Student Name: Sooraj
Student ID: s5030563
Course: 7011CAL
Assignment Task: Research Report
Report Title: Cultural diversity as a main issue within GVT
Due Date: May 15, 2017
Length: 2680 words
Tutor: Darren Volker
Contents
Executive Summary………………………………………………………………...3
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………….4
2. Definition of the GVT…………………………………………………………… 4
3. Characteristics of GVT ………………………………………………………….4
3.1 Geographical dispersion……………………………………………………4
3.2 Cultural diversity…………………………………………………………….4
3.3 High technology dependency……………………………………………...5
4. Cultural diversity issues…………………………………………………………5
4.1 High and Low context culture phenomenon……………………………...5
4.2 Language proficiency ………………………………………………………6
4.3 Trust shortage……………………………………………………………….7
5. Solutions………………………………………………………………………….7
5.1 Corporate culture……………………………………………………………8
5.2 Trainings…………………………………………………………………….8
5.3 Communications…………………………………………………………….8
6. Conclusion. ……………………………………………………………………….9
References………………………………………………………………………….10
Executive Summary
With the globalization of modern enterprise market, phenomenon such as Global Virtual Team is becoming more popular. Companies hire people around the world and their transition to particular place is not require. Which means, people are working from different locations under the same project or programme. For such teams only virtual communication is available, as result, people are connected by computer-mediated communication. This feature along with cultural diversity of team members within same company are one of the major characteristics of Global Virtual Teams. People from different countries are working together and a lot of issues are faced due to these differences. As a result of such differences some cross culture issues might occur. Moreover, working world widely, team members have high technology dependency, as their connection might be realized only virtually. This report will discuss the only issues related to cultural diversity of GVT. How such phenomenon as High and Low context culture might affect relations within GVT? Also, some suggestions as corporate culture might be chosen for cross culture risks mitigation. This paper will provide with some ideas about language proficiency issues and how GVT managers might reduce misunderstandings between team members by trainings and increase teamwork effectiveness. Finally, this report will discuss about the trust shortage between GVT members. How it is important to create trusty environment for employee. Some suggestions about an appropriate communication will be provided which relates to how this communication might help to develop close and open relations between GVT members.
⦁ Introduction
Communication is the most adequate skill on the work place. In past it can be realized virtually or by face-to-face contact. With modern world globalization more and more companies require worldwide connection between employees. As far co-workers are located from each other as less effective face-to face contact and more reliable virtual contact becomes. Global Virtual Team is a team, whose members are working together, but from the different locations. As result, their communication might be done by computer-mediated communication only. However, there are some issues during the working process between team members, because of cultural diversity within GVT team members. This report will describe some difficulties related to team members’ cultural background and will provide with some possible solutions to reduce these difficulties.
⦁ Definition of the GVT
Group of people remotely situated from each other, who are working under one project, might be named a Global Virtual Team (GVT). GVT can be also described as geographically dispersed, culturally diverse and electronically connected working team (Diam, Ha, Reutiman, Hughes, Pathak, Bynum, & Bhalta, 2011). Moreover, virtual connection between team members is the most important characteristic for such type of team working, because people are located in different cities or even countries. According to Brandt, England and Ward (2011), in GVT team members possibly never meet each other, ever though they are working at the same company.
3. Characteristics of GVT
3.1 Geographical dispersion
One of the main features of GVT is dispersion. People are working in one company under the same project from the different locations. Sometimes it can be even different countries. Such phenomenon becomes more popular world widely. For example, companies from developed countries would like to hire people from undeveloped countries because of low salaries or low employee requirements about work place, tax payment and so on. As result, people are connected under one task, but from different places. Google, for instance, has its representatives in such continents as North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Africa and Middle East (Google.com, 2017). Right now Google invites students around the world to take a part in programming projects called Google Summer of Code. Later, many students, who will demonstrate high skills in coding, can get a job in Google. Even more, to be a part of Google employees do not need to move to another country, as they can work through internet remotely. As result, of this kind of programs, many people become co-workers and at the same time living in a different country.
3.2 Cultural diversity
GVTs team members are living in different countries and have a different cultural background which is GVTs another feature. For example, for team members of one company, which are located in a particular country, there is not such a high possibility to meet person from another country, compare with GVT team members. Using the Google company as example, it is can be noticed, that people from Latin America, for instance, may be working with people from Europe and Asia, even these continents are so far from each other.
3.3 High technology dependency
Working remotely, people can be connected with each other only virtually by Internet. The next GVT characteristic is virtual team members’ connection. In modern world an Internet connection is not an issue and there are plenty of available technologies and soft programs, which allows to do it. GVT team members are provided with variety of possible solutions for any required hard and software to communicate with each other during the project process. These communications might include emails, conferences, Skype calls and other programs providing with online connection of several people at the same time. It is possible to mention, that co-workers, who are working at one office might use these types of connection as well and it is not a unique GVTs type of communication. However, for GVT the virtual connection is available only, while other type of team can use face-to face contact, for instance.
4. Cultural diversity issues
GVTs are working remotely and each branch of one company might be located in one country while other is in another country. In this situation people from different countries have to work with each other and sometimes face difficulties with communication and understanding. These issues might relate with variety of aspects, but the most significant are cross culture relations, language misunderstanding and trust within GVT members. As result of these issues, conflicts might occur and lead to poor GVT efficiency (Kankanhalli, Tan & Wei, 2007, p. 240).
4.1 High and Low context culture phenomenon.
According to Hall’s theory, countries might be divided on those with high context culture (HCC) and other with low context culture (LCC) (Hall, 1976, p. 86).
Figure 1. The order of countries, according to the Hall’s theory (Hall, 1976).
As can be noticed from the Figure 1, based on this theory, Asian countries mostly belong to HCC, while north countries, such as Swiss, German, North America mostly belong to LCC. The main idea of this theory is relations between people in terms of their social level and their working place hierarchy. For employees from HCC the relation with authorize person should be very respectful. Each comment from the boss cannot be discussed or questioned, even if this comment is wrong, because it will be understood as disrespectful relation in regards to authority. However, for people from the LCC countries situation is different. Even if the respect of authorities also takes a place in LCC countries, but team member still can discus with boss about some possibly wrong instructions. It means that for these GVT members, who are from HCC country will be very difficult to argue with a boss even if they are require to do it on discussion, for example. Also, GVT project manager should keep in mind about such facts when they want to get honest critic or new idea about project from their workers. They need to assume, that team members from HCC might not feel free to express their opinion just because in their culture, they are not permitted to do it. The same misunderstanding might occur, when boss from HCC can get critique from employee, who is from LCC, and will understand this critic as disrespect from the employee.
4.2 Language proficiency
The language proficiency is another issue, which is related to GVT. GVTs team members are from different countries and they mostly are speaking English. However, as English is a second language the pronunciation for each team member can be different. For example, people from Asia have one accent, while people from India have another. It is obvious, that sometimes they might not understand each other completely, just because of different pronunciation. Moreover, the lack of vocabulary and grammar might be a significant challenge for GVT members to communicate with each other. As has been discussed in Klitmoller et al. (2015), differences in language proficiency may create confusion and conflicts between GVT members. People from different countries simply do not understand each other. They cannot share information clearly and they cannot discuss the project flow, all these issues might have negative impact on working process effectiveness. Communication on the working place is sufficient skill, which requires full understanding between team members and lack of language proficiency might create additional difficulties not just the communication, but understand clearly the main point and the main idea of the message. During the working process GVT members sometimes are required to assist each other with ideas and critical notes. When one person, who is fluent in English, for example, try to make a joke or an idiom during the conversation, accidently might embarrass an interlocutor, simply because another person did not understand this joke or the idiom. In this case, instead of conciliating with the interlocutor, the person who is fluent in English might create a barrier between them.
4.3 Trust shortage.
According to Dorr and Kelly (2011), lack of trust between GVT team members is another issue. It is very difficult to build open relationship, when people do not know each other, but even more challenge, when people have never seen each other. As GVT members are working in the different places and there is no possibility for co-workers to meet in the office, they might not see each other during the whole project. Sometimes team members need to get agreement or clear response from each other and they can meet in a corridor of the office and discuss it. However, for the GVT team members it is impossible. The only way for communication is an email, phone or online charts, which are very different compare with face-to-face conversation. Not only lack of personal connection, but also the lack of social connection between GVT members might be a reason for trust building difficulties (Kayworth & Leidner, 2002). Located in the different countries, people from GVT have different cultural and social lives. As has been discussed in Klitmoller and Lauring (2013), such simple factors as a time spending together during the lunch or birthday celebration in the office might create an open and trust relationship between co-workers. These events help to communicate team members in an informal atmosphere, where people relax and can be open with each other. However, it is quite difficult to realize within GVTs.
5. Solutions
Even if GVTs might have more problems, compare with the ordinary team during the working process, for each issue solution should be defined. Many global companies face quite the same difficulties and general solution might be simply an acceptance of different cultural background of each team member (Cagiltay et al., 2015, p.8). It might help the CEO and managers to understand how to behave with particular team members and what to expect from them.
5.1 Corporate culture.
One of such solutions might be corporate culture, which might be a set of rules and procedures for employees. As has been discussed in Rugholt (2005), in order to avoid dominance of one culture over another, the third culture in business environment should be implemented. Despite the fact, that Rugholt offers this solution as an acknowledgment of differences between Danish and Indians cultural features, and provides with suggestions how set of rules and procedures might help to improve verbal communications between Danish and Indian co-workers; this tactic might be useful for cross HCC and LCC relations also. For example, for each GVT member position should be provided set of rules and procedures in one particular document. This document should describe the zone of responsibilities, the authority position, the model of behaviour in particular situation for each team member. In this case, when GVT members sign this document they demonstrate their agreement with corporate culture of company. Later, if difficult moment within GVT will occur, team member should not to evaluate by himself, what to do, but simply to have a look in corporate procedure and act according to its instructions. As result, a lot of misunderstandings between HCC and LCC GVT members might be avoided, as people will behave not according their cultural believes, but according to corporate rules only. This set of corporate rules has the same idea as the third culture phenomenon, which has been described in Rougholt (2005).
5.2 Trainings
One of the suggestions to avoid language proficiency difficulties between GVT members is organizing GVT members according to their culturally similar location (Noll, Beecham & Richardson, 2010). This means, that European team members will collaborate with European, while Asian team members will collaborate with Asian. However, this method creates many limitations within GVT geographical dispersion, which is one of the main features of GVT. Conversely, in order to avoid language difficulties, team members from different continents need to communicate with each other more often. People should understand and accept cultural differences between each other and try to help other team members to get better results not within project only, but with language practice also. Moreover, GVT members need to participate language trainings together, where they can practice different pronunciation and accent recognition. These trainings might provide with grammar classes, pronunciation practices and some folklore tasks. To get more understanding between GVT members and create more open relations between them, some training might provide with cultural literacy, where team members will be familiarized with native jargon and some jokes, for example. Also, as has been described in Lockwood (2015), the working exchange between project team members has a positive impact on team members’ language tolerance. As soon as people will practice their language with other nationalities, they might become familiar with other accents and pronunciations.
5.3 Communications
To deal with a trust shortage between GVT members, managers need to create common goals for team members and force them to communicate with each other daily (Pinjani & Palvia, 2013). When people are working very close to each other and communicate every day for discussions or sharing knowledge, there is more possibility for trust emerging. Lack of trust between GVT team members is due to both they geographical dispersion and cultural diversity and if it is very difficult to change team members’ location, the difficulties with cultural diversity might be solved by trainings. Based on Pinjani and Palvia (2013) recommendations, these trainings will help team members to create deep relations among GVT members. People will be familiarized with cultural features of each other and it might help them to understand some special characteristics of different nationalities. Also, such trainings might be use as a group meeting, where people simply meet with each other, will see that behind the chart name on the desktop is a person, who has own life, hobby and family. As result, relations might become more open and friendly. According to Savolinan (2013), an appropriate chosen technology might help build trust between GVT members. Based on Dorr and Kelly (2011) recommendations, trainings might include such modules as use of groupware, teleconference and videoconference procedures. Training about communication skills, such as electronic etiquette, cultural awareness and brainstorming electronically might provide GVT members with variety of possible solutions for face-to-face communications by particular technology.
6. Conclusion
In conclusion, several features such as cultural diversity, geographical dispersion and high technology dependency might characterize GVT. However, the most sufficient is cultural diversity as it can be reason for several issues. These issues include cross-cultural interest and trust shortage between team members. Moreover, because people have to speak in the non-native language, they face such problem as language proficiency and this issue also creates some problems with communication between GVT members. In order to avoid these difficulties some suggestions as corporate culture, trainings and communication development have been provided.
References
Brandt, V., England, W. & Ward, S. (2011). Virtual teams. Research-Technology Management, 62-63. Retrieved from https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-2521947141/virtual-teams.
Cagiltay, K., Bichelmeyer, B., & Akilli, G. K. (2015). Working with multicultural virtual teams: Critical factors for facilitation, satisfaction and success. Smart Learning Environments, 16, 1-16. doi: 10.1186/s40561-015-0018-7
Daim, T. U., Ha, A., Reutiman, S., Hughes, B., Pathak, U., Bynum, W. & Bhatla, A. (2012). Exploring the communication breakdown in global virtual teams. International Journal of Project Management, 199–212. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.06.004
Dorr, M. & Kelly, K. (2011). The power of experience UNC executive development. Developing Real Skills for Virtual Teams, 17
https://www.google.com/intl/en/about/locations/?region=north-america&office=mountain-view
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond Culture. [Monoskop]. Retrieved from https://monoskop.org/File:Hall_Edward_T_Beyond_Culture.pdf
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B.C.Y. & Wei, K. (2007). Conflict and performance in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 237-274. doi:10.2753/MIS0742-1222230309
Kayworth, T. & Leidner, D. (2002). Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 7-40. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2002.110455697
Klitmoller, A. & Lauring, J. (2013). When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality. Journal of World Business, 48, 398-406. doi:10.1016/j.jwb.2012.07.023
Lockwood, J. (2015). Virtual team management: what is causing communication breakdown? Language and Intercultural Communication, 15, 125-140, doi:10.1080/14708477.2014.985310
Noll, J., Beecham, S. & Richardson, I. (2010). Global software development and collaboration: barriers and solutions. ACM Inroads, 1, 66-78. doi: 10.1145/1835428.1835445
Pinjani, P. & Palvia, P. (2013). Trust and knowledge sharing in diverse global virtual teams. Information and Management, 50, 144-153. doi: 10.1016/j.im2012.10.002
Rugholt, L.M. (2005). Outsourcing from Denmark to India . Unpublished.
Savolinan, T (2013). Trust Building in e-Leadership – Important Skill for Technology- Mediated Management in the 21st Century. Proceedings of the International Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance, 288-296