Global Virtual Team Structures
Proximal teams’ familiarity, mutual trust and support of others, as well as successful cooperation is associated with shared group membership (i.e., cooperative cohesive ingrouping). This is based on physical standards set by organizations in regard to dress codes, and visual socialization cues and practices. The lack of physical exposure to others outside of personal association, with the use of socially constructed meta-stereotypes activation (Vázquez, Yzerbyt, Dovidio, & Gómez, 2016) does not leave space in GVTs to recognize each team members individual natural eccentricities along with their given expertise, whether within one’s own personal group (e.g., race, sex, age, sexual identity) or a completely outside group (Hechler, Neyer, & Kessler, 2016; Guimond, 2016). Thus, the creation of a living team charter contract before a GVT launch is an essential element to establish team member expectations of communication norms that are critical in challenging awareness deficits and preparing GVTs for the creation of a “Purple Space” to produce virtual closeness to raise performance, group accomplishments, and trustworthiness.
The team charter in essence addresses the overall purpose, project overview, project scope, roles and responsibilities for the GVT collective. These GVT start-up factors are discussed during the creation of the team charter, and must be mutually agreed upon before pursuing virtual closeness in GVTs. Thus, the three important GVT start-up factors of individual contact, contribution interdependence, and role function(s) relatedness complement the key virtual team structures, which include: project management (e.g., work division and ground rules), governance (e.g. dos and don’ts, addressing learning abilities, and decisions through disagreement), and the action plan (e.g., weekly schedules).
One of the most important necessities in starting up a GVT is being conscious and aware of individual contact (i.e., function). Bringing one’s authentic self to a GVT to willingly share views and ideas as a benefit to the team, demonstrates support (Poole, 2005; Tuckman, 1965), psychological investment, and aids the unconscious assumptions of member contributions to meet the end goal (Karp 1980; Miller, 1998; Poole, 2005). Thus, the sophistication of GVTs are knowledge sharing workgroups (Tuckman, 1965) aiming to achieve task completion.
The contributions from GVT members in knowledge sharing workgroups are valuable resources to the organization’s task of solving complex problems. Therefore, the recognition of interdependence allows GVT member leaders to rationalize ways of agreeing and disagreeing to carry out task oriented processes and maintain both individual and collective identity (Miller, 1998; Karp 1980; Lewin, 1997; Poole, 2005). Having established interpersonal relationships through personal contact and contributions makes the roles of GVT members essential to discuss.
Role function(s) and relatedness are also key factors in GVT startups. Each member is responsible for participating, which means adapting to the different roles of expertise played within the GVT (Poole, 2005; Tuckman, 1965). Ultimately, GVTs are creative decision-making architect entities that support combinations of reciprocal unification to complete organizational tasks and solve problems through the use of computer moderated communications and multicultural communication approaches.
