1. Preface

This paper has been written for the course Societal Developments & Institutions. The topic of this paper, knowledge sharing in virtual teams, is primarily focused on the Internationalization aspect of this course. But also aspects from other courses of the Master of Organizational Sciences (Msc OS), like Complexity within Organizations and Organizational Dynamics, are represented in this paper. Virtual teams and especially the knowledge sharing within such a team seemed very interesting to me. The broad link of this topic with the different courses of Msc OS was attractive to me, but also the growth in popularity of using this kind of the teams in nowadays business motivated me into doing this research.
I hope this inquiry about knowledge sharing in virtual teams can facilitate virtual teams in knowing the challenges ahead, and help virtual team managers and -designers in benefit better from the advantages of virtual teams. Furthermore, after reading this paper I hope you, as reader, are (even more) inspired about the possibilities of working with virtual teams in ‘the collaboration economy’.

Key concepts:

Internationalization, globalization, virtual teams, knowledge sharing.

2. Introduction

In today’s society people have adopted media technologies, such as e-mail, chat, and videoconferencing, that enable them to ‘go virtual’ and communicate with other individuals from all over the world. Currently, there are 1,733,993,741 internet users around the world (Internet world Stats, 2009). Because of those technological innovations it is possible to collaborate with other people regardless there geographical position. The last couple of years, next to those technological developments, two other mechanisms developed in a historical way – globalization and demography.

Tapscott and Williams argued in their book Wikinomics (2006): The three mechanisms: technology, globalization and demography are influencing the world towards a new economy, the collaboration economy. Emerging globalization demands and facilitates new forms of economic collaboration and provides all businesses who are seeking for unique talents to fix their problems with talented employees from over the whole world. And demographically there is also a shift. A new generation, bigger than the babyboom generation, the internet generation will dominate the 21ste century because of her demographical presence. This generation has grown up with internet and will utilize this technology in an efficient way and will change the status-quo in a radical way. Doing business and the way of collaborating in business will also change. Old monolithic multinationals which creates added value in a closed hieratically structure is quickly outdated. Successful businesses nowadays need open and porous borders and should compete using knowledge, resources and capacities outside the organization. Even heavy, capital intensive production industries will not be an exception.

Also Ilinitch, D’Aveni & Lewin (1996) addressed those changes; by opening their special issue on new organizational forms and hyper-competitive environments by nothing that, organizations are facing strong forces of change: globalization, demographic shifts, advances in technology, and the demassification of society.

In response to those changes and shifts organizational forms are proliferating. One such new organizational form is found in virtual teams, sometimes called distributed teams (Saunders & Ahuja, 2006). Virtual teams are, in summary, technology mediated groups of people in various places around the world that work together on common tasks (Hardin, Fuller, and Davidson, 2007).

Currently those virtual teams are widely embraced by modern businesses. A motive of this popularity is that they can help organizations adapt better. They may provide firms with advantages such as increased utilization of employee-time, round-the-clock workforce availability, and the opportunity to leverage knowledge and expertise around the world (Paul, Seetharaman, Samarah & Mykytyn, 2004). Virtual teams bring organizations also some other advantage: reduced travel expenses, Co2 emissions, and less working time wasted on traveling (Lu, Watson-Manheim, House, & Matzkevich, 2005). This increasing use of virtual teams is also noted by the Wall Street Journal. It reports that more than half of companies with more than 5000 employees use virtual teams (de Lisser, 1999) Also, a survey by the Gartner group found that more than 60% of professional employees work in virtual teams (Kanawattanachai & Yoo, 2002).

Read also  Climate Change in International Relations

The growth in popularity of virtual teams inquires a summary of how to manage such a team in an efficient an effective way. Questions about what are important factors in managing successful global virtual teams needed to be answered. In this inquiry I will address those success factors in case of knowledge sharing in global virtual teams by answering the question: “What are success factors of knowledge sharing in virtual teams, with team members across the whole globe?”. This enquiry is focused on knowledge sharing in virtual teams because those dispersed teams in particular need to share knowledge, experience and insights in order to function successfully (Rosen, Furst, & Blackburn, 2007). The aim of this paper is to facilitate virtual team managers and -designers with a summary of virtual team success factors in knowledge sharing by which they can benefit better from the advantages of virtual teams.

Firstly I will address the theoretical background of virtual teams. In this theoretical background I will explain the organizational need for virtual teams, give a definition of virtual teams, deal with the key feature of virtual teams; the absence of face-to-face contact and I will give an insight in the knowledge sharing mechanism. In the second part of this paper I will focus on answering the research question based on earlier researches and literature references. This will be followed by a brief conclusion and recommendations of those success factors in knowledge sharing to facilitate virtual team managers and -designers with a practical summary.

3. Literature References

Allen, T., (1977). Managing the flow of technology. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

Armstrong,D.L., & Cole, P. (1995). Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. In Jackson, S. & Runderman, M. (Eds) Diversity in Work Teams: Research Paradigms for a Changing Workplace, p. 497-529.

Bailey, D.E., & Kurland, N.B., (2002). A review of telework research: findings, new directions an lessons for the study of modern work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 23, p. 383-400.

Bell, B.S., & Kozlowski, S.W.J., (2002). A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership. Group & Organization Management, 27, p. 14-49.

Boutellier, R., Gassmann, O., Macho, H., & Roux, M., (1998). Management of dispersed product development teams: the role of information technologies. R&D Management, 28(1), p. 13-25.

Conrath, D., (1973). Communication environment and its relationship to organizational structure. Manage Science ,20, p. 586-603.

Cummings, L.L., & Bromiley, P., (1996). The organizational trust inventory (OTI): Development and validation. Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Read also  European Union Decision Making

de Lisser, E. (1999). Update on small business: Firms with virtual environments appeal to workers. Wall Street Journal, B2

Devine, D.J., clayton, L.D., Philips, J.L., Dunford, B.B., & Melner,S.B. (1999). Team in organizations: Prevalence, charecteristics, and effectiveness. Small Group Research, 30, p. 678-711.

Duarte, D.L. & Snyder, N.T. (2006). Mastering Virtual Teams: Strategies, Tools and Techniques That Succeed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Fiol, C.M., & O’Conner, E.J. (2005). Identification in Face-to-Face, Hybrid, and Pure Virtual Teams: Untangling the Contradictions. Organizational Science, vol. 16, p. 19-32.

Gibson C.B., & Cohen, S.G. (2003). Virtual teams that work: Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

Griffith, T.L., & Neale, M.A. (2001). Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and virtual teams: from nascent knowledge to transactive memory. Research in organizational behaviour, vol. 23, p. 379-421.

Griffith, T.L., Sawyer, J.E., & Neale, M.A. (2003). Virtualness and knowledge in teams: managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, p. 265-287.

Gudykunst, W.B., (1997). Cultural variability in communication. Communication Research, 24, p. 327-348.

Gullahorn, J., (1952). Distance and friendship as factors in the gross interaction matrix. Sociometry, 15, p. 123- 34.

Hardin, A.M., Fuller, M.A., & Davidson, R.M. (2007). I know I can, but can we?: Culture and efficacy beliefs in global virtual teams. Small Group Research, 38, 130-155.

Hertel, G., Geiser, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current emperical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 69-95.

Hertel, G., Konradt, U., & Lehman, K., (2004). Staffing virtual teams: Development and validation of a web-based tool for selection and placement of virtual team members. Manuscript in preparation.

Hollingshead, A.B., (1998). Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74, p. 659-671.

Ilinitch, A.Y., D’Aveni, R.A., & Lewin A.y. (1996). New Organizational Forms and Strategies for managing in Hypercompetitive Environments. Organization Science, vol.7, p. 211-220.

Internet World Stats (2009). Top 20 countries with highest number of internet users. Retrieved November 25th, 2009 from:

Jarvenpaa, S., & Leidner, D., (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10, p. 791-15.

Jehn, K.A., (1995). A multimethode examination of the benefits and determents of intragroup conflict. Administrative science quarterly, 40, p. 256-282.

Kristof, A.L., Brown, K.G., Sims, H.P.Jr., & Smith, K.A. (1995). The virtual team: A case study and inductive model. Advances in interdisciplinary studies of work teams, 2, 229-253.

Lu, M., Watson-Manheim, M.,B., House, C.H.,& Matzkevich, T. (2005). Does distance matter? Bridging the discontinuities in distributed organizations. HICSS 2005.

Levitt, B., & March, J., (1988). Organizational Learning. Annual review of sociology, 14, p. 319-340

Kanawattanachai P., & Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. Journal of strategic Infromation Systems, 11, 187-213.

Kaywoth, T., & Leidner, D., (2000). The global virtual manager: a prescription for success. European management journal, 18, p. 183-194.

Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1992). Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 52, 96-123.

Konradt, U., Schmook, R., & Mälecke, M., (2000). Impacts of telework on individuals, organizations and families: a critical review. In C.L. Cooper and I.T. Robertson (Ed), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 15, p. 63-99, Wiley, Chichester.

Read also  Decision Making in the Cuban Missle Crisis

Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Ilgen, D.R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work group and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124

Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J., (1997). Virtual teams. Reaching across space, time and organizations with technology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Majchrzak, a., Rice, R., King, n., Malhotra, A., & Ba, S., (2000). Computer-mediated inter-organizational knowledge-sharing: insights from a virtual team innovating using a collaborative tool. Information Resource Management Journal, 13, p. 44-53.

Martins, L.L., Gilson, L.L. Maynard & M.T., (2004). Virtual Teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, vol. 30, p. 805-835.

Maznevski, M., & Chudoba, K., (2001). Bridging space over time: global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organizational Science, 13, p. 473-492.

McDonough E., Kahn, K., & Barczak, G. (2001). An investigation of the use of global virtual, and collocated new product development teams. The journal of product innovation management, 18, p. 110-120.

Monge, P., Kirste, K., (1980). Measuring proximity in human organization. Social psychology quarterly, 43, p. 110- 5.

Meyerson, D., Weick, K.E., & Kramer, R.M., (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. Trust in organizations: frontiers of theory and research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, p. 166-195.

Owens, D., Mannix, E.A., & Neale, M.A., (1998). Strategic formation of groups: Issues in task performance and team member selection. Research on managing groups and teams: composition, 1, p. 1419-165.

Powell, A., Piccoli, G., & Ives, B., (2004). Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research. The data base for advances in information systems, 35, p.6-36.

Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T.A., (2007). Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall.

Rosen, B., Furst, S., & Blackburn, R., (2007). Overcoming barriers to knowledge sharing in virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, 36, p. 259-273.

Sanders, C.S., & Ahuja, M.K., (2006). Are all distributed teams the same? Differentiating Between Temporary And Ongoing Distributed Teams. Small Group Research, vol. 37, p.662-700.

Sarker, S., Lau, F., and Sahay, S., (2001). Using an adapted grounded theory approach for inductive theory building about virtual team development. Database for advances in information systems, 32, 38-56.

Scott, W.R. (1981). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S., (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Manage Science, 32, p.1492- 512.

Stasser, G., & Titus, W., (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 48, p. 1467-1478.

Suchan, J., & Hayzak, G., (2001). The communication characteristics of virtual teams: a case study. IEEE transactions on professional communication, 44, p. 174-186.

Townsend, A.M., DeMarie, S.M. & Hendrickson, A.R. (1998). Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Executive, vol. 12, p. 17-29

Tapscott, D. & Williams, A.D. (2006). Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. Penguin Group, New York.

Thompson, L.L. (2004). Making the team: A Guide for managers. New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Warkentin, M.E., & Beranek, P.M., (1999). Training to improve virtual team communication. Information system journal, vol. 9.

Wegner, D.M., (1987). Transactive Memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. Theories of group behavior, New York: Springer-Verlag.

Order Now

Order Now

Type of Paper
Number of Pages
(275 words)