The article “Understanding Conflict in Geographically
Distributed Teams: The Modeling Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and
Spontaneous Communication,” identified a few of the issues and challenges that
I’m dealing with in my company as our clients expand the reach of our public
relations activities from North America to various countries in Latin America,
Asia, Europe, and Africa. In order to
properly provide public relations support in the countries in Latin America, I decided
to subcontract the work to a team of consultants that were very familiar with
the culture and the way that the client needs to work with the various media. I
hired an agency in London that is charged with extending my client’s public
relations efforts into various countries in Latin America.
While working with a team that differs from a cultural and
language standpoint is challenging, perhaps the biggest challenge is the fact
that we’re physically separated by the North American continent and the
Atlantic Ocean and have never met face-to-face. As explained by Hinds and
Mortensen (2005), misunderstandings between geographically-separated teams can
be more extreme than if our teams were collocated. The issue of communications,
already strained by the language barrier, is only exacerbated by the need to
use telecommunications to collaborate.
“A strong shared identity among team members has been linked
to reduced conflict, particularly interpersonal conflict (see Jehn et al. 1999)”
(Hinds & Mortensen, 2005). As public
relations agencies working together towards the objectives of one client, my
agency has been able to develop a shared identity with the Latin America agency
that creates a bond of shared perspectives and experiences that tends to
strengthen our interagency relationships.
As the article stated, our distributed team utilizes Skype, email and
telephone calls to interact which can result in less-than-ideal team
interactions (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).
However, our shared group identity has helped to create a strong,
trusting, productive relationship.
We have also opened the channel of communications to
encourage spontaneous, informal interactions between the London and domestic
team via Skype, instant messaging and email.
This has helped to strengthen our shared identity (Hinds & Mortensen,
2005) and enhanced the trust in our relationships by reducing miscommunications
and greatly minimizing the barriers imposed by the geographic separation of our
teams.
Collaboration between geographically separated team, whether
by a few hundred miles or half a world apart can cause issues that can
negatively impact morale, productivity and effectiveness. However, by focusing on ways to create a
shared identity, enhance shared context and promote spontaneous communication,
organizations can still build strong, trusted relationships that are
increasingly important in today’s global economy (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005).
Hinds, P. H., and Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding Conflict in
Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity,
Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication. Organization
Science, 16, pp. 290-307
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G.B., & Neale, M.A. (1999). Why
differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and
performance in workgroups. Admin. Sci.
Quart., 44, 741-763.
Thanks for sharing this experience. I found the Hinds & Mortensen article really interesting as someone that works with teams around the country.
ReplyDeleteWe have around 15 branches around the country; each with their own shared identity. What I've noticed over the years in corporate communications it that their remote shared identity is not always shared with the corporate/home office identity which is the main identity of the company. For many years we have empowered our branches to act independently, but there's a new sheriff in town (new CEO) and that may change a bit. I know some of the branch leadership aren't really fond of me editing their communications to match our company's strategies, but I work to find common ground and compromise to end up with a product we're all happy with.
However, these are fellow employees in the same company and theoretically working toward the same goal. You are using an example of sub-contracting the work out. Though I recognize that you "work to achieve collective goals" (p. 291), do you think the fact that you are these remote PR firms' clients instead of employers makes a difference? The authors point out that "when a shared group identity is salient, team members are inclined to be more loyal, more trusting and more concerned about promoting the welfare of the group" (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005; Brewer and Miller, 1996, p.293). I'm just curious about whether you can expect the same level of commitment from a distant team if they're not employees of your company. I'm not referring to the work they perform, but instead to a shared identity and team.
Thanks.
Very interesting, Ken. It sounds like you have put in place a number of effective processes to help manage the challenges that come with distance collaboration. Hinds and Mortensen (2005) discuss the challenges of distributed work. However, have you experienced any benefits from this sort of team structure? You discuss the challenges of working across languages and cultures. However, are there any advantages that come with this diversity?
ReplyDeleteKen,
ReplyDeleteWorking in a team environment can be challenging, particularly when there are language and cultural challenges. I recall last week how we discussed technology being used to supplement face-to-face communication. Certainly, technology is necessary when your work requires a great deal of outsourcing. And, it can be rather difficult to use technologies like Skype and IM to communicate. It is great to see how you making successful efforts to open the line of communication and encourage more free flowing communication using technology. How would you rate your relationships with your team now that you have implemented this new strategy?
Ken,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great example of Hinds and Mortensen's research in use. It is interesting to see how effective these shared identities, contexts, and spontaneous communication can be. I would assume that it takes some time after implementation for these methods to really be effective. How long ago did you start this process? And have you noticed a stronger team evolving over time?