Global Virtual Teams: Communication and Features Analysis

This paper analyses the communication and features of global virtual teams with regard to two authors. It looks at the similarities and differences in their arguments on challenges, opportunities, functioning and composition of global virtual teams. The paper recommends using the right communication channels and working for the best interest of the entire team.

Global Virtual Teams
Global Virtual Teams
By (name)
Student number
Faculty of
Professor (tutor)
Name of school (university)
Country
Date
1. Table of Contents

Global Virtual Teams
2. Executive summary.......................................................................................................................3
3. Introduction...................................................................................................................................4
4. Key arguments of the authors........................................................................................................4
5. Differences in arguments...............................................................................................................6
6. Recommendations.........................................................................................................................7
7. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................8
8. References.....................................................................................................................................9

Global Virtual Teams
2. Executive summary
This paper is aimed at analysing the aspect of communication and the features of global
virtual teams with regard to two authors. The paper looks at the similar and contrasting
arguments of the authors as far as challenges, opportunities, functioning and composition of
global virtual teams is concerned. Some of the similarities are having members from different
geographical locations and cultures, improving productivity and that ineffective
communication is a major threat. Some of the differences arise in matters concerning
distance, size of the group, conflict of interest and possibility of physically meeting someday.
Some of the recommendations are using the right communication channels and working for
the best interest of the entire team.

Global Virtual Teams
3. Introduction
Global virtual teams, also referred to as “multinational and multicultural distributed teams”
are defined as “temporary, culturally diverse, geographically disperse, and electronically
communicating work groups.” From the above definition, it is clearly evident that these
groups have some primary distinguishing features such as encompassing individuals from
different places, probably having different time zones, different cultural background, among
other key primary features. In the exploration of Global Virtual Teams (GVT), it is
imperative to dip into what motivates these groups into formation, the advantages that accrue
to them has a result of the unique features stated, as well as the challenges posed to then by
these distinguishing factors. From another writer’s point of view, GVTs are working teams
with people from different geographical location which sprout in the line of duty. Evidently,
the fact that these groups span over a diverse geographical location and that they come along
to meet certain objectives has been given more weight. Similarly, the fact that most of these
groups, if not all, have similar challenges is undeniable. In this paper, therefore, we are going
to discuss Global Virtual Teams from two writer’s point of view, comparing the similarities
and differences of their publication.
4. Key arguments of the authors
While the two articles show contrasting opinions on the opportunities that GVTs have and the
challenges facing them, their arguments seem to converge at a certain point. Firstly, these
teams are formed by individuals of different geographical background. The article, Harvard
Business review says that they are “made up of people in different locations.” Similarly, the
journal of international management holds that these teams are “multinational and
multiculturallly distributed. (Zakaria, 2016)” According to both articles, this aspect is
advantageous since members are able to learn more and improve their knowledge databases
by interacting with individuals from different cultural backgrounds. It also presents the

Global Virtual Teams
advantage of improved performance and stronger decision making due to presence of positive
conflict which reduces the aspect of groupthink.
These groups improve productivity as opposed to groups sharing the same office space
(Kelley, 2017). Again, both articles argue that ineffective communication is one of the major
challenges affecting these groups. That is because it is difficult to accompany someone’s
message with nonverbal cues, gestures and mimics as well as tonal variation that enhance the
understanding of the intended message. One of them says that trust may go down by up to
83% if the send message is not understood when poor channels of communication are used
(Jarvenpaa, 2016). The other article says that most of these groups use means of
communication that can’t support nonverbal communication and therefore inability to build
relationships and trust.From both articles, it is evident that these groups are a cheaper way of
approaching production for most of the companies and estates.
These groups are preferred to groups sharing the same floor office space since there are no
transportation costs and that teams work at the comfort of their locations (Saunders, 2016).
Acquisition of these teams, therefore, has been argued to serve as a competitive advantage for
most of the companies. That is because the firm is in a position to utilize different talents
from different geographical locations without necessarily transporting the manpower to the
geographical location of the firm (Shachaf, 2016). In fact, one the articles says that “most
professionals can do their bob from anywhere. “ The journal of international management
argues that “GVT member diversity also increases the diversity of the resources available.”
Again there is need of having a better communication technology that is able to capture the
intended message and take care of the individuals who support their messages with nonverbal
cues (Gibson, 2016). They argue that most of the team members feel confused and
overwhelmed by the unsupportive current communication technology (Paul, 2017).

Global Virtual Teams
5. Differences in arguments
The two journal articles have proved to have varied arguments on how the features of GVTs
present opportunities and challenges to these groups. For instance, the journal of international
management holds that the aspect of different geographical location is both an opportunity
and a threat (Jarvenpaa, 2016). It argues that having individuals from different locations
increase productivity as projects can be worked upon in 24 hours a day. That is made possible
by the fact that the team members reside in places with different time zones and therefore
when some are asleep others are awake (Sarker, 2017). For instance, when a group is made
up of individuals from Japan, America, Africa and Australia, the members who are awake
can handle the project and pass it to the next team as they go to sleep.
This aspect has also attracted challenges and brought about conflicts and mistrust. When a
person in Japan emails another person in America, the email is likely to be seen in the
morning. When the American individual promptly replies the email, it is seen the next
morning by the member in Japan. That brings about a feeling that there is no determination
and that members are unwilling to cooperative (Daim, 2017). In the journal Harvard business
review, having people from different time zones is only an opportunity as different talents are
brought together. Secondly, journal of international management argues that a constant
communication is not practically possible as individuals come from locations with different
time zones (Jarvenpaa, 2014). The other journal argues that constant calling and texting
between members is necessary to make the team functional.
The Harvard business review argues that these teams can also be formed by individuals in the
same office but different floors while the other journal limits the definition of these teams to
“multinational and multicultural' context. While the Harvard business review journal argues
that the size of the group dictates performance and productivity, the other does not have a
mention of the same. The Harvard business review journal holds that there exists a possibility

Global Virtual Teams
of these team members meeting someday while international management journal holds that
these members may even reach the adjourning stage without even singly meeting (Jarvenpaa,
2015). The table below summarizes the differences between the two journals:
Journal of international management Harvard business review
Geographical separation is both a pro and
a con
Geographical separation is only
advantageous
There are less possibilities of constant
communication
Constant communication is inevitable
There is less possibility of physically
meeting
Members will someday meet physically
The size of the group does not dictate
performance
Small size groups perform better than
large groups
Performance oriented Communication oriented
There is possibility of conflict of interest No mention of the same
Some members may be despised due to
poor communication
All members are assumed to be effective
communicators
6. Recommendations
While there are several challenges that come along as a result of establishment of global
virtual teams, these challenges can be overcome. It is important to appreciate that
communication is very imperative in every team as it creates relationships and strengthens
brings about trust within members. This trust improves individual performance and
consequently increases the total output. It is therefore important that these teams go for the
best communication channels that are capable of transmitting both audio and visual messages
so that there is understanding. It is also important to understand the weakness of each

Global Virtual Teams
member and not attach communication problems to decision making capability. It is wrong to
assume that individuals with difficulty in understanding the universal language have retarded
brains and therefore ignore them in chief decision making. Teams should also turn the
distance barrier into an opportunity so that they can have the team functioning 24 hours a day
such that when some are asleep others are working. Lastly, members should not divide
themselves in lines of cultural similarly as this brings about conflict in the teams. They
should also not allow their personal goals to compromise the goals of the entire team. When
individuals from different organizations come together to form a group that has different
goals and objectives, it is possible that some of them want to reshape the group objectives to
look like those of their domestic organizations. That leads to unresolvable conflict that may
lead to disbandment of the team without meeting its objectives. Team members should also
work in the best interest of the team and not focus on reaping from the team for individual
benefit.
7. Conclusion
Global virtual teams have proven to be very crucial as they improve performance hence
increasing productivity. They give individual members opportunity to learn from their
fellows who have different experience depending on their past experience and cultural
background. It brings together different individuals with different knowledge, talents and
skills thereby improving the chances of strong decision making. These teams also make it
possible to have projects completed in a restively shorter time than if they were to be
completed by members in the same location as some members can work when the rest are
asleep. Thus, the team’s activities will not stop all along the day.
8. References

Global Virtual Teams
Daim, T., 2017. Exploring the communication breakdown in global virtual teams.
International Journal of Project Management, 7(89), pp. 78-89.
Gibson, C., 2016. Virtual teams that work. Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness,
7(9), pp. 20-43.
Jarvenpaa, S., 2014. Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. Journal of management
information systems, 14(4), pp.29-64., 7(9), pp. 56-77.
Jarvenpaa, S., 2015. Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global
virtual teams. Information systems research, 9(8), pp. 45-73.
Jarvenpaa, S., 2016. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization science,
7(78), pp. 76-89.
Jarvenpaa, S., 2016. Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Journal of computer-
mediated communication, 98(8), pp. 78-87.
Kelley, L., 2017. Global virtual teams for value creation and project success: A case study.
International journal of project management, 56(7), pp. 45-87.
Paul, S., 2017. Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the
performance of synchronous global virtual teams. Information & Management, 8(8), pp. 56-
85.
Sarker, S., 2017. The role of communication and trust in global virtual teams: A social
network perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 76(8), pp. 56-87.
Saunders, C., 2016. My time or yours? Managing time visions in global virtual teams.
Academy of Management Perspectives, 89(8), pp. 78-95.

Global Virtual Teams
Shachaf, P., 2016. Cultural diversity and information and communication technology impacts
on global virtual teams: An exploratory study. Information & Management, 78(89), pp. 54-
86.
Zakaria, N., 2016. Working together apart? Building a knowledge‐sharing culture for global
virtual teams. Creativity and innovation management, 7(56), pp. 89-107.