Wk5 IOP/470 Case Study: Developing Transnational Groups

9/8/2020 EBSCOhost

https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=4c9bb65b-21b5-4b67-8f3f-b53338fa4351%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=https%3a%2f%2fweb.a.ebscohost.com%2fehost%2fdetail%2fdetail%… 1/26

EBSCO Publishing Citation Format: APA (American Psychological Assoc.):

NOTE: Review the instructions at http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=&feature_id=APA and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines.

References Zimmermann, A. (2011). Interpersonal relationships in transnational, virtual teams: Towards a configurational perspective. International Journal of

Management Reviews, 13(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00284.x <!–Additional Information: Persistent link to this record (Permalink): https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=shib&db=bth&AN=57480794&site=ehost- live&scope=site&custid=uphoenix End of citation–>

Interpersonal relationships in transnational, virtual teams: Towards a configurational perspective. Previous research has observed that strong interpersonal relationships are especially important for the functioning of transnational, virtual teams (TNTs), but are at the same time particularly hard to achieve in these teams. This article reviews and integrates the transnational and virtual team literature to provide an overview of examined cognitive, behavioural and affective relationship aspects. By demonstrating the interrelations between these relationship aspects, the article deviates from the prevalent, linear input–process–output models of team functioning and makes a first step towards a configurational perspective on relationships in TNTs. It further reviews how several characteristics of the team structure, organizational context and socio‐political environment may facilitate or inhibit relationship aspects. Through a synthesis of previous research, the article develops two examples of likely relationship configurations and their driving factors. The review concludes by recommending methods for future empirical research on relationship configurations in TNTs.

Over the last decade, research on transnational, virtual teams (TNTs) has grown from a small, specialist area into a major stream of interest covering several disciplines. Transnational teams have been investigated by social psychologists as well as experts on international business and information systems. This led to the first literature reviews ([ 6]; [10]; [71]; [77]) and an edited book on the subject ([76]). Given that TNTs are often geographically dispersed, many TNT studies include issues of virtual collaboration.

Owing to the importance of TNTs for international organizations, many researchers have focused on what makes these teams effective. One central, repeated observation is that positive, effective relationships among TNT members are especially important for TNT success, but are at the same time particularly hard to achieve (e.g. [28]; [32]; [34]; [58]). On a broad level, interpersonal relationships in TNTs can be defined as the ways in which team members relate to each other. Some researchers have emphasized the importance of interpersonal relationships in TNTs by

9/8/2020 EBSCOhost

https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=4c9bb65b-21b5-4b67-8f3f-b53338fa4351%40sessionmgr4007&vid=1&ReturnUrl=https%3a%2f%2fweb.a.ebscohost.com%2fehost%2fdetail%2fdetail%… 2/26

referring to the encompassing framework of social capital, which highlights the significance of relationships as a resource of social action ([68], p. 242). Others have used the related theory of social networks to characterize the complex, internal and external links of TNT members and the shifting boundaries of TNTs ([48]; [56]. Moreover, many studies have singled out particular processes, which will here be termed ‘aspects’ of relationships. Relationship aspects are facets of the ways in which TNT members relate to each other, such as trust and communication patterns. Some studies describe interconnections between certain relationship aspects, providing reasons to assume that there may be many more, unrevealed interrelations.

What is missing to date is a comprehensive overview of the most significant relationship aspects in TNTs and their interconnections. The present review aims to sketch such a broad picture from what has been examined so far. Previous TNT research will be integrated to identify suggested interrelations between different relationship aspects. Thereby, the review deviates from the prevalent linear input–process–output models of team functioning that follow classic system models (e.g. [36]; [53]). Instead, it will make a first step towards a non‐linear systems analysis and, through this, a configurational perspective on relationships in TNTs. Both of these approaches provide better insights into the complex nature of TNT relationships and therefore provide a better understanding of what makes good working relationships in these teams.

Non‐linear systems, configurations The non‐linear systems approach claims that social systems tend to consist of a multitude of elements that influence each other reciprocally, making it impossible to clearly distinguish cause and effect and predict their pattern in the long term (see [59], for a review). Nevertheless, post hoc observations of non‐linear system development show that these systems do follow certain patterns, apparently caused by ‘deep‐order dimensions’ within the system itself, which set certain bounds and guide the system’s behaviour. These patterns have been termed ‘attractors’, because they seem to attract system behaviours to follow the pattern ([ 9]). According to [59]), these attractors can be defined in organizations in terms of key success factors.

The configurational perspective, in turn, has been developed in organizational theory (e.g. [60]; [62], [63]). It is influenced by psychological gestalt research, which demonstrates that individuals perceive objects as configurations and thereby reduce their complexity. Gestalts are typical configurations which are not merely a sum of their elements, but have their own distinctive character. Accordingly, the configurational perspective within organizational theory posits that organizational reality cannot be explained by unidirectional, causal relationships between isolated variables, but only in terms of variable configurations, i.e. ‘multidimensional constellations of conceptually distinct characteristics that commonly occur together’ ([60], p. 1175). The effect of single variables depends on their interaction with the multitude of other variables in a configuration. Because of this interdependence, variables tend to fall into a limited number of coherent, typical patterns, i.e. configurations that are equivalent to gestalts. More beneficial configurations, for example regarding organizational success, are characterized by greater congruence between their elements ([63]). Organizational configurations are thought to be formed due to driving ‘forces’ ([60], p. 1176), ‘orchestrating themes’ ([63]), or ‘imperatives’ ([61]) such as environmental constraints, organizational structure or leadership, similar to the attractors of non‐linear systems. Typical configurations can be captured through either conceptual typologies or empirically derived taxonomies ([63]).

With regard to TNTs, attempts to describe typical configurations have so far been made primarily in the practitioner‐oriented literature. For example, [19]) divide TNTs into three performance clusters, namely ‘destroyers’ characterized by negative stereotyping and destructive relationships, ‘equalizers’ who deny differences between team members, and ‘creators’ who recognize and build on differences. Wk5 IOP/470 Case Study: Developing Transnational Groups