Virtual Teams - 6 pages - APA - 4 references - due 14 Nov

Success_Factors_of_Virtual_Teams_in_the_Conflict_o....pdf

Home >Information Systems homework help >Virtual Teams - 6 pages - APA - 4 references - due 14 Nov

Diplomica Verlag

Success Factors of Virtual Teams in the Conflict of Cross-Cultural Team Structures

Stephan Sembdner

Sembdner, Stephan. Success Factors of Virtual Teams in the Conflict of Cross-Cultural Team Structures, Diplomica Verlag, 2011. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/trident/detail.action?docID=774260. Created from trident on 2020-11-10 11:05:20.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Stephan Sembdner Success Factors of Virtual Teams in the Conflict of Cross-Cultural Team Structures ISBN: 978-3-8428-0763-1 Herstellung: Diplomica® Verlag GmbH, Hamburg, 2011 Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Die dadurch begründeten Rechte, insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nachdrucks, des Vortrags, der Entnahme von Abbildungen und Tabellen, der Funksendung, der Mikroverfilmung oder der Vervielfältigung auf anderen Wegen und der Speicherung in Datenverarbeitungsanlagen, bleiben, auch bei nur auszugsweiser Verwertung, vorbehalten. Eine Vervielfältigung dieses Werkes oder von Teilen dieses Werkes ist auch im Einzelfall nur in den Grenzen der gesetzlichen Bestimmungen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in der jeweils geltenden Fassung zulässig. Sie ist grundsätzlich vergütungspflichtig. Zuwiderhandlungen unterliegen den Strafbestimmungen des Urheberrechtes.

Die Wiedergabe von Gebrauchsnamen, Handelsnamen, Warenbezeichnungen usw. in diesem Werk berechtigt auch ohne besondere Kennzeichnung nicht zu der Annahme, dass solche Namen im Sinne der Warenzeichen- und Markenschutz-Gesetzgebung als frei zu betrachten wären und daher von jedermann benutzt werden dürften.

Die Informationen in diesem Werk wurden mit Sorgfalt erarbeitet. Dennoch können Fehler nicht vollständig ausgeschlossen werden und der Verlag, die Autoren oder Übersetzer übernehmen keine juristische Verantwortung oder irgendeine Haftung für evtl. verbliebene fehlerhafte Angaben und deren Folgen.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- I -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS I LIST OF FIGURES VI LIST OF TABLES VII LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS VIII LIST OF SYMBOLS X

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Central issue and problem 1

1.2 Objective 2

1.3 Progress of research work and analyses 2

2 GROUP, WORK GROUP AND TEAM 4

2.1 Historical review 4

2.2 Group 6 2.2.1 Definition 6 2.2.2 Significance 7

2.3 Work group 8 2.3.1 Definition 8

2.3.2 Significance 9

2.3.3 Group work vs. team work 10

2.4 Team 11 2.4.1 Definition 11

2.4.2 Significance 13

2.4.3 Work group vs. team 13

2.5 Virtual team 15 2.5.1 Definition: virtual 15

2.5.2 Definition: virtual team 15

2.5.3 Characteristics of a virtual team 16

2.5.3.1 Space distances 16 2.5.3.2 Time boundaries 17 2.5.3.3 Organisational boundaries 18

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- II -

2.5.3.4 Communication technologies 18 2.5.4 Significance 18

2.5.5 Team vs. virtual team 20

3 CULTURE 23

3.1 Preliminary remark 23

3.2 Traditional concept of culture 24 3.2.1 Overview 24

3.2.2 Anthropological concept of culture 26

3.2.3 Iceberg model 28

3.2.4 Cultural elements 29

3.2.5 Cultural standards 31

3.2.5.1 Definition 31

3.2.5.2 Central cultural standards 32

3.2.5.3 The five-dimensions model based on Hofstede 33

3.2.5.3.1 Power distance 34 3.2.5.3.2 Uncertainty avoidance 35 3.2.5.3.3 Individualism vs. Collectivism 35 3.2.5.3.4 Masculinity vs. Femininity 36 3.2.5.3.5 Long- vs. Short-term orientation 37

3.3 Modern concept of culture 38 3.3.1 Multiculturalism 38 3.3.2 Concepts of multiculturalism 40

3.3.2.1 Interculturality 40

3.3.2.2 Multiculturality 40

3.3.2.3 Transculturality 41

4 SUCCESS FACTORS 42

4.1 Preliminary remark 42

4.2 Models for team effectiveness / team performance 42 4.2.1 Performance based on Lersch 42

4.2.2 Effectiveness based on Hackman 43

4.2.3 Effectiveness based on Campion et al. 44

4.2.4 Summary 46

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- III -

4.3 Influencing factors for success 47 4.3.1 Communication 47

4.3.1.1 Preliminary remark 47

4.3.1.2 Definition 47

4.3.1.3 Levels of communication 48

4.3.1.4 Communication media 51

4.3.1.5 Strategies of successful communication 54

4.3.1.6 Significance 54

4.3.2 Competence 56

4.3.2.1 Definition 56

4.3.2.2 Significance 57

4.3.3 Coordination 58

4.3.3.1 Definition 58

4.3.3.2 Significance 58

4.3.4 Motivation 59

4.3.4.1 Definition 59

4.3.4.2 Significance 59

4.3.5 Trust 61

4.3.5.1 Definition 61

4.3.5.2 Significance 61

4.3.6 Conflicts 62

4.3.6.1 Definition 62

4.3.6.2 Significance 62

4.3.7 Rules 64

4.3.7.1 Definition 64

4.3.7.2 Significance 64

4.3.8 Team head vs. team member 65

4.3.8.1 Requirements on the team head 66

4.3.8.2 Requirements on the team member 68

4.4 Intercultural context 70 4.4.1 Intercultural communication 70

4.4.1.1 Definition 70

4.4.1.2 Intercultural communication problems 71

4.4.1.3 Significance 72

4.4.2 Intercultural competence 73

4.4.2.1 Definition 73

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- IV -

4.4.2.2 Intercultural competence models 74

4.4.2.3 Significance 75

4.4.3 Intercultural team structures 76

4.4.3.1 Definition 76

4.4.3.2 Significance 77

5 RESEARCH 78

5.1 Progress of research work and analyses 78 5.1.1 Problem-oriented interview 78

5.1.2 Interview guide and relevant categories 78

5.1.3 Selection of experts 79

5.1.4 Interviews 81

5.1.5 Transcription 82

5.1.6 Qualitative analysis of contents 83

5.2 Analysis of the interviews 83 5.2.1 Category 1: Communication 84

5.2.2 Category 2: Requirements on the team 85

5.2.3 Category 3: Intercultural competence 87

5.2.4 Category 4: Rules 88

5.2.5 Category 5: Motivation, trust or reliance 89

5.2.6 Category 6: Conflicts 90

5.2.7 Category 7: Benefits from virtual teams 90

5.3 General statements from the interviews 91

5.4 Limits and weaknesses 93

6 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION 94

7 APPENDIX 102

7.1 Appendix 1: Interview guide 102

7.2 Appendix 2: Transcription of Expert 1 104

7.3 Appendix 3: Transcription of Expert 2 123

7.4 Appendix 4: Transcription of Expert 3 133

8 BIBLIOGRAPHY 141

8.1 Literature 141

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- V -

8.2 Thesis 147

8.3 Specialised magazines 147

8.4 Internet / e-journals 148

8.5 Data files 149

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- VI -

List of figures

Figure 1 – Characteristics of group work 9 Figure 2 – From society to the team 12 Figure 3 – Distance perception / virtual distances 17 Figure 4 – Process of virtualisation 19 Figure 5 – Double team structure cube 22 Figure 6 – Three levels of uniqueness in human mental programming 28 Figure 7 – The cultural iceberg model 29 Figure 8 – Acquisition of values and practices 30 Figure 9 – Onion diagram: Manifestation of culture at different levels

of depth 31 Figure 10 – Concepts of multiculturalism 39 Figure 11 – Team performance based on Lersch 43 Figure 12 – Themes and characteristics related to work group effectiveness 45 Figure 13 – Absorption of the elements of communication 49 Figure 14 – Elements of communication 50 Figure 15 – Competence as a relation between individuals and environment 57 Figure 16 – Sources that influence motivation 60 Figure 17 – Conflict area of the team head 66 Figure 18 – Model of intercultural competence based on Chen and Starosta 75 Figure 19 – Types of cultural diversity 76

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- VII -

List of tables

Table 1 – Commonalties and differences between work groups and teams 14 Table 2 – Differentiation of conventional teams and virtual teams 21 Table 3 – Basic definitions of culture 25 Table 4 – Examples of different values for power distance 34 Table 5 – Examples of different values for uncertainty avoidance 35 Table 6 – Examples of different values for individualism and collectivism 36 Table 7 – Examples of different values for masculinity and femininity 37 Table 8 – Examples of different values for long- and short-term orientation 38 Table 9 – Communication media 53 Table 10 – Pros and cons of electronic communication media 56 Table 11 – Requirements on the team head 67 Table 12 – Requirements on the team member 69 Table 13 – Pros and cons of cultural diversity in teams 77 Table 14 – Categories from the interview guide 79 Table 15 – Presentation of the experts 81 Table 16 – Details of the interviews 82 Table 17 – Analysis of category 1: Communication 84 Table 18 – Analysis of category 2: Requirements on the team 86 Table 19 – Analysis of category 3: Intercultural competence 87 Table 20 – Analysis of category 4: Rules 88 Table 21 – Analysis of category 5: Motivation, trust or reliance 89 Table 22 – Analysis of category 6: Conflicts 90 Table 23 – Analysis of category 7: Benefits from virtual teams 90

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- VIII -

List of abbreviations

AG Aktiengesellschaft / Corporation

approx. approximately

CA California

DEc Doctor of Economics

diffs. differences

e.g. exempli gratia / for example

ed., eds. editor, editors

et al. et alli / and others

etc. et cetera

Fig. Figure

FX Foreign Exchange

HR Human Resources

i.e. id est / that is

ibid. ibidem / the same

IBM International Business Machines Corporation

IT Information Technology

m metre

MA Massachusetts

MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology

MM Money Market

MOP Market Operations

NJ New Jersey

No. Number

NY New York

p., pp. page, pages

s., ss. section, sections

S.C.p.A. Società Consortile per Azioni / Corporation

SOX Sarbanes-Oxley Act

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- IX -

TX Texas

V Version

Vol. Volume

vs. versus

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- X -

List of symbols

(?word?) guess at unclear text

* Note

// missing or unintelligible text

{text} descriptive comment or translation

+ and

>word< action

I1 Interviewer 1 = Author

R1-3 Respondent 1-3 = Expert 1-3

word- not finished text

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 1 -

1 Introduction

1.1 Central issue and problem

Due to strong competition and to the most recent market requirements, more and

more enterprises or organisations (in the following organisation only) have to re-

align their business activities in a new way to cope with the current economic situa-

tion. Also in the respective organisational structures, specific changes have to be

made to manufacture the products and to provide relevant services more effec-

tively. Moreover, services are often provided increasingly no longer from a central-

ised location. For this reason, decentralised teams in various locations have devel-

oped, working together to jointly reach the targets. The services are either provided

independently and on a full service basis, or such services are also provided in

various parts and are then joined together or combined in other locations.

So overall, organisations are facing new challenges to a growing extent. On the

one hand, they have to cope with customers from different cultural areas, and on

the other hand, the structure of the employees is changing simultaneously. Wheth-

er these organisations have international departments or not, the trend is now

clearly towards heterogeneous team structures. Consequently, it is crucial for the

organisations to be successful in spite of generally tougher market conditions. And

this operational success will not come about automatically but will require well-

functioning, efficient teams.

As the author works in an international team with intercultural structures, there has

been from the very start a particular interest in the findings and insights to be ob-

tained in the framework of the work for this examination.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 2 -

1.2 Objective

For the reasons given above, the objective is to identify and define the factors

which are principally necessary for effective and successful team work. To adjust to

and cope with the particular relationships within the organisations, the focus will be

on considering and analysing virtual teams in an international and intercultural

business environment.

1.3 Progress of research work and analyses

Before starting with the proper analysis of the success factors for team building;

first of all, the theoretical basis will be provided. So a general overview will be given

on the central subject matter, and simultaneously, basic concepts will be initially

presented.

The second chapter deals with the topic of team and team work. Starting with the

central topic’s partial aspect ‘virtual team’, the term ‘team’ will be defined and ex-

amined more in detail. In this context, first a historical review and the development

of the term will be provided. And hereby a distinct differentiation is made between

the individual terms. Additionally, the transition from the (customary) team to the

virtual team and its particular characteristics will also be emphasised.

A further relevant aspect of the central subject matter is in particular the term

‘cross-cultural’. It refers above of all to the general topic of culture, and this will be

in the focus of the third chapter. The goal here is to describe the fundamentals of

culture, and the factors on which culture is built on. Another emphasis is on the

models explained in the specialised, or trade, literature. These explanations are

necessary for analysing the two terms of intercultural competence and intercultural

communication more precisely.

The fourth chapter deals with the central topic of success factors. They are to be

described and analysed here which contribute significantly to the success of a vir-

tual team. For this purpose, for each success factor a definition is to be provided

and the respective importance and significance will be emphasised. So the intercul-

tural context is also a major focus. In the specialised literature, a wide range of fac-

tors have been described. The selection of such factors, which are to be consid-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 3 -

ered, result from the findings of research work in the area of specialised literature

and are at the same time closely linked to the author’s previous job experiences.

Consequently, the work in relation to this book and the findings are of particular

importance for the author.

Chapter five is to meet the requirements regarding the evaluation of the theoretical

findings based on practical experience. As the factors to be analysed have not yet

been finally determined, a quantitative analysis cannot be made here. This would

require a more comprehensive analysis or survey with a corresponding time frame,

with the aim to get complex data material and figures serving as a basis for empiri-

cal analysis and evaluation. The basis for the analysis will be the practice-oriented

experiences of experts which have been gained through interviews. The questions

necessary for achieving this goal result from the factors that have been elaborated

in chapter four. At the end of chapter five, general statements from experts will be

the basis for the final evaluation.

In chapter six, major results from the chapters two to three will be given. Further-

more, the findings of chapter four will be contrasted with the general statements

obtained from the interviews listed in chapter five. Based on the hereof resulting

final consequences, recommendations for further focal areas of research and anal-

yses will also be given.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 4 -

2 Group, work group and team

Terms such as ‘group’, ‘team’, ‘group work’ or ‘team work’ are often mentioned,

however the users of these items are often not really aware of the exact definition

of the respective terms, or they do not know how to differentiate between them in

detail. Everyone who uses the terms or items has an individual view and under-

standing and / or often uses them as synonyms.

The next section with bullets in this chapter will provide a clearer overview and

a more distinct classification of the terms mentioned, starting with a short historical

review at the industrial development and its view or perspective regarding the hu-

man factor in organisation. This part is followed by definitions for the terms as men-

tioned above, also showing that it is possible to differentiate between them. The

last section of this chapter is about ‘virtual teams’ which will be particularly in the

focus of this book.

2.1 Historical review

The current discussions on group work in Germany essentially result from the pub-

lication of the MIT study of 1991 (Antoni 1994 p. 19). In the beginning of the Nine-

ties, this study had the effects of a catalyser and contributed to positioning the

group work topic to the foreground, making it a subject of intense discussion. Al-

ready since the beginning of the 20th century, team and group work had been in

the focus of interest and resulted from discussions about the concept of scientific

business administration according to Taylor, which was applied at that time. In line

with Taylor’s ideas, the organisations should prefer activities based on division of

labour, on precise regulations, rules and controls; and the organisations should

also implement the principle of the individual, or single, work place and should

make a clear distinction between intellectual and manual work (Feigl 2000, p. 77).

Since that time, Taylor along with Gilbreth (and his wife) have been considered as

the “fathers of the work or occupational science” as with their concepts they scien-

tifically accompanied industrialisation and the related division of labour (Winterhoff-

Sprunk 2002, p. 91).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 5 -

Group or group work concepts could hardly be connected with Taylor’s ideas and

thus did not get much attention initially. So it took decades until they were imple-

mented in the business world and in practice.

In the context of the Hawthorne studies conducted in the 1930ies as well as of the

research programmes commissioned by the Federal Republic of Germany in the

mid of the 1970ies relevant aspects of group dynamics in teams and the hereof

arising questions and issues of labour organisation and structure (partially autono-

mous work groups) were discussed. The pilot projects that were started at that time

were mostly not implemented after their completion (Hackert 1999, p. 54). Only in

the beginning of the 1980ies, owing to the much stronger global competition, group

concepts gained more attention again in the form of quality circles. Generally, the

industrialised countries of the Western hemisphere considered them as the key to

the Japanese business success. The goal of the quality circles was to achieve co-

determination of employees at the respective work place and to have them solve

their work place-related problems independently. These quality circles were estab-

lished especially in big industrial organisations, but were not of particular impor-

tance and were not a topic of discussions at the management level (Antoni 1994, p.

20). But they paved the way for the publication of the MIT study with the title “The

machine that changed the world” which was soon in “a broad focus of public dis-

cussions” and found many readers (Feigl 2000, p. 79). Following Feigl (ibid.), the

superiority of lean production in comparison to manufacturing and organisation ac-

cording to Taylor and Ford was emphasised in this extensive study.

Current discussions are not only based on rational factors but also on responses to

the respective public discussions. Group work has become a term that is en vogue

and trendy and has been implemented as a result of competitors’ information and

upon request of customers in the respective organisation’s own organisational

schemes (Antoni 1994, p. 21). In addition there have also been the effects of struc-

tural causes and conditions such as the change or shift in the market and the com-

petitive situation, the development of new technologies and a society-related

change that have contributed to the willingness to challenge the previous system

and to look for new impetus (Feigl 2000, pp. 80).

Currently, the discussions focusing on team and group work concepts develop on

the basis of practice and do not result from science. It cannot be established if the

high expectations as regards profitability, competitivity and simultaneously work

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 6 -

conditions adjusted to individuals can be met as, according to Feigl (2000, p. 81)

“an empirical and theoretical research deficit“ can be observed. In this context, also

Hackert (1999, p. 49) states that “group work in corporate, or operational, practice

is less in the focus than it may be assumed when looking at the intensity of discus-

sions about it”.

In the following, this book shortly deals with the individual terms as they are partly

used and defined very differently in practice, for instance in the areas of psychol-

ogy, business administration and sociology. The goal is to achieve an easier differ-

entiation.

2.2 Group

2.2.1 Definition

Two definitions will be provided here which refer to the essential or decisive char-

acteristics or features of a group.

According to Gabler (2010a), a group has to be seen and understood as a social

entity, in particular the small group which includes an entity or unit of three to twen-

ty-five members. Furthermore, the following characteristic features exist. There is a

definite or specific number of members who

“pursue a goal jointly during a longer period,

are in a continuous communication and interaction context (‘we experience’; or

sense of working together in a group), and

develop group-specific roles, norms and values”.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 7 -

Staehle (1999, p. 267), following Cartwright and Zander 1968, Schneider 1975,

Forster 1978, describes and defines the characteristics of a group in a more pre-

cise way:

“Relatively long duration of collaboration / working together as a group,

Direct interaction between the members (face-to-face),

Physical proximity,

Members perceive themselves as a group (‘we experience’, sense of working

together in a group, perception of gestalt),

Independent acting and behaviour / attitude will be influenced by others,

Joint goals, values and norms,

Role differentiation, status distribution”.

2.2.2 Significance

In most organisations, groups have an important function because those who are in

charge of staff matters expect increased efficiency on the part of the individual per-

son working in the group.

A generally applicable and accepted definition does not exist. The definitions may

differ or vary and depend on the respective author and which properties or features

of the group are emphasised, for instance the size of the group. Some authors pro-

vide the definition “any number of human beings / individuals“ (Schein 1980,

p. 108); for others at least a dyad or the pair / couple are considered and defined

as a group. The latter definitions have been criticised because the departure of

merely one person already brings about the “collapse“ of this group (Staehle 1999,

pp. 267). Thus the ideal group size would be a group with at least three to five per-

sons as a minimum, or with twenty to twenty-five persons as a maximum. Accord-

ing to Winterhoff-Spurk (2002, p. 96), bigger groups may involve the risk that with

the increasing size of the group the number of persons would increase as well who

would no longer be actively involved in discussions or who would not express their

ideas any longer. And in this context, there would also be the danger of sub-group

formation.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 8 -

In addition, in the specialised literature, different types of groups have been out-

lined. A description will not be provided as the focus is predominantly on teams and

especially on virtual teams.

2.3 Work group

2.3.1 Definition

Following Alioth and Ulich 1983, Antoni (1994, p. 24) states that the joint task and

assignment is an additional main feature for describing a work group. In contrast to

a group that sets its goals itself, Prechtl (1999 p. 31) points out that “as a rule, the

work group receives its task / assignment from an external source“, and that, for

this reason, the scope for setting the goals independently is limited.

Hackman (1987, p. 322) extends the features for defining a work group by the as-

pect of integration into an organisational framework or context, and thus he de-

scribes work groups as

”(1) real groups (that is, intact social systems complete with boundaries and differ-

entiated roles among members);

(2) groups that have one or more tasks to perform, resulting in discernible and po-

tentially measurable group products; and

(3) groups that operate within an organizational context“.

The most significant feature of all types of group works is that there has to be

a joint task. Hereby one has to differentiate between the work order (i.e. objective

goal set by management) and the work task (joint subjective interpretation of the

work order). An additional important feature is communication within the group so

that the work order and assignment will be interpreted as joint task and will be as-

sumed and performed by the group members. Following Weinert (2004, p. 440),

there is group work only involved if the individuals that are part of the group de-

velop and pursue joint goals and if the respective work performance and the be-

haviour are mutually dependent (interdependency).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 9 -

Figure 1 illustrates the priority and importance of the joint task in the context of

group work, along with the already mentioned characteristics of group work.

Figure 1 – Characteristics of group work

Source: adopted from Antoni 1994, p. 25

2.3.2 Significance

Not every organisation-related uniting of employees is group work. The characteris-

tics or features that have been provided so far for a group would also be appropri-

ate for describing, for instance, a school class. To be able to use the term ‘group

work’ in the context of organisations it was necessary to define further characteris-

tics to specify a group more adequately. This has been done in the chapter refer-

ring to the definition.

In particular, work groups can be found above all in large or big organisations, es-

pecially in the areas which allow individual responsibilities. In the work groups, de-

cisions are made that help the individual member in the group to improve the re-

spective work or to mutually foster and enhance the performance of all members in

the group. Katzenbach and Smith (2003, p. 123) clearly specify that “the emphasis

is always on individual performance-focused goals and responsibilities“ and not on

further joint work results.

In organisations and in the business practice, there are quite frequently types of

work which are considered as group work, but which, in terms of their scope or ex-

Joint task consisting of several partial tasks

Several persons

Direct collaboration

‘We experience’

Joint goals

Joint values

Joint rules

Role distribution

Duration / time frame

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 10 -

tent, and with regard to possibilities of cooperating within a work group, cannot be

considered as such. Consequently, Nerdinger et al. (2008, p. 403) do not consider

such work performed in crews (so-called “Kolonnenarbeit“, i.e. work performed by

several persons simultaneously; and they perform various tasks in the same room)

as well as tasks performed successively (so-called “Sukzessivverband“, i.e. de-

pending on the task, several persons process the same item successively) as

group work. Here, cooperation possibilities within the group are too much restricted

or limited; and this is different from the integration of tasks. Here direct or immedi-

ate collaboration is possible and therefore coordination is required.

2.3.3 Group work vs. team work

In the specialised literature, the terms ‘group work’ or ‘team work’ are often used

synonymously or also have contradictory or conflicting meanings. Already Antoni

(1996, p. 7) describes the confusion as to the terms used and warns accordingly

because they rather veil the underlying concepts instead of making them much

clearer. Especially nowadays, and in particular in the management literature, fash-

ionable and trendy key words can be found, such as customer- or client-focused

teams, power teams or service teams (Feigl 2000, p. 81).

Both terms are viewed and discussed in a differentiated way by various authors,

and it is striking in this context that often two aspects are outlined, on the one hand,

the work-coordinative factor, and on the other hand, the social-integrative factor

(Wiendieck 1994, p. 232). According to Foster (1978, p. 20), team work is a specific

form of group work which is distinguished by more intensive group processes.

Weinert (2004, p. 440) distinguishes between the terms ‘work group’ and ‘work

teams’ as well, because especially the latter are shaped by positive synergies,

shared management roles and a joint subject matter. In contrast, work groups are

clearly shaped by focussed leadership or management structures and individual

responsibilities.

Tolksdorf (1994, pp. 236) defines the terms in a completely different way. While

work groups are distinguished by a joint overall task (operative and dispositive) and

by shared responsibilities, work teams are shaped by, or have, separate task struc-

tures (operative tasks of the group, dispositive tasks of the team head).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 11 -

For the purpose of this book, the two terms will not be discussed separately, but

seen and understood as synonyms because an exact distinction in terms of content

does not seem to be appropriate or useful owing to the lacking basis with distinct

and theoretically founded characteristics or features.

2.4 Team

2.4.1 Definition

Keiser (2002, p. 45) specifies as one of the most frequent characteristics of a team,

a higher identification with the goal on the part of individual team members. Simul-

taneously, he explains that individual performance cannot be assigned to individual

team members any longer. With regard to the objective set, a team is “more than

the sum of its components“ (Wilmes 1995, p. 51). According to the statements pro-

vided and following Sulzbacher (2003, pp. 65) and von Rosenstiel (2003, pp. 274),

the definition the term ‘team’ is as follows:

“Strong and intense connection (or ties) to the joint goal,

Joint goal in terms of performance beyond the overall goal,

Strong group cohesion with mutual responsibility of members,

Strong team spirit based on abilities and skills complementing one another,

Increase of performance potential by using synergies”.

Based on the following definition provided by Mohrman et al. (1995, p. 39): “A team

is a group of individuals who work together to produce products or deliver services

for which they are mutually accountable. Team members share goals and are mu-

tually held accountable for meeting them, they are independent in their accom-

plishment, and they affect the results through their interactions with one another.

Because the team is held collectively accountable, the work of integrating with one

another is included among the responsibilities of each member.” Keiser (2002,

p. 46) defines the term ‘team’ as a kind or type of specialisation of work groups,

including and classifying it in the area of small group research. In this context,

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 12 -

Guzzo (1996, p. 9) states “that all teams are groups but that not all groups are

teams”. Based on this statement, Frech (1996, p. 296) views the term ‘group’ as

the always larger framework, or universal basic structure, including the term ‘team’

as well. With the following figure, the attempt is made to achieve a distinction or

differentiation with regard to other majorities of individuals. The latter will not be

further discussed here. The target is to describe the small group and its manifesta-

tion in a larger or overall context.

Figure 2 – From society to the team

Source: adopted from Keiser 2000, p. 42 and Gemünden and Högl 2001, p. 11

Majority / society

Bulk Class

Association Mass Group Family

Large group Small group

Social group Groups in organisations

Work group

Team

Virtual team

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 13 -

2.4.2 Significance

In a lot of organisations, the term ‘team’ has become a popular key word, which is

often somewhat vague in terms of as each entity resembling a group is designed

and labelled as team. Whether the respective specific characteristics actually exist

or not, is often not relevant to some authors. The term ‘team’ which has been taken

from the sports science sector (Comelli and von Rosenstiel 2008, p. 154) is often

found today especially in the management literature. As already mentioned in

a preceding chapter, new definitions of the term ‘team’ are considered, according

to Antoni (1994, p. 21), as fashionable and trendy terms. So in this context the dif-

ferentiated evaluation of the group and team is challenged. Nevertheless, Antoni

(ibid.) has to admit that independency of some analytical characteristics of teams

or their respective manifestation in contrast to groups cannot be denied or doubted.

Also Katzenbach and Smith (2003, p. 68) discuss the term of team and also be-

come aware that different approaches are available. Whereas some exclusively

think of the sports sector, where the individual’s best performance may well lead to

victory, others associate, when thinking of working in a team, values such as coop-

erating, sharing and helping one another. Thus various views regarding costs and

benefits of teams have been mentioned also their risk-carrying ability or potential

that is connected with the loss of hierarchical control. All this shows that a differen-

tiation to the term of work group would be helpful.

2.4.3 Work group vs. team

The term ‘team’ prevails not only in the organisation-focused science compared

with the term ‘work group’, above all also in practice. The often heard opinion is

that teams are more than work groups; in particular the teams’ ways of working

would contribute clearly to differentiating them from work groups.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 14 -

For this reason, using a term in a concise way is strongly recommended because

such terms are always connected with specific images influencing the thinking and

acting of the parties involved. The following Table aims to give an overview of the

common items (commonalities) and the essential differences between work groups

and teams.

Work group Team

Strong, clearly focused team head Shared leadership roles

Individual accountability Individual and mutual accountability

The group’s purpose is the same

as the broader organisation’s mis-

sion

Specific team purpose that the team

itself defines and sets

Individual work products Collective work products

Runs efficient meetings Encourage open-ended discussions

and active problem-solving meetings

Measures its effectiveness indi-

rectly by its influence on others

Measures performance directly by

assessing collective workproducts

D iff

er en

ce s

Discusses, decides and delegates Discusses, decides and does real

work together

More than two persons

Direct interaction in a longer time period

Specific norms and values

C om

m on

al tie

Specific roles

Table 1 – Commonalties and differences between work groups and teams

Source: adopted from Keiser 2002, p. 46 (based on Katzenbach and Smith 1993)

and Beisheim and Frech 1999, p. 288

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 15 -

2.5 Virtual team

2.5.1 Definition: virtual

The terms of virtual or virtuality can be traced back to the same Latin word ‘virtus’,

and they mean (inherent) power or possibility as well as capability (Duden 2006,

p. 1851). While with the term of virtuality “inherent” (or intrinsic) power is assumed,

in case of virtual it implies that ”it is actually available in terms of power or of possi-

bility” (Senst 2001, p. 14). In this context, available does have the meaning of it

exists only in the mind or thoughts, but is not real. Consequently, a virtual team

would merely be a make-belief, an apparent and not really existing team (ibid.).

This is not the case. Instead it can be assumed indeed that virtual teams exist,

hence they are not merely an apparently existing, or make-belief item. Longman

(1995, p. 1596) describes the term of virtual as ”something that is so nearly com-

plete ... than any difference is unimportant”. From this it can be derived that using

the term ‘virtual’ in contemporary everyday life has led to a shift in meaning

(Lipnack and Stamps 1997, p. 5):

“Virtual as in ‘not in actual fact’ but ‘in essence,’ ‘almost like’; and

Virtual as in ‘virtual reality’”.

The term ‘virtual’ which originally stems from Anglo-American language use (”they

act virtually as a team”) would then be translated as follows: “They act almost as /

practically as a team” (Senst 2001, p. 14). The interpretation in German rather con-

veys the impression of ”apparently” or artificiality because the translation would be:

”They apparently act like a team” (ibid.).

2.5.2 Definition: virtual team

For Lipnack and Stamps (1997, pp. 6), a “virtual team, like every team, is a group

of people who interact through interdependent tasks guided by common purpose.

Unlike conventional teams, a virtual team works across space, time, and organiza-

tional boundaries with links strengthened by webs of communication technologies”.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 16 -

But this definition also clearly shows that virtual teams are no new type of team

work, but merely have to be seen or understood as an extension of conventional

team work. Konradt and Hertel (2002, pp. 17) confirm this view and give three es-

sential characteristics or features:

“Virtual teams have characteristics of conventional work groups.

Virtual teams work at decentralised and delocalised work places.

Predominant use of electronic communication media.”

2.5.3 Characteristics of a virtual team

2.5.3.1 Space distances

As a rule, members of a virtual team work at such a distance (in terms of space)

from one another that they do not cooperate on a direct, face-to-face basis.

Figure 3 describes the distances where the individuals, on the one hand, are close

enough (15-metre rule) in order cooperate in person and in reality, and on the other

hand, the distances which are larger and beyond the rule, so that specific meas-

ures are required enabling communication between the team members. In this con-

text, the authors mention and specify virtual teams (Allen 1997, cited in Lipnack

and Stamps 1997, p. 8).

The distance ranges of the above-mentioned model refer to the American percep-

tion of distance and are well worth-while to be discussed. A distance of 15 metres

is, according to Sulzbacher (2003, pp. 87), very short as regular personal interac-

tion in the conventional sense is still possible, and this would then contradict and

be in contrast with the definition of virtual teams. However, the definition for virtual

teams does not request explicitly that personal contacts should be excluded or

avoided. In this context, reference should be made to the above-mentioned ‘almost

like’ because it leaves open which characters or features do not occur in their pure

form. Furthermore, it should be considered that a lasting personal interactive, face-

to-face interaction across a distance of 15 metres requires a lot of effort or can be

perceived as disturbing on the part of adjoining team members. Therefore, it can

be assumed that quite rapidly communication-facilitating technologies will be used.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 17 -

Also here it is evident that the separation line between team and virtual team can-

not be precisely drawn and that also various manifestations are possible, from the

pure form to the mixed form.

Figure 3 – Distance perception / virtual distances

Source: adopted from Lipnack and Stamps 1997, p. 9

and Lipnack and Stamps 1998, p. 33

2.5.3.2 Time boundaries

Virtual teams or their members exceed very easily time-specific boundaries. On the

one hand, this is often the result of increasing distances, for instance, due to inter-

nationalisation; here, with increasing distance, the time frame for the joint work gets

increasingly smaller. But on the other hand, it may be necessary that time-related

Social: 1.20 m – 3.60 m

Intimate: 0 – 0.45 m

Personal: 0.45 m – 1.20 m

Public: 3.60 m – 7.50 m

Conventional teams Virtual teams

Floors

Buildings

Cities

Countries

... Distance perception (North America)

15-metre rule of collaboration

Legend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 18 -

boundaries have to be mastered at the same place, for instance if members are

rarely or never available, or present, at the same time.

2.5.3.3 Organisational boundaries

Based on the problem, co-acting of several organisational areas or, more far-

reaching, the collaboration with other organisations may be required.

2.5.3.4 Communication technologies

Nowadays, virtual teams have a broad range of communication technologies at

their disposal, which are required for compensating the disadvantages or bottle

necks of the above-mentioned characteristics. Thus communication technologies

are a major part and significant component of virtual coordination.

2.5.4 Significance

The innovations of the information and communication technologies of the past few

years have also led to new opportunities in the area of collaboration. Among these

is the possibility to distribute work in such a way that individuals can work together

and perform a joint task without having to be at one specific place. In many areas

of business and administration, people collaborate at different places in order to be

independent from space and time, in teams, namely in virtual teams.

Especially today, in the digital era, the term ‘virtual’ has a further meaning. Through

the use of computers and networks, rooms or living spaces are created that are

real for those groups using them or staying in them. As to these spaces or spheres,

physical equivalents do not always exist. Although in this context, often in everyday

language virtual realities are mentioned, they are in reality digital realities (Lipnack

and Stamps 1997, p. 6). The following Figure is to show that, as a rule, each digital

image has its origin in the real world. It can be changed through abstracting and

modelling processes in very different, varying ways in order to create the desired

new digital reality.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 19 -

Figure 4 – Process of virtualisation

Source: Konradt and Hertel 2002, p. 13 (based on Encarnacao et al. 1997)

Virtual teams do not have intensive mutual, personal relations or they do not exist

at all. Face-to-face contacts exist among conventional teams and thus are listed as

an essential characteristic property. So the question may be posed whether a vir-

tual team can really be seen as a team. Sulzbacher (2003, p. 82) would answer to

the corresponding question with no. Here, it has to be noted that the technological

progress has brought about changes. So members of virtual teams have to com-

municate and interact but the respective communication and interaction is different.

This leads to the conclusion whether this fact nevertheless qualifies the virtual

teams as teams, in particular as the term is largely used in the business language.

With regard to this book, it has to be assumed that virtual teams can be considered

as teams.

Indivi- dual

Real environment

... direct ... through input / output

systems

Abstracting

Modelling

Implementing

Abstract model

Digital image

Reality Virtuality

Perceiving and acting ...

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 20 -

2.5.5 Team vs. virtual team

As has been shown in the preceding chapter, virtual teams are denoted or qualified

as teams. Nevertheless there are differences in comparison to the teams which are

defined and denoted as conventional team. The differences will be dealt with in the

following.

The most essential difference lies, according to Lipnack and Stamps (1997,

pp. 47), in the mutual interactions and relations. These are described as links

based on the “people, purpose and links” model being the characteristics or es-

sence of virtual teams (ibid.). While in conventional teams, the contacts are pre-

dominantly of a personal nature, virtual teams are shaped by more diverse and

varied contacts. This does not just refer to physical connections, such as mains,

devices or systems etc., but also involves contacts and connections between indi-

viduals, such as trust, serving as invisible ties or connection. In virtual teams, par-

ticularly the last type of relations, or connections, is of high relevance as this serves

as a compensation or balance in terms of personal contacts. Here it is evident that

communication in virtual teams is of extremely high priority.

Moreover, there are further major differences between the two types of teams. The

following Table gives an overview in this regard. The criteria which will be consid-

ered are simultaneously an important basis for the success-building factors listed

lateron.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 21 -

Criteria Conventional team Virtual team

Communication - Mainly face-to-face - Mainly using electronic communication media

Social contacts - Are an automatic or inci- dential result

- Must be looked for actively

Manager role - Classical manager role - Direct control

- Manager as coach

- Management by delegation

and target agreement

Management

style

- by „walking around“ - by „communication around“

Reuirements on

the team mem-

bers

- Ability to work in a team - Ability to work in a team

- Ability to work

independently

Team identity - Identity through external characteristics (joint room,

dress code, etc.)

- Identity-building due to

team task and joint goals

Table 2 – Differentiation of conventional teams and virtual teams

Source: adopted from Hertel et al. 2001, p. 29

Figure 5 serves as a transition to the next chapter, preparing the focus on culture.

In a so-called double-team structure cube, Senst (2001, p. 72) combines parts of

the characteristics (language, place, time) of a virtual team, combining them also

with the factor of culture. This enables differentiation between the individual team

structures. Virtual teams represent through an entirely heterogeneous structure

(varying levels / degrees as to all characteristics) one extreme of the cube (upper

left dark cube). The counterpart (lower right dark cube) refers to conventional

teams that have a homogeneous structure (same levels / degrees as to all charac-

teristics). The light green cubes in-between are mixed types, thus variations of the

respective extreme types.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 22 -

Figure 5 – Double team structure cube

Source: adopted from Senst 2001, p. 72

As already mentioned, the aspect of culture can be considered as a characteristic

as well for virtual teams. Thus it will be more closely looked at in the next chapter.

Place Time

S S

S D

D S

D D

Language

S D

Culture D

homogeneous heterogeneous

/ S ... same / D ... different... Team structureLegend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 23 -

3 Culture

3.1 Preliminary remark

The labour environment of today increasingly has to deal with the varying mental

states, conditions of the organisations’ customers and also with those of the re-

spective employees. Due to internationally liberal trading terms ensuring free trade,

freedom in regard to investments as well as, among other things, freedom to

choose the site or location of one’s business, also global interconnection and

crosslinking (networking) is increasing continually. In this context, globalisation is

often mentioned. On the basis of technological progress, it has become possible to

conclude transactions across large distances. Communities and organisations

have fostered this process through treaties and laws additionally. The fact of grow-

ing interdependencies is also associated with an increasingly larger number of in-

dividuals who are involved in global economy. Markets can be developed which are

beyond the own cultural sphere or area. Organsiations send their employees

abroad in order to have their strategies implemented on location. This also includes

that the respective organisations have to deal with and to respond to other cultures

in order to be able to survive in highly competitive markets. The entire process is

additionally linked with an internationalisation in terms of the structure of employ-

ees in the organisations. Consequently, the latter have to deal increasingly with

topics such as interculturality, intercultural communication or intercultural compe-

tence. The following chapters are aimed at providing an insight into the very com-

plex and extensive subject matter.

The terms ‘intercultural communication’ and ‘intercultural competence’ are as re-

gards their meaning quite complex and will not be examined more closely in this

chapter. Both terms will appear again in the chapter on success factors. Neverthe-

less, due to their complexity, already here some elements will be discussed that

are linked to such success factors.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 24 -

In this context, it has to be noted that, in contrast to the central issue and problem,

the term of cross-cultural is not used. According to Litters (1995, p. 21), the use of

the term ‘cross-cultural’ is limited to the “area of analyses relating to cul-

tures .., which are compared by particular aspects“. The members of the particular

culture do not enter into mutual relationships. As this book is based on inter-actions

between team members, the term ‘intercultural’ is made use of in the following. For

this reason, the definition is also used in the following sections. Straub’s (2007a,

p. 7) approach is very accurate; and he starts his analysis as follows: to him, inter-

cultural is “the adjective determinative compound which consists of the two ele-

ments ‘inter’ (serving as determinatum) and ‘cultural’ (serving as determinans)”. In

the Duden (2006, p. 890), the word ‘inter’ which is of Latin origin means translated

into German “zwischen“, i.e. between in English, and points out that in case of

composite words, together with adjectives and nouns, correlations or interdepend-

encies between two or more items are being shaped and denoted. As to further

clarifying and explaining the meaning of the composite adjective, Straub (2007a, p.

7) also states that it would be necessary to deal with the noun culture. Thus the

term or concept of culture will be in the focus of the next section.

3.2 Traditional concept of culture

3.2.1 Overview

Cultural studies, in the framework of interdisciplinary theory discussions, deal in-

tensively with the term or concept of culture. According to Lüsebrink (2008, p. 10),

three basic or fundamental concepts of culture are differentiated which are pro-

vided in Table 3 and are briefly described.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 25 -

Concept Description

Intellectual and

aesthetically

Is closely connected with terms such as education or art.

Works and creations of eminent writers, artists or composers

represent this concept of culture, on the basis of aesthetical

but also of moral-ethical values. The term marks the separa-

ting line that is subject to changes between, on the one hand,

education- and elite-based culture and, on the other hand,

mass and people’s cultures.

Material Is also called instrumental cultural term and can be traced back to the original meaning of culture, namely agriculture. It

includes areas such as culture relating to handicraftsmen,

engineer work, etc.

Anthropological This concept or term of culture incorporates the entirety of collective thinking or mental, perception and acting patterns in

society.

Table 3 – Basic definitions of culture

Source: adopted from Lüsebrink 2008, p. 10

In the course, the anthropological term or concept of culture will be in the focus and

basic scientific research referring to this term will be provided and discussed in

many ways. Anthropology is the science centered on human beings and their de-

velopment (Duden 2006, p. 159).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 26 -

3.2.2 Anthropological concept of culture

Labour and leadership behaviour are influenced by the prevailing cultural norms of

a country. Having grown up in a specific country and cultural space and having had

both education and further training or occupational training there, also implies hav-

ing been intellectually and mentally influenced, or programmed, by the respective

culture. Also if the individual is not aware of this, this influence will be evident as

soon as the respective individual establishes closer contacts with people of other

cultures (Weinert 2004, pp. 85). Based on this fact, Weinert (ibid.) defines culture

as the “merging of profound, deeply anchored personality-specific characteristics,

habits, value patterns and traditions. It is society’s, or societal, heritage, which is

shared among the members of a group; and this heritage is then passed on from

one generation to the next and forms and shapes the behaviour and perception of

the respective members”.

With regard to the aspect of intercultural competence, Baumer (2002, p. 77) per-

ceives and understands culture as “collective awareness or consciousness pro-

gramming that distinguishes the members of a group from those of another group”;

but to him, it is also a term used for “explicit and implicit patterns of a community

and for behaviour patterns of a community”.

Based on the aspect that culture is something which helps to unify, Spencer-Oatey

(2004, p. 4) defines culture as “a fuzzy set of attitudes, beliefs, behavioural conven-

tions, and basic assumptions and values that are shared by a group of people, and

that influence each member's behaviour and each member’s interpretations of the

‘meaning’ of other people's behaviour”.

These coherence-oriented approaches appear initially quite acceptable, but along

with increasing globalisation and specific differentiation of societies, the notion of

the cultural term can hardly be maintained in line with what has been provided

(Rathje 2006, p. 12). Rathje (ibid.) mentions that, those who are opposing the

structural uniformity or unity and homogenity of culture, tend to prefer more “differ-

ence diagnosis” (difference orientation). Hereby existing norms are not denied but

in the focus is that differences within a culture develop solely by the varying inter-

pretation and internalisation of cultural standards.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 27 -

Dahl (2004, p. 7) seems to understand why in practice the limiting, or containment,

of the term of culture to geographical or political boundaries is preferred. The cor-

responding definitions can be applied both to large as well as to small cultural

units. Furthermore, allocation using nationality is rapidly possible as it can be iden-

tified easily. Allocations to a culture or to subculture are more difficult as not every

individual may be part of a subculture. Furthermore, it is argued that individuals

with the same nationality are largely, or for the most part, shaped by the same and

identical values and norms.

As shown above, the term of culture allows a multitude of definitions and interpreta-

tions. Thus Soraya (1996, p. 16) understands why this chaos relating to terms, has

resulted in a certain number of anthropologists’ avoidance of the term ‘culture’. The

term or notion associated with culture in anthropology cannot be unified. In spite of

the general dislike concerning the term of culture and unsolved problems as to its

definition, some anthropologists deal with and discuss these rather conventional

cultural concept and notions from an entirely different perspective.

In this context, Geert Hofstede can be mentioned, who, in the area of cultural re-

search, has identified scientific evidence through his extensive reasearch work,

and these findings prove the existence of cultural differences. In the area of culture-

comparing management research, and especially in the area of culture-comparing

management research, he has investigated the dimensions of culture and how they

affect the success of leading / managing intercultural teams. On the basis of or-

ganisational theories, he provided a further definition, namely culture as the “collec-

tive programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of a group or cat-

egory from those belonging to another group or category (Hofstede 2009, p. 4).

Hofstede (2001, p. 2) divides the above-mentioned mental programming into the

three levels of uniqueness of the human being. This implies that culture is not

something innate but that it has been acquired or learnt. Thus culture does not re-

sult or emerge from genes but from the social environment of the respective indi-

vidual, “because human programming is the truly unique part: No two people are

programmed exactly alike, not even identical twins reared together” (ibid.). The

individual is shaped by values as well as by behaviour, thinking and perception

patterns on the levels shown in Figure 6.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 28 -

Figure 6 – Three levels of uniqueness in human mental programming

Source: adopted from Hofstede 2001, p. 3 and Hofstede 2009, p. 4

3.2.3 Iceberg model

With this model, the attempt is made in a simple manner to provide the viewer with

an approximate understanding in terms of culture. The model (Fig. 7) shows that

essentially there are two parts. There is the top section of the iceberg which is vis-

ible. This part represents things such as music, language, speech, clothing, food,

etc. Furthermore, this part of the iceberg includes behaviour patterns such as

smoking in public, the way how people are waiting in front of a bus, or also spitting

on the floor. All these things are visible.

But there is yet a second part of the iceberg which is initially hidden to the viewer.

This far larger part of the iceberg comprises, for instance, things such as religious

belief, religion, “Weltanschauung” (philosophy of life), motivation, tolerance as re-

gards changes, communicative behaviour patterns, readiness to take risks, etc.

Although these things cannot be seen (i.e. are invisible), they are required in order

to understand the visible part as they are the triggering agent or the motive in this

context (Rothlauf 2009, p. 25).

universal X Is defined by hunger, sexuality and emotions. Includes norms, values, symbols, language, ritu- als as well as time- and space- related (spatial) perceptions.

collective X Is learnt and experienced in social institutions / groupings (family, school, etc.).

X X Personal experiences in combi- nation with individual properties.

individual

Characte- I L Description

Personality

Human nature

Culture

I ... inherited / L ... learntLegend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 29 -

Figure 7 – The cultural iceberg model

Source: adopted from Duarte and Snyder 2006, p. 56 and Rothlauf 2009, p. 25

To understand and grasp the invisible part, core of the iceberg, specific systemat-

ics, i.e. the cultural elements, are required. So the next chapter will focus on this

particular aspect.

3.2.4 Cultural elements

A human being first has to acquire basic values because after the birth he or she is

not yet prepared properly for life. Information required is taken largely uncon-

sciously from the environment. This information includes symbols, heroes and ritu-

als but above all the basic values. Only at the end of the so-called absorption pe-

riod (ten to twelve years), the human being takes on a perceiving or perceptive atti-

tude of learning and thus is focused on new practises. This process is illustrated by

Figure 8.

Culture

Values

Assumptions

Practices and

Behaviours

VISIBLE

INVISIBLE

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 30 -

Figure 8 – Acquisition of values and practices

Source: adopted from Hofstede 2009, p. 10

Through cultural elements, differences in terms of cultural units can be identified

and specified. The large number of cultural elements can be divided essentially into

four categories. Figure 9 shows them in the form of onion skin, which is to illustrate

that symbols may be highly superficial and that values are manifestations of cul-

tures that are most profound (Hofstede 2009, p. 7).

Elements such as symbols, heroes and rituals are subsumed under the term of

practices as they are visible as such for the external observer who is part of an-

other culture, but their cultural meaning or relevance remains invisible. The mean-

ing or relevance of these practices is a result precisely and exclusively from the

type of interpretation preferred by insiders of a culture (Hofstede 2009, p. 9). So no

further analysis will be made in this context.

Family

School

Work

Age Phase of life

Values

Practices

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 31 -

Figure 9 – Onion diagram: Manifestation of culture at different levels of depth

Source: Hofstede 2009, p. 8

3.2.5 Cultural standards

3.2.5.1 Definition

As already pointed out in the chapter above, values, in the anthropological sense,

constitute the core of cultural systems. The psychologist Alexander Thomas (1991,

p. 7) perceives values as cultural standards. He defines these terms as orientation

measures for perceiving, thinking and acting which are typical for groups, organisa-

tions, and nations. In the center is how members of a particular culture have to be-

have, how objects, persons and events or related processes are to be viewed,

evaluated and treated or dealt with. On this basis, Reisch (1991, pp. 81) describes

cultural standards as culture-specifically describable role- and situation-specific

attitudes which are based on cultural norms. They imply that members of a culture

largely agree that in a particular situation a specific behaviour is adequate or is to

be expected as a matter of course. Not complying with that which is expected by

individuals will have negative effects on interaction and possibly will also result in

sanctions. To put it differently, if the behaviour observed deviates by taking into

Practices

Values

Symbols

Heroes

Rituals

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 32 -

consideration certain tolerance limits, it will be perceived and evaluated as strange,

not normal, provoking, etc.

Thomas (2004, pp. 151) distinguishes between three types of cultural standards,

which are the “domain- or area-specific cultural standard”, the “contextual cultural

standard”, and the “central cultural standard”. Following Thomas (ibid.), the central

cultural standard is domain-crossing and can be observed in very different social

domains and areas or scopes of action. For this reason, the latter standard of cul-

ture will be the relevant basis of this book.

3.2.5.2 Central cultural standards

The prevailing opinion that organisations are solely or primarily determined by

tasks and technologies has been accepted for a long time period. Thus it has also

been simultaneously assumed that organisations would be independent from cul-

ture. This was rejected on the basis of results of research. They evidenced that

also work in organisations is not solely restricted to performing tasks in a pre-

determined sequence by using distinct technologies. Instead, especially when

sending an employee abroard or in research or work groups in which people from

various nationalities are present, the respective culture is of considerable signifi-

cance (Weinert 2004, p. 86).

As a result of this finding and insight, the interest in culture-comparing studies has

gradually grown. The latter is aiming to explain the cultural differences through

models. Thus in the specialised literature, a lot of different models can be found.

They cannot all be dealt with, but just one of the models should be more closely

examined in the following chapter. It is the model of cultural dimensions according

to Hofstede which is based on the most comprehensive analysis regarding the

globalisation of organisations (Weinert 2004, p. 91). Additional models are listed

here in an exemplary way:

The model of the cultural basic dimensions developed by Kluckhohn and

Strodtbeck

The Laurent model: is about difference as to the behavioral style of leading staff

The model of intercultural cluster formation

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 33 -

The model of context orientation

The three-dimensions model according to Schwartz

The four-dimensions model according to Hall

The classification scheme (seven-dimensions model) according to

Trompenaars

3.2.5.3 The five-dimensions model based on Hofstede

This model is based on three research projects. The basis was respectively the

thesis or assumption that all societies are confronted with identical basic problems,

and that merely the responses would be varying or be different (Weidmann 1995,

p. 44). In the framework of global studies and research work, questionnaires that

had to be answered by the employees of the IBM organisation were evaluated. In

this context, Hofstede came to the result that there would be a connection between

the national cultures of the employees and their work-related values and attitudes.

Following Lüsebrink (2008, p. 20), Hofstede’s studies are the “most ambitious at-

tempt of doing research focused on central area-crossing values or cultural stan-

dards, which he defines as cultural dimensions. According to Weinert (2004, p. 91)

Hofstede uses them to point out and emphasise cultural differences quantitatively,

by marking each country in relation to each dimension with the points / results

achieved. In this context, dimension means the measurable aspect of a subject of

investigation that can be expressed in figures and in combination with other dimen-

sions serves to describe it (Weidmann 1995, p. 44).

Following Weinert (2004, pp. 92), Hofstede observed after the first study, that the

employees initially vary in regard to their values merely in four dimensions. Espe-

cially the studies conducted by Bond who, with the Chinese Value Survey was fo-

cused on Asia, led to the result that, following the bringing together of both models,

a fifth dimension was added. These five dimensions will be described briefly in the

following. This will be done by giving a short definition. The significance will be

shown using Tables, where for each dimension the corresponding contrasting

forms with regard to organisations will be shown. A closer view on each dimension

is not in the focus.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 34 -

3.2.5.3.1 Power distance

Power distance refers to “the extend to which the less powerful members of institu-

tions and organizations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed

unequally” (Hofstede 2001, p. 98).

Table 4, for instance, shows differences in the social institution ‘organisation’ in

comparison to low and high power distance culture. Here extremes are contrasted;

in real situations also gradings between these two poles can be identified.

Low power distance High power distance

- Co-determination - Autocracy

- Ideal supervisor = democrat - Ideal supervisor = friendly, benevolent

(or complaisant) autocrat

- Tendency to delegate tasks and re-

sponsibility

- Tendency towards centralising tasks

and responsibility

- Hierarchy implies inequality in terms

of the roles for functional reasons

- Hierarchy implies existential inequal-

ity

Table 4 – Examples of different values for power distance

Source: adopted from Weidmann 1995, p. 45

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 35 -

3.2.5.3.2 Uncertainty avoidance

This implies “the extend to which the members of a culture feel threatened by un-

certain or unknown situations” (Hofstede 2001, p. 161).

Table 5 shows the essential differences in regard to organisations.

Low uncertainty avoidance High uncertainty avoidance

- Readiness to make innovations - Resistance as to changes

- Flexible organisations and work

structures / planning

- Formalisation / preferring formal rules

- Spontaneous vertical and horizontal

communication

- Using official communication channels

- Flat hierarchies, low status differ-

ences

- Rigid hierarchies, thinking is based on

status

- Contracts can be negotiated after

having entered into them

- Contracts have to be met

Table 5 – Examples of different values for uncertainty avoidance

Source: adopted from Weidmann 1995, p. 49

3.2.5.3.3 Individualism vs. Collectivism

Following Hofstede (2001, p. 225), “Individualism stands for a society in which the

ties between individuals are loose: Everyone is expected to look after him / herself,

and his / her immediate family only. Collectivism stands for a society in which peo-

ple from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which

throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning

loyalty.”

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 36 -

Table 6 shows further manifestations in organisations of both cultural spheres.

Individualism Collectivism

- Personnel development is shaped

mainly by career planning

- Personnel development is shaped

mainly by group goals

- Management = leading individuals - Management = leading groups

- Equality of opportunities, perform-

ance-orientation

- Members of in-groups are being pre-

ferred (hiring, career advancement)

- Employee and employer relationship

is targeted to specific purpose and is

based on contracts (labour market)

- Employer and employee relationship is

based upon moral principles (loyalty to

organisation)

- Tasks are more important than rela-

tions among individuals (performance

and success)

- Relationships among colleagues are

more important than tasks (harmony)

Table 6 – Examples of different values for individualism and collectivism

Source: adopted from Weidmann 1995, p. 46

3.2.5.3.4 Masculinity vs. Femininity

In regard to this dimension, the masculinity index expresses to which extent gen-

der-specific role distribution is made within society. “Masculinity stands for a soci-

ety in which social gender roles are clearly distinct: Men are supposed to be asser-

tive, tough, and focused on material success; women are supposed to be more

modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. Femininity stands for a soci-

ety in which social gender roles overlap: Both men and women are supposed to be

modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life” (Hofstede 2001, p. 297).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 37 -

Essential differences in regard to the differing behaviour in organisations are

shown in Table 7.

Masculinity Femininity

- Aggression - Intuition

- Competition, readiness to cause con-

flicts

- Collaboration, readiness to make

compromises

- Performance-focused - Empathy / sensitivity

- Living in order to work - Working in order to live

- Assertiveness - Readiness to adjust

Table 7 – Examples of different values for masculinity and femininity

Source: adopted from Weidmann 1995, p. 48

3.2.5.3.5 Long- vs. Short-term orientation

Initially this dimension was denoted as Confucian dynamism, as part of the “Chi-

nese Value Survey” conducted by Bond (Weinert 2004, p. 93). But it has also been

determined that the underlying concepts of values can also be applied to countries

whose past has not been shaped by the teachings of Confucius. Thus this dimen-

sion describes the level or degree of a basic pragmatic future-oriented attitude to-

wards, or against, a dogmatic present-time-related perspective (Weidmann 1995,

p. 50).

“Long Term Orientation stands for the fostering of virtues oriented towards future

rewards, in particular, perseverance and thrift. Its opposite pole, Short Term Orien-

tation, stands for the fostering of virtues related to the past and present, in particu-

lar, respect for tradition, preservation of ‘face’ and fulfilling social obligations” (Hof-

stede 2001, p. 359).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 38 -

As the cultural consequences or effects of these differences are currently still being

investigated, the Table 8 does not show pure behaviour patterns regarding organi-

sations. However, behaviour-related values or attitudes are shown which may also

be applied to the area mentioned.

Long-term orientation Short-term orientation

- Economising (Discipline in spending)

to secure the future (savings)

- High investments for rapid develop-

ment (indebtedness)

- Endurance, long-term goal orienta-

tion

- Impatience, short-term successes

- Pragmatism - Normativism

- Readiness to subordinate to

a collective purpose

- Own goals prevail; aversion to

control / manipulation by others

Table 8 – Examples of different values for long- and short-term orientation

Source: adopted from Weidmann 1995, p. 50

3.3 Modern concept of culture

3.3.1 Multiculturalism

Multiculturalism is above all a kind of political and / or governmental programme or

concept aimed at responding positively to existing multi-cultural societies. Accord-

ing to Schulte (1990, p. 12), multiculturalism is based on the principle of cultural

diversity instead of national simple-mindedness. With regard to contemporary cul-

tures that are shaped by a multitude of possible identities and border-crossing

properties, also Welsch (1995, pp. 39) tends to refuse the traditional notions of

a culture with its horrible dual components, namely the urge to maintain unity inter-

nally, and external separation and isolation based on ethnic manifestations. The

conflict between own culture and foreign culture has to be overcome.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 39 -

The following Figure is to illustrate three possible concepts; here interculturality is,

to be understood as concept but also as a basis for the two other concepts.

The reason is that the concept of interculturality is based on the concept of the tra-

ditional term of culture, which overcomes the external separation and isolation

through elements of intercultural communication and learning. According to

Lüsebrink (2008, p. 18), multiculturality and transculturality are closely interlinked

with the processes of intercultural communication and thus with processes of inter-

culturality. Communication between ethnic minority groups and the hegemonial

national culture within a social system, for instance between German and Indian IT-

programmers, represents a form of intercultural communication, although it takes

place within national boundaries or also within organisations.

Figure 10 – Concepts of multiculturalism

Source: own design based on Mintzel 1997, pp. 57 and Lüsebrink 2008, pp. 13

and Welsch 1995, pp. 40

M u

l t i

c u

l t u

r a

l i s

... Culture group

... State

Legend:

Multiculturality

Transculturality

... Relationships (Intercultural communication and learning)

Interculturality

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 40 -

Depending on the national state or union of states, various frame conditions exist

for multiculturism-based concepts as well as for their analysis and implementation.

In the next three chapters these frame conditions and points of view will not be ex-

amined more in detail; the goal is to provide a paraphrase.

3.3.2 Concepts of multiculturalism

3.3.2.1 Interculturality

This term refers to all phenomena which arise from the contact between or among

different cultures, but do not imply necessarily in each case a communicative di-

mension. Interculturality is more comprehensive than intercultural communication

and predominantly refers to the results and consequences of intercultural commu-

nication processes (Lüsebrink 2008, pp. 13). For instance, interculturality is to be

found in the esthetical sector. Here a creative union and merger of elements from

different cultures occurs which are often based on intercultural encounters and

communicative processes and the associated confrontation and the creative dia-

logue between various cultures (ibid.).

According to Welsch (1995, p. 40), the disadvantage of interculturality is that the

notions in relation to the traditional concept of culture are continued and merely

additions are made in order to compensate the effects of the old approach. Pos-

sibilities are looked for in order to determine to what extent cultures are able to get

along, understand or recognise them. Following Welsch (ibid.), the search for an

intercultural constant element is immense and inexhaustive because there will be

no results in this matter.

3.3.2.2 Multiculturality

Although connections to the term of interculturality exist, the topic of multiculturality

(and also the term transculturality) is completely different.

First, multiculturality implies a society-related fact, something empirically existing,

namely the fact that in a society or in a society organised by the state several cul-

tures can co-exist, peacefully or with conflicts, for instance merely living together in

co-existence or in an integrated co-existence. Consequently, multiculturality is

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 41 -

a socio-cultural characteristic of a society and its manifold cultural differentiation.

Second, this term implies the notion of a multicultural society, thus a mental con-

cept or a mental a construct. To put it differently, it does not refer to the co-

existence of various cultures on respectively separated territories, but refers to in-

dividuals’ living together and to cooperation of various cultures in a country or state

(Mintzel 1997, pp. 58).

This concept, according to Welsch (1995, p. 40), has the disadvantage that also in

future clearly distinct, but virtually internally homogeneous, cultures are anticipated

that, in contrast to interculturality, do not exist on separate state or governmental

territories.

3.3.2.3 Transculturality

This term serves to denote several cultural identities which have developed

through extensive interconnection (interlinkage) and intermeshing of cultures.

Hence, to distinguis between singularity and or foreignness and thus the notion of

autonomous cultural systems, which are underlying the terms of interculturality and

multiculturality, seem questionable (Lüsebrink 2008, p. 17).

Moreover, in his definition Welsch (1995, p. 42) states that cultures are shaped

internally by pluralisation of potential identities and externally have boundary-

crossing outlines. They have adopted an innovative form which passes through the

classical cultural boundaries in almost a matter-of-fact way. In addition, Welsch

(ibid.) is of the opinion that the traditional term of culture fails in regard to internal

differentiation and complexity of modern cultures. The reason is that they have

a wide range of life patterns and life styles which are closely interwoven and are

mutually interconnected. Thus they do not end at the boundaries of national cul-

tures and their relevant national boundaries. As a major cause in this context,

Welsch (ibid.) has identified migration processes, global material and immaterial

interdependencies (international goods transport / transactions and data network

systems) as well as economical interdependencies.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 42 -

4 Success factors

4.1 Preliminary remark

As already shown in the second chapter, there was a change regarding the work

structure and the structure of operational processes in organisations. This change

was associated with the question which form of work would be more successful.

The now following part deals with the question whether it is possible to distinguish

successful teams from less successful ones. In this context, first of all, group or

team effectiveness or efficiency is the decisive criterion for success. It does not yet

give information about the way through which this effectiveness can be achieved in

teams and what precisely the individual factors are like. Nevertheless, approaches

will be provided demonstrating where such factors for team work success actually

are.

Different models which describe team effectiveness and / or team performance are

available. In the following, a small selection of such models will be presented. The-

se models rather provide an external view of the team so that the team can be

compared with another one. In contrast, the second part of this chapter provides an

internal (intrinsic) view by listing individual success factors which are analysed in

terms of their importance and relevance (significance).

4.2 Models for team effectiveness / team performance

4.2.1 Performance based on Lersch

In the model of Lersch (1965, p. 198), team performance is shown in direct de-

pendency of team coherence because team performance can be achieved only by

the co-action or cooperation of the individual team members. Coherence has

proved to be particularly important in case the team faces difficulties when perform-

ing its task or if it has to cope with external challenges. For this reason, team co-

herence as a central factor is in the centre of the model (Figure 11), which is also

dependent on further factors.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 43 -

These dependencies lead to two additional more profound levels affecting basic

human needs. Thus the members of a team and their personal and emotional atti-

tudes which are mirrored in group-internal processes influence and are decisive for

a team’s success or failure.

Figure 11 – Team performance based on Lersch

Source: Lersch 1965, p. 199

4.2.2 Effectiveness based on Hackman

Weinert (2004, p. 421) considers Hackman’s definition regarding team effective-

ness as being the most recognised one. The model of Hackman analyses three

parameters (Hackman 1987, p. 323):

Sense of belonging- ness to a team

... dependent on

Team performance

Team discipline Team morale

Type of leadership + attitude of

team members

Team-internal communication

Satisfying personal needs and

expectations

Team-internal emotional relations

Team coherence

... Topics / Characteristics

... Effectiveness criteria

Legend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 44 -

“The productive output of the work group should meet or exceed the perfor-

mance standards of the people who receive and / or review the output.

The social process used in carrying out the work should maintain or enhance

the capability of members to work together on subsequent team tasks.

The group experience should, on balance, satisfy rather than frustrate the per-

sonal needs of group members.”

This definition demonstrates clearly that team effectiveness is a multidimensional

construct consisting of three dimensions with the respective mutual relations

(Weinert 2004, p. 421):

Team performance (Task performance is satisfactory or not satisfactory)

Long-term viability of the team as unit of performance (social processes ensure

the existence of the team)

Effect of team experience on the individual team members (positive experience

based on team work enhances and promotes the active involvement and dedi-

cation of team members, contributing to satisfy personal needs)

4.2.3 Effectiveness based on Campion et al.

Team effectiveness based on Campion et al. is based on findings and assumptions

of other models and brings them together in a kind of hybrid model of team effec-

tiveness (Weinert 2004, p. 422). As Figure 12 shows, five topics were extracted

from the models examined and were differentiated from one another using 19 dif-

ferent characteristics. Through studies conducted in practice with ordinary work

groups, the characteristics and their direct reference or relation to effectiveness

criteria have been examined (Campion et al. 1993, p. 824). The model resulting

hereof shows as in the two models explained before that effectiveness of a team

can be described by or in terms of productivity and satisfaction of the team mem-

bers. What is new in this regard is that also management and their assessments

with regard to team performance have been integrated.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 45 -

Figure 12 – Themes and characteristics related to work group effectiveness

Source: adopted from Campion et al. 1993, p. 825

Job Design • Self-management • Participation • Task variety • Task significance • Task identity

Interdependence • Task interdependence • Goal interdependence • Interdependent feedback

and rewards

Composition • Heterogeneity • Flexibility • Relative size • Preference for group work

Context • Training • Managerial support • Communication / Cooperation

between groups

Process • Potency • Social support • Workload sharing • Communication / Cooperation

within groups

Productivity

Satisfaction

Manager judgements

... Topics / Characteristics

... Effectiveness criteria

Legend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 46 -

4.2.4 Summary

According to Weinert (2004, pp. 420), the models of group effectiveness describe

the most important factors through which successful teams can be distinguished

from unsuccessful teams. In this context, it is less important to include each possi-

ble variable than to obtain a better understanding for the process through which

such factors influence team effectiveness. Thus the models also contribute to

understanding team processes and team performance as well as to improving

them.

Despite this positive approach towards improved understanding of team processes

and successful (empirical) identification of direct effectiveness criteria and context-

related factors influencing team performance, these models also have disadvan-

tages. What is lacking is a uniform understanding for team processes and their

precise role in determining team effectiveness. As a rule, the models view a team

only from the outside. Often the view into the respective team and the analysis of

the individual factors are missing that are influencing coordination. Experts writing

on the topic and the specialised sector are aware of the fact that internal team

processes and context-related factors play a quite considerable role in organisa-

tions (Weinert 2004, p. 419). Previous examinations were mainly carried out in the

laboratory; especially the aforementioned processes can be simulated only with

difficulty or also not at all. Moreover, predominantly indirect examinations were car-

ried out in which the variables investigated were rather attributes of persons than of

performance teams (ibid.).

In the following, such individual success factors will be more closely examined and

dealt with, with regard to which it can be assumed that they have a quite significant

influence on the social structure and coordination within a team (or also in terms of

team-crossing). Factors which have a positive influence or impact on the team,

based on the findings related to the models described above, contribute to the

team’s success.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 47 -

4.3 Influencing factors for success

4.3.1 Communication

4.3.1.1 Preliminary remark

Communication is often regarded as the virtual carrier of social activities. Informa-

tion is exchanged through communication; and through information a human being

is influenced by another one. In this context, often the term of interaction is men-

tioned which is a result of mutual influences (Schugk 2004, p. 3). Exchange of

communication plays a significant role in contemporary life and thus is being used

in the most diverse social contexts and is also the subject of investigations in dif-

ferent scientific disciplines (Nothdurft 2007, p. 24). So it is not astonishing that to-

day a variety of definitions of the term ‘communication’ is available. Apart from the

comprehensive term of communication used in various scientific areas, there is

also a more specific term of communication. It finds application in interpersonal

communication and refers to commonalities between different human beings.

These commonalities are, on the one hand, the prerequisite for a communication

process as without such commonalities the process would not be getting under-

way; and on the other hand, commonalities have also to be viewed as a result.

Thus communication reinforces existing commonalities and establishes new ones

(Schulz 2009, p.169).

4.3.1.2 Definition

While in communications engineering / technology the term of communication is

defined as the process of conveying information by coding and physical transport,

Pribilla et al. (1996, p. 12) simultaneously points out that this definition does not

take into consideration the aspects of understanding, interpreting and allocation of

significance. In his analyses, Watzlawick et al. (1967 cited in Pribilla et al. 1996,

p. 13) emphasise the behaviour-related effects, the so-called relationship aspect.

This aspect demonstrates how the content-specific component, thus the fact-

specific data, can be interpreted. So the relationship aspect represents a kind of

meta-communication. Consequently, communication does not only serve the

purpose of fact-based performing of tasks, but also influences the social relation-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 48 -

ships between the communication partners. In the area of business administration,

the exchange of information for the purpose of task-related understanding of task

completion is in the focus of interest (Reichwald 2005, p. 257).

In general, without taking into consideration a scientific discipline, the terms of

communication respectively of to communicate, are based on the Latin words

‘communicatio’ and accordingly ‘communicare’ which refer to the social / joint pro-

cess of communicaton in the meaning of understanding among one another as well

as transactions among individuals, particularly using the language (Duden 2006,

p. 983). This way a process is denoted which is based on particular commonalities

between various subjects. These commonalities between those individuals com-

municating can be found in the following four areas (Schugk 2004, p. 3):

Material or energetic connection for transferring signs

Relationship characterised by particular expectations which brings about infor-

mation

Particular concordant cognitions from which expectations can be derived and

which provide signs with a meaning (cognitions here is a collective term for

knowledge, experiences, attitudes and evaluations regarding the reality, namely

by those who are communicating).

Particular intentions or effects with regard to the state or the behaviour of the

communicating individuals (target of communication). It has to be taken into

consideration that the goals of communication may also be of a latent type,

hence that they are goals of communication that have even been set subcon-

sciously.

4.3.1.3 Levels of communication

As already described in the preceding chapter, there are different levels of commu-

nication. There is not just a mere exchange of words, but consciously or subcon-

sciously a lot of types of body-language have been integrated. In accordance with

Schugk (2004, p. 84), there is an acoustic or a visual level of communication, and

the focus of research is on the visual part. The body language, for instance, is

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 49 -

a part of this so-called non-verbal level of communication. Many authors such as

Senner (1998, p. 67) place a particularly high importance to this level of communi-

cation and are of the opinion that it would not get sufficient attention. The latter per-

haps in particular as specialised literature in this sector does not make a uniform

differentiation (Schorsack 1998, p. 34).

The following Figure illustrates on the one hand that the respective types of com-

munication are received by the recipient in strongly differing ways, and on the other

hand it conveys which importance can be accorded to the respective form or type.

Figure 13 – Absorption of the elements of communication

Source: Rothlauf 2009, p. 196

Figure 14 provides an overview of the classifications of non-verbal forms of expres-

sion. Simultaneously, the goal is to clearly present the diversity as regards the el-

ements of communication. A final enumeration of all elements is not in the focus of

this overview, but it is intended to give a rough insight into this comprehensive sub-

ject matter and theme.

non-verbal: 55%

para-verbal: 38%

verbal: 5%

... Element of communication Legend:

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 50 -

Figure 14 – Elements of communication

Source: adopted from Schugk 2004, p. 86

Communication elements

Verbal

Non-verbal

Speech style Argumentation style

Non-vocal Vocal (para-verbal) • Intonation • Sound level • Voice • Accentuation

Timewise • Waiting time

Material • Physical appear-

ance (clothing) • Stimuli in the inter-

action process (pre- sents)

• Stimuli from the environment (office equipment)

Dynamical • Facial expression • Gesture • Posture • Eye contact

Relational • Proxemics • Body orientation

Static • Build • Face form • Skin colour

Physical

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 51 -

Moreover, the available Figure demonstrates the diversity of non-verbal communi-

cation elements and the related notion that through the corresponding channels

a variety of signals can be conveyed simultaneously (Schorsack 1998, p. 44).

A result of this is, according to Spinks and Wells (1997, p. 287), a corresponding

complexity in the intercultural context because “non-verbal barriers to intercultural

communication may pose greater problems than language barriers. Various non-

verbal cues carry different meanings in different cultures. In addition, non-verbal

cues may carry strong meaning in some cultures and little or no meaning in other

cultures”.

Body language can only have effects holistically; it is impossible to act only on the

level of non-verbal communication. Thus Schugk (2004, pp. 86) considers non-

verbal communication as “eminently important” for the success of communication

in general because neglecting this level “can lead to strong disturbances and dis-

ruptions”.

4.3.1.4 Communication media

As defined by Lüsebrink (2008, p. 8), in general communication consists of the

interpersonal and media-driven level. The first level will be looked at more closely

later within the intercultural context. Due to the fact that in the case of virtual teams,

as a rule no face-to-face communication can take place, the media-driven level of

communication will be described here. At this level, technologies are provided with

the help of which, in spite of spatial separation of team members, communication

can take place.

Herefrom a problem with many aspects arises. On the one hand, the question has

to be asked which communication medium is adequate for which content; another

question is whether an organisation has to utilise all types of media existing on the

market. Furthermore, attention has to be drawn to the fact that introducing and

using modern communication media may bring about and trigger a change in terms

of roles and relationships among the employees. While some staff members are

sceptical towards the new world of communication and rely upon traditional pro-

cedures, other team members have a more relaxed or playful attitude in this area.

So this provides potential for conflicts or misunderstandings.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 52 -

For orientation purposes, Konradt and Hertel (2002, p. 87) recommend the Media

Richness Model. “The main task [here is] information processing in organisations

[by] reducing uncertainty (lack in information) and ambiguousness (so clear

decision-related criteria are missing) under conditions of limited processing capac-

ity”. According to the authors (ibid., p. 88), “a fit feature of communication contents

and communication media” is to be targeted. Several approaches are available in

this regard which may be decisive for selection purposes. Among them is, for in-

stance, the question whether news have to be communicated in writing or not in

writing with regard to the symbolic and social significance or meaning. Here it has

to be considered whether feed-back showing recognition should be given in a per-

sonal talk or via e-mail. In this context, aspects such as credibility and status as

well as the hierarchic position play a role. Furthermore, Konradt and Hertel (ibid.,

p. 89) state that in case of selecting a communication medium the fit between prac-

ticability and content has to be weighed. Personal preferences also play a role here

as the persons, depending on their respective socialisation, develop individual

aversions against particular forms of communication.

Virtual teams can choose among a large range of communication possibilities or

options which, according to Konradt and Hertel (ibid., p. 88) can be classified

based on three criteria:

News in written or non-written form

Synchronous or asynchronous communication

Number of participants (one-to-one, one-to-many, many-to-many)

The following Table is to point out communication media, their advantages and

disadvantages as well as their possible aptitude for the use in organisations. This

selection does not present a final listing.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 53 -

Communication media

Advantages Disadvantages Aptitude

face-to- face (group)

- Complex in terms of language

- Feedback: direct + immediate

- Coordination - Travelling costs - Documentation:

complex

- Target-identifying - Team development

face-to- face (two per- sons)

- Complex in terms of language

- Feedback: direct + immediate

- Confidentiality

- Coordination - Travelling costs - Documentation:

complex

- Conflict manage- ment

- Problem-based talk

Video confer- ence

- Complex in terms of language

- Feedback: direct

- Coordination - Documentation:

complex

- Conflict manage- ment

- Coordination

Tele- phone confer- ence

- Informal - Feedback:

direct

- reduced communication channels

- Documentation: complex

- Coordination - Process planning

Tele- phone

- Fast - Personal - Feedback:

direct - Confidentiality pos-

sible

- reduced communication channels

- Documentation: complex

- Coordination - Process planning - Conflict manage-

ment

E-mail - Fast - As needed - Documentable

- Danger of overload - Feedback:

not direct

- Exchange of infor- mation

- Routine communi- cation

Chat - Economical - Task-oriented

- Overlapping of con- tributions

- Exchange of opinion

- Brainstorming Fax - Formal

- Documentation: easy

- Relatively imper- sonal

- Feedback: not direct

- Information - Formal arrange-

ments

Letter - Formal - Documentation:

easy

- Slow - Feedback:

not direct

- Information - Formal arrange-

ments Bulletin board

- Informative - Economical

- Impersonal - Feedback:

not direct

- Information - Data base - Archiving

Table 9 – Communication media

Source: adopted from Konradt and Hertel 2002, pp. 92

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 54 -

4.3.1.5 Strategies of successful communication

The following listing is to provide suggestion in which way communication can be

shaped or be handled so that it can be successful among virtual teams (Konradt

and Hertel 2002, pp. 94).

Communicating frequently is better than communicating not sufficiently

Double feedback loops

Use of several communication elements

Comprehensive documentation of team processes, in particular of success

criteria

Unequivocal and, if required, fixed communication times / dates

Scope for non-work-related communication

Joint events for all team members

Creation / formation of local subgroups

Training and communication concepts

Face-to-face communication in certain cases:

• Task is difficult or new

• Task requires a high level of confidentiality

• Team members do not have sufficient specialised skills / qualifications

• Implementing a team cohesion-focused leadership style

4.3.1.6 Significance

The term of interaction is used in the area of specialised literature also as a syno-

nym for communication. Also if researchers attempt to distinguish between the

terms and their nuances as well as to set priorities in their analyses, this book

“does not make a distinction or differentiation between human interaction and

communication“ (Graumann 1972, p. 1179).

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 1 . D

ip lo

m ic

a V

e rl a g . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

- 55 -

Communication is the actual carrier of social interaction, and especially in case of

virtual teams in which communication is rendered difficult through increasing dis-

tance and virtuality, it is the basis of daily work. Irrespective of the communication

media used, in line with the definition, this implies for the organisation the require-

ment to support virtual teams in their communication processes. In accordance

with Konradt and Hertel (2002, p. 94), virtual team members should not be left

alone, but should be supported long-lastingly to maintain effective communication.

The reason for this is, in contrast to communication which in conventional teams is

developing independently, the lacking simultaneous presence. Consequently, even

in case of advanced virtual teams this support should not be interrupted as the

communication process is much more susceptible to misunderstandings and here-

of resulting conflicts. What has to be added, is the statement of Lipnack and

Stamps (1997, pp. 102) that for a communication process to be successful not only

the media are necessary or have to be made available, but that these passive

media have also to be used by means of interactions in the team. In this respect

“Media provide the nervous system for the virtual team” (ibid., p. 104).

As to management, a certain communication competence is required so that sup-

port can be maintained and be continued. This support will gain in importance if

interpersonal relations with regard to culture have to be taken into consideration.

Depending on the organisation and the respectively implemented organisation cul-

ture, communication media should be selected with great care. Generally, changes

or innovations will be implemented hesitantly and require sufficient time for getting

accustomed to new conditions, which under certain circumstances can prove to be

expensive. So on the part of the decision-makers, a corresponding media compe-

tence is required.

If certain principles and strategies are taken into consideration, then the possible

disadvantages (Table 10), which may result from the use of communication media,

can be avoided. Successful communication is highly important in organisations as

it is the basis for other processes. In order to cope with this relevance and to em-

phasise their importance, the subject matter of communication has been analysed