Causes and Management of Conflict in Virtual Teams - Literature review Example

Causes and Management of Conflict in Virtual Teams Name Student Number Word Count: 1526 Introduction A virtual team refers to a team whose members are physically dispersed across different geographical locations and use computer and information technologies to unite its members so as to attain a shared goal. Virtual teams usually experience a number of challenges including absence of nonverbal and paraverbal cues, less sharing of socio-emotional information and social rapport, less satisfaction and being more task-oriented. Managers of virtual teams need to establish trust, monitor the progress of the team, publicize achievements and efforts, and where possible, ensure all team members have face-to-face encounters early on (Robbins, et al., 2011). According to Barki and Hartwick (2001), conflict in virtual teams might be intensified by differences in time zones, lack of face-to-face interactions, diversity and communication delays. These aspects may prevent development of relationships and understanding among members of virtual teams. This constitute a big problem since if not effectively managed, conflict may result in effective teamwork. This essay will talk about the causes of conflict in virtual teams and on how conflict in virtual teams can be managed through interventions such as choosing team members, effective planning and managing tasks and conducting virtual meetings and use of advanced communication technologies. Effective management of conflict in virtual teams helps ensure effective communication and enhance team performance. Conflict in virtual teams Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2007) assert that, virtual teams have a high possibility of conflicts as team members work across geographical, cultural and time-bound settings. This conflict results in ineffective communications, which gives way to the formation of barriers between team members resulting in reduced interaction and productivity. Time boundaries and physical dispersion Time boundaries and physical dispersion constitute one of the main causes of conflict in virtual teams. Drawing from Gibson and Gibbs (2006: 457), in more geographically isolated teams, it becomes hard to synchronize members. This is because; there is a limited time for synchronous meetings, and most meetings occur outside the standard working hours. Thus, physical dispersion augments synchronization requirements, which delays productivity and communication. Physically dispersed virtual teams are also more accustomed to their own outer environment and usually have less common contextual knowledge. This generates complexity for team members, since they do not know the issues that exist in the environment of a fellow team member ( (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006). Similarly, Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2007) maintain that, time zone differences and physical dispersion leads to delays in communication and can frequently cause conflicts, leading to ineffective teamwork. Delays in communication also cause misunderstandings and can even cause poor relationships among team members. Communication technology Gibson and Gibbs (2006) observe that, dependence on computer-assisted communication lessens opportunities for team monitoring, and makes it hard to deduce knowledge, since the setting is not known. Communication through computer and information technologies lessens non-verbal cues on interpersonal communication aspects such as warmth, attentiveness and tone, which contribute to clarity of message, as well as feedback interpretation. Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2007) argue that using electronic media has a tendency of delaying feedback. Such delays may lead to misunderstandings; causing off-putting feelings amid members if they infer the lack of feedback personally. In certain cases, members may think that the other member is ignoring him or her. Wong and Burton (2001) further argue that use of communication that is electronically mediated by virtual teams might hamper understanding and interfere with knowledge transfer, particularly when the information to be conveyed is ambiguous. Cultural diversity Cultural diversity is regularly the source of main social issues that virtual teams experience. Cultural diversity comprise of both linguistic and national diversity. According to Gibson and Gibbs (2006), culture refers to typical ways of thinking, behaving, and feeling shared amid members of a given group. National diversity generates different expectations about communication practices, as well as reduces team identification. This may lead to stereotyping, misunderstandings, and the incapacity to reach a consensus or make effective decisions. Drawing from Brett, Behfar and Kern (2006), cultural diversity causes several challenges, such as direct vs. indirect communication, fluency and accents troubles, and conflicting decision- making norms. For example, communication in the western countries is usually explicit and direct. The meaning is clear and does not need interpretation; which is why westerners frequently have trouble comprehending the subtleties that non-westerners use. Frustration and misunderstandings often occur because of lack of fluency and accents (Schlenkrich & Upfold, 2009). Brett, Behfar and Kern (2006: 87) observe that, frustration and misunderstandings may influence the perception of team members regarding competence and status. Kankanhalli, Tan and Wei (2007) further assert that, cultural diversity might provoke hostility amid members, as shared dislike, annoyance, and personality clashes become obvious. Structural dynamism, interrelated tasks and non-routine tasks Gibson and Gibbs (2006) assert that, virtual teams with short histories of working together have a tendency of lacking effective models of working together and sharing information. This limits the amount and range of information to be passed to and received by team members. A team structure that is highly dynamic increases perceived risk and uncertainty. The uncertainty leads to hesitancy in sharing information due to lack of trust among members. Bell and Koslowski (2002: 30) further maintains that, virtual teams’ lifecycles are largely ascertained by the type of tasks that the teams perform. Members of virtual teams may be obliged to perform several tasks and take up various roles. Thus, they should be capable of adapting to a range of virtual team circumstances (Bell & Koslowski, 2002). This may lead to role ambiguity and conflict. Conflicts between various role anticipations and individuals’ capacities to meet such expectations create role overload, as well as unconstructive work attitudes. Problems come up, as tasks turn to be complex and need more coordination amid members. Communication, feedback and teamwork become more vital when the roles of members are interconnected and harmonization is needed (Bell & Koslowski, 2002: 31). These social issues adversely affect team communication, as well as create obstacles to effective teamwork through reduced sharing of information and creation of interpersonal conflict (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006). Proposed interventions To solve conflicts that arise in virtual teams, several interventions are suggested. To start with, managers of virtual teams ought to know the likely conflicts stemming from team cultural diversity and the impacts of conflict on performance. Cultural diversity might be reduced through choosing team members where the team has a likelihood of working on highly interdependent tasks. This will not only help managers of virtual teams to deal with the issue of cultural diversity, but also lead to a good team structure (McKinney & Whiteside, 2006). Some multinational firms such as Hewlett Packard and IBM have tried to manage potentially negative effects of cultural diversity through the promotion of dominant organizational cultures for all their employees. Moreover, if a team is likely to be assigned high complexity duties, functional diversity may be promoted to the level where it brings a broader range of viewpoints and thereby promoting discussion on task alternatives. On the contrary, the resulting task conflict should be resolved distributively or integratively, instead of ignored, so as to encourage performance (Sadri & Tran, 2002). According to Teeni (2001), to avert conflict arising from communication technologies, managers should be knowledgeable about communication technologies impacts, such as lack of feedback’s immediacy and large electronic communication volume that might influence conflict. Overload issues associated with large communication volumes can be solved using complex communication technologies such as Lotus Raven, SPIDER and AIMS. Drawing from Joinson (2002), virtual teams can counter physical distance by effectively planning and managing tasks and conducting virtual meetings. Effective planning and management of tasks will help team members to plan and undertake tasks on time and provide feedback immediately without communication delays, which may cause conflicts. Holding virtual meetings will help bring all team members together, which will in turn eliminate contextual differences and misunderstandings that cause conflict in virtual teams. Cultural diversity is frequently a main source of conflict in virtual teams compared to other causes of conflict such as physical dispersion, communication technology and structural. Cultural diversity has serious impacts on virtual teams, including misunderstanding, inability to make decisions and stereotyping (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006). As a result, choosing team members constitute the best intervention. This intervention will help ensure that the virtual team comprise of members who have shared characteristics. This is important, especially in tasks that call for interdependence since it will help evade cultural diversity’s effects that may negatively affect team performance. Choosing members will also help in ensuring effective communication is achieved by avoiding fluency and accent issues (Brett, Behfar, & Kern, 2006). Conclusion Virtual teams are characterised by physical dispersion and use of information and computer technologies to communicate between team members. Time zones, lack of face-to-face interactions, diversity and communication delays intensify conflict in virtual teams. Virtual teams’ conflicts are mainly caused by time boundaries and physical dispersion, dependence on computer-assisted communication, cultural diversity, and team structural dynamism and task interdependence. The conflicts can be solved by using complex communication technologies, choosing team members, effective planning and managing tasks and conducting virtual meetings. Choosing team members is the best intervention since it can solve conflict resulting from different causes. Reference List Barki, H., & Hartwick, J. 2001. Interpersonal conflict and its management in information systems development. MIS Quarterly, 25 (2), 195-228. Bell, B., & Koslowski, S. 2002. A Typology of Virtual Teams: Implications for Effective Leadership. Group & Organisation Management, 27 (1), 14 – 49. Brett, J., Behfar, K., & Kern, C. 2006. Managing Multicultural Teams. Harvard Business Review, 2006 (November), 84-90. Gibson, C., & Gibbs, J. 2006. Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of Geographic Dispersion, Electronic Dependence, Dynamic Structure, and National Diversity on Team Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51 (3), 451-495. Joinson, C. 2002. Managing virtual teams: Keeping members on the same page without being in the same place poses challenges for managers – Workplace Trends. HR Magazine, 47 (6), 68 – 72. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. Y., & Wei, K. 2007. Conflict and Performance in Global Virtual Teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23 (3), 237 – 274. McKinney, V., & Whiteside, M. 2006. Maintaining Distributed Relationships. Communication of the ACM, 49 (3), 83 - 86. Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., Millett, B., & Boyle, M. 2011. Organisational Behaviour. Sydney: Pearson Education Australia. Sadri, G., & Tran, H. 2002. Managing your diverse workforce through improved communication. Journal of Management Development, 21 (3), 227 – 237. Schlenkrich, L., & Upfold, C. 2009. A Guideline for Virtual Team Managers: the Key to Effective Social Interaction and Communication. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation, 12 (1), 109 - 118. Teeni, D. A. 2001. A Cognitive affective model of organizational communication for designing IT. MIS Quarterly, 25 (2), 251-312. Wong, S., & Burton, R. 2001. Virtual Teams: What are their Characteristics, and Impact on Team Performance? Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory, 6 (4), 339 – 360. Read More