Advertisement

Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 273–292 | Cite as

Leadership Dynamics in Partially Distributed Teams: an Exploratory Study of the Effects of Configuration and Distance

  • Rosalie J. Ocker
  • Haiyan Huang
  • Raquel Benbunan-Fich
  • Starr Roxanne Hiltz
Article

Abstract

Despite the importance of leadership and the wealth of empirical studies focused on leadership effectiveness in traditional and computer-supported groups, there is little research examining leadership dynamics in partially distributed virtual teams (PDTs). Virtual teams are partially distributed when they are configured with one or more subgroups of collocated members and isolated members. This paper lays the groundwork for an in-depth study of leadership in PDTs that can be extended to other types of virtual team configurations. Using three dimensions of virtual distance (geographic, cultural and temporal), we analyze how the configuration of virtual teams interacts with leadership dynamics. We also summarize the results of an exploratory study using 12 student teams to examine the effects of distance and configuration on leadership in PDTs. Findings show significant differences in leadership dynamics (i.e., leader emergence vs. leader retention) which impacted team performance. From these results, we develop propositions on leadership and PDTs.

Keywords

Leadership Partially distributed virtual team Geographic distance Cultural distance Temporal distance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allport GW (1954) The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  2. Amir Y (1969) Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psychol Bull 71: 319–342. doi: 10.1037/h0027352 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong DJ, Cole P (2002) Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. In: Hinds PJ, Kiesler S (eds) Distributed work: new ways of working across distance using technology. MIT, Cambridge, pp 167–189Google Scholar
  4. Bales RF (1951) Interaction process analysis: a method for the study of small groups. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell BS, Kozlowski SWJ (2002) A typology of virtual teams: implications for effective leadership. Group Organ Manag 27(1): 14–49. doi: 10.1177/1059601102027001003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bos N, Shami NS, Olson JS, Cheshin A, Nan N (2004) In-group/out-group effects in distributed teams: an experimental simulation. CSCW 6(3): 429–436. doi: 10.1145/1031607.1031679 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bos N, Olson J, Nan N, Shami N, Hoch S, Johnston E (2006) Collocation blindness in partially distributed groups: is there a downside to being collocated? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal, Québec, Canada, ACM, pp 1313–1321Google Scholar
  8. Brewer MB, Miller N (1984) Beyond the contact: hypothesis: theoretical perspectives on desegregation. In: Miller N, Brewer MB (eds) Groups in contact: the psychology of desegregation. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 281–302Google Scholar
  9. Burke K, Aytes K (1998) A longitudinal analysis of the effects of media richness on cohesion development and process satisfaction in computer-supported workgroups. Proceedings of the 31st annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, IEEE, pp 135–144Google Scholar
  10. Cohen SG, Bailey DE (1997) What makes teams work: group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J Manag 23: 239–290. doi: 10.1177/014920639702300303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cook SW (1984) Cooperative interaction in multiethnic contexts. In: Miller N, Brewer MB (eds) Groups in contact: the psychology of desegregation. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 155–185Google Scholar
  12. Cramton CD, Hinds PJ (2005) Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: ethnocentrism or cross-national learning. Res Organ Behav 26: 231–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Souza G, Klein H (1995) Emergent leadership in the group goal-setting process. Small Group Res 26: 475–495. doi: 10.1177/1046496495264002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Espinosa JA, Cummings JN, Wilson JM, Pearce BM (2003) Team boundary issues across multiple global firms. J Manag Inf Syst 19(4): 157–190Google Scholar
  15. Herbsleb JD, Grinter RE (1999) In splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway’s law revisited. Proceedings of the 21st international conference on software engineering, Los Angeles, CA, USA, pp 85–95Google Scholar
  16. Hinds P, Mortensen M (2005) Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: an empirical investigation. Organ Sci 16(3): 290–307. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hofstede G (1991) Cultures and organizations. McGraw-Hill, BerkshireGoogle Scholar
  18. Johansson C, Dittrich Y, Juustila A (1999) Software engineering across boundaries: student project in distributed collaboration. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 42(4): 286–296. doi: 10.1109/47.807967 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kayworth T, Leidner DE (2000) The global virtual manager: a prescription for success. Eur Manag J 18(2): 183–194. doi: 10.1016/S0263-2373(99)00090-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kayworth T, Leidner DE (2001–2002) Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams. J Manag Inf Syst 18(3): 7–40Google Scholar
  21. Lau DC, Murnighan JK (1998) Demographic diversity and faultlines: the compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Acad Manag Rev 23: 325–340. doi: 10.2307/259377 Google Scholar
  22. Lojeski KS, Reilly R, Dominick P (2006) The role of virtual distance in innovation and success. Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  23. Malone TW (2008) Forward to Weisband S (ed), Leadership at a distance: research in technologically supported work. Lawrence Erlbaum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Martins EC (2003) Building organizational culture that stimulates creativity and innovation. Eur J Innov Manag 6(1): 64–74. doi: 10.1108/14601060310456337 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maznevski ML, Chudoba KM (2000) Bridging space over time: global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organ Sci 11(5): 473–492. doi: 10.1287/orsc.11.5.473.15200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McDonough EF, Kahn KB, Barczak G (2001) An investigation of the use of global virtual and collocated new product development teams. J Prod Innov Manag 18: 110–120. doi: 10.1016/S0737-6782(00)00073-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Misiolek NI, Heckman R (2005) Patterns of emergent leadership in virtual teams. Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii international conference on systems sciencesGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Leary MB, Cummings JN (2007) The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in work teams. Manag Inf Syst Q 31(3): 433–452Google Scholar
  29. Panteli N, Davison RM (2005) The role of subgroups in the communication patterns of global virtual teams. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 48(2): 191–200. doi: 10.1109/TPC.2005.849651 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pelled L, Eisenhardt K, Xin K (1997) Demographic diversity in work groups: an empirical assessment of linkages to intragroup conflict and performance. School of Business, University of Southern CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  31. Pescosolido AT (2001) Informal leaders and the development of group efficacy. Small Group Res 32(1): 74–93. doi: 10.1177/104649640103200104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Plotnick L (2008) A proposal for the study of leadership in partially distributed teams. Unpublished Ph.D. Proposal, NJITGoogle Scholar
  33. Plotnick L, Ocker RJ, Hiltz SR, Rosson MB (2008) Leadership roles and communication issues in partially distributed emergency response software development teams: a pilot study. Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii international conference on systems science (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  34. Polzer JT, Crisp B, Jarvenpaa SL, Kim JW (2006) Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How co-located subgroups can impair group functioning. Acad Manag J 49(4): 679–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Powell A, Piccoli G, Ives B (2004) Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research. DATA BASE Adv Inf Syst 35(1): 6–36Google Scholar
  36. Privman R, Hiltz SR (2008) Whose (partially distributed) team are you on? Working Paper, NJITGoogle Scholar
  37. Robey D, Khoo H, Powers C (2000) Situated learning in cross-functional virtual teams. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 43(1): 51–66. doi: 10.1109/47.826416 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sarker S, Sahay S (2002) In information systems development by US-Norwegian virtual teams: implications of time and space. Proceedings of the 35th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, IEEEGoogle Scholar
  39. Schutz WC (1961) The ego, firo theory and the leader as completer. In: Petrullo L, Bass BM (eds) Leadership and interpersonal behavior. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp 48–65Google Scholar
  40. Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, (2nd ed). Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  41. Swigger K, Alpaslan F, Brazile R, Monticino M (2004) Effects of culture on computer-supported international collaborations. Int J Hum Comput Stud 60: 365–380. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.10.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tajfel H (1978) Differentiation between social groups: studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Tajfel H (1981) Human groups and social categories: studies in social psychology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Tajfel H, Turner JC (1986) The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In: Worchel S, Austin WG (eds) Pychology of intergroup relations. Nelson, Chicago, pp 7–24Google Scholar
  45. Turner JC (1981) The experimental social psychology of intergroup behaviour. In: Turner JC, Giles H (eds) Intergroup behaviour. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp 66–101Google Scholar
  46. Weisband S (2002) Maintaining awareness in distributed team collaboration: implications for leadership and performance. In: Hinds P, Kiesler S (eds) Distributed work: new ways of working across distance using technology. MIT, Cambridge, pp 311–333Google Scholar
  47. Wheelan SA, Johnston F (1996) The role of informal member leaders in a system containing formal leaders. Small Group Res 27(1): 33–55. doi: 10.1177/1046496496271002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yoo Y, Alavi M (2004) Emergent leaders in virtual teams: what do emergent leaders do?. Inf Organ 14: 27–58. doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2003.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zigurs I (2003) Leadership in virtual teams: oxymoron or opportunity. Organ Dyn 31(4): 339–351. doi: 10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00132-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosalie J. Ocker
    • 1
  • Haiyan Huang
    • 2
  • Raquel Benbunan-Fich
    • 3
  • Starr Roxanne Hiltz
    • 4
  1. 1.College of ISTPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.School of BusinessPurdue University CalumetHammondUSA
  3. 3.Baruch CollegeCUNYNew York CityUSA
  4. 4.Information Systems DepartmentNJITNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations