Diversity Challenges in Virtual Teams
As we discussed in Chapter 1, participation in virtual teams is an increasingly important phenomenon. The fact that technology makes connectivity and collaboration rather simple can lead to the mistaken assumption that people everywhere approach work in the same way. Diverse teams have the potential for greater conflict than teams in which members have similar background experiences and characteristics. Diversity can express itself in a variety of forms, including, age, gender, and culture, all of which impact the way individuals approach their work. While it can result in more creativity and greater problem-solving abilities, diversity can also complicate communication. Members of diverse teams often have communication styles that differ as well as varying ways of conveying information.
Age Differences
Age diversity is an obvious reality in the workplace, and the span increases as younger workers enter the workplace and as a greater number of older workers stay on the job longer. Fostering effective communication between four generations with an age difference of up to 60 years is especially challenging for companies committed to innovative teambased arrangements.
The following generations make up today’s U.S. workforce.
While individual differences exist, each generation is a product of the knowledge, experiences, and values that prevailed during their segment of history. Understanding and appreciating such factors can improve communication between people of various generations. Furthermore, studies indicate that concerns over generational conflict are often unfounded. For instance, Boomer resistance to Generation Xers might be based on an assumption that the casual attitude of members of the younger generation indicates they are slackers. Experience, however, has revealed Generation Xers’ positive characteristics. Similarly, Gen Xers may look critically at the lack of responsibility, sloppy work habits, and crude manners exhibited by Gen Y and Z, and fail to recognize the value of the energy and enthusiasm these younger workers bring to the table.
When properly managed, companies with a strong mix of older and younger workers have a distinct competitive edge. Younger workers bring new ideas, a broad range of technology skills, and an eagerness to adopt new ideas, while older workers contribute a strong work ethic, experience, and institutional memory.
Encouraging team members who are quite diverse in age to work together requires effective communication, an appreciation for the value of diversity, and patience in learning new ways of interacting with people from vastly talented yet differing generations. Team members can enhance their generational competence in several ways:4
While knowledge of the characteristics of the various generations can be helpful in adjusting behavior and communication styles, team members should avoid the trap of stereotyping individuals according to their age. Effective team members seek to understand each person individually.
Gender Differences
Differences in the way men and women think affect the way people work in and manage remote teams. In The Female Vision: Women’s Real Power at Work, Helgesen and Johnson cite research showing that women are highly skilled multitaskers, which can cause them to overcommit. Those who manage remote women workers can benefit from understanding that women’s tendency to overcommit can lead to burnout and diminished creative thought. On the other hand, men’s ability to focus on one thing for a long time can lead to tunnel vision and insensitivity to people and behavior not seen as “mission critical.” While time on task can be perceived as yielding better results, often short bursts of concentration produce better outcomes than agonizing for longer periods.6
Another major gender difference affecting team management is the fact that women generally are more likely to speak up if they are unhappy with their immediate circumstances and environment, while men tend to suffer in silence and tolerate the situation much longer. Research on communication patterns in mixed-gender work groups shows that the traditional behaviors of men and women may restrict the richness of discussion and limit group productivity. The typical male approach to work tasks is confrontational and results oriented, whereas the female method of working is collaborative and oriented toward concern for individuals. The adversarial male style leads to respect, while the collaborative female style engenders rapport. Differences in male and female behavior that accentuate gender differences are often so subtle that group members may not be aware of what is happening.7
Until fairly recently, most research on the communication styles of men and women focused on face-to-face interactions. Current research has also addressed computer-mediated communication (CMC), such as communication that occurs via e-mail, instant messaging, and electronic meetings. Such studies validate gender differences in communication patterns. In one study, for example, women using CMC with other women developed more disclosure and a sense of community, whereas men using CMC with other men seemed to ignore the socioemotional aspects of group functioning and were more likely to use mild flaming (emotional language outbursts). Overall, men tend to be less satisfied with CMC experiences and show lower levels of group development than do women.8 However, without daily contact and the familiarity of working in the same location, managers may experience difficulty in understanding gender-related issues in team behaviors.
Cultural Differences
Diverse teams frequently face cultural barriers, not the least of which are language barriers. Obviously, a certain degree of fluency in the common language used by the team is a prerequisite to effective communication. Avoidance of slang, jargon, and acronyms increases the likelihood that messages will be clearly understood by all. Beyond basic language considerations, however, team members must also recognize other challenges of cultural diversity and adapt their behavior accordingly. Recognition of cultural patterns and expectations and adaptations to spoken and written messages can improve cross-cultural virtual team interactions.
According to many team development experts, every team, whether face-to-face or virtual, advances through a series of predictable stages toward optimal performance. Psychologist Bruce Tuckman described the four stages in team development as forming, storming, norming, and performing. As culturally diverse teams move through these progressive stages of team development, various problems can arise, as summarized in Figure 2.1.9
Forming Stage Issues
In the forming stage, members get to know each other and to understand their team’s tasks. In this initial stage, cultural expectations for formality influence the ease with which members get acquainted and interact with one another. Cultural differences will often be apparent in this initial stage and may play out in various ways:
Working relationships during the forming stage are typically guarded, cautious, and noncommittal—even in the best of circumstances. As team members size up one another in terms of strengths and commonalities, those who perceive themselves to be dissimilar from the rest of the group are likely to feel alienated and to lack commitment. At least one face-to-face meeting is crucial, as research indicates that when teams are unable to meet face-to-face—even once—they are less able to handle cultural differences and to understand and appreciate one another.
Storming Stage Issues
In the storming stage of team development, conflict occurs in interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal conflict resulting from cultural differences may be heightened because of different views on a variety of issues, including leadership, meeting structure, and use of time. Cultural differences during this phase of team development become especially obvious:
The manner in which those of various cultures handle conflict differs widely. Members of some cultures disdain conflict and often will not speak out when a difference of opinion arises. This approach can be viewed by others as aloofness, a lack of commitment, or even a passive boycott. Disruption can occur over different expectations for appropriate delivery of criticism. For example, Germans typically opt for direct delivery of criticism, while southern Europeans tend to prefer indirect levying of criticism. Austrians tend to prefer an approach somewhat in the middle of the two extremes. Some other potentially confrontational points for diverse groups include the following:15
Norming Stage Issues
During the norming stage, team members find harmonious cohesiveness. Good feelings and the free exchange of ideas and feedback abound. Collaboration is achieved in the norming stage, though it typically takes longer to achieve in cross-cultural teams than in groups of people with similar cultural characteristics.16 Points to consider about collaboration include the following:
Managers and team members alike should be careful during the norming stage to assure that groupthink does not occur. Groupthink can happen when the team striving for unanimity refuses to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. The blinded thinking of such teams often leads to limited solutions and poor outcomes. Diverse teams are not as likely as homogenous, cookie-cutter teams to exhibit groupthink. But for diversity to promote the creative expression of ideas, individuals must be encouraged to apply their talents and experiences and to be open-minded to the ideas and views of others. Some members, such as is typical of the Japanese culture, will wait to be invited to voice their opinion. Silence might be interpreted as passive agreement by other members. The eloquent language of some members, such as the British, may be interpreted by some as agreement when in fact it is not.18
Performing Stage Issues
During the performing stage, the group becomes a truly collaborative team, with members inspired to go the extra mile to reach the team’s objectives. During this phase, coordination of deadlines and meeting schedules is essential to success. Research bears out that when under pressure, team members tend to revert to their own culturally determined behaviors and ignore the team’s norms.19 Members of cultural groups who are accustomed to tight schedules will see those with a more relaxed view of time, such as Latin Americans, as idle and uncommitted. Some cultural groups are more willing to work through their private time, while for others working time and leisure time are starkly separated. Last-minute completion of tasks is easier for some to deal with than for others who prefer to work steadily and finish with time to spare.
Virtual teams do have a greater potential for conflict than do teams able to meet face-to-face, and cultural diversity that is often present in virtual teams poses additional communication complications. While variations in beliefs, behaviors, and expectations occur within all cultural groups, certain generalities about those from certain cultural groups can be useful for others seeking better understanding. Given little or no other information about an individual’s values and behaviors, knowledge of the person’s culture provides a good first impression of that person.20 Experiences in cross-cultural interactions do serve to improve a person’s abilities to adapt in similar future situations. Cross-cultural awareness benefits the team in several ways:
Advantages derived from diversity are not automatic. To reach a high performance level, culturally diverse teams must work diligently to overcome barriers that could often be easily resolved in homogenous, face-to-face teams. The following suggestions can help you build cultural harmony:22
Tuckman, along with coauthor Mary Ann Jenson, refined the original team stages theory by adding a fifth stage called Adjourning, which is also referred to as Transforming or Mourning. Adjourning, is the dissolution of the group that ideally occurs once the task is completed successfully; everyone can move on to new things, feeling good about what has been achieved.23 From an organizational perspective, recognition of and sensitivity to team members’ vulnerabilities in this fifth stage is important, particularly if members of the group have been closely bonded and successful in their team activity. Managers in virtual environments must make the challenging decisions as to whether to keep particular teams intact for additional assignments or break them up and re-form for future work.
Understanding, appreciating, and addressing diversity challenges are important steps toward managing virtual teams. In Chapter 3, we will examine other strategic ways to promote team success.
Case 2.1: Sabre Builds Trust in Virtual Teams
Off the Mexican coast, with waves crashing around them, a team of five people struggles to keep a hand-assembled raft afloat. As the raft bounces uncontrollably, two people fall into the crashing waves. The remaining three rally together to pull their companions back on board. With all safely back on the raft, the tired team paddles onward.
While this scene may sound like a clip from an action-packed adventure movie, it’s actually part of a team-building activity organized by Sabre, Inc. to develop its virtual workforce. Virtual teams make up a significant portion of the workforce at Sabre, a company that specializes in travel reservations. Distributed team members communicate via e-mail, phone, videoconferencing, and web-based conferencing. Sabre’s teams are moderately but not completely virtual, with teams meeting face-to-face once a year and some team members working in the same location. The raft exercise is just one method Sabre uses to build trust among its members. Virtual team members at Sabre share some thoughts on other elements of trust building:
When you are working with people you never see, you can develop trust, but you must respond to that person. Follow through. If you tell them you are going to get back to a customer, get back to them.
You gain trust in people when all are contributing to the same idea and goal. You start trusting each other when you start meeting results and everybody has their role within the team and knows what their responsibility is and takes ownership to achieve results.24
Unlike face-to-face teams, for which trust results from social bonds formed through informal chats, impromptu meetings, or business lunches, virtual teams must find unique ways to promote trust building and build a base of trust on dependable performance. Sabre’s leadership works proactively with virtual teams in creative ways to promote the trust-building process.
Reflect
Apply
Design a trust-building activity that you believe would help promote trust in your virtual teams. Describe it in an internal blog post that motivates employees to want to take part.
Case 2.2: Promoting a Virtual Team Culture at Zapier
How can you go about building culture when there are thousands of miles between teammates? This important question is asked frequently by virtual companies such as Zapier, an information services company that specializes in connecting various sources of information into one integrated platform for its client companies. Zapier offers a variety of flexible work options for its full- and part-time employees spread across the United States and several other countries. “The first thing to realize is that your culture has to be built around more than ping pong tables,” says Wade Foster, Zapier cofounder and CEO. “Games and other group activities that lend themselves to being in person are simply not a possibility on a day-to-day basis for remote teams. Therefore, your culture has to be built around something more than playing table tennis to unite the team.”25
Just as a colocated office develops its own personality through inside jokes, shared experiences, and a collaborative environment, a remote team needs to develop something similar. Zapier employees use a variety of strategies to help build their virtual culture. Slack is the online version of the water cooler, where random work discussions happen and news, jokes, and pop culture are bantered back and forth. Discussions are recorded so nothing gets lost, and there’s no “behind-your-back politics” that happens in many colocated offices. Google Hangouts is used for quick, ad hoc one-on-one meetings, and GoToMeeting works well for bigger team meetings. During chats, employees make frequent use of five-minute personal check-ups just to see what other members are up to. Pair Buddies is a weekly random pairing with someone on the team that allows colleagues to catch up on work issues and life in general. These activities keep some semblance of the office social life as part of work.
According to Foster, Zapier gets the whole staff together twice per year for a company retreat. During the retreat, employees take part in activities designed to help foster the organization’s culture and build individual trust, including pairing up to cook team dinners and hiking as a group. “Getting things done tends to be a by-product of trust,” says Foster. “Teams inherently evaluate each other on what was completed that week. We do this by sharing weekly updates on our internal blog every Friday—which creates a desire to finish something important each week.”26
Reflect
Apply
Research one of the technology tools used by Zapier to promote effective collaboration. Compose a memo to upper management, describing the technology and explaining how it can improve the culture within your organization’s virtual teams and ultimately increase productivity.