Virtual Teams: Is technology adoration sufficient enough to manage?

The improvement of overall global infrastructure through the last decades has directly influenced the global interconnection and global collaboration. It has also immensely facilitated the geographical expansion of organizations. Such a development has not only been a catalyst for innovations, but also a genesis for the growth of tools, techniques, and technology. Such innovations focus primarily on networking, connectivity, communication, collaboration, and Virtual (project) Teams.

Organizational expansions beyond continents have brought in new factors. No longer is the skill and talent pool of an organization concentrated in a single location. Despite being in the same organization various experts are dispersed among different time zones and through various geographies. As a consequent, they are only available virtually.

Also, advancement in Human Capital Management, employee empowerment, and increasing work-life balance awareness, has brought in a new breed of young professionals. They choose to work as freelancers or from their preferred place, than working in corporate cubicles. In a way, availability of the right talent for a team has surpassed the conventional physical boundaries. It has brought in realities of virtual availability of Virtual Teams.

Such virtual realities have a direct influence on the teams, team management, project management methods, techniques, and operational style. It has directly impacted all major components of project management. It includes Virtual Manager/Project Manager’s skills, team collaboration, and the terminologies used. It has brought in Virtual Team (VT) and Virtual Project Management (VPM) to the central focus, which is evidently different from the traditional and classical approach. As per a recent survey, 76% of organization manage their projects through Virtual Teams.

Before we move further, let us discuss the definition of the Virtual Teams (VT) and the Virtual Project Management (VPM). Peterson & Stohr identify Virtual Teams (a.k.a. Geographically Dispersed Team) as a “group of individuals who work across time, space and organizational boundaries with links strengthened by webs of communication technology.” Some others look at is as “If you want virtual results, create a Virtual Team” (Brake 2006).

One of the reasons for broad and grand acceptance of Virtual Team is because “they cease time and space being obstacles, and they are usually cost-efficient. Virtual Teams “can follow the Sun” and exploit all 24 hours of a day (Berry 2011). This is immensely beneficial for global organizations. This is not primarily because of being cost-efficient, but due to the fact that this is the only way to manage such global organizations effectively.

Virtual Project Management (VPM) has three dimensions — Team, Location and Time. The most composite definition can be “Virtual Teams are teams whose members are geographically distributed, requiring them to work together through electronic means with minimal face-to-face interaction. Often, Virtual Teams consist of cross-functional members working on highly interdependent tasks and sharing responsibility for team outcomes” (Malhotra, 2007).

As any traditional project has its inherent challenges to manage and as any team has its own list of obstacles to face. The Virtual Teams bring additional complexities to the already existing ones. It is qualitatively and quantitatively different to manage a project virtually i.e. Virtual Project Management.

Practically, this brings a unique flavor to the overall problem statement while managing projects virtually. Technology always helps solve the existing problems we face, but at times it also creates new problems for us to handle. Such unique challenges to VPM can be grouped in both technological and non-technological or seen holistically, being of the same nature.

Some may think that the problems of the Virtual Teams can be resolved merely by technology adoration. Focusing primarily on setting up online communication channels, videoconferences, share points, chatrooms etc. But it may not be completely true. It is an undisputed fact that the needs of human collaboration can only be met by face to face interaction. “Surely new technologies can provide a new mechanism to fill this gap to a larger extent, but it does not prove that these mechanisms are the equal or superior substitutions to other/earlier options.” (“Dispersed Teams Are the Peopleware for the 21st Century” Jessica Lipnack and Jeffrey Stamps 1997)

Let us explore some significant challenges created directly or because of technology for Virtual Teams:

Team and team selection

• The primary criteria for selection of a Virtual Team member can not only be the required skill to deliver the product but must be the additional ability to communicate virtually and through the electronic medium. Most of the time virtual Virtual Manager/Project Managers fail to recognize these criteria. Also, it is important to specifically inquire about the interest of the person and his/her willingness to be part of a Virtual Team, rather than taking it as an assumed willingness. Such lack of communication skills or lack of interest in working as a Virtual Team disrupts the project collaboration and creates communication bottlenecks.

Time zone difference

• Time zone differences sometimes prove to be an asset or at times become the biggest roadblock for Virtual team/projects. Availability of a crucial team member at a time, which is not suitable for the rest of the team may become a limiting factor in project execution. At times, conflicting time zones become the constraint for delivery speed. Team meetings falling at odd hours for some members may be more disturbing than being productive.

Trust

• As the Virtual/Project team has to work together to deliver the common outcome or product, mutual trust and faith are the most important. Reaching a level of trust depends over natural and physical nuances like observation, dialogue, and body language. Unfortunately, virtual communication means cannot fulfill such human attributes so easily. As a result, Virtual Teams take a longer time to build trust. Lack of face to face interaction and physical presence causes a disadvantage for the Virtual Team in gaining mutual trust.

Loyalty to the goal

• Effect of any communication depends over the richness of the communication media used. Lack of face-to-face interaction and poor quality online communication or insufficient communication directly affects the team’s collaboration on the common goal or objective. There cannot be a substitution of clarification through walking to the desk of another team member or agreeing for a conflicting point over coffee in the canteen. Unless adequately addressed, Virtual Teams, suffer from less loyalty to the common goal. It can have unresolved conflicts for longer times.

Lower homogeneity

• In a survey conducted by Pullan, P. & Prokopi, E. (2016), 76% of the survey takers mentioned engaging remote participants, as the primary challenge. Due to a lack of opportunities for a close bonding among team members and not having enough opportunities for informal interactions, there are always challenges in transforming a Virtual Team into a coherent single unit. As a result, there is more possibility of having low homogeneity or a sense of belonging in the team.

Lack of mutual knowledge

• Virtual Teams have limited interactions, but more formal communications, compared to working together under a single roof. The normal team building exercise is rare for Virtual Teams. As an effect, the common or tacit knowledge is very rarely shared among the team. This brings them to the downside of Virtual Teams i.e. there are minimal opportunities for collective learning and knowledge sharing. The team most of the time, remains a collection of specialists working individually to deliver a common product.

Lack of a common language

• In most cases, the Virtual Team is geographically dispersed, each team member may have different preferences of language. Though there can be a common language for communication purposes, it may be the case that not all team members are equally proficient in the chosen common language. Interacting and putting across their point to the team in a foreign language by a technical expert may be a real challenge, not only for him but for the rest of the team to understand as well. In such cases, even though there is a chosen common language for the virtual team/project, it is not an equally/freely shared language.

Cultural barriers

• In a Virtual Team, there are very high chances that team members come from different countries and hence are belonging to distant cultures. Every culture interprets written and verbal cues differently. Body language is also interpreted differently. So the complexities and chances of misplaced interpretations increases manifold for the Virtual Team. Even though media richness of video conferences is much more than written, but it cannot substitute the presence of a person. Video interfaces provide a minimal support in overcoming cultural barriers.

Technological issues

• Online communication is the backbone of Virtual Teams. It’s the glue which keeps the whole team together. Naturally, in the case of technology, a Virtual Team can suffer due to a computer breakdown, slow network, and chocked bandwidth etc. There can be also a selection of inadequate tools to manage the virtual project. It can have poor collaborative software, noise in communication and other technological disruptions.

Over-documentation

• To fill in the gap of single location team existence, the Virtual Team uses multiple channels of communication and information storage. Unfortunately, each communication requires documentation and records of discussion. The consequence of such enforced communications ends up in having over documentation, multiple versions, and redundant information. The excessive urge to fill the gap between physical and time distances creates an overflow of information. It may not be the optimal use of team resources. At times, updating and managing the documentation, itself becomes one major task.

Scattered Stakeholders

• Not only are the team members geographically dispersed but the significant stakeholders or sponsors are too. Sometimes handling multiple stakeholders situated at distant locations becomes a significant task for a Virtual Team/Project Manager. It may be that it is not possible to bring all of them together at the same time even through virtual means.

Leading the Virtual Team with the traditional approach

• Most Virtual Team Managers/Project Managers are trained to manage the projects with project teams in their project rooms (war rooms) with the classical approach. The Project Managers tend to manage the Virtual Team as they will manage the physical teams. Even modern project management methods talk more about how to manage demand and product delivery than how to manage Virtual Teams. Most of the time Virtual Projects are managed in a traditional mindset with a mere addition of online tools. This may work against the very needs of the Virtual Team.

So which are the key success factors to overcome these challenges while managing Virtual Teams and Virtual Projects?

We should always keep in mind that Virtual Teams and Virtual Project Management encounter all the obstacles by any regular team and project management in an organization. In addition, they face issues which are unique to a virtual environment. Hence it surely needs additional sensitivity and efforts on the part of team members and Virtual/Project Managers.

Ultimately, we are dealing with people, while managing physical or Virtual Teams. Whereas the basic needs of both the team stand the same, Virtual Teams have additional needs which are complex and dynamic in nature. The Virtual/Project Manager should be specially trained and equipped for Virtual Teams, he must be sensitive to the emotional needs of Virtual Team members. He should be an expert in online collaborations, leading virtual meetings and independent workers.

The other major underlying challenge i.e. building trust is the most difficult to handle. Surely there is no formula to build trust and it will vary in the case to case basis. Trust in a Virtual Team can be built through better information sharing, by keeping the team updated about the project all the time. It can be earned by showing professional flexibility and accommodation. One better way to earn quick trust might be by being quick to respond to the team members and being available for them when required.

To summarize, most of the VT/VPM challenges can be handled through enhancement of communication skill, developing virtual management skills and the ability to build trust. This is true not only for the Virtual Virtual Manager/Project Managers but also for the Virtual Team members.

Virtual Manager/Virtual Project Managers have to be creative enough in using technology and have to understand that technology in itself, is just a minor enabler, not the doer. There is “significant more” which needs to be done humanly to have a virtual team as an organic performing team. Making the individual member feel part of the team and remain proactive in handling the side effects of virtual realities, is the only way.

Author’s Bio:

Parthasarathi is Global Senior Finance Business Engagement Manager at ABB, for Planning and Reporting. He has professional qualifications in Finance, Accounting, Internal Control, Financial Audit, Information System Audit, Fraud Examination, Information Security and Project Management. Parthasarathi’s expertise and knowledge cover Change Management, Process Improvement, Infosec Security management, Risk and Compliance, Segregation of Duty, IS service delivery, New technology implementation, IS Demand and Budget Management. He works closely with functional leaders in Business and IS/IT in his organization and keeps a close watch over related industry and process innovations.