Working with Global Teams: Not all in the same room

This is part of the Working with Global Teams series

Previous Post: Working with Global Teams: Pesky Time Zones Revisited

———————————————

A friend of mine,Shoaib Ahmed, has an excellent blog on Agile, and Project Management. 

He’s based in New Zealand, and as New Zealand is literally so far away from “the rest of the world” (said with a cheeky wink), he has a pretty good idea of some of the challenges that are met when working in a globally dispersed group.

Shoaib’s latest post goes into this in more detail. He mentions things such as time difference, culture, and reporting lines. Click here to read what he says.

Related posts:

 

Working with Global Teams: Pesky Time Zones – Revisited

Timezones

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of the Working with Global Teams series

Previous Post: Pesky Time Zones

In my “Pesky Time Zones” post I discussed different time zones. Namely, how even adding the abbreviation for the time zone that you are in can be meaninglessfor the recipient.

Especially if they are not familiar with anything but the abbreviation for the time zone that they are in.

While trying to find out what 11pm EST is in the country I live in, I came across an excellent site:

http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/info/timezone.htm

 

 

This site lists all the different time zones with the offset from GMT.

Now – this is what is handy for me. If I know the offset of a specific timezone, then I can easily calculate the difference between that timezone and the time zone where I am living.

 

I recommend  bookmarking that site and having it close at hand.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cultural Dimensions – How people from different countries and cultures are…different

This is part of my “Working with Global Teams” series.

cultural differences

I’ve been reading Malcom Gladwell’s book “Outliers“. In part of it, he delves into a study that a dutchman had done into different cultures.

I found this fascinating and looked into it further. The dutchman was Geert Hofstede and he had built a model that described different cultures using six different dimensions.

Now – ever since moving to a foreign country, and then starting work for an international company, I have been trying to find a way that would help me understand, and to describe, the differences in the cultures of the people I live with, and work with.

And, it seems that Hofstede’s model certainly helped with that.

The six dimensions are:

  • Power distance index (PDI): This dimension refers to how people perceive those with power. For example – is the head of the country honoured and revered, or seen as “no different than us”.
  • Individualism (IDV) vs. collectivism: – “The degree to which individuals are integrated into groups”.
  • Uncertainty avoidance index (UAI):  – Best summed up as “how many rules and regulations are in place to ensure that things happen as they should.”
  • Masculinity (MAS), vs. femininity: Is there a big difference between what are perceived as the “male” role, and the “female” role.
  • Long term orientation (LTO), vs. short term orientation: – This dimension measures how much importance a culture puts on “the future”, as opposed to how important they hold onto traditions, and the past.
  • Indulgence, vs. restraint: Hedonistic behaviour, or not.

This made it so clear for me – looking at the different cultures I have lived in, as well as the different cultures I have worked with, I was able to finally get some clarity on how the cultures differed. To be able to categorize behaviours I had seen.

Hofstede’s work is still widely use, and very relevant. In fact, here is a quote from wikipedia:

Why is it important to be aware of cultural differences?

“Culture is more often a source of conflict than of synergy. Cultural differences are a nuisance at best and often a disaster.”

Despite the evidence that groups are different from each other, we tend to believe that deep inside all people are the same. In fact, as we are generally not aware of other countries’ cultures, we tend to minimize cultural differences. This leads to misunderstandings and misinterpretations between people from different countries.

Instead of the convergence phenomena we expected with information technologies availability (the “global village culture”), cultural differences are still significant today and diversity tends to increase. So, in order to be able to have cross-cultural relations, we have to be aware of these cultural differences.

With his five (the Indulgence dimension was added recently) dimensions model, Geert Hofstede has lighted on these differences. Therefore, it is a great tool to use in order to have a general overview and an approximate understanding of other cultures and, to know how to behave towards individuals from other countries. Because, we still need to cooperate with members of other cultures, and maybe more than ever with the new problems which have arisen for several decades like environmental issues. Therefore cross-cultural understanding is indispensable.

Geert Hofstede has a site where you can compare two cultures against each other, as well as learn more. Go and see how much difference there is between the cultures. (http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_dimensions.php?culture1=&culture2=7#compare)

Other great references:

Working with Global Teams: Date Formats

Timezones

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of the Working with Global Teams series

 

Previous Post: Working with Global Teams: Pesky Time Zones


OK, I’m going to give you a date, and I want you, without thinking about it, to tell me when it is.

11/7/7

Did you choose the 7th day of the 11th month of 2007? Or did you choose the 11th day of the 7th month of 2007? Or even the 7th day of June 2011?

All three are valid.

I’m sure whatever you choose was based on what is normal where you live. And that’s great when communicating with other people within that area (city, county, country).

But when you working beyond the extend of that area, as part of a global group for example, then you need to be aware of the date formats.

For example, if someone in Japan was asked to do something by 11/10/12, then they would aim at the 12th day of October 2011. While someone in North America would know that, obviously, the date is November 10, 2012.

Real life example – my car was broken into when I was in the United States. The police officer who arrived, asked me for my date of birth. I told him 17-11-73 (17th day of November 1973 – and not my real date of birth). You’d think that, obviously, there is no 17th month, that he would be able to work out what I meant. However, he was so used to MM-DD-YYY that he had to stop and think about it.

While it’s easy to rant and rave about how stupid this is, the fact is that different date formats are one of the things that comes with working with a global team.

ISO 8601 suggests using YYYY-MM-DD (similar to what our Japanese friend in the example would use). I think that this is a brilliant idea, and gives a clear standard. Also it allows a list of dates (in a spreadsheet or similar) to be easily put in order.)

However, I know that unless you were used to it, even this would cause frustration, and possible errors (until it became second nature).

When communicating with people in other parts of the world, using e-mail, fax, or carrier pigeon, I recommend using a  long date form. Something like “10 January 2013″, or “January 10, 2012″. Sure – even there, there are differences in the way that it is written, but at least you know what the month is, you can see what the year is, and (hopefully) you can work out that the rest is the day.

This would certainly prevent issues and miscommunication regarding dates.

For some interesting reading on this subject , check out the following:

The Use of Collaborative Software in Virtual Teams

I was delighted to discover a whitepaper by Eike Grotheer’s on “The Use of Collaborative Software in Virtual Teams”.

I’m interested in how “virtual teams” operate and work together, and so started reading his work. Then I realised that I had actually been part of his research. To gather data for his thesis, Eike had sent out  requests to participate in a survey in May 2010. (Google still has a cached copy of the survey). In November 2010, he sent out the results of his research. And I never looked at it!  (Kicking myself now, though!)

As I read Eike’s work I got even more excited – his research not only involved communication in virtual teams, he had used TAM (Technology Acceptance Model) to determine the effectiveness of the software.

(If you are not familiar with TAM (Technology Acceptance Model please check out my earlier posts: Predicting User Acceptance; and Applying (loosely) the Technology Adoption Model to a Real-Life situation)

Eike had used some pretty advanced statistical techniques to analyze his findings (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient; Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance), and I won’t go into those in detail.

Survey Results Summarized
  • 265 people responded to the survey,
  • There was also a very large variety of tools in use (Microsoft Outlook, SharePoint, Microsoft Project Server, Lotus Notes, Lotus Sametime, Lotus Quickr, and Google Apps were all listed, along with other collaborative applications).
  • Most of the features that are frequently used can be split into two categories:
      • Tools for sharing and managing information (e.g.  document, content and knowledge management)
      • Tools for direct communication between team members

User Satisfaction and the Use of Collaborative Software in Virtual Teams

OK – this is where it started getting interesting. Eike rightly states that

the use of information systems can only provide a benefit to an organization if users first of all have interest in using them and then actually make use of them.

To try and explain this the Technology Acceptance Model was devised (refer earlier mentioned posts for more detail). It states that the a user’s intention to use a system is influenced by the perceived usefulness and  the perceived ease-of-use.

Eike analyzed these two determinants (perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use) to determine their impact on the use of collaborative software. (He points out that, as everyone who responded to the survey is already using collaborative software, the intention is already known, and that the use is measured.) 

Again, I won’t go into too much detail. In the survey there were 4 statements that were related to the perceived usefulness, and 4 statements that were related to perceived ease-of-use.

Performing a bivariate correlation analysis on the data from the survey, Eike was able to show that there was a positive correlation between the perceived usefulness and the actual use. This effectively proves (statistically) that the more users perceive collaborative software to be useful within a virtual team, the more they will use it. (Sounds logical, but then this fact means that the TAM can be verified).

Tackling the other determinant of the TAM, Eike did a bivariate correlation analysis between each perceived ease of use item, and the extent of use of collaborative software.

There was no significant correlation which meant that the ease of use of collaborative software  has only a minor effect on the usage behaviour. However, it wasn’t actually possible to draw a conclusion as the survey participants were all experienced IT users, and the difficulty of the software may not have prevented it being used.

Going further, Eike investigated the impact of TAM factors on project success. Again using statistics he was able to show that there was a positive correlation between perceived usefulness and project success, and between perceived ease-of-use and project success. This confirmed that a relationship between the use of collaborative software and project success does exist.

In other words, the more useful the participants perceived the collaboration software that was used in the virtual team to be, as well as how easy they thought it was to use, had a positive impact on the success of the project in all aspects.

Summing it up

Sometimes it is easy to think “well, that’s already obvious”, but I always find it valuable to be able to scientifically prove (in one way or another) what everyone assumes.

And that is why I found Eike’s research exciting. From a handful of well thought-out survey questions, he was able to scientifically prove that

if software is considered useful by its users, it enables them to become effective and productive in their work, and if it is easy to use, it enables them to make use of it straight away, and leads quickly to desired results. 

Other useful links:

 

 

Working with Global Teams: Pesky Time Zones

Timezones

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of the Working with Global Teams series

Previous Post: Working with Global Teams: e-mail confirmation

This post touches again on different time zones.

Often, especially when members of the team are in different countries, it is easy to “forget” what the local time is of the other team members.

Added to that, unless you have a good understanding of the geographical location of a particular place, the Time Zone Abbreviation may not mean a thing. For example…knowing that Kuressaar is in Estonia is one thing. However, knowing that the time zone abbreviation for Estonia is EET  is another. Unless you happen to live in Eastern Europe, you might have to keep work out what EET actually means.

Even once you have worked out that EET is Eastern Europe Time, you then have to work out what that actually means to you. And have they started their summer time/daylight saving yet? It can all get very confusing, and leads to meetings being scheduled at times that are either late in the evening, or very, very early in the morning.

What is handy is to have something that is “in your face” that shows the current time of that other location. You can have clocks on the wall, but if these are analogue, then there is still the question – “is it morning, or evening there?” A better idea is having digital clocks that use the 24 hour style for reporting time (this is used a lot in Europe – 06:00 is different from 18:00). But then, if you aren’t used to the 24hr style, even that can be confusing.

There are a number of other ways that this can be done. The main point is:  Have something that is visible at a glance. Something that constantly reminds of the difference in the times of you and the other people in your global team. So you don’t even have to stop and think….”now what time was it there?”

If you have any suggestions, please feel free to leave a comment below.

Working with Global Teams: e-mail confirmation

global team communication

Image via Wikipedia

This is part of the Working with Global Teams series

A global team, by its very definition, is made of of people in different geographical locations and often different time zones.

In these situations, it is a good idea, if you receive an e-mail from one of the other team members, some sort of sign, or acknowledgement that you have read the e-mail. Sure, you can set up email to notify the sender when the recipient has opened the email, but nothing is as good as clicking on Reply, and typing a quick e-mail to say “Hey – just looking into“, or “Got your e-mail. Just need to talk to Fred & Tish about it“.

When people are not able to stroll into the other person’s office, or peer over their cubicle divider, this small “communication” just let’s those people involved know what is going on.

Even then – it doesn’t have to be a reply by e-mail. Could be an IM, or even (gasp) a phone call. The benefit of an e-mail response includes:

  • Usually the reply will include the original e-mail. You get conversation chain.
  • If the person you sent the email to is not in a different time zone, it doesn’t matter if the person isn’t online at the time.

This way the sender at least knows whether that something is happening. This leads to a better “team”.

email communication responding polite global

Following Post: Pesky Time Zones