DE Oracle @ UMUC

Virtual Teamwork in the Online Classroom: Social and Cultural Characteristics and Influences - Part I

Datta Kaur Khalsa, Ph.D.

Director of Assessment, UMUC Department of Education,

Graduate School of Management and Technology

Published: July-August 2010

Category: » University-showcase » Papers-studies

Introduction

Reaching beyond traditional limits of geographical boundaries and time constraints, the online classroom provides diversified groups of students with opportunities for virtual interaction and authentic team communication, planning, and projects. Traditional team processes take on a new look as online students are required to adapt to the merging of technology, culture, identity, and community in an asynchronous, mostly text-based virtual team process. In order for instructors to facilitate online teamwork more effectively and for students to participate in teams more successfully, it is beneficial to understand the role of social and cultural characteristics during the virtual interactive process.

A study with graduate students from the California Public University System who were experienced in virtual teamwork determined that traditional social and cultural influences remain important in current virtual teamwork (Khalsa, 2007). The graduate student survey results are discussed in this first article of a two-part series, noting virtual team challenges as well as the suggestions they offered for improvement to the multicultural, virtual team experience. The student suggestions also inform guidelines for online faculty and students who are involved with forming a cultural hybrid to accomplish virtual team goals.

Background

Online learning can benefit from the creation and sharing of knowledge versus long-established knowledge transfer and assimilation. Extending learning opportunities through discussion, collaboration, and virtual teamwork present opportunities for a collective effort of understanding. Dynamic interaction in virtual teamwork creates a hybrid of geographical locations, perspectives, and professional backgrounds, and it mirrors authentic interaction needed in many professions, and organizational settings.

Short and temporary time frames towards completion of team projects require members to engage in independent tasks with common goals. Online team interactions require some unlearning, relearning, and deep appreciation for the innovative process. Students must be aware of personal, social, and cultural dimensions that acculturate in a virtual time and workplace. Most online team research has emphasized benefits, technology guidelines, processes, and content development. However, social and cultural influences affect many aspects of teamwork, including interpretations, roles, expectations, and progress. A framework for discussing social and cultural characteristics includes examination of traditionally recognized components to determine if their prevalence is still influential in multi-cultural interaction in online learning teams.

Traditional Social and Cultural Characteristics

Virtual team acculturation is an individual’s ability to adapt to the cultural behavior patterns of others and the ability to shift interdependence among strangers. The powerful sociocultural forces that have been rooted in social and cultural history are now required to function in an interdependent, virtual, and multicultural global team setting. To determine if traditional social and cultural characteristics still have strong influence, let’s first examine what influences were originally established.

Hall (1977, 1990) researched patterns of different cultures and noted that there are cultural perceptual differences related to time, space, relationships, and materials. Hofstede (1997, 2001) studied values of people in different cultures and created similarities to a study done 20 years prior by Inkeles & Levinson (1969). The determined values resulted in four dimensions:

1. Power, including perceptions of wealth and status
2. Uncertainty avoidance, including perceptions of rules, regulations, and flexibility
3. Individualism, including perceptions on self-reliance, group harmony, and team recognition
4. Gender, including perceptions on competition, assertiveness, and nurturance or support in teamwork

Storti (1990, 1998) built on Hall (1990) and Hofstede’s (1997) work and spoke of two dimensions as building blocks of sociocultural differences: visible dimensions (behaviors) and invisible dimensions (assumptions, values, and beliefs). Perception of self-identity, group identity, time, and power were subcategories of these dimensions. After a further comparison of these four frameworks, there is strong evidence that the following eight dimensions affect traditional group actions as well as group identity and group harmony:

1. Power and status
2. Assertiveness and competition
3. Recognition
4. Leadership
5. Gender
6. Time and flexibility
7. Support and nurturance
8. Rules and regulations

The described comparison stimulates further investigation to determine if the traditional notions of sociocultural influences remain applicable when individuals engage in virtual group work, crossing cultures and geographical boundaries with predominantly text-based communication. The investigation prompted these questions:

• Are traditional sociocultural influences an important part of virtual team processes, which require that cultural and geographical boundaries be crossed with a text-based, asynchronous, virtual communication process?
• Does the new look of online learning teams require unique adaptations as online students merge technology, culture, identity, and community?

Preliminary research (Khalsa, 2007) implies that there is current relevancy to traditional sociocultural dimensions on virtual group work, more specifically online virtual learning teamwork as shown by a survey with 45 graduate students.

Graduate Student Participants

Forty-five online graduate students (22 females & 23 males) were surveyed (Khalsa, 2007). The participants were a multicultural group of adults with a variety of career goals and experiences including corporate online training, K–12 teaching, university, business and military distance education development. All students were enrolled in a university certificate or master's degree program designed to acquire necessary credentials and skills to be an effective online instructor. All students surveyed had been members of virtual learning teams, which were required to produce a technology and learning-related course project collaboratively.

Survey Method and Results

Semi-structured and unstructured survey answers were obtained through an online survey, coded by this author. The survey questions were designed to determine aspects of the virtual team experience, and the survey analysis was designed to determine the influence of eight previously mentioned sociocultural dimensions. The frequency at which these sociocultural dimensions appeared in the 45 student survey answers are displayed in Figure 1. Notes on the influence of team and member support during the virtual team process was most frequently mentioned. Two females mentioned the existence of offensive comments by two males who were their team members. Other dimensions were also viewed as important with the frequency range noted in the graphic.

Graduate Student Comments

Graduate student comments helped define influences and offer general suggestions for team interaction. These results are discussed here.

Team Support: Graduate students defined aspects of team support as sharing ideas, communicating positively and frequently with constructive criticism, providing alternate viewpoints, and displaying professionalism. Lack of team support included workload inequality, lack of communication, and generally "not doing their part." Students recommended moving a team project forward in a way that builds trust and effectiveness through timeliness and frequent communication.

Time and Flexibility: Interpretation of time varies among cultures. Adult careers and overloaded work schedules also add to the challenge of virtual teamwork. Students may need suggestions on how to work with such time challenges. Remedies suggested by the graduate students included an awareness and acceptance of diversity, tolerance of time zones differences, and a willingness to put forth extra personal effort. Respect and trust for team members are also recommended solutions.

Rules and Regulations: Virtual collaboration presents opportunities for a collective effort of understanding and project advancement. Normally social practices, roles, and rules regulate thought and behavior. In a virtual team environment, these characteristics may exist with broader interpretations. Initial guidelines and rules can eliminate confusion and ineffectiveness. One-third of the graduate students surveyed noted that team rules are important to project quality and completion. Discussing team member workloads and schedules with agreement on communication methods and frequency helped eliminate unnecessary delays and miscommunications in addition to clarifying expectations.

Recognition, Power, and Status: When an individual’s identity and perception are verified by a group, the group membership is recognized. Thoughts, feelings, and behavior are affected by the presence or implied presence of others. Individual identities often include levels of status or power, yet virtual team identity requires individual adaptation or acculturation. Twenty-three specific comments emphasized some aspect of recognition or power. As some students noted, virtual team members may need to recognize that giving up a degree of power is part of successful virtual teamwork.

Leadership, Assertiveness, and Competition: Leadership and assertiveness often serve each other. As noted by these graduate students, overly assertive team members can offend others. However giving due consideration to all member perspectives and paying special attention to being too assertive broadens team respect and trust and most likely will minimize competition, even though the existence of competition was not mentioned. Eleven percent of the students noted the need for one main team leader or a plan to alternate the person in the leadership role to best serve timelines and focus for project completion.

Gender: Diverse cultural backgrounds include diverse philosophies, some of which may include lack of gender equality or sensitivity to gender issues. As noted earlier, two females out of the 45 students surveyed noted biased gender comments by two male team members. To help students alleviate sensitive diversity issues, netiquette guidelines that include points on cultural and gender sensitivity have been found to help prevent inappropriate interaction, as was noted by the surveyed participants.

Implications and Limitations

The sample of participants was limited in number, but the participants’ previous experience with virtual teamwork provided in-depth insight and comments on the team experience. The results, therefore, are especially important for online graduate programs which are offering virtual teamwork and have multicultural adult student populations similar to this population of students. The background, dimension frequencies, and student comments can provide a foundation of understanding for instructors and online students by offering them insight into communication, planning, and challenges for virtual teamwork.

Summary

This article offers background on traditional sociocultural influences that have affected face-to-face group processes. Comparison of research displays eight key dimensions that have been found to impact group identity and group harmony: power and status, assertiveness and competition, recognition, leadership, gender, time and flexibility, support and nurturance, and rules and regulations. With the increased popularity of online learning and online team projects, it is important to determine if the same sociocultural dimensions influence virtual group processes. Graduate students who are experienced in virtual teamwork helped determine that similar sociocultural influences exist in the virtual world today. Their survey comments provided suggestions for team planning and interaction, including notes on team support, "doing your part," building trust and respect, acculturation to the group identity, assertiveness, and gender sensitivity.

Considering the complexity of a global society, it is no longer clear if the traditionally recognized sociocultural influences fully apply to virtual teamwork. However, the online graduate students surveyed here create the awareness that, in virtual learning teamwork, traditional social and cultural influences may still exist today. Being aware of these influences and planning to avoid pitfalls in each area can help online students and instructors create a more effective virtual team process.

Part 2 of this series will provide sample student comments and present a practical framework for virtual teamwork.

References

Hall, E. (1977). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor Books.

Hall, E. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Cultural consequences. London: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Inkeles, A., & Levinson, D. (1969). National character: The study of modal personality and sociocultural systems. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 311-378). Boston: Addison-Wesley.

Khalsa, D.K. (2007). Multicultural dimensions in e-learning teamwork. In A. Edmundsen (Ed.), Globalized e-learning cultural challenges (pp. 254-269). New York: Idea Publishing.

Storti, C. (1990). The art of crossing cultures. Boston: Intercultural Press, Inc.

Storti, C. (1998). Figuring foreigners out. Boston: Intercultural Press, Inc.