web worker daily has some fantastic tips for starting a virtual project team (or as they say, a remote team).

while it is a short piece it includes some very smart tips!!! they talk about preparation a lot! deciding on a tool to use (basecamp, mindmapping, etc), making sure both the client and team members know how to use the tool, buying webcams & getting everyone setup and comfortable with them, plus making sure everyone is on IM. this is something i feel isn’t done enough. how often do we say ‘oh yeah, we have email. that will work’ and that’s the extent of the planning. in my thesis research, barely anyone used progressive technology such as blogging, wikis, mindmapping, etc. the bulk of communication was via phone and email.

they also mention being alert to people’s different communication styles – some people will love the video cam while others will hate IM (those that type slow might not be the biggest IM fan, especially when paired with someone who does type fast!) – and setting expectations around when communication will occur.

i think these are all very important tips. frequently not enough time is allocated to get people up to speed on their required toolkit and it will negatively impact the group. taking these early steps, making mistakes together (oops, i guess i do have to plug in the camera’s usb!) will assist in fostering trust amongst the group.

business week has several articles about working virtually (as part of their special report: virtual life) the virtual meeting room touches on companies who let their employees and partners meet as avatars in virtual worlds. companies like qwaq provide second life style avatars & spaces where you can share documents while getting the visual aspects virtual teams are missing out on (the bulk of the way we communicate) . (disclaimer: i haven’t tried qwaq) this is an exciting new area i will probably get addicted to.

fyi, biz week also has some screen shots of leo burnett’s SL area and how it’s being used in house with players in 3d collaboration such as qwaq & tixeo.

a couple new tools i’ve found recently

skrbl is a within your browser whiteboard. you can sketch or do text in a limited range of colors and print or email it. i couldnt figure out how to erase a scribble which was annoying. good for when you need to share a quick sketch.

a new GTD tool, nozbe lets you run 5 projects for free, list your to-dos & next stops and categorize them. nice ajax interface.

Research published in Feb 2007′s Computer Standards & Interfaces shows more ideas are generated by virtual teams when using IM than when using email – or at least that’s what the abstract says.

but when you read the article, you realise the research (subjects = grad biz students) really showed one extra idea for IM than with email which suggests IM might be more beneficial than email for idea generation. not a very strong result.

there wasn’t any significant difference btwn the task satisfaction of the 2 groups, nor was there any difference in ‘user playfulness’. hence IM can be used as a serious business tool and people are satisfied with both options. that’s good information but i hesitate to say IM is better for idea generation than email just based on this research.

article details:
An exploratory investigation of two internet-based communication modes
Albert H. Huanga, Shin-Yuan Hungb and David C. Yenc

Abstract
Instant messaging (IM) was first introduced in the late 1990s. It has a relatively short history of adoption compared to other electronic media such as e-mail. In the first few years, the majority of IM users were teenagers. Only a relatively small portion of adult Internet users used IM. Recently as the young IM users gradually enter the workforce, an increasing popularity of IM among working professionals is expected. Consequently, the use of IM in the workplace for job-related task becomes more likely. The potential impact of IM will also become a more important organizational issue. This study compares the use of IM versus e-mail as the communication tool to facilitate group task for geographically dispersed teams. An experiment using 44 teams in the United States was conducted. The results show that teams using e-mail are more effective in terms of generating ideas than teams using IM. There are no significance differences between the two communication methods, in terms of task difficulty, playfulness, and ease of use.

SMH has a story (pub’d Oct 21) about telecommuting.

the article says toshiba and about 10 other companies (westpac, telstra, foster’s, pfizer, etc) worked together to promote flexible work practices. wow! that is so encouraging and fantastic!

the article points to the group’s output as – producing a ‘detailed and practical guidebook that issues such as setting up flexible working practices, managing people by performance rather than attendance and dealing with workplace culture and attitudes’. you can get that guidebook at toshiba’s flexible working website.

i’m not quite sure what to make of the SIG. there’s some major names and i know some of the smaller companies involved. i’m sure the work was done with the greatest intentions. it’s hard (at this point) to comment more because to receive the guide i had to fill out a form with my physical address and they will mail it to me. nope, you can’t download the guide. there are individual files you can download but it’s unclear if they’re part of the guide or extra bits. i’ll let you know.

one bit from the article i want to pull out – toshiba did research in 2004 on the attitudes of managers and employees towards flexible working. it seems like the SIG resulted from this research. a quote from the SMH article:

“One thing that came though very strongly in our research was that working from home was almost seen as a modern term for having a sickie,” Whittard says. “People would assume you’re out shopping, down the beach or playing golf. So before you let people work flexibly you have to look at their workload, clearly communicate what’s expected of them and measure their work fairly against that. Otherwise you get a level of mistrust, which is what our research found – that managers are less trusting of flexible workers and believe that employees disapprove of their colleagues who sometimes work away from the office.”

a sad state of affairs and probably the reason why a small step such as a guide was produced. you CAN download their research results entitled ‘Mobility & Mistrust. they list 5 key findings in their executive summary but actually 4 of the 5 can be read as issues around trust or rather not trusting employees. no wonder i had such a hard time finding companies to work with while i was doing the thesis.

will post more when i get the paper version.

The Effects of Cultural Diversity in Virtual Teams Versus Face-to-Face Teams
D. Sandy Staples, Lina Zhao. Group Decision and Negotiation. Dordrecht: Jul 2006. Vol. 15, Iss. 4; p. 389

AbstractDiversity in the national background and culture of team members is common in virtual teams. An experimental study, with short term teams, was undertaken to examine the effect of cultural diversity on team effectiveness and to examine if this effect changes depending if the team worked face-to-face (F2F) or virtually. Heterogeneous teams were created that had greater diversity than homogeneous teams of individualism/collectivism values, different languages spoken, country of birth, and nationality. The teams worked on a desert survival task either F2F or virtually (via audioconference and electronic chat tools). The overall results indicated that heterogeneous teams were less satisfied and cohesive and had more conflict than the homogeneous teams, although there were no statistical differences in team performance levels. However, examining just the heterogeneous teams found that the performance of the virtual heterogeneous teams was superior to that of the F2F heterogeneous teams. The results support Carte and Chidambaram’s (2004) theory that the reductive capabilities of collaborative technologies are beneficial for newly-formed diverse teams.