The two dimensions of virtual and collocated project teams or what project team members WANT and GET : empirical evidence
Bredillet, Christophe, Dwivedula, Ravikiran , & Ruiz, Philippe (2006) The two dimensions of virtual and collocated project teams or what project team members WANT and GET : empirical evidence. In International Research Network for Organizing by Projects-IRNOP 7, X'ian.
|ERA Evidence (PDF 866kB) |
Administrators only | Request a copy from author
The current paper compares and investigates the discrepancies in motivational drives of project team members with respect to their project environment in collocated and distributed (virtual) project teams. The set of factors, which in this context are called ‘Sense of Ownership’, is used as a scale to measure these discrepancies using one tailed t tests. These factors are abstracted from theories of motivation, team performance, and team effectiveness and are related to ‘Nature of Work’, ‘Rewards’, and ‘Communication’. It has been observed that ‘virtualness’ does not seem to impact the motivational drives of the project team members or the way the project environments provide or support those motivational drives in collocated and distributed projects. At a more specific level in terms of the motivational drives of the project team (‘WANT’) and the ability of the project environment to provide or support those factors (‘GET’), in collocated project teams, significant discrepancies were observed with respect to financial and non financial rewards, learning opportunities, nature of work and project specific communication, while in distributed teams, significant discrepancies with respect to project centric communication, followed by financial rewards and nature of work. Further, distributed project environments seem to better support the team member motivation than collocated project environments. The study concludes that both the collocated and distributed project environments may not be adequately supporting the motivational drives of its project team members, which may be frustrating to them. However, members working in virtual team environments may be less frustrated than their collocated counterparts as virtual project environments are better aligned with the motivational drives of their team members vis-à-vis the collocated project environments.
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Conference Paper|
|Keywords:||project management, virtual project team, collocated project team|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > COMMERCE MANAGEMENT TOURISM AND SERVICES (150000) > BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT (150300) > Business and Management not elsewhere classified (150399)|
|Divisions:||Current > Schools > School of Civil Engineering & Built Environment|
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Science & Engineering Faculty
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2006 [please consult the author]|
|Deposited On:||04 Apr 2012 09:41|
|Last Modified:||04 Sep 2012 08:40|
Repository Staff Only: item control page