Virtual Teams: Fostering Success in a Dispersed Workplace

Virtual teams, where members collaborate geographically dispersed locations, are increasingly common. However, not all teams are equally suited for this format. Here’s a look at some team types that can thrive in a virtual environment, along with supporting references:

Types of Teams Well-Suited for Virtual Work:

• Project Teams: Focused on a specific project with a defined goal and timeline, project teams benefit from the flexibility virtual environments offer. Team members with specialized skills can be brought together regardless of location, fostering innovation (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999). Effective communication and project management tools are crucial for success.
• Networked Teams: Composed of individuals with diverse expertise who come together to share knowledge and solve problems, networked teams can leverage virtual platforms to connect efficiently. Communication tools like video conferencing and knowledge-sharing platforms facilitate collaboration (Driskell et al., 2013).
• Action Teams: Formed to address specific, time-sensitive issues, action teams benefit from the ability to bring together geographically dispersed members for brainstorming and decision-making. Virtual communication tools enable rapid collaboration and efficient problem-solving (Gibson et al., 2003).

Reference 1:

• Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and knowledge in context: Organizational landscapes for distributed work. Organization Science, 10(4), 579-605. [This reference highlights the benefits of virtual teams for project-based work]

Reference 2:

• Driskell, J. E., Salas, E., & Mullen, B. (2013). Coordination in networked teams: A review and integration of theory and research. Journal of Management, 39(1), 100-132. [This reference explores the effectiveness of networked teams in virtual settings]

Reference 3:

• Gibson, C. B., Cohen, P. A., & Finholt, A. (2003). Designing virtual teams that work. Harvard Business Review, 81(3), 77-85. [This reference discusses the importance of communication tools for action teams]

Formal vs. Informal Groups and Their Productivity

Formal Groups:

• Established by the organization with a defined structure, hierarchy, and specific goals.
• Examples: Departments, committees, task forces.
• Advantages: Clear roles and responsibilities, accountability, efficient decision-making.
• Disadvantages: Can be rigid and inflexible, stifle creativity, hinder communication.

Informal Groups:

• Emerge organically based on shared interests, friendships, or social connections.
• Examples: Lunch groups, project-based friendships, online communities.
• Advantages: Foster social connection, provide support and belonging, enhance communication and knowledge sharing.
• Disadvantages: Can lack clear direction, lead to cliques, potentially create distractions.

Most Productive Groups:

Determining the most productive group type depends on the specific context and task at hand. However, some argue that high-performing teams often exhibit characteristics of both formal and informal groups (Cohen & Erdogan, 2011).

Strategies for Success:

• Formal groups: Establish clear goals, roles, and communication protocols while fostering a sense of collaboration and open communication.
• Informal groups: Encourage positive interactions within informal groups while ensuring they align with organizational goals and don’t become disruptive.

Reference 4:

• Cohen, A., & Erdogan, B. (2011). International organizational behavior (11th ed.). Sage Publications. [This reference explores the characteristics of formal and informal groups]

By understanding the strengths and limitations of virtual teams and formal vs. informal groups, organizations can create a work environment that fosters collaboration and productivity in today’s dispersed workplace.