Ingroup Dynamics and Perceived Effectiveness of Partially Distributed Teams

Linda Plotnick Jacksonville State University ; Starr Roxanne Hiltz New Jersey Institute of Technology ; Robin Privman

Abstract

Research problem: Partially distributed teams (PDTs) are virtual teams that consist of at least two distinct geographically dispersed subgroups that communicate mainly through information and communication technology (ICT). As such teams become increasingly prevalent, it is important to understand how to manage them to maximize team effectiveness. The perceptions of effectiveness of PDTs may be significantly decreased when they are characterized by ingroup dynamics, consisting of preferential attitudes and actions toward collocated members, with accompanying conflict and lack of trust in regard to the distant subteam(s). Research questions: Do ingroup dynamics negatively impact perceptions of effectiveness in PDTs and, if so, how strongly? What factors can lessen ingroup dynamics-specifically, can training or reliable ICT support decrease ingroup dynamics? Does organizational context affect these relationships? Does whether or not the PDT is international affect these relationships? Does the number of subgroups in a PDT affect these relationships? Literature review: Social identity theory suggests how ingroup dynamics may emerge and create fault lines between subteams in a PDT. Effectiveness is defined in terms of process performance, which refers to how well the teamwork process has been undertaken. Prior research suggests that ICT reliability and training for work in distributed teams may decrease ingroup dynamics and improve effectiveness. International members, the specific organizational context, and the number of subteams per team might moderate these relationships. Methodology: An online survey of professionals with experience in PDTs was conducted, with two subsamples-one from a single large telecommunications company and one from a mix of organizations. Partial least squares regression was used to build and test a model of the relationships among the variables measured. Results: Ingroup dynamics have a strong negative relationship with perceived effectiveness. Overall, technology reliability and training significantly reduce ingroup dynamics. In the telecommunications company, training increased ingroup dynamics; thus, training may not always be beneficial, depending on organizational culture and the modes and types of training provided by a specific organization. Neither international membership on the team nor the number of subgroups per team was a significant multigroup moderator on any path in our model. Conclusions: These results help to extend social identity theory into this domain as they elucidate specifically that ICT reliability and training promote effectiveness of PDTs and that ingroup dynamics affect the perceptions of effectiveness in such teams. The results give managers guidance on what issues of PDTs to focus on to promote the effectiveness of PDTs.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2016-09-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2016.2583258
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

Cites in this index (7)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  4. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  5. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Show all 7 →
  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Also cites 50 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1108/S1474-7979(2011)0000022012
  2. 10.1016/j.infsof.2013.06.005
  3. 10.1080/07421222.1998.11518216
  4. 10.1287/orsc.10.6.791
  5. 10.1108/09593840610718036
  6. 10.1287/orsc.1120.0750
  7. 10.1177/0149206311426187
  8. 10.5465/AMJ.2006.22083024
  9. 10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335
  10. 10.1016/j.tele.2013.10.004
  11. 10.1145/1506409.1506442
  12. 10.1037/0022-3514.34.1.82
  13. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  14. 10.1023/A:1008669710763
  15. 10.2307/3151718
  16. Does PLS have advantages for small sample size or non-normal data?
    MIS Quart  
  17. 10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.010
  18. 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2009.08.001
  19. 10.1287/orsc.1090.0434
  20. 10.1145/968464.968467
  21. 10.4018/978-1-59140-204-6.ch006
  22. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups
    Acad Manage Rev  
  23. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.10.006
  24. 10.1287/orsc.1080.0379
  25. 10.5465/AMJ.2005.17843943
  26. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2011.00371.x
  27. 10.1080/19416520.2011.586108
  28. 10.1016/j.im.2006.11.007
  29. 10.1109/17.797960
  30. 10.1016/j.orgdyn.2007.04.007
  31. 10.1145/1513593.1513599
  32. 10.1007/s10726-009-9180-z
  33. 10.1016/S0149-2063(01)00090-3
  34. 10.1287/orsc.2013.0885
  35. Virtual teams: Anticipating the impact of virtuality on team processes and performance
    Proc Acad Manage  
  36. 10.1027/1866-5888/a000076
  37. 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1986.tb00732.x
  38. 10.1037/1089-2699.4.1.98
  39. 10.1287/mnsc.1030.0134
  40. 10.1177/104649649903000201
  41. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00335.x
  42. 10.1037/0022-3514.58.5.812
  43. 10.2307/3069399
  44. 10.1145/1031607.1031679
  45. 10.1016/j.im.2007.01.002
  46. Virtual organizational learning in open source software development projects
    Inf Manage  
  47. 10.1002/hrm.20106
  48. 10.1177/0149206305279113
  49. 10.1177/108056990006300407
  50. 10.1002/spip.185