Distributed ICT: project summary

Globalisation describes an increased distribution across all aspects of organisational, financial and social endeavour. For many organisations, distributed projects have proliferated, but with some issues: ongoing research shows that whilst 90 % of large companies are conducting global projects to take advantage of distributed skills, around-the-clock operations and virtual team environments, less than one third of them have effective, established practices to help project managers and team members working over a distance (Binder, 2007).
A body of research is accumulating on the issues raised by globalisation and distribution, particularly in the area of project management. However, far less study has been undertaken on the effects of distribution on the project team and its members. Yet the unique characteristics of multi-site projects indicate that the dimensions of distribution (both physical and psychic (eg linguistic, emotional, cultural)) give rise to a number of issues not faced in local teams. As example, while physical distance can cause latencies in communication, psychic distance may result in misjudgements, misunderstandings, and conflicts between participants who do not share the same organisational or ethnic culture.
Rao, Earls, & Sanchez (2007) suggest that most organisations struggle to reach the required levels of quality and effectiveness from distributed projects because their methods and practices are not adapted to a multi-cultural environment. The challenge therefore lies in identifying and developing approaches, strategies and tools to integrate participants with different conventions, rule-systems and backgrounds.

	Background
	Globalisation describes an increased distribution across all aspects of organisational, financial and social endeavour. For many organisations, distributed projects have proliferated, but with some issues: ongoing research shows that whilst 90 % of large companies are conducting global projects to take advantage of distributed skills, around-the-clock operations and virtual team environments, less than one third of them have effective, established practices to help project managers and team members working over a distance (Binder, 2007). A body of research is accumulating on the issues raised by globalisation and distribution, particularly in the area of project management. However, far less study has been undertaken on the effects of distribution on the project team and its members. Yet the unique characteristics of multi-site projects indicate that the dimensions of distribution (both physical and psychic (eg linguistic, emotional, cultural)) give rise to a number of issues not faced in local teams. As example, while physical distance can cause latencies in communication, psychic distance may result in misjudgements, misunderstandings, and conflicts between participants who do not share the same organisational or ethnic culture. Rao, Earls, & Sanchez (2007) suggest that most organisations struggle to reach the required levels of quality and effectiveness from distributed projects because their methods and practices are not adapted to a multi-cultural environment. The challenge therefore lies in identifying and developing approaches, strategies and tools to integrate participants with different conventions, rule-systems and backgrounds.

	The Project
	The ultimate aim of this project is to provide resources that can be readily taught and easily communicated to assist organisations setting up effective distributed teams. Organisation-based study is required to validate the literature. The requirement is for organisations that undertake software development within a distributed/virtual environment. Research methods include observation of the team(s) at work, interviews of team members and completion of appropriate questionnaires to assist in modelling at team and team-member level. Therefore, the approach taken is expected to be mixed method: a review of the literature of teamwork (a brief overview is included as Attachment 1) team modelling based on tools such as Kluckhohn-Strodtbeck’s Cross-Cultural Framework (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961) and Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Framework (Hofstede, 1997) aspects of team development (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977) based on an investigation of communications practices (McCroskey, 1997) and trust-building (Nemiro, 2004). Tools include Social Network Analysis (Wasserman & Faust, 1994), team orientation (Keirsey & Bates, 1984), Johari window (Luft & Ingham, 1955), in order to identify the important parameters and the relationships between them that are key to explaining what happens in distributed teams. Organisational case studies will lead to the development of best practices for distributed/virtual team development, recommend organisational strategies for team structures, and propose alternatives for the implementation of the new practices and methods.

	Resources
	Funding for the project is provided through Murdoch University’s Outside Studies Programme and Research Excellence Grants Scheme for the researcher (Dr Jocelyn Armarego). No direct funding is required from the organisations involved in the project. However, resource commitment, in terms of access to appropriate staff, and the indirect cost of staff time is a necessary component of participation.

	Dr Jocelyn Armarego Email : J.Armarego@murdoch.edu.au Web: http://www.it.murdoch.edu.au/~s980606e/ Telephone: +61-8 9360 7351

	References
	Binder, J. C. (2007). Global Project Management. London: Gower. DeMarco, T., & Lister, T. (1999). Peopleware: productive projects and teams (2nd ed.). New York: Dorset House. Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. London: Mc Graw Hill. Keirsey, D., & Bates, M. (1984). Please Understand Me (3 ed.): Prometheus Nemesis Book Company. Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. Evanston (IL): Row, Peterson. Luft, J., & Ingham, H. (1955). The Johari window, a graphic model of interpersonal awareness. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the western training laboratory in group development., Los Angeles. McCroskey, J. C. (1997). Self-report measurements. In J. A. Daly, J. C. McCroskey, J. Ayres, T. Hopf & D. M. Ayres (Eds.), Avoiding Communication: Shyness, Reticence, & Communication Apprehension (pp. 191-216). Cresskill (NJ): Hampton Press. Nemiro, J. E. (2004). Creativity in Virtual Teams: key components for success. San Fransisco (CA): Wiley. Rao, M. T., Earls, T. W., & Sanchez, G. (2007). International collaboration in transorganizational systems development: the challenges of global insourcing. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 10(3). Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. (1977). Stages of small group development revisited. Groups and Organization Studies, 2, 419-427. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.