3.4 Features of team development

Introduction

Each team must find its own speed and pattern of development. There is evidence that the maturing process of a virtual team is likely to be more complex and challenging than is the case with an in-person team. It is important to keep in mind that the stages of development are not mutually exclusive. Activities at one stage may overlap and recur at another and in the course of working together, a team may return to an earlier stage of development. Overall, there are four dimensions that can be clearly highlighted as vital to team development. These are: developing trust, clarifying roles and objectives, ensuring open and friction-free communication, personal relationship-building and collaboration. In the following, these dimensions and their relevance in the various development stages will be discussed.

Trust

A critical driver for developing a positive working climate and achieving task performance is the development of trust. Trust or trusting as a central variable can be understood as the belief in the team’s competence and integrity to manage the task well. Additionally, trust refers to the willingness of team members to be vulnerable in the sense that a person trusts the actions of another person without being able to monitor or control the validity of the action. Furthermore, trust involves disclosure in the sense that a person is ready to share confidential or private information and talks about their own mistakes and weaknesses. Trust is essential in relationships that require collaboration and cooperation and is positively related to a team’s satisfaction, performance and commitment to a task. Trust is also critical to effective communication and a low level of trust may, for example lead to ambiguous information being interpreted negatively.

Well, if you don’t have trust, it’s not a team. How can you work well with people you do not trust? A team without trust is not a team, full stop."

Source: Learning journal, 2020

From a personality perspective, some people more than others are intuitively prepared to trust. People with a high tendency to trust have learned in the course of their life that trusting others affords them more advantages than disadvantages, which is why trust is their default behaviour. This attitude is only expires when a person clearly displays untrustworthy behaviour. People with a low tendency to trust, on the other hand, initially act cautiously and sceptically in many situations. There may also be variations in an individual’s propensity to trust based on subjective beliefs about the extent to which trust is possible and meaningful in certain areas of life. For instance, a person may regard trust as appropriate in private contexts but not as a suitable strategy in work relationships.

At the beginning of a working relationship, where the interaction partners have hardly any information about each other, trust develops on the basis of calculation. Calculation-based trust is founded on an assessment of the extent to which one's own interests coincide and are compatible with those of the other person. The interaction partners weigh up the benefits and costs associated with the relationship, i.e. whether it appears worthwhile to take some risks when entering into a dependent relationship, for instance because there is a prospect of long-term cooperation. This trust can be kept alive through rewards in the event of expectations being met or the threat of punishment in the event of a breach of trust, e.g. loss of reputation. For some relationships trust remains at this level, e.g. because the parties do not need a more complex relationship or trust violations have occurred, thus making it unlikely that further trust will develop.

Knowledge-based trust occurs when the interaction partners get to know each other better through repeated and varied interactions and information sharing. It is based on the observation that the behaviour of the other is consistent over time and in different contexts, and thus one knows the other person sufficiently well in order to be able to predict future behaviour. Even if the increased knowledge about a person leads to the belief that the other is predictably untrustworthy, even this type of predictability enhances trust. Many working relationships do not progress beyond an enhanced knowledge-based trust.

In constructive, long-term relationships, in which the interaction partners get to know each other in depth and share many positive experiences, identification-based trust may develop. This is a deeply felt trust between the interaction partners. It emerges from knowing and identifying with the other person’s beliefs, values and intentions. In this case, strong feelings can develop between the interaction partners. They mutually understand, agree with and endorse each other’s needs and wants, and shift their focus from maximizing self-interest to maximizing joint outcomes. Identification-based trust thus makes it possible to act on behalf of the other and make decisions in mutual interest, so that any form of control or monitoring becomes unnecessary. However, identification based trust requires intensive and frequent interaction and only develops in a small proportion of relationships. This type of trust would be more indicative of the performing phase.

Trust between interaction partners in a professional relationship thus requires a considerable amount of time and develops in small steps through frequent interaction, whereby dealing with knowledge, information and errors is essential. It can also be observed that trust between the interaction partners is initially based primarily on a cognitive foundation, while in later phases of a relationship the affective side of trust plays an increasing role as people invest emotionally in the relationship, express genuine care and concern for the well-being of the other person, believe in the virtue inherent in the relationship and are convinced that these feelings are reciprocated.

"What was a real challenge was to build trust remotely whilst being under pressure to perform. Thinking back, we had little choice but to trust each other in order to complete a common task… I have missed the personal touch of face-to-face communication."

Source: Learning journal, 2020

This quote signals that developing trust in virtual teams appears to be even more important than in face-to-face teams and at the same time it is also a lot more challenging. It requires careful consideration of the technology used, in particular in highly virtual teams, since this often has to replace the spontaneous meeting for lunch or the casual chat at the water cooler, during which informal work and non-work related conversations help team members to get to know each other on an informal basis. When the visual contact is missing or reduced, it may simply take longer to identify and adjust to the habits and skills of the other team members. And since team members are in different locations and possess a variety of cultural backgrounds and technical expertise, a number of initial ambiguities will need to be clarified before they can start to trust the team. These might involve questions regarding how the information they offer will be used, whether their contributions will be recognised, whether other members will share and contribute equally, and what type of working style will be expected or agreed upon.

When team members experience a trusting attitude towards them, this usually evokes stronger trust, creating a self-reinforcing cycle. However, trust can be broken much faster than it can be built, and has to be seen as a dynamic construct and thus a process. This is why trust development and maintenance is a central issue in any phase of team development. The fact that trust-building is a process is highlighted in the following quotes:

"Initially there was a lack of comfort, rapport, and trust on our team."

"At the beginning interpersonal trust was not high. I sensed a high level of insecurity about positions and roles..."

"There was a lack of comfort and trust among team members, making cooperation and collaboration difficult – at least early on."

Source: Rosen, Benson; Stacie Furst and Richard Blackburn, 2007. Overcoming barriers to knowledge sharing in virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, 36 (3), pp. 259-273, p. 262

If we understand that team members have a propensity for different levels of initial trust and also acknowledge differences in the developmental trajectories of cognitive and affective trust throughout the working relationship, then we can see that trust development and maintenance is an ongoing task. The pre-existing trust that a person feels acts as an information filter, i.e. new information tends to be interpreted in such a way that existing expectations and impressions of a person are confirmed. Calculation trust would be more indicative of the storming phase, whereas knowledge and identification-based trust would be more indicative of the norming and performing phase of team development.

Sharing personal information and getting to know each other are central pillars for trust development in the storming phase, whereas clarifying group goals, work procedures and expectations are more relevant in the forming stage of team development. Developing common understanding and identity as well as common work routines on the other hand, is central in the norming and performing phase of team maturation. A key factor in team development is therefore how well the team manages to initiate the trust-building process, thus laying the groundwork for a constructive working relationship.

Clarity of roles and objectives

Defining, setting and communicating clear, mutually agreed goals, as well as ensuring a common understanding and motivation towards the tasks to be completed are key aspects of any form of teamwork. However, when teams work virtually, these points are even more imperative simply because team members cannot physically walk into an office and ask for clarification or further details. At the same time, developing a clear purpose is essential for building loyalty and establishing trust in intercultural and virtual teams. It appears that in virtual teams a strong, shared vision of roles and objectives is much more important in staying oriented to each other and committed to the team than a detailed implementation plan. This may be so because sharing a goal and having a common purpose acts as a substitute for the lack of informal in-person meetings, which are crucial in keeping the team attuned to each other and building strong relationships.

The process of clarifying and setting objectives has its first tentative beginnings in the initial phase, and it is likely that more concrete goals can start to form in the storming phase. However, due to the fact that goals are rarely static, require adjustments and at times even change in character, they require regular revision. And even if the overall goal remains the same, the strategies taken to reach the goal are likely to change as teamwork progresses. This means that regular checking, feedback, queries or verification are needed to ensure that everybody has the same understanding of the goals and sub-goals at all times.

Clarity of roles and objectives go hand in hand and ensure that team members know what the purpose of working together is, but also the role they are to play in achieving it. Roles help geographically dispersed team members to relate in the sense that they know when to link up, for what purpose and what their relationships are. It appears that ensuring role clarification is even more relevant in virtual rather than in co-located teams and needs to include all members as well as the team leader. Of course the number of team members has an influence on the intensity of role clarification and as the quote from a team of three shows, it can be done without it. However, this team also sees the danger of not clarifying roles:

"We never specifically decided on our roles and each member took on a role as a task came into force. However, if things had turned out to be heated, and the roles were also unclear, we would have had a disorganised mess, which could have dragged our whole process down.""

Source: Learning journal, 2020

Given the dynamic nature of virtual team work, the clarification of roles and objectives are typical tasks in the storming and norming phase, but with the development of the team, team roles may need to be redefined. This means that although team roles can be defined based on the goal set in the storming and forming phase, they should be re-assessed as the team  matures through constant feedback and clarification.

In conclusion it can be said that clarifying roles and objectives is an important task during the initial phases of team development, which needs to be reassessed throughout the team’s life cycle. This helps virtual team members to relate to each other and therefore clarification needs to be even more explicit than in a co-located team in order for the team to function well.

Relationship-building and collaboration

Collaboration, understood as the ability and willingness to ‘pull together’ and work towards a common goal requires a sense of dedication and commitment towards completion of tasks. Developing a personal bond with other team members helps to promote and maintain such a commitment. In fact, it has further benefits since a personal relationship and sense of connection supports the transition from the idea of ‘them and us’ towards a ‘we’ concept. Developing such a common identity supports a positive team atmosphere and thus helps to avoid incorrect assumptions and reduce potential misunderstandings since questions can be asked freely and without hesitation. It also provides an environment in which trust, understanding, compassion and acceptance of all team members can flourish.

In a team environment in which members feel personally connected, it becomes a lot more comfortable to share ideas, admit mistakes and provide constructive feedback, which in turn supports task performance. The development of personal relationships between team members is thus considered to be an important prerequisite for establishing and maintaining virtual working relationships. Indeed, there is ample scientific evidence that personal bonds greatly contribute to a positive team atmosphere and task performance. In such an atmosphere there is a willingness to share personal information and interests as well as supporting each other through difficult times. This kind of sharing is vital for establishing a common 'we' identity and feeling. Developing and using team bonds as a support network solidifies the connections among team members as the following quotes underlines:

"The major challenge I see is that working in a virtual team means that everybody contributes a small piece towards the whole project, and therefore many people do not have the big picture. In other words, they don't just deliver software, they are part of an entity [...]. There was something that came up later: 'You've been aware of that for a half a year, why didn’t you tell me about it earlier?', 'Well, that wasn't our task' [...]. And they are actually RIGHT, but they were the only ones who noticed it. To see themselves as part of the whole team, is I think a problem that can also affect a non-virtual team. But this is simply the question, do I feel responsible for the whole project or really only for my small part?"

(Translated from the German quote below)

B11 (l.260-274): "Die Hauptherausforderung, die ich sehe, da ein virtuelles Team auch bedeutet, dass jeder quasi einen kleinen Teil letztendlich zu dem Gesamtprojekt liefert, ist, dass ganz vielen Leuten das große Picture fehlt. Sprich nein, sie liefern nicht nur Software, sondern sie sind Teil des Ganzen [...]. Da waren dann so Sachen, die spät aufgekommen sind: ‚Ihr wisst es seit einem halben Jahr, wieso habt Ihr es nicht vorher schon kommuniziert?‘, ‚Naja, das war ja nicht unsere Aufgabe‘ [...]. Und sie haben erst einmal RECHT tatsächlich, aber sie waren die Einzigen, die es gesehen haben. Und sich DA quasi als Teil des Ganzen zu sehen, wobei ich glaube, dass ich das gleiche Problem in einem nicht virtuellen Team haben kann. Sondern das ist einfach die Frage, fühle ich mich für das Gesamte verantwortlich oder wirklich nur für meinen kleinen Teil?"

Source: Randhawa, 2020, p. 95

Some people need more time to open up, share personal information and develop personal relationships than others. Relationship building as well as developing a team identity is a process which starts in the initial phase of team evolution and may continue throughout the entire team building process. It goes hand in hand with the establishment of trust.

Communication

Communication in virtual teams is of course linked to the technology used. As a starting point, team members need to consider the whole spectrum of communication technology designs that might be feasible considering the team's ultimate goal. They need to decide which synchronous and asynchronous channels are best suited in each situation in their specific work environment. The selection of communication technology is vital since there is no doubt that the technological infrastructure exerts a considerable influence on knowledge sharing, team coherence and ultimately team performance. However, focusing excessively on the technical issues risks ignoring the importance of the people using the technology and their influence on the team's success. Indeed, it is the  interplay between technical communication tools and the people who utilise different elements of communication which makes communication in virtual teams a complex undertaking as the quote indicates:

"Talking on the phone you get some kind of a picture of the issue. But due to the challenges of using the telephone, speaking English, intermittent internet problems, dialling in did not work and [...] the sound quality was awful. You wouldn't BELIEVE the things I've experienced. [...] Especially at the beginning it was exhausting. If you're new to the company, first of all you need some kind of acceptance. You want to introduce yourself, but how can you do that when the technical setup is a catastrophe?"

(Translated from the German quote below)

B6 (l. 175-186): "Am Telefon macht man sich ja irgendwie so ein Bild. Aber durch die Herausforderungen des Telefonierens an sich, auf Englisch, unterbrochene Internetleitung, Einwahl hat nicht funktioniert und […] Tonqualität war eine Katastrophe. Ich hab da SACHEN erlebt. […] Es war am ANFANG besonders sehr anstrengend. Wenn du neu bist im Unternehmen, du brauchst erst einmal so eine gewisse Akzeptanz. Du willst dich vorstellen, aber wie soll das gehen, wenn selbst die technischen Herausforderungen schon eine Katastrophe sind?"

Source: Randhawa, 2020, p. 92

Team communication can be conceptualised as an exchange of messages between two or more team members and can thus be regarded as the foundation of any teamwork. It enables team members to express themselves and to share knowledge and information. Interpersonal communication is always a form of social interaction and can be understood as an attempt at mutual understanding and the construction of meaning between at least two people. And it is this aspect of mutual construction of meaning which requires particular attention in virtual teams.

If we want to establish mutual understanding and common meanings then the communication frequency is key. Although high communication frequency does not guarantee identical viewpoints among team members, it increases the likelihood of convergence of perspectives, especially in the earlier stage of team development and when the level of virtuality is high. High communication frequency in the initial stages of team development and a comparatively high density of interactions provides opportunities to establish trust, and contributes to the establishment of a common identity and understanding. At the same time, it is important to ensure the quality of the information shared as many virtual teams suffer from an excess of unnecessary information, resulting in cognitive overload and consequently decreased performance.

Of course it is difficult to measure communication quality but generally speaking it can be defined as the extent to which communication is perceived as clear, complete, understood and timely. The notion of perception in this context is of particular relevance because it draws attention to the receiver of the message. It emphasises that high quality communication involves shared understanding. This shared understanding can refer to preferences for different communication styles, the chosen working language and work locations. When teams have different understandings of terms and concepts and operate in different time zones, the perception of timeliness plays an important role. A team member may receive an e-mail much later than the rest of the team and his or her immediate reaction may be to interpret this as a late response. Time zone differences also limit the opportunities for real-time interactions. In this context the notion of closed-loop communication is relevant, a term used for ensuring that the message has been sent, received and understood. The higher the virtuality of a team, the higher is the proportion of asynchronous communication. And in a virtual team setting, closed-loop communication can mitigate some of the issues that endanger effective communication. The establishment of a closed-loop communication system and thus more positive perceptions of timeliness, is an important activity during the storming and norming phase.

Communication in virtual teams is also susceptible to misunderstandings and misinterpretations when transmitting, understanding and interpreting messages since it is generally more complex when mediated through technology. This is because because the media used is always accompanied by channel reduction and filter effects. The fact that facial expressions and spatial awareness of sounds, which usually guide a conversation and support mutual understanding, are partially or completely missing in electronic communication, increases the potential for miscommunication.

Members of virtual teams need to pay particular attention to the negotiation process regarding the technology used and the frequency of communication required as well as mechanisms to ensure that the content of communication has been received and understood. It is vital that the team understands the particular challenges of communicating virtually, establishing the issues to be agreed upon and a closed-loop communication system. This process is likely to start informally in the first meeting but needs to be dealt with more explicitly during the storming and norming phase of team development and should be part of regular feedback rounds.

---