Advertisement

Group Decision and Negotiation

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 345–366 | Cite as

Strengthening Identification with the Team in Virtual Teams: The Leaders' Perspective

  • Anu Sivunen
Article

Abstract

The number of virtual teams is increasing in today's workplaces. In virtual teams, the members can have different cultural backgrounds, they often work in different countries and are professionals in their own fields. In addition, as such diverse and dispersed teams communicate mainly through communication technology this raises the challenge for the team leader of how to unify the team and get the members to identify themselves with the team. This qualitative study focuses on four virtual team leaders and their attempts to strengthen the team members' identification with the team through computer-mediated communication. The results show four different tactics employed in enhancing identification with the team: catering for the individual, giving positive feedback, bringing out common goals and workings and talking up the team activities and face-to-face meetings. The roles of organizational change and technology in identification with virtual teams are also discussed.

Keywords

communication technology computer-mediated communication identification team identity team leader virtual team 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ATLAS.ti©, version 4.1 [Computer Software]. Scientific Software Development, 1996–2000.Google Scholar
  2. Ashforth, B. E. and F. Mael. (1989). “Social Identity Theory and the Organization,” Academy of Management Review 14, 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barke, K. and D. W. Schlueter. (1988). “A Critical Evaluation of Organizational Commitment and Identification,” Managerial Communication Quarterly 2, 116–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell, B. S. and S. W. J. Kozlowski. (2002). “A Typology of Virtual Teams: Implications for Effective Leadership,” Group & Organization Management 27, 14–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryman, A. (1989). Research Methods and Organization Studies. London, Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  6. Burke, K. (1950). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley, University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cheney, G. (1983). The Rhetoric of Identification and the Study of Organizational Communication. Quarterly Journal of Speech 69, 143–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheney, G. and P. K. Tompkins. (1987). “Coming to Terms with Organizational Identification and Commitment,” Central States Speech Journal 38, 1–15.Google Scholar
  9. Chidambaram, L. and R. P. Bostrom. (1997). “Group Development (II): Implications for GSS Research and Practice,” Group Decision and Negotiation 6, 231–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coffey, A. and P. Atkinson. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. Thousand Oaks, Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Connaughton, S. L., and J. A. Daly. (2004a). “Identification with Leader: A Comparison of Perceptions of Identification Among Geographically Dispersed and Co-Located Teams,” Corporate Communications 9, 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Connaughton, S. L. and J. A. Daly. (2004b). “Leading from Afar: Strategies for Effectively Leading Virtual Teams,” In: Godar, S. H. and Ferris, S. P. (eds.), Virtual & Collaborative Teams: Process, Technologies, & practice. Hershey, PA, Idea Group, Inc., pp. 49–75.Google Scholar
  13. Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln. (1994). “Introduction: Entering the Field of Qualitative Research,” In: Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, Sage, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
  14. Ellemers, N., D. de Gilder, and S. A. Haslam. (2004). “Motivating Individuals and Groups at Work: A Social Identity Perspective on Leadership and Group Performance,” Academy of Management Review 29, 459–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Epitropaki, O. and R. Martin. (2005). “The Moderating Role of Individual Differences in the Relation Between Transformational/Transactional Leadership Perceptions and Organizational Identification,” The Leadership Quarterly 16, 569–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Glaser, B. G. and A. L. Strauss. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago, Aldine.Google Scholar
  17. Godar, S. H. and S. P. Ferris. (2004). “Preface,” In: Godar, S. H. and Ferris, S. P. (eds.), Virtual and Collaborative Teams: Process, Technologies and Practice. Hershey, Idea Group, pp. vi–xii.Google Scholar
  18. Hogg, M. A. and D. J. Terry (2000). “Social Identity and Self-Categorization Processes in Organizational Contexts,” Academy of Management Review 25, 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jackson, P. J. (1999). “Organizational Change and Virtual Teams: Strategic and Operational Integration,” Information Systems Journal 9, 313–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kark, R., B. Shamir, and G. Chen. (2003). “The Two Faces of Transformational Leadership: Empowerment and Dependency,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, 246–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kayworth, T. R. and D. E. Leidner. (2002). “Leadership Effectiveness in Global Virtual Teams,” Journal of Management Information Systems 18, 7–40.Google Scholar
  22. Lea, M. and R. Spears. (1992). “Paralanguage and Social Perception in Computer-Mediated Communication,” Journal of Organizational Computing 2, 321–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lincoln, Y. S. and E. G. Guba. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Mael, F. and B. E. Ashforth. (1992). “Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial Test of the Reformulated Model of Organizational Identification,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 13, 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mael, F. A. and B. E. Ashforth. (1995). “Loyal from Day One: Biodata, Organizational Identification, and Turnover Among Newcomers,” Personnel Psychology 48, 309–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McColl-Kennedy, J. R. and R. D. Anderson. (2005). “Subordinate-Manager Gender Combination and Perceived Leadership Style Influence on Emotions, Self-Esteem and Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Business Research 58, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Meyer, J. P. and L. Herscovitch. (2001). “Commitment in the Workplace: Toward a General Model,” Human Resource Management Review 11, 299–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miles, M. B. and A. M. Huberman. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills, Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Mowday, R. T., R. M. Steers, and L. W. Porter. (1979). “The Measurement of Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 14, 224–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Scott, C. R., S. R. Corman, and G. Cheney. (1998). “Development of Structurational Model of Identification in the Organization,” Communication Theory 8, 298–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tajfel, H. (1974). “Social Identity and Intergroup Behaviour,” Social Science Information 13, 65–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Townsend, A. M., S. M. DeMarie, and A. R. Hendrickson. (1998). “Virtual Teams: Technology and the Workplace of the Future,” Academy of Management Executive 12, 17–29.Google Scholar
  33. Van Maanen, J., J. M. Dabbs Jr., and R. R. Faulkner. (1982). Varieties of Qualitative Research. Beverly Hills, Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Wiesenfeld, B. M., S. Raghuram, and R. Garud. (2001). “Organizational Identification Among Virtual Workers: The Role of Need for Affiliation and Perceived Work-Based Social Support,” Journal of Management 27, 213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wiesenfeld, B. M., S. Raghuram, and R. Garud. (1998). “Communication Patterns as Determinants of Organizational Identification in a Virtual Organization,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3(4). Retrieved May 2, 2005, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/wiesenfeld.html.

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CommunicationUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations