Communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Examensarbete
15 högskolepoäng, grundnivå
Communication, collaboration and
belongingness in virtual teams
– mapping out enablers and constraints
Kommunikation, samarbete och tillhörighet i virtuella team
– en kartläggning av möjliggörare och begränsningar
Saga Fristedt
Examen: Kandidatexamen 180 hp Examinator: Maria Engberg
Huvudområde: Medieteknik Handledare: Henriette Lucander
Datum för slutseminarium: 2021-01-14Abstract In an increasingly digital world, virtual work becomes more common every year. Additionally, virtual work has suddenly become the reality for a large part of the world’s population due to the coronavirus pandemic. Therefore, a study on virtual teamwork is currently of high relevance. The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper understanding and provide knowledge on enablers and constraints for communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams as well as ICTs impact on the virtual teamwork. The study has a phenomenological research design with a qualitative approach. Empirical data has been collected by studying three transnational, virtual teams by conducting six semi-structured individual interviews. The sample was selected through a strategic selection. A thematic analysis has been conducted to compile and analyze the data, which thereafter has been set in relation to the theoretical framework of the study. The enablers found in the results were flexibility and availability for communication, clearly defined roles, high level of both task- and relationship based communication as well as depth of relationships, trust and shared understanding for collaboration, and responsibility, seeing into team members homes and virtual social team activities for belongingness. Additionally, ICTs were found as a main enabler for all themes. The identified constraints were time dispersion for all three themes, as well as virtuality as a whole. Additionally misunderstandings was identified for collaboration and lack of natural and spontaneous social conversation for belongingness. Furthermore, the findings implicate that ICTs with characteristics of richer type in relation to media richness are preferred most of the time to enable a better virtual work climate regards to communication, collaboration and belongingness. However, some criteria for media richness cannot be fully utilized in virtual teams due to time dispersion. Lastly, findings implicate that the choice of ICT based on previous experience, rather than linked to suitability, might hinder an optimal model of ICT usage for a well- functioning virtual team. Keywords Virtual teams, ICT, communication, collaboration, belongingness, media richness
Sammanfattning I en allt mer digitaliserad värld blir virtuellt arbete vanligare varje år. Virtuellt arbete har dessutom hastigt blivit verklighet för en stor del av världens befolkning på grund av coronapandemin. Därför är en studie om virtuellt teamarbete av hög relevans i dagens samhälle. Syftet med denna studie är att få en djupare förståelse och ge kunskap om möjliggörare och begränsningar för kommunikation, samarbete och tillhörighet i virtuella team samt ICTs inverkan på virtuellt teamarbete. Studien har en fenomenologisk forskningsdesign med ett kvalitativt tillvägagångssätt. Empirisk data har samlats in genom att studera tre transnationella, virtuella team genom genomförandet av sex semi-strukturerade, individuella intervjuer. Intervjupersonerna valdes ut genom ett strategiskt urval. En tematisk analys har genomförts för att sammanställa och analysera data, som sedan satts i förhållande till det teoretiska ramverket för studien. De möjliggörande faktorer som hittades i resultaten var flexibilitet och tillgänglighet för kommunikation, tydligt definierade roller, hög nivå av både uppgifts- och relationsbaserad kommunikation och relationsdjup, förtroende och delad förståelse för samarbete, samt ansvar, att få en inblick i teammedlemmarnas hem och virtuella sociala teamaktiviteter för tillhörighet. Dessutom identifierades ICT som en övergripande möjliggörare. De identifierade begränsningarna var tidsskillnader för alla tre teman samt virtualitet i helhet. Utöver detta var missförstånd identifierat för samarbete och brist på naturlig och spontan social interaktion för tillhörighet. Dessutom visar resultaten på att ICTs med egenskaper av rikare typ i förhållande till media richness oftast föredras för att möjliggöra ett bättre virtuellt arbetsklimat när det gäller kommunikation, samarbete och tillhörighet. Vissa kriterier för media richness kan dock inte utnyttjas fullt ut i virtuella team på grund av tidsskillnader. Slutligen visar studiens resultat på att val av ICT baserat på tidigare erfarenhet, snarare än kopplat till lämplighet, kan hindra en optimal modell för användning av ICT för ett väl fungerande virtuellt team. Nyckelord Virtuella team, ICT, kommunikation, samarbete, samhörighet, media richness
Preface This study is a bachelor thesis in Media Technology, written by Saga Fristedt in fall 2020 within the program Project Management within Publishing at Malmö University. The study is about enablers and constraints for virtual teamwork, which has been very interesting to write about due to the fact that virtual work, due to the coronavirus pandemic, has become most people’s reality during the year of 2020. With an ongoing pandemic and a parallel (virtual) internship, the road here has not been completely straight. I would like to thank my exceptional supervisor, Henriette Lucander, for being very supportive and for giving great advice throughout the whole process. Furthermore, I would like to thank all respondents for their contribution to the result, and for taking their time to help me conduct this study. Malmö, 2021-02-05 Saga Fristedt
Table of Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................... 3
1.1.1 Research Questions............................................................................................. 4
1.2 Target group................................................................................................ 4
2 Research Overview & Theoretical Framework ........................................ 5
2.1 Virtual teams ............................................................................................... 5
2.1.1 The usage of ICT in virtual teams ......................................................................... 6
2.2 Media Richness Theory .............................................................................. 7
2.2.1 Media richness in virtual teams ............................................................................ 9
2.3 Crucial factors of virtual teams ................................................................ 10
2.3.1 Communication in virtual teams.......................................................................... 11
2.3.2 Collaboration in virtual teams ............................................................................. 12
2.3.3 Belongingness in virtual teams ........................................................................... 13
3 Method...................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Research approach ................................................................................... 14
3.1.1 Study design ...................................................................................................... 14
3.2 Research setting ....................................................................................... 15
3.3 Data collection .......................................................................................... 16
3.3.1 Selection / Sampling process ............................................................................. 16
3.3.2 Interviewing process .......................................................................................... 18
3.4 Data analysis ............................................................................................. 19
3.4.1 Thematic analysis .............................................................................................. 19
3.5 Ethical considerations .............................................................................. 20
3.6 Quality of study ......................................................................................... 20
4 Results ..................................................................................................... 23
4.1 Communication ......................................................................................... 23
4.2 Collaboration ............................................................................................. 25
4.3 Belongingness .......................................................................................... 26
4.4 ICT .............................................................................................................. 28
4.5 Opportunities ............................................................................................ 32
5 Discussion ............................................................................................... 33
5.1 Enablers for virtual teamwork .................................................................. 33
5.1.1 Communication .................................................................................................. 33
5.1.2 Collaboration ...................................................................................................... 34
5.1.3 Belongingness ................................................................................................... 355.2 Constraints for virtual teamwork ............................................................. 36
5.2.1 Communication .................................................................................................. 36
5.2.2 Collaboration ...................................................................................................... 37
5.2.3 Belongingness ................................................................................................... 37
5.3 Interdependency between enablers and constraints ............................. 37
5.4 Effects of enablers and constraints ......................................................... 39
5.5 ICT .............................................................................................................. 40
5.5.1 Media richness of ICTs....................................................................................... 40
5.5.2 Preferences and usage ...................................................................................... 41
6 Conclusion ............................................................................................... 43
6.1 Limitations and suggestions for future research ................................... 44
References ...................................................................................................... 45
Appendix 1 – Interview guide ........................................................................ 51List of tables and figures Figure 1. Communication Media and Information Richness (based on Daft & Lengel, 1984) ............................................................................................................................ 8 Table 1. Respondents mapped out in relation to their teams ...................................... 18 Table 2. ICT usage in the teams ................................................................................ 28 Table 3. Enablers and constraints for virtual teamwork .............................................. 38 Figure 2. Media richness of ICT used in the teams .................................................... 41
Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
1 Introduction
In an increasingly digital world, with rapid globalization, environmental changes and
collaboration technology development, virtual work has been an upcoming trend for the last
couple of decades (Samul & Petre, 2019; Felstead & Henseke, 2017). According to Flexjobs
(2019), the American remote workforce grew 159% between 2005 and 2017. However, the
coronavirus pandemic has sped up the development of virtuality in our daily lives and has
heightened the need for companies to adopt digital business models to allow teams within the
organization to continue “business as usual”, even though stay at home orders heavily has
affected workers all over the world (McKinsey, 2020). Due to the fact that only about 2% of
employees in Europe worked from home in 2015 (Eurofound, 2017) and only 3,4% of
Americans had remote working experience on a 50% activity grade or more before the
pandemic (Flexjobs, 2020), it is understandable that there are concerns about how a virtual work
climate will work out within organizations, both temporarily and in the long run (PwC, 2020).
Due to the rapidly increased trend of virtual work as an effect of the current coronavirus
pandemic, the need for more up to date research within the field is crucial (Zeuge et al., 2020).
Since the birth of the internet, almost all teams use some kind of technology in their work,
meaning they are all virtual to some extent (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). Within the field, several
terms are frequently used to describe the same phenomenon and there are several definitions of
a virtual team. However, most seem to agree on main characteristics such as that a virtual team
is a group of individuals interdependent in their tasks with a shared responsibility for outcomes
who are dispersed over time and/or location and use a range of communication technology to
accomplish their tasks (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). Virtual teams will in this study be defined as
fully dispersed, relying on a fully virtual work model with no face-to-face interaction between
any team members, thus, teams with a limited extent of virtuality will be excluded.
Furthermore, the geographical dispersion will be of great relevance in the study, as the studied
teams work between Sweden and the U.S. and therefore over several time zones. The
technology used for enabling virtual teamwork will in this study be termed ICT, Information
and Communication Technology. Examples of such tools are email, video-conferencing tools,
file-sharing and chat-based tools.
Previous research does not seem to have a coherent picture of whether virtuality is positive for
team effectiveness or not (Gilson et al., 2015). However, Hafermalz and Riemer (2016)
emphasize that the virtual aspect can have both positive and negative effects on the work, with
one large concern being the fear of isolation. With individual well-being in mind, Bartel,
1Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
Wrzesniewski and Wiesenfeld (2012) raise awareness of the challenge for employees to develop
a strong sense of organizational membership when working virtually. It is common that remote
workers express concerns about missing out on social interactions, both on work and non-work-
related topics, that occur more naturally in the office than when working remotely (Cascio,
1999, 2000; McCloskey & Igbaria, 2003). Research has shown that virtual teams face more
significant communications challenges than face-to-face teams (Hertel et al., 2005). It is also
shown that the communication within virtual teams are more impersonal than for colocated
teams (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2015; Schlenkrich & Upfold, 2009).
According to Zeuge et al. (2020) virtual teams have already been widely considered in research.
However, due to the rapid change towards a more virtual work climate for a large part of the
world’s population due to the coronavirus outbreak, further research is needed since the future
will continue to be shaped by virtual teams. Furthermore, Zeuge et al. (2020) believe that a
comprehensive, up to date overview of the current situation is missing, as most of the research
material is written in a pre-corona environment. Additionally, a comprehensive, recent study on
remote work (Buffer, 2020) shows that collaboration, communication and belongingness are the
most concerning factors for remote workers globally. These findings have founded the interest
of focusing the thesis around the concerns about communication, collaboration and
belongingness in virtual teams. As Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have
been proved to play an important role in a virtual landscape, a desire to gain further
understanding of how these can affect the factors above has also arisen.
Marlow et al. (2017) find that findings in prior research regarding communication in virtual
teams are widely mixed. Therefore, they have identified the most relevant features of
communication to the study in future research on virtual teamwork. Marlow et al. (2017) argue
that communication frequency, communication quality and communication content are the most
vital factors for functioning communication in virtual teams, which therefore will be taken into
consideration in this study.
Depth of relationships, trust and shared understanding are suggested to be crucial factors for
collaboration within virtual teams (Peter & Manz, 2007). However, these factors have also been
proven to be harder to achieve in virtual teams (Zimmerman, 2011). The virtuality and
geographical dispersion entail a higher risk of differing beliefs, contradictory values and
divergent interpretations (Florea & Stoica, 2019). Therefore it is of interest to examine whether
there are opportunities to decrease these constraints by particular ICT usage. According to
International Labor Organization (2020) teams in which the majority or all of the members are
2Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
working remotely rely heavily on regular electronic communication to foster collaboration,
trust, and transparency.
A literature review made by Gilson et al. (2015) shows that there has been limited research on
the topic of well-being and whether well-being is positively or negatively affected by virtual
teamwork. The authors stress that there are split thoughts on the effects as some virtual team
members may feel a sense of isolation and loneliness, whereas others might relish the higher
levels of autonomy and independence. Patterns of results for this have been found in research on
adjacent topics (e.g. Bélanger et al., 2013) but, to date of their review in 2015, it had not been
extensively integrated into work on virtual teams. It is therefore evident that there is a research
gap within the field of virtual teamwork regarding belongingness as this can be linked to well-
being, making it essential to further study the phenomenon. Furthermore, the fact that most
workers today, due to the pandemic, do not even have a choice whether they would like to work
in a virtual team or not, the fact of forceness into virtual teams is also an unexplored area within
the field.
Reviews show that empirical studies on technology’s role in virtual teams have concentrated on
technology’s effect on team performance (Schweitzer & Duxbury, 2010; Van der Kleij et al.,
2009; Aritz et al., 2018). Nevertheless, research has not yet shed much light on how technology
can enable and constrain communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams.
Furthermore, most previous research within the field have limited their studies to just a few
media channels, and have not made an extensive review of a wider range of media used to
communicate in virtual teams (Aritz et al., 2018). Therefore, a specific study on how different
ICTs can help overcome the concerns of communication, collaboration and belongingness, that
has arisen in comprehensive studies of remote workers (Buffer, 2020), will be of relevance to
fill a gap within a research field that is now more relevant than ever.
1.1 Purpose
The intent is to gain a deeper understanding and provide knowledge on enablers and constraints
for communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams. More specifically, ICTs
will be studied to understand what impact their elements have on these factors and how the
usage of technology can contribute to a well-functioning virtual work model.
3Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
1.1.1 Research Questions
To reach the purpose, the study will aim to answer the following research questions:
RQ 1: What are the enablers and constraints for communication, collaboration and
belongingness in virtual teams?
RQ 2: How do the characteristics of ICTs impact communication, collaboration and
belongingness in virtual teams?
1.2 Target group
The study is aimed at researchers within the field of virtual teamwork who want to identify
enablers and constraints for virtual teamwork and who have an interest of understanding how
characteristics of technology tools affect virtual teams. Furthermore, the study is aimed for
organizations working with virtual teams who want to gain knowledge of successful design
methods for virtual teams. It can also be of interest for managers of teams which have been
forced to transition into a virtual work model due to the current pandemic, as well as for
decision makers who want guidance regarding user preferences of, and attitudes towards,
different ICTs in a work or study climate in an implementation process regarding virtual work.
4Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
2 Research Overview & Theoretical
Framework
The research overview and theoretical framework is the research foundation which this study is
based on. A definition of virtual teams and usage of ICTs, which is an essential part of virtual
teamwork (Laitinen & Valo, 2017), initiates the chapter, followed by a presentation of the
Media Richness Theory which will work as a foundation for analyzing the ICTs in the study.
Furthermore, an overview of crucial factors of virtual teamwork identified in previous research
regards to communication, collaboration and belongingness and their challenges is presented.
The structure of this chapter is chosen as knowledge about theory on ICT usage and media
richness is needed to gain a better understanding of the previous research related to
communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams.
2.1 Virtual teams
A virtual team is a group of individuals interdependent in their tasks with a shared responsibility
for outcomes who are dispersed over time and/or location and use a range of communication
technology to accomplish their tasks (Gibson & Cohen, 2003). Regarding upsides of virtual
teamwork there are several aspects both for the employer and employee. From the perspective
of organizations, some aspects that have been shown as advantages of virtual teams include
higher profits, improved access to global markets, environmental benefits (Cascio, 2000),
higher productivity by using different time zones of members who are geographically dispersed
(Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017), greater flexibility and responsiveness (Hunsaker & Hunsaker, 2008,
Piccoli et al., 2004, Powell et al., 2004) as they often are based on flat organizational structures
without hierarchies and central authority (Jarvempaa & Tanriverdi, 2003), opportunities to
reduce travel, relocation (Dulebohn & Hoch, 2017), operating and capital costs (Geister et al.,
2006). From the perspective of individuals working in virtual teams, they may enjoy the
flexibility of working from a location of their preference, which can implicate a flexibility that
may facilitate the balance of employees' work and life and potentially increase their satisfaction
with the job (Samul & Petre, 2019). Overall, virtual teams have been shown to more easily and
innovatively respond to the changing requirements of the environment based on the latest
knowledge, flexible working arrangements and application of information and communication
technologies (ICTs), making organizations agile and competitive (Samul & Petre, 2019).
Regarding documented downsides, virtual teams tend to meet more communication-related
obstacles than colocated teams (Florea & Stoica, 2019), and interpersonal relationships are
5Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
proven to be harder to achieve (Zimmermann, 2011). Studies have also shown that virtual teams
can face difficulties in regard to the technology-mediated collaboration in form of time lags and
a greater occurrence of misunderstandings (Gilson et al., 2015). According to Florea and Stoica
(2019), the lack of face-to-face interaction may be associated with negative affective
commitment. A recent literature review conducted by Morrison-Smith and Ruiz (2020)
identified the distance factor to be the most associated with challenges in virtual teams, where
reduced motivation and awareness, as well as establishing trust were main challenges virtual
teams face due to the fact that they lack the common denominator of location.
When a virtual team is transnational, and thereby distributed over several parts of the world, a
distinct difference from colocated teams can be the time difference. The time aspect has showed
to affect virtual teamwork both positively and negatively. It may enable a greater extent of
effectiveness and productivity due to the fact that the team may operate over several time zones
(Sarker & Sahay, 2002), but the time difference may also implicate abnormal or uncomfortable
working hours that can cause difficulties for team members to fit their work to their private life
(Felstead & Henseke, 2017). The abnormal working hours may also entail a more flexible work
style, where individuals can plan their time after more personal preferences than in a traditional
work environment (Felstead & Henseke, 2017), which therefore can be seen as a positive
aspect, but also as a negative aspect for someone in need of a clear and set structure. Sarker and
Sahay (2002) have identified several issues regarding time dispersion that have a negative effect
on virtual teams. For example, working on different time zones mean that teammates might
have different psychological and social activity patterns, such as that a European team member
might reach the end of the workday when an American member of the team wakes up.
Therefore, Sarker and Sahay (2002) mean that virtual teams need to find ways to use time lags
in a positive manner, rather than seeing it as an obstacle, as members of these teams most often
cannot work in parallel to each other.
2.1.1 The usage of ICT in virtual teams
Technologies that are used to enable virtual teamwork can be termed Information and
Collaboration Technologies (ICTs). Examples of such technologies are tools like Zoom, Slack,
Microsoft Teams, Outlook and Google Suite. Even though ICTs make virtual teamwork
possible, they are seen as widely inadequate for repairing the problem of distance in virtual
teams, not the least with regards to the social aspect (Hafermalz & Reimer, 2016). However,
there is also research arguing that ICT-based communication does not have to cause a limitation
in the actual interaction, but rather just need some extra time to foster social relationships
6Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
between team members, as the pace of communication tends to be slower than face-to-face
interaction (Henttonen & Blomqvist, 2005). Furthermore, studies have also shown that some
virtual teams have reported a deeper intimacy and cohesion than some face-to-face teams
(Henttonen & Blomqvist, 2005), which indicates that the outcome depends on additional
factors, and that virtual teams actually have a possibility to obtain a social value to a great
extent.
2.2 Media Richness Theory
The Media Richness Theory (MRT), also known as Information Richness Theory, was
originally presented by Daft and Lengel (1984; 1986). It aims to explain how different media
channels offer certain levels of media richness depending on its characteristics, and thus
indicate that organizational success is based on the organization's ability to process information
of appropriate richness to reduce uncertainty and clarify ambiguity (Daft & Lengel, 1984;
1986). Despite its age, MRT is still seen as a landmark foundation of studies on continuously
evolving communication technology and media use behavior, and is commonly used within
research on virtual teamwork (Ishii et al., 2019). According to MRT, the richness of media is
evaluated based on the following four criteria: (1) immediacy of feedback, (2) number of social
and non-verbal cues, (3) language variety, and (4) personal orientation (Daft & Lengel, 1984;
1986; Daft et al., 1987).
Immediacy of feedback is measured by how quickly someone responds to your message. For
example with an email, you will not be sure if it has been received until you get a reply, which
can take more or less time. In a call or face-to-face meeting, you will get immediate feedback as
you speak. Number of social and non-verbal cues aims to measure the variety of ways in which
message through a medium can be communicated, such as visually or verbally. Furthermore,
language variety refers to the range of ways a message can be mediated. For example, numbers
can indicate precise measures, while oral communication simplifies the process of decoding for
more complex information. Personal orientation refers to the fact that media in various degrees
enable personality in forms of feelings and emotions. For example is face-to-face interaction
most commonly seen as more personal than communication over email. (Daft et al., 1987)
Channels that are high in richness hold a higher degree of these four criteria than media of lower
richness, and media of varied richness might be suitable in different contexts (Draft & Lengel,
1984; 1986). Daft and Lengel (1986) recommend rich media to be used for more equivocal
messages, such as in situations when things need to be discussed between team members where
7Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
a shared understanding and “rapid information cycles” have to be achieved, whereas lean,
written media is preferred for clear, easily interpreted messages, such as information sharing, or
something simple as a scheduled meeting time, where the risk of misunderstanding is small.
Lean media generally contains less social characteristics, and is therefore suitable for sharing a
wider range of information, compared to richer media that tends to include a higher degree of
social characteristics, which means it is more suitable for deeper, more interpersonal
information exchange (Miranda & Saunders, 2003). MRT suggests that individuals should
match media to the level of equivocality of a task to optimize effective communication in the
specific context (Draft & Lengel, 1984; 1986).
Figure 1 below, based on Daft and Lengel (1984), show how different media can be mapped out
on a scale of media richness. Face-to-face interaction is evaluated to be the richest medium
because of its high score in all four criteria for media richness (Fleischmann, Aritz & Cardon,
2019). Face-to-face interaction enables instant feedback, personal communication and the
largest number of social and non-verbal cues as well as variety of language in form of signals
through eye contact, body movement and facial expressions additionally to the verbal
communication (Daft & Lengel, 1984).
Figure 1. Communication Media and Information Richness (based on Daft &
Lengel, 1984)
8Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
2.2.1 Media richness in virtual teams
As a theory presented in the 1980s, MRT has been widely discussed for several decades.
However, more recent studies have investigated how the theory can be revisited and developed
to be better adapted to the modern media climate with rapid technological development and the
many new ICTs in today’s world. In the original theory, computer-mediated work was seen as a
lean medium (Daft & Lengel, 1984; 1986), but due to the development of such communication
tools, this type of medium could nowadays be seen as more or less rich depending on its
characteristics and functions (Carlson & Zmud, 1999; Dennis, Fuller & Valacich, 2008; Ishi et
al., 2019). Additionally, as MRT originally determined particular media in an objective manner,
and due to irregular empirical findings when using the original theory, scholars started to add
subjective views of the media which have shown that personal experience, attitudes and
knowledge about a medium should, additionally to the objective characteristics with regards to
media richness, be considered when evaluating the usefulness and effects of different ICTs in
virtual teamwork (Ishii et al., 2019). Later research on MRT in virtual teams has thus shown
that there is also a distinct correlation between users’ previous experience with a medium and
how favorable the channel will be perceived (Fleischmann et al., 2019).
Rich media is, according to Daft and Lengel (1984), recommended to be used more extensively
in organic organizations where the environment is changing and complex, as richer media tends
to enable a better collaboration in this type of environment due to a higher level of immediacy
of feedback, higher degree of cues, personalization, and language variety. In general, media low
in richness is used more extensively in mechanistic organizations within stable environments, as
tasks in this type of environment tend to be more structured and wider well-known, which most
often means that uncertainty and ambiguity is less occurring (Daft & Lengel, 1984). As virtual
teams often operate in an agile, more complex and changing manner (Samul & Petre, 2019), it
can thus be considered that these teams would benefit from using richer forms of media in their
work.
A recent study on media use and media richness in modern, virtual teams showed that teams
using richer communication channels early in their team process were better coordinated and
reached better results than teams using leaner communication channels (Aritz et al., 2018).
Additionally, the team members of the studied virtual teams evaluated richer channels, such as
interactive tools like Google Docs, to be more effective, and lean channels such as traditional
email as less effective (Aritz et al., 2018). Industry reports have for years indicated that
traditional tools like email are much less efficient for virtual teamwork than newer, interactive
and collaborative tools (Aritz et al., 2018), which due to their ability to score higher on the four
9Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
criteria for media richness (Daft & Lengel, 1984; 1986) can be categorized as richer channels
even though they are not always similar to face-to-face interaction. The importance of using
richer media early in a team process was also originally stressed by Daft and Lengel (1984) as
they meant that equivocality is caused by divergent frames of reference, which can be resolved
by discussions through rich media. Furthermore, they believed that less rich media, such as
more impersonal written communication, documents and reports, could be used for coordination
in a team once a common understanding of tasks and the organizational work had been
established (Daft & Lengel, 1984).
Regarding ICTs that are being used to enable virtual teamwork, video conferencing, such as
Zoom or Skype, is a medium high of richness as it is as close to face-to-face interactions as you
can get in a virtual climate (Fleischmann et al., 2019). Since video conferencing enables the
possibility to see and hear each other in real time, it scores high in all four criteria of MRT (Daft
& Lengel, 1984; 1986). However, later research suggests that media, and specifically modern
technologies, should not be distinguished along a straight line between rich and lean, but rather
from a more nuanced perspective, as new media tend to combine the traditional criteria for
media richness (immediacy, cues, language variety and personal orientation) in unexpected
ways (El-Shinnawy & Markus, 1997; Fleischmann et al., 2019). Certain media may be
positioned on the leaner side of the scale of media richness when focusing on one criteria, but
richer when focusing on another (Fleischmann et al., 2019). For example, an online chat tool
like Slack enables quick feedback, but tend to be low on cues and language variety, which
means that the criteria of MRT do not align with each other for this particular ICT.
2.3 Crucial factors of virtual teams
Working in teams normally means social interaction to a great extent, and when discussing
virtual teams in particular, this type of interaction is often challenged in one way or another due
to the lack of face-to-face interaction. As suggested by the previously explained Media Richness
Theory, face-to-face interaction is the richest kind of medium with the most social cues that
enables more personal communication (Daft & Lengel, 1984; 1986). In its absence, virtual
teams have to find alternative ways to include a high degree of social interaction through
technology tools, as this is proven to have a great impact on virtual teamwork (Florea & Stoica,
2019).
According to a recent literature review made by Dulebohn and Hoch (2017), previous scholars
cannot seem to agree on a mutual conclusion regarding effects of virtuality on teamwork.
10Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
However, comprehensive factors that seem to be present in the majority of all research on
virtual team in one way or another are communication, collaboration and belongingness, which
all are indicated to have an impact on team outcome – task-related as well as regarding social
relationships. Therefore, communication, collaboration and belongingness in virtual teams are
presented below.
2.3.1 Communication in virtual teams
Marlow et al. (2017) claim that findings in prior research regarding communication in virtual
teams are widely mixed. They argue that this is due to lack of clarity on what should be
included when studying communication in a virtual context, significantly due to technological
advancement, meaning team communication has been greatly developed. To address this gap
and set an agenda for future research, Marlow et al. (2017) have identified the most influential
communication features in virtual teams. Their findings suggest that three main factors of
communication play a vital role in the functioning of virtual teams: communication frequency,
communication quality and communication content.
Marlow et al. (2017) suggest that a higher communication frequency is more important in a new
team to create a higher degree of collective understanding and cognitive behavior within the
team. However, too high frequency can be a hinder for team processes as it can cause
information overload. Furthermore, Marlow et al. (2017) mean that the quality is the most
important aspect of communication in virtual teams and is a main enabler for shared
understanding, both regarding shared beliefs within the team and understanding regarding roles
and responsibilities. Communication quality refers to the degree to which the communication
among team members is accurate and understood, instead of the actual amount or frequency.
Marlow et al. discuss communication timeliness and closed-loop communication as part of
quality. They mean that timeliness can be an issue in virtual teams due to time dispersion
causing delays and constraining real-time communication. Closed-loop communication means
that the sender of a message follow-up with the receiver to make sure no misunderstandings
occurred in the communication process, which is an issue more occurring in virtual teams than
in colocated teams. Marlow et al. argue that communication content can be divided into two
types; task-oriented interaction where the communication is focused on task completion, and
relational interaction which is communication of interpersonal nature. Both types are argued as
being important for virtual team functioning, but interpersonal communication has been evident
to foster cohesion and trust (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1998). Media richness theory suggests that
media of lower richness, that has no social and non-verbal cues, will constrain social
11Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
relationships (Daft & Lengel, 1986. However, Marlow et al. (2017) argue that it is evident that
virtual teams are able to create social, relational bonds through ICT (without social and non-
verbal cues) and thereby develop affective aspects such as trust within the team.
2.3.2 Collaboration in virtual teams
Similarly to Marlow et al. (2017), Kauffman and Carmi (2017) divide communication in task
based and relationship based communication. Furthermore, Kauffman and Carmi suggest that a
higher and better level of collaboration within a virtual team can be obtained by incorporating a
high level of both task and relationship based communication in the virtual work model, as
these can build cognitive respectively affective trust, which is seen as another important factor
for a functioning virtual collaboration. Furthermore, Peter and Manz (2007) suggests that depth
of relationships, trust and shared understanding are crucial factors for collaboration within
virtual teams. Therefore, they mean that virtual teams can create a context for the team members
by focusing on these factors, which thus can lead to better team performance and collaboration.
Clearly defined roles have by several scholars been stressed as an important factor for
functioning virtual teams as this has shown to have a large effect on other aspects (Zimmerman,
2011). For example poorly defined roles can cause stress and confusion which can affect both
individual well-being and team effectiveness (Zimmerman, 2011). It is suggested that greater
task complexity in virtual teams need greater task interdependence, which in turn is dependent
on clearly defined roles (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002).
Trust, which can be explained as a shared psychological view on intentions and behaviors
between members of a team, is crucial for a functioning virtual team, but is often challenged
due to the virtuality (Gibson & Cohen, 2003; Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020). Both the
geographical dispersion and the use of ICT in virtual teams have been evident to make it harder
for team members to build common ground and to gain an understanding of each other’s
behavior, as the time, space and lack of social cues makes identities of individuals more
ambiguous, which in turn can cause a lower level of trust in a team (Henttonen & Blomqvist,
2005; Morrison-Smith & Ruiz, 2020). Furthermore, the virtuality and geographical dispersion
imply that differing beliefs, contradictory values and divergent interpretations may have a
higher impact on the team results than in colocated teams due to fewer natural opportunities to
address these differences and that way find common ground (Florea & Stoica, 2019). However,
it is suggested that team identity can help bridge these concerns and strengthen trust and shared
understanding (Henttonen & Blomqvist, 2005).
12Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
2.3.3 Belongingness in virtual teams
As in all teams, virtual teams can have a stronger or weaker team identity, and it has been
proved that a higher degree of team identity in virtual teams can reduce some of the negative
aspects of geographic dispersion (Zimmerman, 2011). However, a high degree of team identity
seem to be harder to achieve in virtual teams than in colocated teams due to the virtuality and
reliance on ICT, which means a lack of non-verbal cues such as facial expressions and body
language as well as less natural personal, informal bonding (Zimmerman, 2011). A shared team
identity may also be more challenging to obtain due to the lack of a shared context between the
team members (Florea & Stoica, 2019).
It is argued that virtual teams tend to be more task-oriented than traditional teams and therefore,
a main concern when analyzing virtual teams is the lack of social interaction and belongingness
(Hafermalz & Riemer, 2016). By studying how remote working tele-health nurses overcome the
issue of social isolation due to team dispersion, Hafermalz and Riemer (2016) found that
individuals within virtual teams can create and maintain a belongingness through technology.
Their study indicates that the creation of virtual “water cooler chats” build belonging within the
team and can contribute to a positive team performance. Furthermore, other research have
shown that positive, interpersonal affect, such as liking and affection, towards other members of
the team can foster trust as well as motivation to contribute towards mutual goals due to a
higher identification with the team (Zimmerman, 2011).
However, there are research with contradicting findings suggesting that the interpersonal bond
between team members that can be enabled through for example virtual water cooler chats, does
not have to be the most important for creating belongingness. Rogers and Lea (2005) argue that
a sense of belonging as well as a social presence within a virtual team can be achieved by
creating a shared social identity as a group, rather than creating interpersonal bonds between the
individuals. They also mean that belongingness can be created without simulating face-to-face
interaction in the virtual setting, e.g. through video functions. By conducting two case studies,
both consisting of ten groups of distributed, collaborating students, Roger and Lea (2005) found
that social and physical presence could be conceptually separated as a shared social identity and
feeling of belonging to the team could be achieved with the use of technology tools of relatively
low richness, such as text-based platforms. Thus, they suggest that it is social presence that is of
most importance for the motivation for group based behavior, rather than the feeling of physical
presence.
13Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
3 Method
In the following chapter, the methodology used for conducting the study is presented and
backed by method theory. Argumentation for selected methodology choices are presented
throughout the chapter, but a specific discussion of how quality has been assured in the study is
presented by the end of the chapter.
3.1 Research approach
Due to the nature of the purpose and research question in this thesis, a qualitative research
approach has been used. This kind of approach is suitable for exploring and understanding how
individuals and groups perceive and handle a social or human problem (Creswell & Poth, 2017).
3.1.1 Study design
The study is formed out of a constructivist worldview perspective, where the purpose is to seek
understanding of how individuals experience the world in which they live and work (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018). Rather than starting off from a theory, an approach of inductive character is
usually taken in this type of research to try to find a pattern of meaning in the empirical material
to develop theories of how things are and why (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). However, this
study has more of an abductive approach, which means that the researcher has gone back and
forth between theory and empirical findings throughout the research process. This alternating
process between theory and data collection is used in abduction to examine how the empirical
data support existing theories as well as whether the data may result in new perceptions and
findings that call for modifications in existing understandings (Thornberg, 2012). The abductive
approach was thus considered suitable for this study, as the concept of virtual teamwork has
been set in a new light in today’s society due to the coronavirus pandemic, which therefore
could mean that pre-existing knowledge could fail to explain the empirical findings.
Furthermore, a phenomenological research design has been applied, which means individual
experiences of a specific phenomenon is studied (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) – in this case the
phenomenon of virtual teamwork. The research design is applied on a case, which means the
study could also be seen as a case study. However, it is argued that a comprehensive case study
needs a research design in form of a mixed method (Yin, 2018), but as a case in this study is
more used as a part of the method to explore the phenomenon of virtual teamwork, the author
would argue that this is not the main study design. To enable the phenomenological study
design, interviews have been conducted using an interview guide with open-ended questions,
14Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
which according to Creswell and Creswell (2018) is a recommended way of collecting rich data
when approaching a phenomenon, as well as a case, to analyze in this type of study.
3.2 Research setting
The object studied in this phenomenological case study is an American business organization
promoting Swedish-American trade through events, networking and business matchmaking.
The organization consists of several smaller, regional organizations located all over the U.S.,
with separate teams that come together in an umbrella organization, striving for streamlined
operations over the regional borders. The organization is working both towards the Swedish and
the American market, but most activities are normally conducted towards the American time
zones.
The selected object is chosen due to its Swedish-American characteristics, where the
coronavirus pandemic has had a great impact on the teamwork model all over the organization,
as most of the teams now work over several time zones – most commonly a Swedish and an
American one, which is a main difference from before, as all team members in each team
normally were located in the same office, in the U.S.. Most teams within the organization
consists of 3-5 persons; an Executive Director and one to four additional team members. The
team members beyond the executive director are replaced every 6-12 months, as these most
commonly are interns moving from Sweden to the U.S. for a limited internship period as part of
their studies. Because of the time cycles, which means that all interns have been replaced since
the beginning of the year, and due to visa and travel bans into the U.S., most interns are
currently working from Sweden, as they have not been able to travel to the U.S. for their
internship period, which means all teams have been forced to transition into a virtual work
model.
All the three studied teams consisted of one manager based in the U.S. and one or more interns
located in Sweden. Additionally, two of the teams did also have interns located in the U.S., but
the interns used as respondents in this study were all located in Sweden. None of the teams have
had any face-to-face interaction with each other prior to the start of the virtual work model,
which means all social interaction and eventual get-to-know-each-other activities have had to be
done virtually.
The size of the team varied from 2-4 members: Team A had two members, whereof one intern
in Sweden, Team B three members, whereof one intern in Sweden and one in the US, and Team
C four members, whereof two interns located in Sweden and one in the US. The team with only
15Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
two members had help from the board of directors which was present in the daily operations to
a greater extent than in the other teams. A table of the teams and respondents used in the study
is presented below in section 3.3.1 – Selection/Sampling process.
Some of the respondents had prior experience from working remotely, but not to any greater
extent than a few months before joining the current virtual team.
3.3 Data collection
Semi-structured interviews have been used as a qualitative data collection method to find
answers to the research question. This type of interview is characterized by the fact that it
follows an interview guide with rather open questions and themes that lead the discussing
forward (Alvehus, 2013). However, the semi-structured design still leaves room for personal
influences of the respondents, which means each interview can look quite different (Alvehus,
2013). According to Creswell and Poth (2017), qualitative research is used when we want to
empower individuals to share their stories and this type of interviews will make it possible to do
so. Creswell and Creswell (2018) as well as Gray (2014) refers to this type of data collection as
most suitable when conducting a study with a phenomenological research design as it gives an
opportunity to find out about individuals’ personal views on a phenomenon. This methodology
has been beneficial in this study due to the fact that the purpose is to investigate individuals’
feelings as well as human interaction within teams, which means that it was of importance to
ask about personal experiences and thoughts during the interviews.
The questions were focused on attitudes and feelings about the virtual teamwork with a focus on
communication, collaboration and belongingness and how the respondents thought this was
working out in their teams. Furthermore, the questions aimed to explore the respondents’
attitudes towards different ICTs and how they believe the tools supported or counteracted the
concerns about collaboration, communication and belongingness within the virtual team.
3.3.1 Selection / Sampling process
The selection of interview respondents was done from a strategic selection, which means that
the respondents are chosen based on specific experiences or positions in relation to the
questions that will be asked (Alvehus, 2013). The strategic selection was based on the fact that
it was seen as an advantage of interviewing several members on the same team. This way the
possibility of individual differences on how the members of the same team experienced the
16Communication, Collaboration And Belongingness In Virtual Teams
– Mapping Out Enablers And Constraints
ICTs’ effect on their virtual teamwork could be discussed. Respondents were also selected out
of several teams to enable a comparison of how the work models could differentiate for teams
within the same organization. It was believed that it could be of interest to interview at least two
people who hold different roles within each team, such as a manager and an intern, to
investigate whether differences in attitudes and thoughts about the virtual work model may have
had a connection to the position held. By investigating this, it also enabled the possibility to
compare the findings from the different teams to look for possible patterns.
Alvehus (2013) explains how a sample can be homogeneous or heterogeneous, where
homogeneous means that respondent are more alike, and heterogeneous means that respondents
are more diverse. It can be argued that the selection in this study can be seen as both
homogenous and heterogenous, as respondents homogenously work in similarly functioning
teams, but both managers and interns were selected to make it more diversified in a
heterogeneous manner.
A recommended sample size for a qualitative study varies widely, and according to method
theory it is hard to recommend a specific number as qualitative research aims to elucidate
something particular and specific, rather than generalize information which more is the case in
quantitative research where a larger sample therefore can be of greater importance (Alvehus,
2013; Creswell & Poth, 2017). Thus, the importance of the sample size it that it is big enough to
achieve saturation of the material (Alvehus, 2013). Creswell and Poth (2017) means that an
optimal sample size also depends on the chosen research approach and that a sample size of 3 to
10 participants could be a considered a reasonable recommendation for phenomenology.
Furthermore, Gray (2014) recommends a sample size of 6-8 participants to secure validity of the
material. To ensure saturation of the data in the study, i.e. that no new information would
emerge during a further data collection through more interviews, the aim was therefore to
conduct at least six interviews, where at least two people within three different teams were
interviewed. Two backup interviews were also planned in case of low quality or irrelevant data
collection from any of the initially planned interviews. When saturation of the data was believed
to have been met, an extra interview was conducted to further secure the saturation of the data
collection.
Below is a table of the selected respondents and their anonymization for the presentation of the
result and data analysis.
17You can also read
