Search results

Challenges of teamwork in online classes may adversely affect students’ future attitudes toward teamwork. Further, there is a concern about whether online programs foster students’ teamwork skills. To answer these questions, the purpose of this paper is to compare online and face-to-face students’ attitudes toward teamwork, interest in learning teamwork skills and teamwork self-efficacy.

The authors developed a conceptual model explaining how students’ background, engagement in learning teamwork, teamwork self-efficacy and interest in learning teamwork affect attitudes toward teamwork and rigorously tested the model for a meaningful comparison between online and face-to-face students. Attitudes toward teamwork, teamwork interest and teamwork self-efficacy of 582 online and face-to-face students who attend the same academic program were compared.

The results suggest that online students have less positive attitudes towards teamwork compared to face-to-face students although online students have a higher level of teamwork self-efficacy. Therefore, online students’ relative less positive attitudes toward teamwork cannot be explained by the lack of engagement, teamwork skills or interest.

The homogeneity of the sample population is one of the limitations of the paper although it provides the opportunity for a comparative study of online and face-to-face students by controlling the majors.

Instructors should evaluate the appropriateness of team assignments while incorporating teamwork in online classes.

Concerns about online teamwork are discussed but have not been rigorously investigated in the literature. The authors conducted a comprehensive study involving 582 undergraduate students. The findings of this paper suggest that new approaches are needed to incorporate teamwork in online classes. The results also show that importance of building teamwork self-efficacy.

Current trends such as a steadfast movement toward globalization, increased connectivity and use of networks in business relationships, rapidly changing technology, increased pressure for economic profitability, and economic concern create an environment where a focus on global team effectiveness is imperative. This study provides greater clarity on the workings of global hybrid team effectiveness including an examination of accelerators and decelerators. It also proposes a new model of Global Working behaviors to be applied systematically to all McKinsey 7-S areas – Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Style, Skills, and Staff – in order to accelerate global hybrid team effectiveness.

In light of contradictory research findings, the purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating effects of team setting (face‐to‐face or online) on the relationship that team member affect and interaction processes have on individual team source learning, and at the team level on the relationship between group cohesiveness and perceived team performance.

Students enrolled in graduate level organizational behavior classes at a large university in the southeastern United States responded to the survey. The final sample included 79 students in 21 on‐campus teams and 97 students in 26 online teams. All classes surveyed required a detailed team project. Tests of the moderator hypotheses were conducted using hierarchical linear multiple regression.

Team setting moderated the relationship that member teamwork orientation and member social interaction had on individual team‐source learning; the relationships were stronger in online teams.

The results have implications for teams in a variety of settings since the team composition and nature of the work conducted by student teams are similar to that in Western organizational contexts. To avoid possible conflicts that impede learning and performance in online teams, administrators should ensure that team members are chosen carefully and give members a strong reason for being on the team.

This paper extends the model examined by Williams et al. to include member social interaction and consider the context in which teamwork occurs and its effects on personal learning and team performance.

While some modern organisations have established “virtual work teams”, which are said to be comprised of people who are geographically separated and who work across boundaries of space and time using computer driven communication technologies, it is also true that many organisations remain structured around conventional face‐to‐face teams. Increasingly, the conventional face‐to‐face team is endeavouring to increase its productivity by utilising some of the technology and characteristics of the virtual team. In fact, it may not be practical any longer to draw a distinction between conventional face‐to‐face teams and virtual teams, due to the invasive nature of technology throughout most modern organisations.

Looks at new communications technologies, such as videoconferencing systems, which have enabled the creation of “virtual organizations” and “virtual teams”. Investigates the hypotheses that both “social presence” and “media richness” associated with a communication medium used to support geographically‐dispersed software development teams, will have a significant impact on team productivity, perceived interaction quality, and group process satisfaction. Results supported the predicted superiority of the face‐to‐face setting over the videoconferencing setting with regard to team productivity. They also indicated that a communication medium characterized as high in both “media richness” and “social presence” can engender a greater sense of interaction quality. There were no significant differences between the face‐to‐face and videoconferencing settings for group process satisfaction.

Identifies a set of expectations about information technology (IT) adoption and usage in work groups, based on prior theory. Describes a longitudinal study on the adoption and usage of asynchronous technologies in small face‐to‐face groups. Compares observations with expectations. Concludes that expectations were generally supported except in one case, where file transfer was used synchronously to support face‐to‐face interaction. Observed one use of asynchronous technology to maintain social distance because of poor relationships. Discusses the implications of the findings. Offers possible areas of future research.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced many organisations to transform face-to-face teams into virtual ones through the adoption of remote working modes. This event has represented the starting point of a process that is changing how management control (MC) systems are designed and implemented to guide employees towards organisational objectives. The previous literature on virtual teams (VTs) has devoted scant attention to MC issues. This study aims to fill this gap by exploring how MC – and particularly cultural control – has changed to cope with the shift from face-to-face to VTs and by analysing the interrelationship between the different control mechanisms and the resulting tensions.

The research adopts the methodological framework based on abduction to provide a theoretical explanation and conceptualisation of MC in virtual settings. To tackle the research objective, this work undertakes a cross-sectional field study based on semi-structured interviews with managers of different service companies.

The results of the research highlight the key challenges that managers are called to deal with to design and change MC systems when implementing remote working. In particular, managers must cope with the reduced possibility to leverage cultural controls. To do this, this study’s analysis found that managers act by introducing and/or removing formal and informal controls and by orchestrating the interplays and tensions between these mechanisms.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, to date limited attention has been paid to MC in VTs. Moreover, few researchers have investigated the process of MC change from face-to-face to VTs. This work aims to contribute to this nascent stream of literature by providing interesting implications for both research and practice.

A growing body of literature exists on virtual (i.e., geographically dispersed) teams; however, few summaries of this knowledge are available. The purpose of this paper is to help fill this gap by reviewing empirical research that addresses the effectiveness of virtual versus traditional (i.e., co-located) teams. Based on the typical input-process-output model of team effectiveness, we classify almost 200 empirical studies on virtual teams according to key dimensions of the model, including tasks and group characteristics, contextual factors, and supervisory behaviors. We develop propositions to address neglected research areas regarding the differences between virtual and traditional teams. There is still much to learn about virtual teams and how the physical dispersion of team members affects team effectiveness. It is our hope that our review and propositions will guide future research efforts and will help human resource professionals realize the potential for distributed teams in their organizations.

Oregon Graduate Institute reports a laboratory experiment that compared three different communications modalities (face‐to‐face, audio‐only, and audio and video) across two co‐operative tasks, which can be characterized as visual and non‐visual. In each task, effectiveness varied as a significant function of modality. However, the directions of these functions were opposite. That is, for the visual task conversants were more effective in the face‐to‐face and audio and video modalities than in the audio‐only modality; for the non‐visual task, conversants were more effective in the audio‐only modality than in the face‐to‐face modality. Additional analysis of the non‐visual tasks suggests that modality affects the extent to which asymmetry of knowledge results in asymmetry of influence between conversants.

Due to geographic dispersion and reliance on technology-mediated communication, developing collaborative capital can be a challenge in a virtual team. Knowledge sharing is one form of collaborative capital that has been identified as critical to virtual team success. This chapter develops a theoretical model that proposes that shared leadership in virtual teams is positively related to knowledge sharing between team members, and that this relationship will be partially mediated by trust. The model also shows that a team's degree of reliance on technology-mediated communication will moderate the relationships in the model.