Understanding the dimensions of virtual teams.

The focus of this study was to empirically investigate how virtual teams operate in an online MBA program. Building knowledge and skills required for a successful career is a central component of higher education, especially in business schools. Importantly, virtual teaming has been considered a useful method in meeting this educational demand. Given these needs, it is important to better understand the dynamic nature of virtual teaming. In terms of this study, data from content analyses, surveys, and interviews were divided into three key categories: (a) task, (b) social, and (c) technological dimensions. The findings indicated that pedagogical transformation of teaching and learning skills as well as a shifting mindset from residential programs to online environments is critical to the success of virtual teams.

**********

With the explosive advances in educational technologies during the past decade or two, the philosophies of teaching and learning in educational fields have continuously shifted and been transformed. Technologies allow students to experience new learning environments where they can communicate regardless of time and location. One result of this educational transformation is that learning together in teams has become a common way of taking advantage of online environments.

Teamwork has been widely utilized as an effective instructional method in residential higher education environments. During the past few years, numerous studies have indicated the value of teamwork in online educational fields. Duarte and Snyder (1999), for example, mentioned that the use of virtual teams can assist in student knowledge generation and help them prepare for the real world. In addition, Conrad and Donaldson (2004) argued that collaborative activities that involve student idea sharing and other forms of interactions trigger deeper processing of content. Palloff and Pratt (2005) also noted that teamwork in both residential and online environments promotes transformative learning by developing critical thinking skills and reflection.

As the value of virtual teams is increasingly acknowledged and promoted, understanding the dynamics of teams and teaming operations in online environments is critical to the success of virtual teams in practice. It is especially important to identify the aspects of virtual teams that are central to designing collaborative environments. For instance, Carabajal, LaPointe, and Gunawardena (2003) proposed that there are three dimensions, which have to be taken into consideration when designing and facilitating virtual teaming activities, namely task, social, and technological components.

How to enhance team effectiveness is a key concern for all types of teams. Unfortunately, previous studies have concentrated on the issue of team effectiveness from the perspective of the task dimension. The task perspective for teams mainly highlights cognitive strategies related to how to achieve mutual learning goals and produce better performance. In addition, the outcomes of team activities are frequently compared to those of individual activities.

Recently, researchers have expanded their approaches to understanding the dynamics of virtual teams. They have begun to recognize that social and technological considerations add to instructor concerns and requirements in building and promoting effective online teams. From this research, it is clear that a sense of belonging to such teams or online communities as well as the appropriate use of learning technologies need to exist within virtual teams. Similarly, emotional feelings support the ability to collaborate (Palloff & Pratt, 2003, 2005). As a result, instructors and students need to navigate both the task and social dimensions to ensure quality performance and feelings of being part of a virtual team (Duarte & Snyder, 1999). In addition, the choice of technologies for effective virtual teams has important consequences for the successful accomplishment of team tasks as well as the ongoing maintenance of the team (Ahern & El-Hindi, 2000). Effective communication and collaboration over time and distance are influenced by what and how technologies are applied to match the quality of task performance (Duarte & Snyder). Therefore, the dynamic operation in virtual teams relies on the balanced interrelationships among task, social, and technological dimensions, not just one of these variables.

Admittedly, many instructors and students recognize the value of virtual teams, but may lack the social and technological skills to promote team effectiveness in online environments. Also, the increased use of virtual teams has not been accompanied by empirical research efforts to better understand team operations in online learning environments, although there is a great deal of interest and studies related to teamwork. In this sense, the present study explores how virtual teams operate in practice from the perspective of a virtual teaming framework. This study focuses on two specific research questions. From the viewpoint of task, social, and technological dimensions, (a) what strategies are used to promote virtual teaming activities? and (b) what are the perceptions of instructors and students regarding the operation of virtual teams?

The focus of this study is neither to verify the appropriateness of an existing virtual teaming framework, nor to clarify the best instructional strategies and technologies for team effectiveness. Rather, this study reveals how different strategies are used within virtual teams in online learning environments. A fundamental interest for instructional designers, researchers, and educational practitioners is how teams collaborate online. Therefore, the findings of this study will assist instructors and online learning specialists when designing and facilitating collaborative activities to ensure high quality online learning.

THEORETICAL REVIEW ON VIRTUAL TEAM

As indicated earlier, the framework of virtual teams is comprised of three dimensions: (a) task, (b) social, and (c) technological dimensions (Carabajal et al., 2003). Virtual teams are defined as "a group of people with complementary competencies executing simultaneous, collaborative work processes through electronic media without regard to geographic location" (Chinowsky & Rojas, 2003, pp. 98). This definition indicates that virtual teams are incorporated into three dimensions--executing simultaneous collaborative work processes (i.e., the task dimension); a group of people (i.e., the social dimension); and electronic media (i.e., the technological dimension). The following section introduces the role of each of these dimensions within effectively functioning online teams.

Task dimension. Teams, whether operating in residential or online environments, are a collection of individuals who share responsibility for learning outcomes (Cohen & Bailey, 1997). Teams are formed in order to achieve specific interdependent learning goals or task performances. Virtual team members use technologies to communicate and collaborate to increase productivity. Team members brainstorm and make plans on how to accomplish team tasks effectively. For instance, they share opinions, develop ideas, and struggle to make mutual decisions. This process sometimes causes potential cognitive dissonance and conflicts among team members. Sometimes, virtual teams may have more difficulty reaching consensus during collaborating activities than traditional residential teams due to participant invisibility in online environments. In this case, sharing the purpose of teaming activities is important in motivating students to pursue team performance. Setting mutual goals, achieving consensus, and providing teamwork guidelines assist students in their engagement and completion of online teamwork (Carabajal et al., 2003).

Social dimension. Virtual teams differ from residential teams in the degree of physical proximity among team members. In virtual teams, members interact interdependently and collaboratively in different geographic locations (Chinowsky & Rojas, 2003). Differences in languages, cultures, and values across national boundaries can cause students to struggle with multiple confrontations and feelings of dissonance. However, social engagement and emotional relationships among team members cultivates a sense of belonging and team unity. Affective relationships strengthen the human bonds of cohesion, and finally promote mutual achievement throughout effective communications.

Technological dimension. Another feature of virtual teams, distinct from residential teams, is the technological dimension. Virtual teams collaborate through electronic communications channels (Chinowsky & Rojas, 2003). Collaborative technologies, which seldom are used in residential teams, often involve new pedagogical approaches for both online instructors and students. With collaborative technologies, instructors and students can interact in varied formats, times, and locations. What types of technologies and how technologies are used for teamwork impacts the quality and depth of the virtual teaming process and consequences (Carabajal et al., 2003; Duarte & Snyder, 1999). The effective use of technologies plays a decisive role in communication and collaboration over time and distance. Technologies also facilitate personal connections with instructors and students as well as the degree of social presence among them (Duarte & Snyder). While a plethora of technologies are currently in use by virtual team members across a range of online program initiatives, it is vital to identify technologies that have the potential to improve the performance of virtual teams (Duarte & Snyder).

Interestingly, virtual teams can be considered open systems. In open systems, each component is subsequently affected by the other dimensions (Carabajal et al., 2003; Cuevas, Fiore, Salas, & Bowers, 2004). Virtual teams do not operate properly if any dimensions are lacking or missing. In other words, the task, social, and technological dimensions embedded in the nature of virtual teams influence each other interchangeably and constantly.

Conrad and Donaldson (2004) observed that a key success factor for online learning is whether collaborative knowledge can be established and enhanced. Virtual teaming activities can contribute to increased student interactions and idea sharing which finally leads them to deeper and more reflective thinking. As a result, in today's online world, the use of virtual teams has become a common mechanism for gaining competitive advantage in global environments (Duarte & Snyder, 1999). However, simply implementing virtual teaming activities does not guarantee the effectiveness and efficiency of performance in teams. How teams operate along each of the three primary virtual teaming dimensions-task, social, and technological-will determine the successful operation of teamwork in online education. To better understand virtual team operations, we explore these three dimensions in this study.

METHODOLOGY

In this research project, we studied an accredited online MBA program at a top ranked business school in a large Midwestern university. In contrast to competing online MBA programs, the faculty pool was drawn from the full-time, tenured faculty. The online MBA courses were designed for students who planned to continue their employment as business professionals, while earning their MBA. Data collected in this study included content analyses of course documents and class assignments, surveys of the students, and interviews and focus groups of the faculty members and students.

Content analyses. Twenty seven (27) online MBA courses across a wide spectrum of business disciplines were selected for content analyses. The content of course web sites was analyzed based on a detailed coding scheme. Virtual teams, one of components of this coding scheme included the following subitems: use of virtual teams, team size, team changes, team discussion, task deliverables, team interactions, peer evaluation, and a combination of teamwork and individual work. Descriptive data were obtained by counting the frequencies of occurrences based on the coding scheme. Importantly, the inter-coder agreement was 81%.

Surveys. In the study, 102 students completed a 62 item online survey. Questions were asked about their perceptions related to various aspects of online teaching and learning including virtual teams. These survey questions were primarily 5-point Likert type items (1) and open-ended questions. Importantly, the internal reliability of the survey, as reported through Cronbach's alpha, was .91.

Interviews. Interviews of 27 faculty members and 10 students were conducted in order to obtain an indepth understanding of the operation of virtual teams. In these interviews, 27 semi-structured questions were asked and each interview took 45-60 minutes in a one-on-one interview format. Transcribed interviews were classified under different dimensions of virtual teams.

Importantly, the data of content analyses, surveys, and interviews were analyzed using Strauss and Dorbin's constant comparison method (Merriam, 1988) and were conducted with the purpose of identifying emerging themes for different dimensions of virtual teams. The constant comparison method can be used for triangulating multiple data sources to identify emerging issues (Patton, 1990). In other words, both quantitative and qualitative methods incorporated into this study reflect the diverse nature of the study's questions.

FINDINGS

The content analyses were employed as a major data source to identify the use of strategies for virtual teams (Research question 1), while the results of surveys and interviews were analyzed to examine the perceptions of instructors and students regarding the operation of virtual teams (Research question 2). All the data sources were organized under three different categories: (a) task, (b) social, and (c) technological dimensions under each research question.

Strategies Used for Virtual Teams

According to content analyses, the virtual teaming approach was widely used in this online MBA program. Twenty-one of 27 online MBA courses (78%) used virtual teams as major instructional activities. All the 21 courses incorporating a virtual teaming approach employed a team size of 4-6 students.

Task dimension. The task dimension of virtual teaming relates to team design, cognitive development, and team performance. The majority of the online MBA courses in this study offered students options to form their own teams rather than to assign them to instructor-selected teams. Discussion in small groups was an instructional event in the process of virtual teaming activities (8 courses, 30%), while 23 courses had discussion in large groups (85%). Interestingly, only 7% of courses (two courses) changed teams by assignment or by semester. In terms of course requirements and motivations, 78% of courses (21 courses) designed course deliverables at the team-level, thereby fostering frequent discussions and student interactions.

In terms of combinations of individual work and teamwork, 78% of courses combined teamwork and individual work in the online MBA courses (21 courses). Also, 33% of the courses used inter-team interactive techniques (9 courses), while 19% of the courses analyzed (5 courses) applied the techniques of peer evaluations.

Social dimension. Indicators of social presence, interactions with instructors and peer students, and a sense of community were included in the social dimension. Results from the content analyses indicated that several strategies were used to increase the social atmosphere over the online teaching and learning in general. For example, all 27 courses used the functions of personnel profile with short self-introductions accompanying student pictures at the beginning of the courses. However, 7% of the courses (2 courses) used an introduction forum in their own courses, and provided an online coffee house where students could talk about nontask topics socially or privately. These strategies were in use as a way of socialization for online learning and assisted in social interactions for virtual teaming both directly and indirectly.

Technological dimension. The use of application tools for virtual teaming activities was a key part of the technological dimension. The most frequently used application tools in online MBA courses in general were traditional communication tools and two-way text-based asynchronous or synchronous tools. In detail, e-mail (100%, 27 courses) and telephone (30%, 8 courses) were identified as frequently used tools in this online program. Discussion forums were also in good use for class activities (85%, 23 courses) and for team activities (15%, 4 courses).

Interestingly, 33% of courses offered private team areas to students for file sharing among virtual teams (9 courses). Meanwhile, the synchronous tools commonly used for class discussion (41%, 11 courses), and for team discussion (19%, 5 courses) were real time chat. However, audio-based and video-based application tools were seldom used for virtual teaming activities.

Perceptions on Virtual Teams

As alluded to earlier, the results of surveys and interviews in this study provided information on the perceptions of students regarding virtual teams as well as online teaching and learning in general. The instructors' perception data was also collected mainly through one-on-one interviews.

Task dimension. The overall results of the surveys showed that the students have positive attitudes toward virtual teaming activities in their courses. Approximately, 93% of the respondents felt that sharing information and giving peer feedback in team projects contributed to student learning (M=4.17, SD=.63), as referred to in the following student quote: "... It's a real good learning process because you have all kinds of different people coming from all kinds of different backgrounds and walks of life ..."

About 86% of the students surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that working in teams was helpful to their learning (M=4.22, SD=.91). Similarly, 86% of students indicated that virtual teaming helped create collective knowledge (M=4.18, SD=.80). Equally important, 70% of students responded that instructors provided clear guidelines or procedures for working in teams (M=3.82, SD=.87).

Similarly, instructors mentioned that they used virtual teams in online MBA courses because they felt that the virtual teaming approach was (a) similar to the conflicts and problems in the real business world, (b) appropriate to develop application skills, (c) a means to foster teamwork skills, and (d) a solid way to reduce heavy workload. A quote from one instructor below exemplifies these benefits:

  ... In most business settings, they're going to be involved with teams
  and we need to simulate that a little bit. I think they learn a lot
  from the teamwork ... because they have an opportunity to express
  their understanding of materials and rationale for certain
  recommendations that they're making. An opportunity to see what other
  people are saying as well ...

Not surprisingly, the interviews also supported the idea that the instructors and students viewed the virtual teaming approach as a better approach for complex tasks or problems. It is interesting to note that one concern raised in this study was how instructors design and facilitate team tasks. As revealed by the following instructor quote, they perceive that online cases have to be deeper and the design of case contents better articulated, compared to residential settings. A couple of citations address this issue:

  ... Team assignment is much more the case oriented assignment and
  there's a lot more discussion on that case oriented assignment than
  there is on the other ones that aren't as case oriented. Questions
  become broader. They become more generic and can be answered in a
  broader framework and they're placing it more frequently in the
  context of their work of how do we apply this in our work and how does
  this get implemented as well as how do we answer this assignment?...

  ... (In online courses) We use fewer cases but in greater depth over a
  longer period of time with interim submissions by the students with
  interim feedback from the faculty ...

Most instructors in this study expressed deep concerns about real world skill practices throughout virtual teaming activities. For many of them, the practice of critical thinking and problem solving epitomizes the reason for teaching in a business school. The following is a quote from one instructor that illustrates the importance of exposing students to real-world skills and situations.

  ... Everybody knows that the core lesson in marketing is about heeding
  the customer in some way. We can force them to realize that
  understanding a concept and using it is a very different thing. It
  requires discipline and a variety of changes in thought patterns ...

Social dimension. The survey results indicated that about 43% of students believed that they got to know other students well throughout online teaching and learning in general (M=3.24, SD=.86), and about 60% of students felt that they better understood the emotions of peers in online courses though online interactions (M=3.53, SD=.98). In addition, 60% of students claimed that they seldom felt lonely or isolated when conducting online activities (M=3.44, SD=1.07).

However, there was a slight difference in the pattern of results obtained from the interviews and surveys. For instance, on the interviews, about one half of the students expressed difficulties in knowing peer students in a short amount of time while working in online environments. As one student stated:

  ... But kind of strong arming, because we don't understand each
  other's personalities and we've only had a very short amount of time
  to meet one another, so for me the most difficult part of, and the
  worst part, the hardest part, is to try and understand who these other
  people are ...

Similarly, instructors mentioned that the impersonality of the online environment was a key difference that they experienced compared to their residential courses. Many instructors agreed with the importance of building social presence and its usefulness, but they were not sure if their students shared a sense of social presence in their courses.

  ... I don't know. In some cases they're from the same company and the
  same location but in other cases they're in the same company and
  they're in totally different parts of the world. So I don't now
  whether they know each other or not. But at least with the teams I
  create a sense of community with 4 or 5 people ...

  ... That's one of the difficulties. It's a very impersonal environment
  whereas the face to face it's much more personal. You can develop
  rapport with a student; you see the interaction that's going on
  between people and you can use that in a teaching environment. That's
  much more difficult to do in an online environment and that's one of
  the things that I feel is missing from the online environment ...

As one improvement area, some students suggested to provide more opportunities to get a stronger network among themselves and cohesive activities in which all the students can play a role. As one student noted:

  ... The people that I communicate with and work with the best are the
  people that I've met here face to face and I know who they are and
  where they're coming from. You need to get to know your team members
  more in an online environment. Some events are necessary ...

In regards to encouraging social awareness in online environments, instructors recommended that they provide more specific signs to employ personal identity in their courses. The following quote from one online instructor exemplifies the necessity of a visual touch with students.

  ... But it, conversation with him directly or indirectly cued the
  thought of sort of talking heads just animation graphics maybe and
  that would be artificial but nevertheless if we could inject something
  like that then peer team level meetings would appear to install
  identity maybe a little bit more robustly. Deepen, it's still pseudo
  personal but maybe just a little more personal ...

Technological dimension. The survey results show that 75% of students believed that application tools were used effectively supporting online teaching and learning in general (M=3.83, SD=.91), while, even more (85%) mentioned that the tools fostered deep learning (M=4.07, SD=.66). Ninety percent (90%) of participants responded that these application tools were easy to use (M=4.10, SD=.57). In particular, over 72% of students who participated in virtual teaming activities were positive about the functions of team tools (M=3.74, SD=1.01).

While there was overall high satisfaction with the use of certain tools provided by the course management system, some students indicated that they frequently used other collaborative tools outside of their courses (e.g., AOL e-mail, instant messaging, etc.), which made virtual team processes hard to track since archives or records of student activities were not maintained, as referred to in the following citation from one student:

  ... (As a student) I have some technical difficulty because I am not
  from North American, like I work in Venezuela, so sometimes like a
  time zone there's a big difference. The other thing is the conference
  call, like in Venezuela there is no toll free, so whenever they set up
  a "1-800" free call I have to pay for every penny and I don't really
  like it. So the way to solve it is use AOL, chat room, MSN ...

  ... I would say that this is partly a challenge of knowing what to do
  but it's also partly a challenge of doing what I know I could do and
  don't, is since you don't see the people you don't know if they're
  getting it or not ... you don't know who in the group did what to make
  group assignments. All you see is the final output. And so I have
  observed when it comes time for the final exam that there's a
  significant group of people who don't know some things that they
  really should know ...

As indicated, synchronous tools were in relatively low use within virtual teams. LiveMeeting, for instance, is a software product that allows synchronous audio and video communications and was available for use of instructors and students in this program. Most instructors did not have chances to use it in their online courses because of time-consuming work, unfamiliar functions, and unknown benefits of such tools.

DISCUSSION

In the previous section, we described the actual strategies used for virtual teaming and perceptions of students and instructors on virtual teaming from a standpoint of task, social, and technological dimensions. In particular, the perception of students and instructors obtained from the qualitative data is summarized in the Table 1.

With consideration of the survey and interview results from students and instructors, what implications can we ascertain from the findings? How can you interpret the actual use of virtual teaming strategies, and student and instructor perceptions from the perspective of task, social, and technological dimensions? In the following section, we discuss some challenges and issues regarding the operation of virtual teams in online MBA courses along the three dimensions studied here.

Task Dimension

Overall, the instructors and students expressed satisfaction regarding the task dimension of virtual teams in online MBA courses. The findings verified that teamwork is a popular instructional method even in online environments. As Duarte and Snyder (1999) stressed, most instructors have a strong confidence in the usefulness of the virtual teaming approach in online education.

Pedagogical strategies in virtual teaming activities that were widely used by instructors included (a) the empowerment of team formation, (b) team-level deliverables, and (c) the balance of individual work and teamwork. Regarding team formation, it appears that instructors and students considered the freedom of team formation as a key trigger to increase team cohesion and to minimize potential complaints and confrontations evolving during teamwork activities. However, since these techniques have been widely employed in residential teaming activities, we can assume that online instructors adapt the same or at least similar instructional techniques that they were accustomed to using in face-to-face settings over the years.

It is desirable that instructors provide clear guidelines on the virtual teaming process to promote task effectiveness. In addition, it is encouraging to discover that some instructors realized deeper levels of depth and complexity in designing team tasks which may differ from those of residential teams.

Social Dimension

The findings also reveal some interesting implications regarding the social dimension of virtual teams. Overall, instructors did not recognize the necessity of social techniques or tools, thereby lowering the degree of the social dimension within virtual teams. Most instructional techniques that were used in online MBA courses related to the social dimension were also commonly used in teams within the residential version of the MBA program, not solely or specifically in virtual teaming activities. These social techniques (e.g., introductions, sharing of favorite web resources, picture sharing, etc.) can help students know each other regardless of teams at the beginning of the courses, but hardly guarantee the maintenance of social presence within virtual teams. It is conceivable that continuous human interactions throughout formal or informal feedback or monitoring between students, and students and instructors, could assist in increasing and maintaining social presence and an overall sense of belonging.

Interview results also verified that many instructors admitted that current online MBA courses were rarely designed with consideration for how to build social environments where students freely exchanged and negotiated their ideas. From a student perspective, the degree of social presence or a sense of belonging reached a middle, if not high, level. One of the reasons for limited social interactions was that students have difficulties knowing peer students in a short time, while conducting teamwork simultaneously. This leads them to jump directly into performing team tasks without strong team cohesion (i.e., a task focus).

As Duarte and Snyder (1999) noted, most satisfaction for teamwork comes from the balance of task performance and social dynamics. However, the findings here show that online MBA instructors were more oriented toward increasing the effectiveness of online team performance rather than other important social and technological considerations. The assumed reason for this high task focus or orientation is that most online instructors who have taught residential courses over the years maintain their mindset of teaching residential courses and are unaware of the importance of social presence in online environments.

Technological Dimension

In the technological dimension, the most popular tools used were e-mail, telephone, discussion forums, and real time chats. The results indicate that instructors and students are accustomed to using text-based application tools. On the other hand, they seldom used audio-based or video-based application tools. For instance, audio conferencing, video conferencing, and synchronous conferencing were provided within the courses, but they were not used as much as text-based application tools. The low use of audio-and video-based application tools resulted from the fact that such application tools required instructors and students to acquire additional technical skills. Another fundamental cause of hesitation in use of such tools is rooted in increased demand for additional time and effort within online teaching and learning environments.

Remarkably, the findings show that one-third of online MBA courses provided students with teamwork spaces. Of course, a privately shared space is an essential tool for managing teamwork. By keeping team deliverables updated and continuously discussing team projects in such an online shared space, instructors and students have a sense of what they have done so far and how consensus was made throughout team negotiations.

The findings reveal that even though teaming approaches have been widely used in online MBA courses, the appropriate tools provided for effective teamwork are still lacking. This interpretation is consistent with a recent study by Kirschner and Van Bruggen (2004), which stressed that current collaborative technologies for teamwork tend to be designed for mechanical functions of basic communications, but are of limited use for supporting teaming activities.

Compared to the task dimension, the level of activity related to both the social and technological dimensions in virtual teams was relatively low in these online MBA courses (see Table 2). The phenomenon of unbalanced activation of the three dimensions within virtual teaming can be interpreted in this way. Many online instructors have applied the virtual teaming approaches to their own courses with an underlying goal of achieving high standards of online education. However, the findings reported in this study suggest that online instructors tended to replicate the residential settings as much as possible in online environments. For instance, instructors lacked awareness that a sense of belonging is requisite to promoting to team achievement. Furthermore, they failed to take advantage of many technological possibilities for collaboration. Consequently, the technological potential of the Web was not sufficiently utilized to enhance course interactivity and teaming activities in their courses, modules, and programs.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This study was conducted to understand how three dimensions of teaming operate in online environments, namely, task, social, and technological concerns. In addition, we assessed whether each dimension was properly integrated in various online MBA courses within a highly ranked program. Our findings revealed that instructors recognized the importance of virtual teams in online learning environments, but may not yet have grasped how to make such activities successful. As a result, we propose three recommendations for designing and creating better virtual teaming activities.

First, there needs to be a change in how instructors monitor the teaming process. Most instructors still use traditional modes or methods of assessment in their online courses in which final products or team deliverables are the major component of evaluating students. Considering that the experiences of learning from social-constructivist perspectives emphasize knowledge building throughout students' interactions, the assessment of virtual teaming has to cover the "teaming process" as much as, or more than, the development of team products (Carabajal et al., 2003). A large portion of the teamwork approach in online education currently depends on the level of observed team behaviors. Instead of monitoring team processes, negotiations, and interaction patterns, instructors typically place more weight on final outputs submitted by teams at the end of their online courses. The value of the virtual teaming approach in learning environments is to assist students in internalizing the process of consensus building that occurs among team members when engaged in cognitive and social conflicts. Assessment of teamwork processes could help both instructors and students understand what makes virtual teams effective.

Second, social familiarity and strong human bonds are preconditions for pushing students to effectively and efficiently collaborate with others. They experience cognitive conflicts, social confrontations, psychological dissonance and dilemmas, and many cultural barriers while managing the virtual teaming process. Several features of online environments (e.g., invisibility. varied locations, delayed feedback, nonreal time interactions and events, etc.) can enhance such difficulties. Social presence and a sense of belonging do not always impact the team performance directly, but they can lessen these tensions, which occur during the virtual teaming activities. Therefore, instructors should be aware of the importance of social presence as another central dimension of virtual teams for effectively functioning online classes, in general. Also, they should guide the online learning process in an adaptive way, thereby helping students to understand the uncertainty and nonroutine nature of their work while balancing various tasks and social dynamics.

Third, additional technologies designed for virtual teams to communicate, socialize, link information, and share and negotiate ideas need to be provided. Since technologies provide a gathering place or socially shared space that reinforces the team's purpose and meets their needs (Carabajal et al., 2003), it is vital to identify and focus on those technological groupings that improve the performance of virtual teams (Duarte & Snyder, 1999). As noted by Kirschner and Van Bruggen (2004), current technologies employed in business education are typically used for team communication, though they have not been specifically designed to support their collaborative work. Proper choice of technologies will lead to successful accomplishment of team tasks and the maintenance of the team. Also, proper use of real-time, visual tools with multiple modes of communication channels could enrich the efficiency and effectiveness of online learning. Such application tools are predicted to help establish a better professional intimacy, realism, and real-world flavor for students. Simultaneously, timely training opportunities related to the use of more sophisticated application tools have to be provided for both instructors and students.

In this study, several negative elements, obstacles, or difficulties were identified in virtual teaming activities (e.g., free riding, grading, depth of group learning experiences, cross cultural issues, difficulty working in different time zones, etc.). However, if there is a proper coordination of task, social, and technological dimensions in the design and operation of virtual teaming, such issues can be overcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This study explored the operation of virtual teams in online MBA courses within a highly successful and rigorous program. Not surprisingly, the task dimension was the area emphasized most by instructors, not the social or technological dimensions. However, it is still an appropriate goal to maintain a good balance of task performance, social dynamics, and use of appropriate technologies for better virtual teaming activities. More balance in the implementation of each dimension could be an impetus for creating value for online learning experiences in business education.

It is a positive sign that the perceptions of instructors have been slowly but continuously transforming the importance of social interactions and the appropriate use of tools to make more engaging and fruitful online learning environments. Extensive faculty training support has to be provided to speed up this transformation within business education. Also, the success of online courses depends on the appropriate integration with emerging technologies, not just the mere adoption of new technologies, to foster transformative learning experiences.

The context of this particular study focused on business education. Consequently, the findings may have limitations that restrict the generalization to other academic fields. Nevertheless, the recommendations regarding designing better virtual teaming activities could be useful for practitioners, instructors, and designers who intend to implement the virtual teaming approach in their respective academic fields. Based on the empirical findings provided on this particular project, further indepth studies are encouraged to develop specific strategies, process guidelines, and innovative tools for successful virtual teaming activities across academic disciplines.

References

Ahern, T. C., & El-Hindi, A. E. (2000). Improving the instructional congruency of a computer-mediated small-group discussion: A case study in design and delivery. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(3), 385-400.

Carabajal, K., LaPointe, D., & Gunawardena, C. N. (2003). Group development in online learning communities. In M. G. Moore, & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 217-234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Chinowsky, P. S., & Rojas, E. M. (2003). Virtual teams: Guide to successful implementation. Journal of Management in Engineering, 19(3), 98-106.

Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-290.

Conrad, R. M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2004). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cuevas, H. M., Fiore, S. M., Salas, E., & Bowers, C. A. (2004). Virtual teams as sociotechnical systems. In S. H. Godar, & S. P. Ferris (Eds.), Virtual and collaborative teams: Process, technologies and practice (pp. 1-19). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.

Duarte, D., & Snyder, N. T. (1999). Mastering virtual teams: Strategies, tools and techniques that succeed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kirschner, P. A., & Van Bruggen, J. (2004). Learning and understanding in virtual teams. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7(2), 135-139.

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by Korea Research Foundation Grant (KRF-2003-037-B00071).

Note

(1) 1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree

SEUNG-HEE LEE, CURTIS J. BONK, RICHARD J. MAGJUKA, BUDE SU, AND XIAOJING LIU 

Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN USA

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

[e-mail]

Table 1 Summary of Perceived Issues on Virtual Teams

Dimension      Perception of virtual teaming  Issues

Task           * Positive attitude on         * Required a balance of
dimension        operation of virtual           social and technological
                 teaming activities             dimensions
               * Helpfulness of virtual       * Product oriented and
                 teaming activities for         less consideration on
                 collective knowledge           process of virtual
                 building                       teaming
               * Clear instructional
                 guidelines or procedures
                 for working in groups
Social         * Gradual recognition on       * Correlation of social
dimension        importance of creating         presence and performance
                 cohesion and positive        * Instructor's prejudice
                 emotions within courses        on building social
               * Necessity of a sense of        climates
                 belonging for working
                 online
               * Instructor's lower sense
                 of presence
Technological  * Roles of technological       * Low awareness of
dimension        tools for working together     appropriate use of
               * Heavily used for               technological tools for
                 communication purposes         supporting virtual teams
                 than promoting students'     * Collaborative tool
                 online collaborative work      design issues: Tools are
                                                less likely to provide
                                                an instructor with
                                                information about a
                                                team's collaborative
                                                processes

Table 2 Summary of Dimensions of Virtual Teams in Online MBA Courses

Dimensions of virtual teams                               Degree (2)

Task dimension    * Shared purpose of virtual teams       H
                  * Belief of contribution of virtual     H
                    teams on knowledge building
                  * Use of diverse techniques for team    M
                    activity design
Social dimension  * Use of social techniques in virtual   M
                    teams
                  * Use of human interaction approach     M
                  * Sharing social presence and cohesion  M
Technological     * Use of text-based (a)synchronous      M
dimension           tools
                  * Use of audio-and video-based          L
                    (a)synchronous tools
                  * Usefulness of collaborative tools     M

(2) H=High, M=Medium, L=Low