global virtual teams teigland

April 2008

Leading in a global networked organization

Robin TeiglandCenter for Strategy and CompetitivenessStockholm School of [email protected]

[email protected] 2

Leading from a distance is an absolute necessity in our

industry. It will be that way in more and more industries. It is a hard skill. People who have never done it don’t even recognize it as

a separate skill.

Connaughton & Daly

[email protected] 3

Why the growth in global virtual teams?

What can you do to improve effectiveness in global virtual teams?

What are some new tools for working in a global networked organization?

Today’s discussion

[email protected] 4

A world of rapidly growing knowledge ….

>A person’s lifetime

18th centuryOne week

2008

Fischbowl 2007

[email protected] 5

…that becomes quickly outdated ….

50%knowledge

relevant

50%knowledgeoutdated

First year of technical-based

educationThird year

of educationFischbowl 2007

[email protected] 6

Watch the following video• Did You Know: Shift Happens 2.0• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcfrLYDm2U

How is your organization affected by these external trends?

[email protected] 7

Growth

Time

Output of information and knowledge

Human absorptive capacity

A world of rapidly growing knowledge..

Cohen, WM och Levinthal, D A, Absorptive Capacity: A new Perspective on Learning and Innovation, Working paper, Carnegie Mellon University and University of Pennsylvania, October 1989

[email protected] 8

…and increasing connectivity.

The information age in which we live allows both large and small

businesses to thrive on a global scale. Technologies like the internet, mobile phones, etc. have made our

shrinking world even smaller.

Kingsley 2005

[email protected] 9

Increasing degree of globalization

The extent to which networks of individuals and organizations, markets, and technologies are

interconnected across geographic and cultural boundaries

• Beech and Chadwick 2004, Friedman 2002

[email protected] 10

From a multi-domestic company to a successful global firm

Multi-domestic

Global

Sub7

HQ Sub10

Sub9

Sub8

Sub13

Sub11

Sub3

Sub5

Sub4

Sub1

Sub2

Sub6

Sub14

Sub14

Integrated


Decade of collaboration at Shell

1997• “Networked Community” project initiated at Shell Oil; key

exec drives collaboration as he advances up hierarchy 1998-2000

• Knowledge management, communities of practice, and virtual working projects undertaken across Group: consistent methodology for virtual working implemented; key teams launched

2001-ongoing• Technology for virtual working implemented in Livelink by

Group IT organization 2002-03

• Pilot collaboration between EP business and Global IT stressing “new ways of working” and simple tools

2004-present• Key European Business with support from IT. HR and Learning

invest consistently in collaboration experiments and education

Lipnack & Stamps 2007


What are the benefits of global networks?


Profitable growth through higher efficiency and innovation

• Preventing the waste of valuable resources - avoid reinventing the wheel

• Ensuring the use of leading-edge technology and thinking across the firm

• Increasing customer satisfaction through shorter lead-times and consistent behavior

• Creating a competitive cost structure• Facilitating breakthrough and incremental innovations

through combination of technologies and ideas from across and outside the firm

An attractive workplace that encourages cross-functional co-operation across the globe

• Attracting and retaining key individuals

What are the benefits of global networks?


Cap Gemini – NCN MS Electronic Community Background and objective

• To provide programmers working with Microsoft products a forum to help each other solve problems

Organization • 345 programmers across Nordic countries

Activities• Helping each other through posting questions and

responses on listserv nicknamed “L2A2L” (Learn to Ask to Learn)

Critical success factors• “Eldsjäl” – one who burned for the community and

walked the talk• High level of reciprocity

Teigland & Wasko 2003


Performance differs based on one’s network

Firm A

Highcreative

Low on-time

Highon-time Low

creative

Teigland 2003

Highcreative

Virtualcommunity

Firm B


…and on the networks within the firm

Company A

R&D Ericsson

R&D HP

R&D % Revenue from products dev’d in last three years

Poor High High

Speed, time to market Medium Poor High End customer satisfaction Poor Medium High

Teigland et al 2000


Networking activities recognized and rewarded at individual and unit levels

Management support for informal and formal networking activities across internal and external boundaries

Extensive socialization: personnel rotation, cross-office teams

A visionary organization • Clearly defined mission: ”To make technical

contributions for the advancement and welfare of humanity”

• Supporting core values, e.g., teamwork• Company-wide goal of World’s Best Laboratory

Hewlett-Packard (1990s)

Teigland et al 2000


But the move from a multi-domestic company to a globally integrated one is challenging


Proximal collaboration

When people are more than 50 feet apart, the likelihood of

them collaborating more than once a week is less than

10%.

Allen 1984


Stockholm

London

Brussels

HelsinkiMadrid

Copenhagen

Islands of competence despite management’s continuous efforts

Transferred from

Stockholm

Teigland 1998

San Francisco


Trust & reciprocity are essential for

knowledge exchange in

networks


…and most importantly, management cannot mandate social relationships

Jan

Lars Pia

Anna

Nils

Bill

Erik

Mike

Al

AlexJohn

Eva

Hans

Miguel

Paul


Increasing use of Global Virtual Teams

Manager

Team Member

Team Member

Team Member

Team Leader

Manager

Manager

Manager

GVT: A group of people often with complementary skills not normally together in one location at the

same time functioning across boundaries of space, time, and organization, working together to achieve

a shared purpose, and supported by technology


Great potential from GVTs! Resources

• Getting the best people, no matter where they are• Different perspectives from several locations• Better resources for problem solving

Process• Improved quality of decision making, eg test ideas in

multiple contexts before making final decisions• Greater commitment to tasks

Results• Improved creativity and innovation• Higher motivation• More individual need satisfaction• Higher organizational commitment• Reduced employee burnout due to travel• Reduced expenses related to travel and office costs

Schermerhorn 2004

Creation of the whole > sum of its parts


What are the key challenges to GVTs?

Think for 1-2 minutes individually about the challenges with virtual teams that you are experiencing, have experienced, or have seen around you.

Discuss these with others at your table for 10 minutes.

Select the 3 most crucial challenges per table.

Appoint a spokesperson to present them. Share with the group.

Baan 2005


What are the key challenges to GVTs?

Three key aspects make working in virtual teams different from working in collocated teams:

• You’re dealing with greater complexity, • of which you see less, i.e., reduced visibility, • while having to rely on “handicapped”

communication

within the overall theme of greater cross-cultural diversity.

Baan 2005


Improving GVT performance

Lipnak & Stamps 2007, Coleman 2006


Achieving collective competence through collaboration

Collective competenceGroup’s ability to work together

to solve problems and achieve common goals

Shared normsShared routines

Shared languageShared understanding

Created in the course of joint action and problem solving

Ruuska & Teigland 2008


Collective competence

It’s really important to get a collective perspective in order for everyone to

understand the project’s core and to develop the project’s goals and outcomes…a critical point is when everyone is on the same page

and is able to look at the project with the same ”set of eyeglasses”.



GVT collective competency framework

Team Tasks

Technology

•Complexity scorecard

•Team configuration

•Virtual team roles

•Project charter•Team processes•Communications

planning

• Level “playing” ground• Right technology

• Manage by the task• Standard guidelines

Leadership



planning


Team Tasks

Technology


•Team configuration•Virtual team roles

Leadership• Level “playing” ground

• Right technology • Managed by the task• Standard guidelines


The complexity scorecardHow does your team rate on a scale of 1-low to 5-

high: Organizational diversity

Members from multiple functions? Members from multiple divisions or organizations? Members with multiple jobs/tasks? Flexible member composition, ie changes over time in size and

members? Geographical diversity

Wide geographical spread (number of time zones spanned)? Members from multiple national cultures? Members with different native languages and fluency? Differences in cross-cultural fluency?

Technological diversity Differences between members regarding access to

communications and technology facilities? Differences in ability to use various communication

technologies? Motivational diversity

Members with different underlying goals Adapted from Baan 2005


Diversity presents additional challenges to achieving performance

Surface diversity• Ethnic background, age, gender

Structural diversity (difficult to see)• Different training/educational and occupational

backgrounds– Learning histories, i.e., own patterns of information

acquisition and use – Perspectives on analyzing and solving problems – Example: Basic researcher vs politician vs

salesperson



“Work-to-live”culture

Risk avoidance

Knowledgeacquisition

Knowledgesharing

+

—

Cultural differences affect GVT behaviors

+

Teigland 2003


We live in different worlds – researchers focus on creating new knowledge/

publications while companies want to develop products that can be sold. And it’s difficult to achieve real cooperation even if

you understand one another.

There are always culture crashes when researchers meet people from

the public and private sectors…it takes time to build bridges between

the different worlds.



Team configuration matters!

Fully dispersed Three subgroupsTwo subgroups

Least conflictMost trust

Most conflictLeast trust

Polzer et al 2002


Clearly define virtual team roles

Coleman 2006





Team Tasks

Technology


planning




Develop a clear project charter …

Spend sufficient time specifying• What are the vision, purpose, and goals/objectives?• What are the roles and responsibilities of the

members?• What are the “rules of the game”? • How are decisions to be made?• How are conflicts to be resolved?• When and how are resources to be supplied?



Reducing complexity to

something manageable

Identifying priorities and importance, sequence of

activities

Highlighting interdependen

cebetween actors

and tasks

Creating a common language

My view….

Making views explicit

Why spend the time?


Conduct joint problem solving tasks Ensure participation by all members in

joint tasks from the very beginning of the project

• Example: Development of project objectives Use boundary objects to facilitate

understanding



We started to draw pictures for one another. ”Let’s make a simple sketch,

what should the website look like?” We started by drawing something on the computer, something visible around

which we could discuss.



Develop a rhythm in meeting frequency

Face-to-face meetings pump oxygen and blood into the life of the team and its relationships between members - heartbeats

Rhythm determined by frequency and type (eg face-to-face, phone) of meetings

Time between “heartbeats” depends on task (interdependence, complexity, schedule) and degree of collective competence

Face-to-face meetings do not need to coincide with major decision points! Rhythm is more important.

Adapted from Maznevski 2001


Heartbeat evidence – Ineffective team

• No established rhythms of face-to-face meetings

• No rhythm of contact for virtual meetings

1 3 975 11 13

Maznevski 2001

Month


Heartbeat evidence – Effective team 1

•Meets face-to-face every four months

•Irregular virtual meetings

1 3 975 11 13

Maznevski 2001

Month


Heartbeat evidence - Effective team 2

• Meets face-to-face every six months

• Meets by formal telephone conference every two months

1 3 13975 11

Maznevski 2001

Month


Stretch time, don’t overload it

Team Member

Team Member

Team Member

Team Leader

•High performing teams stretch time, ie leverage time differences and technology •Low performing teams overload time, ie

meeting together simultaneously too often



Team Tasks

Technology




planning




Teams that focus on the issues of being “virtual” sometimes do well, but often don’t

Teams that focus on being a team and getting their job done well generally figure out the technology anyway

But equal technology support for all team members is essential!!

• Each team needs to customize its own communications strategy based on members experience and skills

Technology is not the most important part!

Adapted from Maznevski 2001

90% people + 10% technology


Some simple rules

1. Facilitate a level “playing” ground

2. Choose the right technology

3. Manage meeting frequency and technology by the task

4. Develop guidelines for using technologies

Keep the technology simple!


Rule 1: Facilitate a level “playing” ground

Give people access to good training Make available as many communication

technologies as possible to all But use lowest common denominator in

terms of skills across members

Remember this is dynamic!

What you set up today is probably not how people

will work in one year


Rule 2. Choose the right technology

Face-to-faceVideoconferenceTelephone – 1 personTeleconferenceInstant messagingEmail – 1 personEmail – ListWikiBlogFaxLetter

Media are richer to extent that

• Allow for feedback• Allow one to

communicate using multiple modes (senses, channels) at same time

Lo

High

Adapted fromMaznevski 2001

Technologies are characterized by their richness


Complexity = Richness

Rule 2: Choose the right technology

The more complex the message, the richer the medium required

More complexity:• Earlier stage in the decision-process• Number of messages in the same interaction• Greater degree to which information depends on

context to be understood (tacitness)• Number of cultural, organizational, professional,

geographic, or time boundaries crossed• Degree to which the message must generate

commitment from the receiver

Maznevski 2001


Interdependence = Frequency + Richness

Rule 3: Manage by the task

The more interdependence the task requires…

… the more frequent the communication should be; and

… the more complex the messages usually are, the richer the media (see Rule 1).

Maznevski 2001

The task may require different amounts of interdependence at different stages


Heartbeat evidence - Effective team 2

• Meets face-to-face every six months

• Meets by formal telephone conference every two months

1 3 13975 11

Maznevski 2001

Month


Rule 4: Develop guidelines Example: Email

• Answer messages promptly • Update your outgoing message when out of the office • Keep distribution lists current• Clearly identify the subject in the subject line • Prioritize mail by coding top of message with either

“Requires action” or “For your information (FYI)”• Send short, straightforward messages (no scrolling

required)• Use attachments sparingly • Use websites to communicate large documents • Check spelling and grammar• Send group mail when all recipients actually need it • Forward messages with care and consideration • When replying to a mail, only keep the relevant part of the

mail• Only write what you are willing to see in the newspaper• Avoid irony• Do not use for urgent messages (use voice-to-voice or

face-to-face)• Agree that email is a supplement and not a substitute for

personal interactionReeves-Lipscomb 2001



Team Tasks

Technology




planning

•Tools selection & code of conduct

•Training needs analysis•Shared workspace

Leadership


Characteristics of high-performing teams

A clear and elevating goal A task-driven, results-oriented structure Competent, committed members who work

hard A collaborative climate High standards of excellence External support and recognition Strong and principled leadership


What is project success?

Two types of project outcomes

1. Objective – Fulfillment of objectives on budget and on time

2. Subjective - Satisfaction with project by members

Leverage differences among participants to produce innovative and synergistic solutions



What characterizes strong GVT leadership?

Think for 1-2 minutes individually about the challenges of leading virtual teams that you are experiencing, have experienced, or have seen around you.

Discuss these with others at your table. Share with the group.

Baan 2005


Our project leader really understands the different worlds of the project since he has

worked both as a practitioner and as an academic. He is good at networking and

communicating with everyone.


Avoid creation of an “inner circle” Ensure information equity

• Avoid informing local team members before distant ones

• Make information open to all• Link “big picture” with “little picture”

Pay attention to those who are distant• Avoid giving more attention to those team members

who are closer geographically or organizationally• Aim to have weekly / bi-weekly one-on-one chats

with all team members where concerns can be raised and feedback given

• Provide access to other connections in your network• Don’t assume anything, silence does not mean

people agree/disagree, care/don’t care. Constantly check in and get involvement

More difficult in GVTs!!!


“The frequent interactions with people you have here [at

headquarters] are often attributed to trust. And over distance you have

a complete void there. So you are missing one of your fundamental

tools. Somehow you’ve got to overcome that. And that’s where the

one-on-one calls come in…”

Accessibility and attention matter more than physical closeness

What can you do with your interaction to make it more

personal?


Encourage distributed leadership …

Make every member responsible for recognizing when task and/or maintenance activities are needed and taking actions to provide them

• Leading through task activities focuses on solving problems and achieving performance results

• Leading through maintenance activities helps strengthen and perpetuate the team as a social system

Reassign virtual team roles periodically


Make sure you are well connected

Manager

Team Member

Team Member

Team Member

Team Leader

Manager

Manager

Manager


Foster trust to build relationships

Coleman 2006

Practices and discipline build trust, not who you are in virtual environments


Learning how to move on the axes

Caulot 2006



Team Tasks

Technology




planning


• Managed by the task• Standard guidelines

Leadership


How well does the organization support GVTs?

Human resource policies Training development Standard organizational processes Electronic communication and collaboration

technology Organizational culture Leadership Competence

Duarte 2006


Evolving global collaboration at Volvo IT


Available methods and tools at Volvo IT


Virtual team guide and exercises


Numerous virtual team space tools…

Coleman 2006


…and external social media sites

Rey 2008


Match the tool to the goal Text messaging/IM

• Quick connections Blogs

• Build reputation• Share information

Wikis • Collaboration and knowledge sharing

Forums & message boards• Get employee feedback• Solve mutual problems

Facebook, MySpace, Ning• Build relationships, share

Second Life, QWAQ, other virtual worlds• Build relationships• Collaborate• Replicate the “water cooler”


Facilitating the virtual workforce

•Completely private virtual business worlds offering tools to conduct business and

collaborate•Fortune 500: Johnson & Johnson, Novartis,

Motorola, Intel


Improving global collaboration

Creating immersive workspaces in virtual worlds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnPBQAxUuDE



Team Tasks

Technology




planning


• Managed by the task• Standard guidelines

Leadership


Leadership and learning are indispensable to

each other.”

- John F. Kennedy

Leadership, teaching, and learning are

inextricably interlinked.

- Jack Welch

Leading and learning


”No one knows everything, everyone knows something,

all knowledge resides in humanity.”

networks.

Adapted from Lévy 1997


Sources Coleman, D. Virtual Team Spaces, 2006. Connaughton, SL & Daly, JA, “Leading from Afar: Strategies for

Effectively Leading Virtual Teams” in Virtual Collaborative Teams: Process, Technologies, & Practice (S. H. Godar & S. P. Ferris, Eds.).

Lipnack, J. & Stamps, Virtual Teams: Reaching Across Space, Time, and Organizations with Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, 1997.

Maznevski, M. High performance from global virtual teams, 2001.

Schermerhorn, Jr., J., Management, 2004. Teigland, R. Knowledge Networking, 2003.

http://www.hhs.se/NR/rdonlyres/4165BDC8-C42C-43CF-8EEF-57DCEB0939BC/0/TeiglandthesisKnowledgeNetworking.pdf

Robin’s homepage at www.knowledgenetworking.org


What is a network?

A set of actors connected by ties

•Ties/Links−Knowledge, trust, team, sit by, dislike, etc.−Alliance, customer, investment, etc.

Tie •Actors/Nodes−Individuals−Teams− Organizations, etc.

Actor