Building
Trust & Rules
1.
Introduction of our collaboration
I have to admit
that this time of virtual collaboration between the evening and morning groups
for the virtual assignment is really a tough task for me. It is the first time
I worked with someone I had never seen before for a common goal which requires
frequent communication and interaction. Our first audio meeting was arranged on
4th March after two rounds of emails and was conducted through
skype. Thereafter, we continued to communicate with the morning group through
instant mobile messenger Wechat, audio call tool Skype and formal emails for
the identification of collaboration project and collaboration parties. My
general impression of our collaboration would be “lack of trust” and a
“compromised” outcome. Although there exist other factors for the not-so-successful
outcome, I believe that the most important reason would be the missing of trust
between our two groups and the lack of ground rules. I will explain why I think
this way in the following section though the analysis of conflicts encountered
during our collaboration with the morning group.
2. Conflicts
Recalling the
whole collaborating process, I believe I encountered three major intergroup
conflicts. The first conflict is related to the determination of collaborating
project, and the second one is related to the naming of the online community
platform, and the third one is about the frustrating false consensus. I will
give more elaboration in the following section.
2.1 Conflict over
determination of collaborating project
The first and the
fiercest conflict occurred when our two groups tried to decide which group
represents which industry or community and what the collaborating project would
be. Our evening group wanted to act as a NGO focusing on taking care of senior
citizens and would like to address the issue of recruitment difficulties in
term of volunteers, while the morning group preferred to represent a sports
wearing company who wanted to design a pedometer mobile app for sales
promotion. We, as the opposite collaborating partner, obviously did not agree
on the pedometer mobile apps as our collaborating project because we did not
see any benefit to our side as a NGO caring for empty-nest elderly, nor did the
project solve our volunteer recruitment difficulties. The morning group did not
favor our proposal of an online volunteer community with advertising support
from sports wearing company either. The tedious communication then followed
formally through emails or informally through Wechat and Skype for many rounds.
Both groups finally compromised and reached an agreement on an online community
of psychological volunteers and settled the argument.
2.2 Conflict over
the naming of online platform
The second
conflict rises from the different opinions on the naming of the online
community platform. Initially, we named our community as
PsychologicalVolunteersOnline. Later, the morning group suggested a better
name—hafee (abbreviated from “holistic aid for empty-nest elders”). However,
considering that the online community is mainly composed of psychological
student volunteers, psychological counseling practitioners as well as
professors, Sophia suggested changing “holistic” to “psychological”. This
proposal was strongly opposed from the other group and due to time constraint,
we compromised and agreed to keep the “holistic”.
2.3 False
consensus phenomena
While the previous
two conflicts are apparent and above the table, the last one is implicit and
unobvious. There are two times that we thought the morning group had agreed
upon our proposal during our Skype discussion; however, on the day following
the virtual meeting, the group would either send email to us bringing up their
own proposal again, or communicate only with one of our evening member to
inform the rest of us of their real opinions. We felt a little frustrated for
some time by this indirect way of communication because we originally thought
we had gained the consensus. We then changed our communication style in the
following meetings. We firstly tried our best to encourage them expressing
their ideas directly in the meeting and then reiterated our understanding of
the meeting results so as to make sure that we were on the same page. Things
got better thereafter.
In general, above
are the three major conflicts we encountered during our collaboration, though
other minor conflicts also occurred, such as the scheduling for meetings. Most
conflicts are task conflicts over contents of the work. Although we tried to
collaborate initially for each case, for most of the time, we ended up adopting
the “compromise” strategy. Of course, if the issue is not very important, we
tried to “avoid” argument and conflict. Generally speaking, I think what we
adopted were the most suitable ones in view of the time constraints and task
difficulty.
3. The reason for
the conflicts
3.1 Lack of trust
As I have learnt
from the HPC course that conflicts stem from many sources, such as the
different personal opinions, communication problems, unclear goals, and
resource scarcity, I think that our conflicts mainly result from different
personal opinions as well as communication problems, which can actually be
solved if we trust each other enough between the two groups.
So why didn’t we
develop trust during our cooperation? I think the answer is that being virtual
it is difficult to establish trusted relationship because “trust needs touch”
according to Charles Handy’s “Trust and the Virtual Organization”1.
However, in order to simulate the actual environment one may face during
virtual organizing, we were not allowed to meet in person with the other group
members; therefore, we are unable to read the non-verbal cues during meeting
through Skype or conversation through Wechat. Naturally, due to lack of
frequent face-to-face communication and interaction, we can’t form an information-intensive
mental picture of the other group members, thus, can’t trust them for their
capabilities. My experience of “lacking trust” during virtual collaboration is
also proved to be common by a survey done by RW3 CultureWizard
Consultancy titled “the Challenges of Working in Virtual Teams” which says that
“the greatest personal challenges respondent faced are…difficulty in
establishing rapport and trust”.2
3.2 Individual
differences
Of course, another
reason for the conflict may be the different individual value systems due to
different background in major as well as working and life experience. For
example, the morning group wanted to design pedometer apps probably because
they were familiar with information system and its application in different
industries, while we as the business and management students saw the mobile
apps from a more practical and feasible point of view. In addition, we, after working in
companies for several years, tend to see things negatively most of the time, while
the younger and less experienced team mates are more positive and optimistic.
4. Other reasons
for the not-so-successful outcome
4.1 Lack of ground
rules
Although to be
virtual we cann’t expect frequent face-to-face interaction to build trust and
relationship, there are also other measures we can harness to improve team
performance and efficiency. One of such measures is to set ground rules at the
first meeting regarding the type and frequency of communication as well as the
procedures for dealing with conflicts3. Unfortunately, we did not
realize the importance of setting such rules during our first meeting. What we
adopted is to call for meeting once one group requested. I still remember that
both groups tried to convince the other party for their own proposals and
nobody wanted to compromise during one of meeting in March. The meeting lasted
about one and half hour and everyone was tired and frustrated. Had we had rules
on resolving differences, it would be easier and more efficient to solve
problems. Besides, it would be also easier to get other members committed to
the common goals, since we obviously sensed that some members of morning group
did not attend meetings ever since the first one.
4.2 Lack of clear
roles or leadership
Another reason
would be the lack of clear roles or leadership. According to Golnaz and John’s
“Managing the Virtual World”, “virtual team leaders should be assigned to
teams” who will provide support to the team, foster an atmosphere of
collaboration through building trust, communicate team goals and direction and
have strong interpersonal communication skills. Although above description of a
virtual team leader may be an ideal example, I do realize that a clearly defined
team leader would help to smooth the communication channel and provide formal
and informal support to team members. However, for our virtual team composed of
two groups, there is no clear definition of team leader, or coordinator or
administrator. We are all contributing to the project based on the availability
of our time and effort and nobody is in any authority to request efforts of
others if someone is not willing to contribute. This further demonstrates the
importance of determining clear roles.
5. Conclusion
To sum up, I think
that I have learnt a lot through the virtual collaboration this time and
understand that conflicts are inevitable and constructive if handled properly
with tactical skills, such as assignment of team roles, establishment of ground
rules and the organizing of necessary trust-building activities. I will apply
what I have learnt to the team work in the future.
6. Reference
1. Charles Handy,
Trust and the Virtual Organization, Harvard Business Review, 1995
2. Virtual Team
Survey Report-2012, RW3 CultureWizard
3. Golnaz Sadri
and John Condia, Managing the Virtual World, Industrial Management, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment