The prevalence of virtual-based teams have increased significantly within recent decades as a result of expanding corporate globalization. This rapid growth has exacerbated communication issues within the global virtual team setting. Issues related to poor work-life balance due to variance in work time zones, poor dissemination of team decisions and discussions, and insufficient use of collaborative tools, are common issues within the global diverse virtual team. Challenges exist even in virtual teams that are based in a single region, as differences in functional backgrounds and departmental cultures create challenges which are difficult to address within their virtual setting. Although interdependent constructs appear to be straight-forward and clear, the challenges teams face in accomplishing a shared goal is complex. Research in the area of team dynamics has provided support and guidance on improving interpersonal relationships, communications, and planning; thereby, enhancing team efficiencies. This presentation will review emotional intelligence (EI) and how it relates to the current team efficacy research. The related attributes and challenges at the individual, team, leadership, and organizational level will be reviewed with a focus on enabling the virtual-based team to succeed.
With over 16 years of experience as a virtual team member, Christine Loch brings a wealth of experience and knowledge to the science of team dynamics. She is currently completing her PhD in organizational leadership at Northeastern University, Boston MA, with a research focus on team dynamics in the virtual-setting. As a past presenter at the national Drug Information Association Conference, and several times a presenter at the national Oncology Nursing Society Congress, Christine brings an engaging presence on this captivating topic, which will leave the audience with at least one new pearl of wisdom to try out on their own virtual-based teams at home.
Call Girls in Dwarka Mor Delhi Contact Us 9654467111
Why is My Team Failing: Understanding Conflict and Building Trust
1. Why is My Team Failing
Christine Loch
Senior Medical Writer
PRA Health Sciences
Society for Technical Communication
Conduit : STC-PMC Mid-Atlantic TechComm Conference
Willow Grove, PA
April 7, 2018
2. Agenda
The Anatomy of Conflict
A Cultural View of Conflict
Trust
Bringing Your Best Self to the Table
Your Turn: Applying the Theories
14. “…a process whereby one party perceives that their interests are being opposed by
another party…”(Iorio & Taylor, 2014).
Complicated by….
Positionality
Emotions
Anatomy of Conflict
(Iorio and Taylor, 2014; Wickramasinge and Nandula, 2015)
15. Anatomy of Conflict
Disruptive
Reducing overall team
performance
Strained relationships
Enhanced creativity
Lead to innovative problem-solving,
More complete shared understandings
across a team
(Iorio and Taylor, 2014; Wickramasinge and Nandula, 2015)
16. Anatomy of Conflict: Structural Balance Theory
(Wallace, Heath, and Singh, 2013; Wickramasinghe and Nandula, 2015; Huang, 2016; Meyer, Bond-Barnard, Steyn, and Jordann, 2016)
GOOD
BAD
17. The Anatomy of Conflict: Maladaptive Cycle
Conflicting
Views
Discomfort
Avoidance
Communication
Breakdown
Misconceptions
(Wickramasinghe and Nandula, 2015; Huang, 2016; Meyer, Bond-Barnard, Steyn, and Jordann, 2016)
18. High Other Concern Low Other Concern
High Self-Concern
Collaborate Compete
Low Self-Concern
Accommodate Avoid
Compromise
The Anatomy of Conflict: Dual Concern Theory
(Martinez-Moreno, Zornoza, Orengo, Thompson, 2015)
19. The Anatomy of Conflict: Causes
(Huang, 2016; Wickramasinghe and Nandula, 2015; Wallace, Heath, and Singh, 2013)
personality
Tasks
Processes
23. (Huang, 2016)
A Cultural View of Conflict
Western Cultures
• Competitive
• Individual
Focused
Eastern Cultures
• Avoid; Resolve
Quickly
• Team Focused
24. Russians may disagree just for lively discussion.
Brazilians, Mexicans, and Saudi Arabians may avoid disagreements.
The Danish, German, and Dutch may prefer conflict when
approached in a calm and factual manner.
(Meyer, 2015)
A Cultural View of Conflict
27. Trust
Clarity in Roles and
Responsibilities
Social
Connections
Common Goals
TRUS
T
Distributed
Leadership
28. Trust
Be Vulnerable
Seek clarity
Seek support
Be Supportive
Compliment
Praise
Ask open ended questions
Seek input from around the room/call
Share the Load
Shared decision making
Create Social Connections
Pre/post meeting chats
TRUST
31. (Bradberry, and Greaves, 2009)
Bringing Your Best Self to The Table
Can I
identify and
control my
internal
emotions?
What emotions am I
perceiving from others?
32. Emotional Intelligence is not a transformation to sainthood
(Bradberry & Greaves,, 2009)
It is…..
- Reflect on your
reactions
- Seek to understand
your reactions
- Make appropriate
changes
Bringing Your Best Self to The Table
34. 1. Affirm One Another
2. Give Each Person Space
3. Don’t Interrupt
4. Only Volunteer Yourself
5. “I” Statements
6. Respectfully Listen
7. Be Open
(AVP, 2002)
Active Listening
Applying the Theories
Assumptions
36. (AVP, 2002)
My Idea
My Idea
My Idea
My IdeaMy Idea
My Idea
My
Idea
My Idea
Ignoring
Bringing Your Best Self to The Table
Shared Space
Psychologically
Safe
37. 1. Search for Common Ground
2. Reach for What is Good in Others
3. Listen Before Making Judgements
4. Seek Truth, Disregard Assumptions
5. Use Surprise and Humor
6. Follow Your Gut, Your Inner Sense of When and How to Act
7. Build Community Based on Respect and Truth
(AVP, 2002)
Transforming Power
Bringing Your Best Self to The Table
41. References
AVP (2002). AVP manual basic course. St Paul, Minnasota: AVP USA.
Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional intelligence 2.0. San Diego, CA: Talent Smart.
Huang, L. (2016). Interpersonal harmony and conflict for Chinese people: a yin-yang perspective. Frontier
Psychology . 7: 1-14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00847
Iorio, J., Taylor, J. E. (2014). Boundary object efficacy: the mediating role of boundary objects on task conflicts in
global virtual project networks. International Journal of Project Management. 32:7-17. doi:
10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.04.001
Lencioni, P. (2001). The five dysfunctions of a team. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Martinez-Moreno, E., Zornoza, A., Orengo, V., Thompson, L. F., (2015). The effects of team self-guided training on
conflict management in virtual teams. Group Decision and Negotiation Journal. 24:905-923. doi:
10.1007/s10726-014-9421-7
Meyer, E. (2015) Getting to si, ja, oui, hai, and da. Harvard Business Review.74–80. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/2015/12/getting-to-si-ja-oui-hai-and-da
Meyer, I.P., Bond-Barnard, T.J., Steyn, H., Jordaan, J. (2016) Exploring the use of computer-mediated video
communication in engineering projects in south africa. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering. 27
(2):60-71. doi: 10.7166/27-2-1298.
Wallace, S., Heath, D., Singh, R. (2013). Structural stability and virtual team conflict. 2013 46th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences. doi: 10.1109/HICSS>2013.501
Wickramasinghe, V., Nandula, S. (2015). Diversity in team composition, relationship conflict and team leader
support on globally distributed virtual software development team performance. Strategic Outsourcing: An
International Journal. 8(2/3); doi: 10.1108/SO-02-2015-0007
Notas del editor
Welcome
Before Lunch
Keep blood sugars up/ snack
Lots of engagement and Q&A
Continue the conversation over lunch
Index Cards & Pens:
Instructions
No Name on Card
Write on the card, what you like to change in your teams and/or work environment.
Index Cards & Pens:
Instructions
No Name on Card
Write on the card, what you like to change in your teams and/or work environment.
In between = maladaptive behaviors
- avoidance, when faced with conflicting views.
- avoidance = communication breakdown;
- misconceptions erodes the health of team relations,
- reducing cohesion, effective
-knowledge exchange
- overall team productivity).
- avoidance, when faced with conflicting views. - avoidance = communication breakdown; - misconceptions erodes the health of team relations, - reducing cohesion, effective -knowledge exchange - overall team productivity).
Although both Wickramasinghe and Nandula (2015), and Huang, (2016), attempt to place emotions in a separate unique category, research supports that negative emotions are associated with most conflict, despite the causality. Studies conducted by Huang (2016) support that task and process-based conflicts, do elicit emotional responses. In such cases, emotions remain on the periphery, and as such, are easier to control, thereby allowing for a clearer path to open communication and subsequent conflict resolution (Huang, 2016)
As such, Huang’s (2016) research finds that despite the type of initial conflict (emotional or task/process-based), a superficial harmony, created by avoidance or accommodation and driven by a low self-concern, can result in lingering negative emotions (Huang, 2016). These residual emotions can insidiously erode at the collaboration and connections within the team