a society or an organization, accepts and esteems their socio-cultural aspects unique to every group, and promotes and aids their constant contribution inside an inclusive cultural setting that empowers everyone in a societal or organizational context. The concept of cultural diversity is of great significance in the contemporary American society for the reason that the country itself, together with the learning institutions and workplaces, are made up of varied racial, ethnic and cultural groups (Priest & Nieves, 2006). To capitalize on this diversity, the groups have to find a way to understand one another to attain cooperation and collaboration that is crucial to overall improvement in team performance.
Cultural diversity is one of the issues affecting virtual teams in the contemporary American community. According to Garfias (1991), the United States was never a culturally diverse society earlier on. But globalization has made cultural differences to be an issue worth addressing. Typically, the current America is basically dominated by western values; it is also under the influence of Asian, Native American, Latin American and Polynesian cultures. The present racial and ethnic diversity has roots in the intensified migration from many ethnically and racially diversified communities in addition to variation in death and birth rates among the immigrants, settlers and natives. The U.S has been conventionally deemed as a melting pot. Greene (2011) presents diversity from a different perspective when he posits that the U.S has its own individualized cultures like music, habit, dialects and social behaviors that have played a role in the present diversified state. From the onset of 1960s, the country has been getting more inclined towards pluralism, cultural diversity and the salad bowl image. Based on the domineering traits of the American culture, numerous subcultures have come to be within the country. Often times, the cultural affiliations of these subcultures of individual citizens is dictated by issues such as political orientation, social class and a host of demographic features like ethnic group membership, occupation, and religious foundation.
A study by Shachaf (2008) recognized cultural diversity as one the factors that have negatively impacted the effectiveness of global virtual teams (GVT). Effects on virtual teams from this diversity are caused by challenges that pertain to intercultural communication. In essence, language and cultural differences may cause miscommunication, which affects team identity, cohesion and trust. In Shachaf’s study, the complexities encompassed more heightened interaction costs alongside the effects that underlie intercultural communication and miscommunication. The communication challenges were results of language and cultural barriers. In particular, language issues posed a challenge in both spoken and written modes, thus prompting team members to devote extra effort and time to encode and decode messages. Consequently, the interaction cost increased at both the sender and the receiver end.
Because of a global society, virtual teams face new challenges. Lockwood did a report on a large globalized workplace that would address problems with communication in virtual teams. Lockwood’s report addresses communication problems that are caused by technology. Lockwood (2015) reported that the lack of trust, lack of meeting skills management, intercultural communication breakdown and technology instability were some of the many challenges facing virtual teams. Business managers depend on effective communication between team members to complete the task. “Accents, as a location of communication breakdown in workplaces, are well-documented in a number of studies” (Lockwood, 2015, p. 137). Without effective communication, a specific task may end up as a failure.
Differences in Communication
In the business world, managers build relationships with their employees through face-to-face communication, which builds trust and creates a work relationship. This type of team building is common in many businesses today, but the lack of face-to-face communication is one of those challenges facing virtual teams. In the virtual team environment, managers do not have the option of that face-to-face communication to build a trust work relationship (Lockwood, 2015). Frequency and continuity of communication between members is necessary for global virtual teams to be effective (Scott & Wildman, 2015). Scott and Wildman (2015) used student population and temporary teams in their research to understand the effects of culture, communication, and conflict with GVTs effectiveness. Scott and Wildman noted in their research that culture and geography affect GVT effectiveness.
That lack of face-to-face communication to build that relationship is just one challenge facing virtual teams. In order for team members to have trust, each team member should make a good-faith effort for all commitments, be honest about those commitments, and not take advantage of other team members (Lacerenza et al., 2015).
The lack of communication between virtual team members can ultimately become a problem. Some virtual team members may be situated in different time zones. “One unavoidable obstacle is the conflict that occurs when communication must transpire between differing time zones and schedules” (Lacerenza, Zajac, Savage, & Salas, 2015, p. 91). This difference in time zones can be problematic when each team member holds specific information about the project and with that lack of communication, it may be difficult for this project to become successful. This is only one communication issue that a culturally diverse society faces, particularly in organizations using virtual teams, which may have members in other cultures and countries.
Differences in Leadership
Effective leadership is a must for a successful virtual team. Without proper leadership, it does not matter if it is a virtual team or any other structure within that organization, because the likelihood of that task succeeding is very small. “Leadership becomes even more important within Global Virtual Teams (GVTs) as different aspects of culture impact the emergence of leadership, the effectiveness of leadership styles, and the team’s acceptance of the leader” (Lacerenza, Zajac, Savage, & Salas, 2015, p. 97). Leadership is crucial within GVTs as culture, leadership styles, and the team’s acceptance of that leader all have some impact on GVTs effectiveness. When considering different cultural backgrounds for GVTs, one particular leadership style and hierarchical structure may work well for one organization but may not work well for another. Leadership is the process of influencing and supporting others to work enthusiastically toward achieving objectives. The performance of the Company Depends on the leadership practices.
Numerous evidences point to the idea of group composition directly or indirectly impacting group outcomes and calling on the leaders to address the underpinning issues. Shachaf (2008) posits that teams with extreme homegeneity and heterogeneity exhibit a hightened level of productivity, whereas less heterogenous teams feature a lower productivity level. Shachaf cites sources like Daily, Whatley, Ash, and Steiner (1996), who hold the opinion that a diversified lot can have greater efficiency as pertains to work output. Cultural diversity in a team is seen as an opportunity to use variation in the perspectives of the involved employees to improve creativity. Additionally, diversity exposes team members to several options when seeking answers to their questions or concerns, thus helping to improve team performance.
Although a diversified team could be promising to the leadership of an enterprise by improving performance, attainment of improved perfomance is never easy, mainly because of the communication barriers that are common among diversified groups. Shachaf (2008) identifies cultural diversity as one of the factors that are known to heighten the conflicts, complexities, confusion and ambiguity underpinning team communication, thus posing challenges for members and leaders. It is for this reason that some studies like Stumbling Blocks in Intercultural Communication by Barna (1994), have associated culturally diversified lots with limited cohesion and integration as manifested through slower speech, erroneous communication alongside translation problems (Shachaf, 2008). Regardless of the interaction platform used by virtual teams, presence of the stated limitations poses a constraint on the efficiency with which messages are finally channeled from the senders to the receivers.
Spotts and Chelte (2005) discuss the impact of virtual teams within learning environments and argue that students in virtual learning centers can still depict the high performance level if subjected to ongoing evaluation, thus paving the way for effectiveness in the virtual world. In other words, virtual teams can at times perceive themseleves as more cohesive groups capable of enjoying the individual contributions of respective team members; Spotts and Chelte further state that this is brought about by the high level of accountability that is common in the online learning arena. Often times, the accountability is actualized through the plan by the learning institutions to record the student-centered formal interaction sessions whilst provding a transcript ahead of reviews. In essence, it is this practice that leads Spotts and Chelte to suggest that team leaders need to use effective management as a tool to raise morality, promote innovativeness and increase the productivity associated with virtual teams.
Management Styles
Warkentin and Beranek (1999) present synchronous and asynchronous methods as the two main approaches of managing virtual teams. Synchronous management refers to an “involved team” working from geographically separate locations at approximately the same time, whereas asynchronous management involves an “involved team” working in geographically separate locations at different times. One loophole that has been mentioned in the synchronous approach to virtual communication is that the spontaneous responses open way for team members to exchange ideas with little structure. Besides, the participants communicate with one another in such a manner that it, at times, becomes difficult attributing a given idea to an individual participant or determing the reason that forms the basis of a given decision. On the other hand, asynchronous sessions look more structured in comparison with the synchronous sessions. In many cases, the sessions depend on documents exchanged by the involved participants. Such a manner of operation allows team members to associate an idea with an originator, in addition to allowing members to figure out the reasons that underlie a given decision. Though beneficial, asynchronous sesssions take longer time, hence may pose danger to the productivity of an enterprise. In this reign of information and enterprise globalization, management teams are compelled to handle issues such as increasing competition and uncertainty alongside the rapid changes in the operation environments of different organizational contexts. Such challenges have seen some organizations transform into flatter enterprises bearing virtual teams, temporary structures and with a mission to achieve more through a limited number of employees. One motivating factor behind this move is the point that business entities that own non-substitutable and unique competencies and resources that are not attainable by their competitors are likely to have a competitive advantage.
Gibson and Cohen (2003) suggest that virtual teams need to be structured in a pattern that remains consistent across diversified cultures. In their suggestion, they underscore the importance of designing, managing and implementing virtual teams in a manner that allows harnessing of different talents all through the globe while aiming at solving business challenges, serving customers and creating new product brands.
Though there are a number of inherent shortcomings in the use of GVT for communication, business entities can still follow a set of best practices to create an enabling environment for effective performance of virtual teams (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). The specific measures include the following. First, the teams need to have a shared understanding regarding the objectives, the processes leading to the accomplishment of the objectives and the role that each of the participating members is to assume. By building on a shared and a common understanding, a virtual team learns how to alleviate the diversity that pertains to contrasting schools of thought. Second, the teams should be structured in ways that allow given organizational departments to work in unity. In general, different organizations are subject to varied levels of uncertainty in the operational environment and worldwide competitive pressures. This variation gives the meaning that there is a higher likelihood of the organizational units bearing varied policies, systems and organization structures which can directly or indirectly impair virtual team communication. For instance, an organizational unit could feature IT policies that do not allow mailing to outside organizations; therefore, it will not communicate to other organizations via mail. Finally, the virtual teams need to be structured in ways that can build and allow members to win one another’s trust and communicate freely.
Competition for competent staff is set to be more intensive in the future, considering that the main difficulty with staff will be to hire and retain. Other than proficiency in information processing and digital operation, staff will be required to have great innovation skills and global vision to be considered more valuable. Besides, a culture that cherishes high performance will result in heightened expectations as per recognition, working climate as well as pay initiatives. In general, the dynamic nature of the digital world, especially in the service sector, poses opportunities and threats for nearly everyone. All over the world, IT tools are perceived as instruments that can breed implications to business enterprises from offering costs savings, expanding target markets, and introducing a more intensified competition among firms. It is on this ground that the contemporary employers rarely perceive appropriate competencies in the knowledge that their prospective staff gain through formal learning institutions. To make the staff fit, management often invests in training workshops while targeting current staff along with modification of technology to suit the skill-sets that are available among staff. Thus, information processors aspiring to enjoy the improved compensations that relate to IT should be at the forefront to embrace the new technologies alongside upgrading their skills to be transformed into knowledgeable workers capable of becoming members of virtual teams.
In order to increase a common understanding within the virtual teams that the knowledge workers form, Gibson and Cohen (2003) suggest that managers could begin by composing groups or teams that bear a similar background. According to them, teams with shared backgrounds—in a demographic or professional sense—have a higher likelihood of figuring out and resolving differences and conflicts that arise among them in a productive fashion than teams with members from dominantly diversified backgrounds. Silicon chip design team is a prime example of a virtual team whose success is based on teams composed of members who share a disciplinary background, which leads to a more intensified friendship than it would have been expected of a team that is geographically dispersed.
Composing virtual teams consisting of similar members is rarely practical, and risks interfering with other objectives of the teams. For instance, teams consisting of product developers will often need to bear variation in expertise to trigger more significant innovations. Developing culturally-diverse teams can help managers ensure that product designs consider the variation in needs that are associated with given cultural settings. Nonetheless, team members still have the ability to view themselves as a single unit despite managers desiring team diversity or the same managers failing to find pleasure in recruiting staff from a large collection of qualified candidates. To actualize this, Gibson and Cohen (2003) suggest that managers should devise formal training programs on differences in cultural diversities to make virtual team members more knowledgeable of their similarities.
Virtual Teams
Increasing growth of the Internet-based communication and growing trends in globalization have brought about the rising number of employers who wish to use virtual teams to execute routine duties inside and across different organizations. According to Warkenting and Baranek (1999), the GVTs are becoming a reality in the 21st century business contexts, with many business entities establishing branches all throughout the globe and employing teams that have never even met each other to work on joint projects. This trend is partly attributed to the idea of multinational entities resorting to outsourcing as a way to enjoy the services of different expertise to remain relevant in the face of the growing level of competition among business entities.
Formally defined, virtual teams refer to teams that are made up of workgroup sets using technology to communicate or collaborate with the intention of accomplishing a given task (Warkenting & Baranek, 1999). Typically, these teams are based in geographically separate regions and the technology under use is computer mediated communication systems (CMCS). These computer-oriented communication utilities help to alleviate the time and space constraints that face one-on-one meetings, improve the depth and range of information that team members gain access to, improve the effectiveness of a group’s task performance by getting rid of process losses, and increase the capacity range and speed regarding managerial communications. These mentioned benefits work together to improve an organization’s overall performance.
One of the objectives of embracing the GVT technologies is creation of the selfsame levels of effectiveness and speed that is associated with the communication patterns in conventional meetings. This has not been easy to achieve because of cultural differences among the involved members. In spite of these differences, it is still possible to train virtual teams to appreciate the value of group interaction. In a study aimed at establishing the impact of training virtual teams on the communication-related benefits of group interactions, Warkenting and Baranek (1999) reveal that teams that obtained relevant training ended up showing an improved attitude towards the interaction process in the long run, particularly in spheres such as sincere expressions, commitment and trust.
The advent of the global virtual teams (GVT) has seen a number of the 21st century organizations integrate superb expertise available for task-related performance, in spite of the involved parties being in different geographic locations. As a result, multinational organizations have been able to access a wider range of skills that are believed to minimize development time in addition to increasing organizational performance, team participation and lateral communication. Though well aimed, this state of the art practice faces more significant communication challenges in comparison with the conventional face-to-face teams. This is partly attributed to a culturally disparate composition of numerous teams, which increases the complexity during the use of GVT to support routine business duties, considering that cultural biases are likely to distort communication.
Technology has opened up opportunities for organizations today to communicate virtually. Some of the draw-backs with this type of communication could be prerecorded video conferencing where the communication is only one way and it lacks the ability for the other team members to engage in the discussion. “Asynchronous communication allows team members to carry on conversations over long periods of time or when schedules conflict, but may hinder openness and information sharing as well as shared consensus on task representation and task strategy” (Lacerenza, Zajac, Savage, & Salas, 2015, p. 94). Teleconferencing is another issue that affects virtual teams today because that technology lacks the ability for visual cues that can help build a work relationship. Virtual teams that use teleconferencing lack eye contact, a smile, and nodding.
A number of sources contend that virtual teams only come to be after numerous cultural hurdles have been dealt with (Spotts & Chelte, 2005; Shah, Raza & UlHaq, 2012). Contrary to the virtual teams, physical teams that have attained mutual trust serve as safe avenues for members wishing to engage in communication, and are ready to make risky moves while letting their susceptibility show. In essence, human beings have the tendency to trust individuals seen to be similar to them, yet the communication pattern in the virtual teams does not exhibit the interpersonal cues that help in building trust in the conventional communication patterns. In explaining the shortcomings of using GVT to communicate, Spotts and Chelte (2005) describe virtual teams as avenue that lack crucial non-verbal perspectives of communication alongside the traditional cues that are typical of social interactions such as eye contact or nodding.
Shachaf (2008) completed a study on the effects of cultural diversity and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) related to team effectiveness; this study identified the aspects of intercultural communication likely to be negatively impacted as a result of cultural diversity. The particular aspects were direct vs. indirect, contextual vs. personal, succinct vs. elaborate and instrumental vs. affective cultures. Direct vs. indirect pattern means the degree to which individuals disclose their intention via explicit verbal communication. Contextual style was formal, which reflects the social and organizational differences between people and the personal style assumed similarity and equality. Elaborate style provides the required information, and succinct style provides less verbal information while using silence and pauses. The instrumental style is sender and goal oriented, and the affective style is receiver and process oriented (Shachaf, 2008).
According to Shachaf (2008), Israelis and Americans raised the concern that GVT members based in China or Japan were never direct in terms of communication. As such, these team members often felt confused while they pleaded with the Asian team to give further clarifications and more precise responses, and deduced that communication with the Asian team was such a great frustration. There is no doubt that such a level of discontentment impairs proper channeling of information and effectiveness of the virtual team.
Dyson and Nataatmadja (2006) cite Geert Hofstede’s 6-year study on numerous IBM employees based in 53 countries. According to the study, the cultural diversities challenging virtual teams are: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism, masculinity vs. femininity, and long-term vs. short-term orientation. Dyson and Nataatmadja (2006) also cite Edward Hall’s work related to the impact of cultural diversity on communication. Hall states that low-context societies practice direct and explicit communication whereas high-context societies use communication patterns requiring familiarity with both verbal and non-verbal cues that bear implicit meanings. Further, the latter class has interest in the backgrounds and the history of association of the communicators. For instance, parties will be found attaching more values to messages conveyed by the respected lot or fellows with high social status compared to low-context societies.
Getting virtual teams to link up teams distributed all over the globe is never easy. Team leaders often have to formulate plans that can tackle issues like the inherent cultural diversity among team members alongside the involved team being located in varied countries. It is this challenge that makes Dyson and Nataatmadja (2006) report that attaining effectiveness within culturally diverse virtual teams to be an expensive and intimidating endeavor. The differences will be depicted in spheres such as contrasing methods of solving problems, variation in work ethics, varied ideas as pertains to what should be treated as a good performance, communication patterns, loyalty to the authorities, and variation in the scope of accountbaility within a work environment. If left unaddressed, the differences can lead to conflicts that can severly impact the performance and quality associated with a virtual team.
Two task-related characteristics that have been mentioned of virtual team conflicts and differences are task routineness and task independence (Kankanhalli, Tan, & Wei, 2007). The task routine is the programmability and the extent of structuredness of a task. Considering this characteristic, virtual teams founded on routine tasks have limited instances of ambiguities in terms of solutions or paths towards executing given tasks, thus reducing conflicts in the teams. On the other hand, task interdependence is the degree to which members of a team should rely on one another in an effort to accomplish tasks. Using this criteria, the impact of conflict among team members is likely to be higher if the involved team members are performing tasks that depend on one another. This means that cultural diversities can affect team performance more if the members of the team in question are charged with duties that are reliant on each other.
Theoretical Framework
This research will be guided by Knudtzon’s model of how people relate to others and their environment including human computer interaction. The theory acknowledges that technology primarily affects the interaction of people by influencing sociability. Knudtzon (2002) reveals that face-to-face interaction is different from computer sociability. In developing the model, Knudtzon relied on various social-cultural theories that inform studies on human computer interaction; these include, social informatics theories, CSCW models, online community models that emerged from the work of Whittaker (1997), activity theory, and distributed cognition models. Knudtzon developed her model based on these key models. Knudtzon’s model of human-computer interaction can be viewed as an assemblage or consolidation of other theories into one human-computer interaction theory. Technology development highly influences communication among people. Communication is an essential aspect of culture and determines the sociability among people. Therefore, with the advent of technology, the human-computer interaction becomes an essential aspect of culture. Yet, cultural differences exist in how different cultures communicate and these cultural differences which are affected by today’s technology affect the effectiveness of virtual teams. The advent of the global economy has resulted in the rise of virtual teams as a way of improving business operations. Virtual teams refer to team members, communicating via distance and hence involving different cultures, who interact primarily through the use of information technology and rarely meet face-to-face. According to Knudtzon (2002), virtual teams can be classified as an online community.
In inferring the influence of this aspect of culture on virtual teams, Knudtzon states that there is a dispute between social theories and computer sociability. This dispute occurs due to interference with communication between different cultures. Communication affects virtual team performance in two various aspects. First, cultural differences affect message interpretation (Huls, Piggott & Zwiers, 2014). Diverse cultures have differences in interpretation of message making it difficult for members of the virtual teams to understand each other which may compromise their productivity. The difficulty in understanding each other results from differences in cognition in a team as compared to an interference with communication between different cultures. Communication misinterpretations are critical aspects of cultural differences, and it can affect the performance of virtual teams.
The second aspect of communication that affects virtual teams is the technological platform used. Differences in cultural preferences of various technological platforms offer critical aspects of cultural differences, and it can affect the performance of virtual teams. Communication also affects the technological platform that a virtual team utilizes. Differences in cultural preferences of various technological platforms offer a challenge to the satisfaction of virtual team’s members. Knudtzon’s model of human computer interaction emerged from the existing social and cultural theories related to human interaction.
The Knudtzon’s model of human-computer interaction is supported by various studies such as research by Alhawary, Shacaf, Staples & Zhao and others. A study by Alhawary (2012) on factors affecting collaboration among members of virtual teams using technology for communicating shows that cultural differences are important determinants of collaboration, which consequently affects the success of virtual teams. The study sought to examine factors that affected collaboration among members of virtual teams in Jordanian Royal Medical Services. A sample of 105 members was drawn from two Jordanian health services, the King Hussein Medical centre and Queen Alia medical centre. Using simple regression analysis, Alhawary (2012) found that cultural differences had significant effect on collaboration. However, the study has its limitation since it employed a case study approach thus reducing its generalizability.
These findings are further supported by the results of Shacaf (2008) on the impact of cultural diversity on virtual teams. Shacaf (2008) sought to examine the impact of cultural diversity on the effectiveness of global virtual teams using technology as their communication tool. The exploratory study collected data from 41 members of virtual teams from 9 countries. Results from the study indicate that cultural diversity enhanced the decision making process. However, cultural diversity had a negative effect on communication among members. The results can be attributed to the fact that different cultures have different approaches to communication. Shacaf (2008) further noted that information communication technology mitigated against the negative effects of communication among the virtual team members.
Another important study is by Staples and Zhao (2006). The study sought to investigate the impact of cultural diversity on virtual teams. The study focused on the performance of culturally heterogeneous teams versus that of a homogeneous cultural team. In the study, the researchers created teams based on language spoken, nationality and individual versus collectivism values. Each team was tasked with developing a desert survival kit. Staples and Zhao (2006) found that heterogeneous teams were less united and had more instances of conflict as compared to their homogeneous counterparts. However, there were no statistical differences specific to performance. These findings further support Knudtzon’s model of the impact of cultural diversity on virtual teams.
A study conducted by Hung and Nguyen (2008) found that cultural diversity has a significant effect on collaboration among virtual team members. In their study on the impact of collectivism/individualism on collaboration among team members, Hung and Nguyen (2008) found that people who came from countries with high levels of individualism were less likely to collaborate with their counterparts. The study employing 33 participants further noted that language was also a key factor in determining whether team members would collaborate. Team members with high levels of language identity were less likely to collaborate with other team members.
While the literature search does not yield any empirical studies that have utilized Knudtzon’s perspective on prescriptive theories, there are many studies that support the model as discussed. Most of these studies show that culture has a negative effect on virtual team cohesion and collaboration. In addition, these studies note that information technology has a moderating effect on the negative impact of culture on virtual teams. The model and the study clearly show that indeed, culture has an effect on the effectiveness of virtual teams. However, there is no consensus on significance of this effect. The model is applicable to the study, as it shows there is an effect with virtual teams when dealing with cultural differences and therefore establishing the significance of this effect is essential and will be the focus of this study.
Research Design
This study will employ a qualitative case study research design using semi-structured interviews as the data collection tools. A qualitative case study will allow gaining more depth and meaning based on the individual’s responses from interview questions. It creates openness in data collection and allows responses to be expanded. Qualitative data collection through interviews helps get a complete picture about why people act in certain ways and their feelings and perceptions about these actions. The qualitative data collection method is indispensable when an issue is to be examined in depth and in detail.
Samarah, Paul and Mykytn’s (2002) study focused on advancing a model that links a joint approach to conflict management and the cultural diversity that is typical of virtual teams. They formulated a set of hypotheses, which they later tested, using a two-phased experiment. Phase 1 was a pilot study involving 20 virtual teams consisting of graduate students emanating from the U.S and India-based top management schools. Each team featured four members. Ten out of the 20 teams constituted students from a similar country (to mean 5 groups exclusively remaining for U.S students and 5 groups exclusively remaining for Indian students), whereas the treatment group was constituted of 10 culturally diverse roles. Securing membership in any of the groups followed a random fashion and the virtual teams communicated synchronously using a web interface. For consideration as a culturally homogenous lot, the group in question consisted of students who were nationals of the states they represented. The variables that were measured in this research study were issues such as joint approach to conflict management, consensus, cultural diversity, participation, and perceived decision quality. Samarah, Paul, and Mykytyn’s (2002) study will contribute to an overall better understanding of virtual team interrelationships between cultural diversity. In a qualitative study intended to empirically investigate the multi-cultural challenges befalling the virtual teams, Vinaja (2013) gathered data using coded semi-structured interviews and questionnaires. The interviews were transcribed, and then coding and content analysis was used to establish the major challenges within the multi-cultural virtual teams. The virtual teams consisted of graduate students from Mexico and the U.S, whereby half of the teams acted as controls groups (consisting of students from one country) while the other teams consisted of a mix of students from the two countries. Members were randomly assigned to the respective teams while adopting a synchronous approach to communication using an electronic bulletin board and email, alongside asynchronous utilities like General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) software and chat. As a way to increase validity, the researcher measured the cultural orientation associated with each subject instead of presuming a cultural orientation founded on the country of residence of individual interviewees. Vinaja concluded that this study will provide the necessary information for critical success in managing multi-cultural virtual teams.
Staples and Zhao’s (2006) study focused on the effects of cultural diversity in virtual teams versus face-to-face teams. Three hundred and eighty university students did participate in the experiment and were divided into 79 teams. The face-to-face (F2F) teams meet in a room to work on a specific task without any computer tools. The virtual team members were divided into separate rooms and were not allowed to interact with each other. They had to communicate with computer tools like electronic chat and telephone conferencing to complete the specific assigned task. This allowed Staples and Zhao to collect the necessary information. Staples and Zhao concluded that the negative aspects of diversity appeared to be reduced by using the appropriate communication media in the beginning of the virtual team deployment. For example, Staples and Zhao stated that, “even though common in practice, it could be that it is better to introduce telephone conferencing at a later stage in a team’s development” (Staples & Zhao, 2006, p. 403).
Conclusion
Cultural training of employees will facilitate bridging of the cultural gap in organizations, which will facilitate proper and efficient team performance in addition to promoting harmony and ideological convergence among team members and the firm’s employees at large. Chapter 3 will explore the methodology to be used to determine how cultural diversity affects virtual teams.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The research aims to understand how cultural differences affect the performance of the virtual teams. The identification of the problems that arise in the organization’s virtual teams due to the cultural differences would help the managers respond effectively. The effective response would enhance the performance and the competitive advantage of a business entity. Baxter and Jack (2008) noted that the use of a case study in the qualitative research would be relevant where the research aims to answer the how and why questions. Therefore, the case study is relevant to the research, because it motivates an understanding of the impact cultural diversity has on the virtual teams. Company A, Company B, and Company C are distinguished companies in this perspective that will allow the research to meet its objectives.
Research Design
The research design for this study is a qualitative case study. Qualitative research is significant when the research is not oriented towards understanding the quantitative aspects of a phenomenon. As explained by Myers (2008), qualitative research is fundamental to understanding the contexts in the culture and the social lives of the people and the cultural aspects that influence the interactions of people in their places of work. Cultures increase the complexities, conflicts, and difficulties in communications among the team members. Cultural diversity largely influences how the Virtual teams accomplish their duties. With the changes in the cultural needs among the different virtual teams, it is hard to make a choice on the leadership style that would be transformative to the organization.
The cultural differences that influence effectiveness of virtual teams would be best measured through qualitative measures. It is difficult to quantify culture and thus difficult to employ the [corrective] quantitative measures. The qualitative research will provide a detailed response to the relationship between culture and the performance of the virtual teams (Pellissier, 2007). Diggs-Brown (2012) noted that qualitative research approach would be useful in gaining a thorough understanding of a given phenomenon. The comprehension of the impact of culture in the virtual teams would facilitate the managers in developing strategies to address the problems that arise. Moreover, management would improve how virtual teams work as well as the competitive advantage of the business.
The experimental research design was a potential quantitative research design. The design enables the researcher to get a blueprint on the tests of hypothesis by coming up with valid conclusions. The relation between an independent and dependent variable is investigated. The impact of the cultural differences in the virtual teams would be investigated by making culture an independent variable and effectiveness of culture a dependent variable. Nevertheless, the aim of the research will involve the identification of the cultural differences; thus, the experimental design did not fit adequately for this research (Hinkelmann, Kempthorne & Wiley, 2008).
The research on how cultural diversity influence virtual teams fit very well to the requirements necessary for the study through the case study. A case study is a kind of empirical study aimed at investigating a current phenomenon in its natural setting, particularly when there is no clear boundary between the phenomena and the context (Woodside, 2010). Klenke (2008) stated that case studies are significant in the research that aims to answer the questions why or how. The case studied is important in explaining the complex life situations where interventions are necessary. The case study gives a researcher an opportunity to interact with the respondents and crucially understand the essential elements of the phenomenon under study. The case studies are also important in new areas of research where there are few theories and researches (Klenke, 2008). The use of the virtual teams is a new development, and many of the companies have not yet embraced its significance.
The choice of the leadership style is dependent on the situations and the environment to which it is being applied. When managers fully understand the needs and the difficulties faced by their employees, they have the capability to respond efficiently and adequately. Therefore, the use of the case studies is relevant in giving managers detailed information on the influence of culture on the effectiveness of the virtual teams. Globally, the unstable international environment makes managers adopt different ways and methods to help build competitive advantage. The researcher cannot quantify the variables and concepts using the experimental or the survey designs and therefore case studies remain relevant. Cases studies remain relevant for this study since the researcher has petite control of the phenomenon and that requires detailed investigation and understanding (Klenke, 2008).
Incorporation of other quantitative and the qualitative research approaches was considered. The employment of several research approaches helps in the triangulation through the application of diverse methods in addressing the research questions. The triangulation attained using both qualitative and the quantitative methods assists in coming up with comprehensive and more relevant conclusions to the study. Nevertheless, the application of the two methods requires understanding the relationships, differences, and challenges in combining the two research approaches. The primary objective of the research is to understand the influence of the cultural diversity on virtual teams and does not require the application of quantitative data (Reviere, 2013). Therefore, there was no need for the application of quantitative methods in the research.
Several qualitative methods were considered for this study, but were rejected. One of the qualitative research designs is ethnography. Ethnography is a study directed to understand people and their culture. An important method aims to understand the culture of the people. However, there was the need to understand the impact of culture and therefore ethnography was not chosen. The ethnographic research is also known to consume a lot of time, and it does not give a detailed analysis of the phenomenon in the study (Myers, 2013).
Another method considered is the grounded theory. Grounded theory is an inductive method used in the development of theory after an accomplishment of a systematic research. The method was important since there is less theoretical research on the culture and the virtual teams. Nevertheless, the enormous orientations towards development of the theory may contribute to deviation from the research (Keele, 2011). Theory is not the focus of the study but rather gathering data about the effect of culture on the virtual teams and hence grounded theory is not relevant to this study.
Phenomenology is considered and eliminated. Phenomenology is a research method with roots of origin from the phenomenological philosophy intended to give a description experience, as it was lived by the individual; an important method that could be used to understand the experiences of the virtual company employees with regard to the cultural differences. Nevertheless, it is hard to ascertain the validity and the reliability of the information obtained (Rubin & Babbie, 2010). Phenomenology was not chosen because the lived experiences of the participants were not the focus of the study. The case study remains the fundamental method that would give a detailed understanding of the cultural differences that have an impact on the effectiveness of virtual teams.
Population and Sample
The participants of the study will be selected from Company A, Company B, and Company C which are companies located in the USA. Company A is located in New Jersey, Company B is located in Minnesota, and Company C is located in California. These companies are business associates of the ABC Company located in Marlette, Michigan and engaged in rural health. Company A has a target population of 10, Company B a target population of 500, and Company C a target population of 1000. The research population for each company will be employees who are team members and who have worked for a period of six months or more for the company. This researcher will get that information from the CEO or team manager from each company. Such time duration will ensure that the selected participants are well conversant with the various issues regarding virtual teams.
A sample of 10 employees will be chosen from the research population. This sample will consist of 7 team members and 3 team leaders. One team leader and 3 team members will be chosen using convenience sampling from the research population of each company. Members for the sample for each company will be selected using convenience sampling. According to Latham (2007) convenience sampling allows selection of participants depending on their availability and consent to participate.
Instrumentation
A survey using open ended questions will be used to collect data. To gain a full understanding of the impact of the cultural differences on the virtual teams, the researcher will develop a set of survey questions (Appendix A and B) for team members and a set for the team leader that will cover cultural aspects of the employees such as language, beliefs, and the other aspects on the work. The survey questions are based on the Hofstede’s cultural dimensions’ theory (Hofstede, 2010) and will consider how the language affects the communications, interactions, and relationships among employees.
Pilot Study
A pilot study will be conducted using convenience sampling, which will consist of one employee to review the interview questions for the team members and one team leader to review the interview questions for the team leaders to assess the understandability and relationship to the research questions. From their comments, the interview questions will be updated before the actual study is done. In this way, the assessment will find any unclear sections or questions on the interview questions that need to be modified, such that the participants understand better and doubts avoided. The two people chosen for this pilot study will not be part of the sample.
Role of the Researcher
This researcher is an accomplished information technology manager with expertise across infrastructure planning, systems architecture and design, and database management. This researcher was tasked with implementing and managing a robust IT infrastructure to support enterprise business needs spanning administrative and clinical operations across multiple buildings. Through diligent application of his substantial technical knowledge, which contributes to several continuous improvement initiatives to enhance system and network operations while supporting the hospital’s mission of providing high-quality care. This researcher has in-depth knowledge of HIPAA, OSHA, MIOSHA, and other requirements that allows this researcher to develop sophisticated security solutions that fully comply with existing regulations. This researcher holds fiscal responsibility for department and project budgeting, tracking, and analysis to maintain alignment with goals and targets.
Interview with Team Members
The researcher will obtain team member names from the team leader of each company. The interviewees will be encouraged to provide the relevant information regarding the challenges and benefits they get when working virtually with members from different cultural backgrounds.
The team leader will inform them of the research earlier, and they will be informed that their participation will be voluntary (Appendix C). This will be done through emails sent to them individually. The researcher will conduct the interview thru e-mail.
Figure 1: Research Questions and Interview Questions for Team Members
Research Questions
Interview Questions
What cross-cultural communication differences affect team members and their interactions in a virtual team environment?
Based on your experience, how are virtual team members expected to be consulted or told what to do?
How does hierarchy in the organization affect virtual team member roles and interactions?
How do rules, both written and unwritten, affect the emotional nature of virtual team members? Explain and give an example.
Do you believe that speaking one’s mind is healthy or do you believe harmony should always be maintained? Please explain your answer and give an example to clarify your answer.
From your experience, how are opinions and decisions determined in a virtual team environment?
Do you believe there should be a balance between family and work or do you believe work prevails over family? Explain.
Do you believe that traditions are sacrosanct or do you believe that traditions are adaptable to changed circumstances? Please explain your answer.
Do you believe that your freedom of speech is important or do you believe that freedom of speech is not a primary concern? Please explain your answer. Give an example to clarify your answer.
9. Based on your experience, how does language influence the interactions of virtual teams?
What are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment?
10. Based on your experience, what management style is in use by your virtual team manager?
11. As a management style characteristic, is building trust a challenge when working in a virtual team?
12. How has the management style used in the virtual team affected the hiring process of new employees?
How does a business prepare an employee to better understand cultural differences?
13. Based on your experience, has the company provided you with team integration strategies in cases of cultural differences?
14. Based on your experience, how does the diversity of the team affect your interactions and performance as a virtual team?
15. Based on your experience, what behaviors have you noted in your virtual team that would highlight cultural differences?
Interview with the Team Leader
In an effort to gain data on the experiences of its employees on the cultural environment in the virtual teams, interviews with the team leaders of Company A, Company B, and Company C will be conducted. This data will enable understanding the experiences of the managers when managing teams consisting of people with different cultural backgrounds.
Interviews with team leaders from Company A, Company B, and Company C will be held. The researcher will contact the CEO of the company to obtain team leader names. Each team leader will be asked for their preferred place of interview. Before the interview is initiated, the interviewees will be given the opportunity to review and sign the consent form.
Figure 2: Research Questions and Interview Questions for Team Leaders
Research Questions
Interview Questions
What cross-cultural communication differences affect team members and their interactions in a virtual team environment?
Based on your experience, how are virtual team members expected to be consulted or told what to do?
How does hierarchy in the organization affect virtual team member roles and interactions?
How do rules, both written and unwritten, affect the emotional nature of virtual team members? Explain and give an example.
Do you believe that speaking one’s mind is healthy or do you believe harmony should always be maintained? Please explain your answer and give an example to clarify your answer.
From your experience, how are opinions and decisions determined in a virtual team environment?
Do you believe there should be a balance between family and work or do you believe work prevails over family? Explain.
Do you believe that traditions are sacrosanct or do you believe that traditions are adaptable to changed circumstances? Please explain your answer.
Do you believe that your freedom of speech is important or do you believe that freedom of speech is not a primary concern? Please explain your answer. Give an example to clarify your answer.
9. Based on your experience, how does language influence the interactions of virtual teams?
What are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment?
10. What management style do you use?
11. As a team leader, is building trust a challenge when working in a virtual team environment?
12. What management style do you use when hiring virtual team managers?
How does a business prepare an employee to better understand cultural differences?
13. How does your company provide employees with team integration strategies in cases of cultural differences?
14. How does your company handle team diversity?
15. As a team leader, what behaviors have you seen in your virtual teams that would highlight cultural differences?
Data Analysis
Data will be analyzed for each interview question pertaining to each research question. Themes will be developed in support of each research question. The study will utilize pattern matching and content analysis for the analysis of the data. In pattern matching, the relationship between the data obtained with the available theories will be evaluated. In content analysis, the data will be analyzed for themes that can be identified. The content analysis can also be done for the qualitative data and without the need for generating frequency codes. The crucial method applied in the content analysis is the thematic coding, wherein the research works from the manifest to the latent coding (Klenke, 2008). A research colleague familiar with the problem of culture in work organizations will also be useful in reading through the data so that themes can be determined. The data will be analyzed using ATLAS.ti to determine the variable of each aspect. The variety of themes in three sets can then be narrowed down to the final set of themes for each research question.
Validity and Reliability
The case study’s quality will be evaluated by considering various types of validity. The construct validity is used to test the accuracy of the measures used in the case study. The measures used in the study must be accurate to make correct inferences from the data. In most instances, the construct validity is assured by the use of the multiple data sources and significantly the application of the qualitative and quantitative data sources. Consideration will be given to the construct validity by obtaining the data from team members and team leaders of each Company A, Company B, and Company C. The comparison of the information obtained from all the participants would support construct validity (Klenke, 2008).
The external validity and the reliability of the data will also be analyzed. The external validity of the case studies is closely related to the analytical generalization that helps in the generalization of the case studies to the results of the other case studies. The theory is significant in the analysis of the case studies results as well as the development of the research questions (Duff, 2008). In reliability, emphases are placed on the proof that the procedures can be repeated and obtain similar results. In the research, different people were interviewed who were truly informed of the objectives and the need for the research. They had the ability to make informed decisions and contribute significantly to the research objectives.
Role of the Researcher
The main role of the researcher in this study is that of an instrument of collecting data. This researcher is currently a student at Baker College and would like to understand how cultural differences affect the performance of the virtual teams. I will be conducting the survey collection per e-mail with the participants and will guide the analysis of the data for the research.
Ethical Considerations
The ethics ensure proper relationships with the participants and facilitate the research to be carried out in a professional manner. The adherence to ethics ensures that the respondents have taken the research positively, and they have provided honest responses to the researcher. Notably, the ethics ensure the attainment of the research objectives.
The study will be done with adherence to ethics through various actions. First, there will be a request for permission to conduct the research from each company which are Company A, Company B, and Company C from the CEO. Besides the information provided to them by the CEO, the study participants will be informed of the significance of the research and requested to participate in the research voluntarily. Moreover, the interviewees will be informed that the information they will give in the research will be confidential and will not affect their working relationship. Moreover, all sample participants will be allowed to inspect and see the consent forms of carrying out the research. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval will be obtained from Baker before starting the research to assure protection for the rights and welfare of human participants.
Summary
The most important research objective is to understand how cultural diversity influences the performance of the virtual teams. There are enormous difficulties experienced by the virtual teams as a result of cultural differences. When the managers have full understanding of how culture influences the virtual teams, they have the ability to respond effectively. The response would help improve the performance of the team and the competitive advantage of the company. The research will utilize a qualitative research approach, and the case study has been identified to be the most effective qualitative method. Culture is known to increase the complexity of communication and conflicts in virtual teams. The case studies are a good fit for the research that aims to answer the questions why and how. Therefore, the study of how the cultural diversity influence the virtual teams would be very effective when carried out with the case study method. The cases studies facilitate the researcher to come up with the information that is highly detailed. The detailed information would enhance the understanding of the different cultures. Subsequently, the virtual teams would be structured consistent with various cultural needs. The researcher had also considered the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods in the research to benefit from the triangulation. Nevertheless, the study of the phenomena could not be attained using quantitative methods. Other methods such as ethnography and the grounded theory were also not relevant for the study.
Data will be collected through the use of semi-structured interviews. The researcher will interview the employees and the CEO of each Company A, Company B, and Company C. The employees who work from each company will be given a survey. The data will be analyzed using content analysis, construct, and external validity. Reliability will also be under consideration. Chapter 4 will cover the results and an analysis of the results.
References
Ager, P., & Brückner, M. (2013). Cultural diversity and economic growth: Evidence from the US during the age of mass migration. European Economic Review, 64, 76-97.
Babbie, E. (2013). The basics of social research. Cengage Learning.
Barna, L. M. (1994). Stumbling blocks in intercultural communication. Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed., pp. 337-346). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544-559.
Cox, T. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco, Calif: Berrett-Koehler.
Daily, B., Whatley, A., Ash, S., Steiner, R. (1996). The effects of a group decision support system on culturally diverse and culturally homogeneous group decision making. Information & Management, 30, 281-289.
Day, R. A, & Brunner, L. S. (2009). Brunner & Suddarth’s textbook of Canadian medical-surgical nursing. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Diggs-Brown, B. (2012). Strategic public relations: An audience-focused approach. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Duff, P. (2008). Case study research in applied linguistics. Taylor & Francis.
Dyson, L. E., Nataatmadja, I. (2006). ICT And Its Impact On Managing Global Virtual Teams. Internet & Information Systems in the Digital Age: Challenges & Solutions, 498-504.
Galliers, R. D., Madon, S., & Rashid, R. (1998). Information systems and culture: applying ‘stages of growth’ concepts to development administration. Information Technology for Development, 8(2), 89-100.
Garfias, R. (1991). Cultural diversity and the arts in America. Public money and the muse: Essays on government funding for the arts, WW Norton, New York, 182-194.
Gibson, C.B., Cohen, S.G. (2003). Virtual Teams that Work: Creating Conditions forVirtual Effectiveness. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Greene, D. (2011). The Jewish origins of cultural pluralism: The Menorah Association and American diversity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Hasan, H., & Ditsa, G. (1999). The impact of culture on the adoption of IT: An interpretive study. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 7(1), 5-15.
Hofstede, G., 2010. Geert hofstede. National cultural dimensions.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C., & Wei, K. K. (2007). Conflict and performance in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 237-274.
Keele, R. (2010). Nursing research and evidence-based practice: Ten steps to success. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Klenke, K. (2008). Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Emerald Group Pub.
Knudtzon, K. (2002). Social and Cultural Theories.
Lacerenza, C. N., Zajac, S., Savage, N., & Salas, E. (2015). Team training for global virtual teams: strategies for success. In Leading Global Teams. New York: Springer, 91-121.
Leidner, D., Kayworth, T. (2006). A Review of Culture in Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(2), 357-399.
Lockwood, J. (2015). Virtual team management: what is causing communication breakdown?. Language and Intercultural Communication, 15(1), 125-140.
Myers, M. D. (2013). Qualitative research in business & management. London: SAGE.
Myers, M. D. (2008). Qualitative Research in Business & Management. London. SAGE Publications.
Pellissier, R. (2008). Business research made easy. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta.
Png, I. P., Tan, B. C., & Wee, K. L. (2001). Dimensions of national culture and corporate adoption of IT infrastructure. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 48(1), 36-45.
Priest, R. J., & Nieves, A. L. (2006). This Side of Heaven: Race, Ethnicity, and Christian Faith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA.
Reviere, R. (1996). Needs Assessment: A Creative And Practical Guide For Social Scientists. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Samarah, I., Paul, S., & Mykytyn Jr, P. (2002). Exploring the links between cultural diversity, the collaborative conflict management style, and performance of global virtual teams. AMCIS 2002 Proceedings, 155.
Scott, P. & Wildman, J. (2015). Culture, communication, and conflict: a review of the global virtual team literature. In Leading Global Teams, 13-32.
Shachaf, P. (2008). Cultural diversity and information and. An exploratory study. Information and Management, 131-142.
Shah, Y. H., Raza, M., & UlHaq, S. (2012). Communication Issues in GSD. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 40, 69-75.
Spotts, H., Chelte, A. (2005). Evaluating the Effects of Team Composition and. The Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management.
Stasi, C. E. (2013). Effective Communication in a Virtual Team. The Open University Business School, 1-7.
Staples, D. S., & Zhao, L. (2006). The effects of cultural diversity in virtual teams versus face-to-face teams. Group Decision and Negotiation, 15(4), 389-406.
Vijayakumar, V., Gey, R., & Wende, E. (2008). Storytelling–a Method to Start Knowledge Transfer in Offshore Software Development Teams–Research in Progress Paper. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Knowledge Management Southampton Solent University (Veranst.).
Vinaja, R. (2003). Major challenges in multi-cultural virtual teams. Proceedings: Southwest Case Research Association, 341-346.
Warkentin, M. , Beranek, P. (1999). Training to improve virtual team. Information Systems Journal, 271-289.
Appendix A
Team Members Interview Questions Based on the Research Questions
Research Question 1
What types of cultural differences affect team members and their interactions in a virtual team?
Based on your experience, what specific cultural differences affect the interactions of your virtual team?
Based on your experience, how does language barrier influence the interactions of virtual teams?
Based on your experience, how do personal preferences among virtual team members influence the interactions of the team?
Research Question 2
What are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment?
Based on your experience, what management style is in use by your virtual team manager?
As a management style characteristic, is building trust a challenge when working in a virtual team?
How has the management style used in the virtual team affected the hiring process of new employees?
Research Question 3
How does a business prepare an employee to better understand cultural differences?
Based on your experience, has the company provided you with team integration strategies in cases of cultural differences?
Based on your experience, how does the diversity of the team affect your interactions and performance as a virtual team?
Based on your experience, what behaviors have you noted in your virtual team that would highlight cultural differences?
APPENDIX B
CEO Interview Questions Based on the Research Questions
Research Question 1
What types of cultural differences affect team members and their interactions in a virtual team?
What specific cultural differences affect the interaction of your virtual teams?
How does your company manage language barriers when dealing with virtual teams?
How do you prepare your virtual team employees on cultural differences?
Research Question 2
What are the most common management styles in a virtual team environment?
What management style do you use?
As a CEO, is building trust a challenge when working in a virtual team environment?
What management style do you use when hiring virtual team managers?
Research Question 3
How does a business prepare an employee to better understand cultural differences?
How does your company provide employees with team integration strategies in cases of cultural differences?
How does your company handle team diversity?
As a CEO what behaviors have you seen in your virtual teams that would highlight cultural differences?
appendix c
CONSENT LETTER
You have been invited to take part in a study to learn more about how cultural differences affect the performance of the virtual teams. This study will be conducted by Paul Gugel. You must be at least 18 years of age to participate.
If you agree to be in this study, you will participate in an interview with the researcher. You will be asked some questions which you will answer to. Your participation in the study may last approximately one hour.
Participation in this study is voluntary. You may refuse to participate or withdraw at any time by notifying the researcher. Non-participation will not affect your employment. You may choose not to answer any questions that you prefer not to.
The confidentiality of your research records and identity will be strictly maintained. Identifying information appears only on consent forms, which will be locked in a secure office for three years after the completion of the study and will then be destroyed. To preserve the anonymity of the data, each person is assigned a random code number that will be used to keep track of data produced by the experiment. Results of the study in any presentation or publication will include only group results, and no identifying information will ever be used.
If there is anything about the study or your participation that is unclear or that you do not understand, if you have questions or wish to report a research-related problem, you may contact Paul Gugel at pgugel01@baker.edu. For questions about your rights as a research participant, you may contact Baker College.
You will receive a copy of the signed consent letter for your files.
************************************************************************
______________________________________ ____________________
Participant’s signature Date
______________________________________ ____________________
Researcher’s signature Date
Our Service Charter
-
Excellent Quality / 100% Plagiarism-Free
We employ a number of measures to ensure top quality essays. The papers go through a system of quality control prior to delivery. We run plagiarism checks on each paper to ensure that they will be 100% plagiarism-free. So, only clean copies hit customers’ emails. We also never resell the papers completed by our writers. So, once it is checked using a plagiarism checker, the paper will be unique. Speaking of the academic writing standards, we will stick to the assignment brief given by the customer and assign the perfect writer. By saying “the perfect writer” we mean the one having an academic degree in the customer’s study field and positive feedback from other customers. -
Free Revisions
We keep the quality bar of all papers high. But in case you need some extra brilliance to the paper, here’s what to do. First of all, you can choose a top writer. It means that we will assign an expert with a degree in your subject. And secondly, you can rely on our editing services. Our editors will revise your papers, checking whether or not they comply with high standards of academic writing. In addition, editing entails adjusting content if it’s off the topic, adding more sources, refining the language style, and making sure the referencing style is followed. -
Confidentiality / 100% No Disclosure
We make sure that clients’ personal data remains confidential and is not exploited for any purposes beyond those related to our services. We only ask you to provide us with the information that is required to produce the paper according to your writing needs. Please note that the payment info is protected as well. Feel free to refer to the support team for more information about our payment methods. The fact that you used our service is kept secret due to the advanced security standards. So, you can be sure that no one will find out that you got a paper from our writing service. -
Money Back Guarantee
If the writer doesn’t address all the questions on your assignment brief or the delivered paper appears to be off the topic, you can ask for a refund. Or, if it is applicable, you can opt in for free revision within 14-30 days, depending on your paper’s length. The revision or refund request should be sent within 14 days after delivery. The customer gets 100% money-back in case they haven't downloaded the paper. All approved refunds will be returned to the customer’s credit card or Bonus Balance in a form of store credit. Take a note that we will send an extra compensation if the customers goes with a store credit. -
24/7 Customer Support
We have a support team working 24/7 ready to give your issue concerning the order their immediate attention. If you have any questions about the ordering process, communication with the writer, payment options, feel free to join live chat. Be sure to get a fast response. They can also give you the exact price quote, taking into account the timing, desired academic level of the paper, and the number of pages.