Teaming: Are two communication modes better than one?

Jennifer Parlamis, Rebekah Dibble
{"title":"Teaming: Are two communication modes better than one?","authors":"Jennifer Parlamis, Rebekah Dibble","doi":"10.1108/tpm-10-2018-0065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nApplying media synchronicity theory (MST) as a theoretical foundation, this paper aims to examine whether teams using multiple communication modes perform better on a complex intra-team task than those using a single mode.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors adopted a mixed-methods explanatory design. Data were collected from 44 teams directly following participation in the Everest Leadership and Team Simulation. Teams were assigned a specific mode of communication: virtual (text-chat only), face-to-face (FTF) or dual (FTF and chat).\n\n\nFindings\nNo significant differences in team goals achieved were found when comparing dual modes to single modes, counter to predictions based on MST. Qualitative data indicated that FTF communication is dominant and might lead to “medium inertia” when multiple modes are available. FTF teams reported higher perceptions of team effectiveness than text-chat-only teams.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis study was conducted on a small number of teams in an artificial environment; therefore, generalizability is limited. Future research should consider other measures of team performance and test teams in a virtual setting where distance, as well as time, are factors.\n\n\nPractical implications\nFTF communication tends to be dominant to a point where virtual options are ignored, suggesting that greater awareness around communication processes required for complex tasks, and ways to appropriate different media for conveyance or convergence, is key to team performance.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study highlights the importance of determining processes by which teams shift between media to maximize conveyance and convergence processes. Additionally, distinguishing between objective performance and perceptions of performance highlight an additional challenge for teams that can be explored.\n","PeriodicalId":150524,"journal":{"name":"Team Performance Management: An International Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Team Performance Management: An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/tpm-10-2018-0065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Purpose Applying media synchronicity theory (MST) as a theoretical foundation, this paper aims to examine whether teams using multiple communication modes perform better on a complex intra-team task than those using a single mode. Design/methodology/approach The authors adopted a mixed-methods explanatory design. Data were collected from 44 teams directly following participation in the Everest Leadership and Team Simulation. Teams were assigned a specific mode of communication: virtual (text-chat only), face-to-face (FTF) or dual (FTF and chat). Findings No significant differences in team goals achieved were found when comparing dual modes to single modes, counter to predictions based on MST. Qualitative data indicated that FTF communication is dominant and might lead to “medium inertia” when multiple modes are available. FTF teams reported higher perceptions of team effectiveness than text-chat-only teams. Research limitations/implications This study was conducted on a small number of teams in an artificial environment; therefore, generalizability is limited. Future research should consider other measures of team performance and test teams in a virtual setting where distance, as well as time, are factors. Practical implications FTF communication tends to be dominant to a point where virtual options are ignored, suggesting that greater awareness around communication processes required for complex tasks, and ways to appropriate different media for conveyance or convergence, is key to team performance. Originality/value This study highlights the importance of determining processes by which teams shift between media to maximize conveyance and convergence processes. Additionally, distinguishing between objective performance and perceptions of performance highlight an additional challenge for teams that can be explored.
团队合作:两种沟通模式比一种更好吗?
目的运用媒介同步性理论(media synchronicity theory, MST)作为理论基础,研究使用多种沟通模式的团队是否比使用单一沟通模式的团队在复杂的团队内部任务上表现得更好。设计/方法/方法作者采用了混合方法的解释设计。数据是在参加珠峰领导力和团队模拟后直接从44个团队收集的。团队被分配了一种特定的交流模式:虚拟(仅限文字聊天)、面对面(FTF)或双重(FTF和聊天)。当比较双模式和单模式时,没有发现团队目标实现的显著差异,这与基于MST的预测相反。定性数据表明,FTF通信占主导地位,在多种模式可用时可能导致“中等惯性”。FTF团队比只使用文本聊天的团队对团队效率的感知更高。研究的局限性/意义本研究是在人工环境中对少数团队进行的;因此,概括性是有限的。未来的研究应该考虑团队绩效的其他衡量标准,并在距离和时间都是因素的虚拟环境中测试团队。实际影响ftf通信往往占主导地位,以至于忽略了虚拟选项,这表明对复杂任务所需的通信过程的更多认识,以及采用不同媒体进行传递或聚合的方法,是团队绩效的关键。原创性/价值本研究强调了确定团队在媒体之间转换的过程的重要性,以最大化传达和融合过程。此外,区分客观绩效和绩效感知突出了团队可以探索的额外挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信