Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.83.5.275-282
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Team Building in an Online Organizational
Behavior Course
Maurice Grzeda , Rana Haq & Rolland LeBrasseur
To cite this article: Maurice Grzeda , Rana Haq & Rolland LeBrasseur (2008) Team Building in
an Online Organizational Behavior Course, Journal of Education for Business, 83:5, 275-282,
DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.83.5.275-282
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.5.275-282
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 79
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:12
TeamBuildinginanOnlineOrganizational
BehaviorCourse
MAURICEGRZEDA
RANAHAQ
ROLLANDLEBRASSEUR
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
FACULTYOFMANAGEMENT
LAURENTIANUNIVERSITY
SUDBURY,CANADA
ABSTRACT.Theauthorsdescribethe
developmentanddeliveryofateam-building
exerciseinanonlineorganizationalbehaviorundergraduatecourse.Qualitativedata
ofstudentperceptions,collectedatthe
endofthecourse,revealedbothpositive
andnegativereactionstovariousaspects
oftheteam-buildingexercise.Basedon
thesereactions,theauthorsdiscussneeded
improvementsintheassignment.Theyconcludebyconsideringhowtheirexperience
withtheteam-buildingexercisecontributes
toongoingdiscussionsaboutteamworkin
managementeducationandteambuilding
forvirtualteams.
Keywords:online,teaching,teambuilding,
teamwork
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
I
nthisarticle,wedescribethedevelopment of a team-building exercise
for an online, undergraduate organizational behavior (OB) course in an
Honors Bachelor of Commerce degree
program. Our purpose in sharing these
experiences is to demonstrate one case
oftransferringteachingtechniquesfrom
the traditional classroom to the online
teachingenvironment.Thesignificance
of the Internet for education and traininghasbeenwidelyrecognized(Hirsch,
2001; Pantazis, 2002), yet necessary
supportsforbothinstructorsandlearnersareoftenlacking(Teghe&Knight,
2004). In describing our experiences,
wehopetosupporteffectiveuseofthe
Internet as a teaching tool and to contributetothediscourseonteamsinmanagement education (Tonn & Milledge,
2002), virtual teams in the workplace
(Lurey&Raisinghani,2001),andWebbasedteachingofOB(Bigelow,1999).
Educational researchers have demonstrated that a successful Web-based
course depends on both course design
(Huang, 2000) and student interaction
andcollaboration(Stacey,1999).Thelatter increasingly involves virtual groups.
Course projects completed by virtual
groupstendtoenhancestudentlearning
(Carr-Chellman,Dyer,&Bremen,2000)
and perceptions of efficacy (Gabriel,
2004).Thesocialinteractionofthesevirtualgroupshighlightstheimportanceof
communityforonlinestudents(Conrad,
2002; Lock, 2002; O’Reilly & Newton,
2002). Conrad (2005) defined community as “a sense of connection, belonging,andcomfortthatdevelopsovertime
among members of a group who share
apurposeorcommitmenttoacommon
goal” (p. 2). In the online environment,
Conradlinkedcommunitytoasenseof
safety,trust,andsharing.Focusingmore
onprocess,Locklinkedasenseofcommunitytocommunication,collaboration,
interaction,andparticipation.Incontrast,
the management literature has tried to
understand virtual groups in terms of
team-buildingandteamlifecycle(Furst,
Reeves,Rosen,&Blackburn,2004).The
team perspective has the advantage of
covering both the task and relationship
dimensionsofgroupwork.
Weofferevidencethateffectiveexperiential teaching practices can be transferred from the physical to the virtual
classroombyincludingadequatesupports
forstudents.Asaresult,ourresearchbolstersthepositiontakenbysomescholars
that online education is not inferior to
the traditional classroom (Drago, Peltier,Hay,&Hodgkinson,2005;Iverson,
Colky,&Cyboran,2005).
Webeginthisarticlebydescribingthe
developmentoftheteam-buildingexerciseinouronlineOBcourse.Wepresentstudentperceptionsofteamworkclimatebasedonqualitativedatacollected
at the end of the course and describe
student suggestions for improving
May/June2008
275
onlineteamdevelopment.Wethendiscussourperceptionsofneededimprovements based on these reactions. Our
conclusions focus on the challenges of
teamwork in management education
andthevalidationofteambuildingwith
virtualteams.
METHOD
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
CreatinganOnlineCourse
Theteam-buildingexercisedescribed
inthisarticlewasdevelopedasateam
assignment in an online undergraduate
OB course, part of a new online honors management program. The adult
learners targeted by this program had
acquired,throughpostsecondarystudies
and practical work experience, a wide
range of competencies in the area of
financial management. However, they
hadlittleornoexposuretotopicsusually covered in an undergraduate OB
course or to teaching methods such as
experiential learning and team-based
courseprojects.
The course itself was organized
into 12 modules, each one consisting
of assigned readings and explanatory
notes covering a key OB topic (e.g.,
leadership), review questions for studentself-assessmentpurposes,andone
ormoreteamassignmentsdesignedfor
teamsof10students.Anasynchronous
communication platform was selected
for the course, and teams were given
at least 5 days to complete the online
discussions of assigned questions. At
the conclusion of the discussion, each
teamwasrequiredtosubmitaresponse
to the assigned questions. Teams were
expected to self-manage the team processes necessary for completing these
weeklyteamassignments.
Team-BuildingExercise
By integrating a team-building exercise,weintendedtohelpstudentsdevelop team process skills in support of
effective execution of the team-based
course requirements.We drew on various management education and practice sources to guide the development
of the team-building exercise. In particular, questions about the quality of
team learning experiences (Thacker &
Yost, 2002) and the impact of student
276
JournalofEducationforBusiness
performance assessments on team processes (McKendall, 2000) were most
compelling.We believe that the online
environment offered an opportunity to
emphasize team-process skill development(Holmer,2001).
The team-building exercise relied
on OB concepts such as team dynamics covered in the course readings, the
team effectiveness model (TEM) shown
in Figure 1, and the Process Thermometer Questionnaire (PTQ; Cohen, Fink,
Gadon,&Josefowitz,2001),atoolused
tostimulatereflectiononteamprocesses.
(Copies of the Instructions to Students
andthePTQareavailableonrequestfrom
the first author.) Hughes, Ginnett, and
Curphy (1993) provide a more detailed
description of the TEM and its applications.TheOBtextadoptedforthiscourse
(McShane, 2001) dealt extensively with
theTEM in the chapter devoted to team
dynamics. By applying the TEM as the
conceptualframeworkfortheassignment,
we expected the relevance of the text
materialtoincreaseforstudents.
In our adaptation of the model two
categories, team environment and team
design, corresponded to structural
parameters over which students had no
control. Team environment comprised
the academic setting, the orientation to
theassignment,andthetechnologyplatform(seeFigure1fordefinitions).Team
design included team size and composition, which were predetermined with
the intent of maximizing student learning.AccordingtotheTEM,theseinputs
influence the team processes described
Team
environment
•Academic
setting—online
coursedelivery
andframework
•Orientation—
instructions
providedto
completethe
assignment
•Technology—
technologyusedin
assignmentsand
course
by Tuckman’s (1965) stages of group
development (forming, storming, norming,andperforming).Theteamprocessesparameterwascapturedbythefirst11
dimensionsofthePTQ,andteameffectiveness outcomes (i.e., goal achievement,membersatisfaction,andlearning)
werecoveredbythe12thdimension.
StepsintheTeam-Building
Exercise
We expected students to complete the
team-building exercise steps in the first
half of the course. The second course
module introduced students to the teambuildingexercise,givingthemadetailed
outlinethatincludedtheassignmentpurpose and objectives, assignment weight,
andascheduleofteam-buildingactivities,
deliverables,andduedates.Bytheendof
Module2,teamsdraftedateamcontract
including team goals and commitments
(Cohen et al., 2001) and completed the
PTQ. In Module 6, halfway through the
course, students prepared a final report
coveringteamworkclimateandanaction
plan for improving team effectiveness,
submitting it to the instructor by e-mail.
Attheconclusionofthecourse,students
againcompletedthePTQ,butwithadditionalopen-endedquestionstappingperceptions of the team’s effectiveness and
theteam-buildingexercise.
AssessingStudentPerformance
The team-building exercise sought to
emphasize both the process of teambuilding and team outputs consisting of
Teamdesign
•Teamsize(7–10students)
•Teamcomposition(students
areassignedtoteams
randomly)
Teamprocesses
•Creatingandmodifyingthe
teamcontract(development
ofteamnormsandroles)
•Monitoringteamdevelopment
withtheprocessthermometer
Team
effectiveness
Threeoutcomesof
teamprocesses
•Achievedteam
goals
•Satisfiedmember
needs
•Facilitated
learningand
development
FIGURE1.TeamEffectivenessModel.AdaptedfromHughesetal.(1993).
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
the project reports. The course authors
designed the assessment framework to
shape effective individual participation
in the teamwork process. The first part
of the course shaped participation. Students received participation marks for
theircontributiontothediscussionbased
on the instructor’s assessment of individual contributions to the online discussions of assigned questions or short
cases.Theroleofinitiator/recorder(IR),
whose responsibilities included initiatingtheteamdiscussionanddraftingand
submittingawrittendiscussionsummary
inresponsetotheassignment,wasrotated among team members. In addition
to grades, students whose performance
didnotmeetexpectationsreceivedfeedbackandcoachingfromtheinstructorto
improvetheircontributiontoteamwork.
Theteam-buildingexerciseculminated
inateamreportevaluatingteamworkprocess during the first half of the course
and the team’s consensus about needed improvements for the last half of the
course.Theteam-buildingreportrequired
studentstoanalyzetheirownteam’sprocess;thus,studentsrealizedthatthepath
toasatisfactorygradeinthisassignment
wasagoodunderstandingofprocessand
asoundapplicationofteam-processskills.
Thereportgradeearnedbytheteamwas
an indicator of how aware the team was
of its process strengths and weaknesses
and how well the team understood what
improvements were needed. The second
halfofthecoursedidnotincludeateambuildingcomponentandfollowedamore
traditional grading approach in which
teamwork outputs, consisting of case
reports,wereassessedwithnoreflection
ontheteamprocesses.
RESULTS
We consider the effectiveness of the
team-building exercise based on qualitative data collected from students who
completedthefirstofferingoftheundergraduateOBcourse.Thequalitativedata
werecollectedattheendofthecourseand
consisted of students’ comments on and
reactionstotheoveralleffectivenessofthe
team-building exercise (i.e., its experientialvalueinlearningaboutteamfunctioning,teammemberroles,andactionsthat
result in improved team performance).
Although all students participated in the
team-buildingexerciseandcompletedthe
PTQ questionnaire at the conclusion of
thecourse,theopen-endedquestionseliciting the qualitative data on the exercise
anditseffectivenesswereoptional.Useof
thisqualitativedataforresearchpurposes
alsorequiredthestudent’swrittenconsent.
Afterdiscardingcasesinwhichthefinal
questionnairewasnotreturnedorwritten
consent was not provided, we were left
with89participants(i.e.,aresponserate
of68%).
StudentPerformanceonTeamBuildingExercise
Theresponsestotheopen-endedquestionswerecodedusingtheNUDISTsupportedNvivosoftware.Theanalysisidentified five keywords/nodes corresponding
tofivedimensionsoftheTEMshownin
Figure 1: academic setting, orientation,
technology, team processes, and team
effectiveness.Eachnodereceivedapositiveornegativeattributetoreflectthetone
of student responses to the item.A total
of 423 comments were coded, giving an
average of 4.8 comments per participant.
Ofthese423comments,59%werepositive and 41% were negative. The results
of the content analysis in Table 1 were
organizedtocorrespondtothedimensions
of the TEM in Figure 1. Team environment,includingacademicsetting,orientation, and technology, received a total of
73 comments, of which only 16% were
positive. Participants did not control the
team environment, which was entirely
determinedbythecoursedesigners.Team
processreceived190comments,ofwhich
59% were positive; it appears that the
majorityofparticipantsexperiencedsome
successasateammember.Similarly,team
effectivenessaccountedfor159comments,
of which 78% were positive. This statistic suggests that most of the participants
appreciated what they had learned about
team-buildinginavirtualenvironment.
Welearnedthatthereweresignificant
challenges in team development given
thetimeconstraintscreatedasaresultof
the12-weekcourseduration.Thevirtual
teamsinthiscourseappearedtorequire
additionaltimetointeractthroughmany
more message posts before team members knew each other well enough to
begindevelopingpositiveworksynergies
and adequate structure for weekly task
accomplishment.Virtualteamstypically
require more structure to perform their
work; they benefit from more explicit
identificationofmemberroles,expectations,andprimarytaskobjectives(Lurey
&Raisinghani,2001).Ateam’sinteraction style is one of the most important
predictors of effectiveness (Balthazard,
Potter,&Warren,2004)andneedstime
tobecomeestablished.
Most students were accustomed to
working independently and were new
to online teamwork. Comments suggested that the technical aspects of the
communication platform were largely
foreign to many students. Not having
skills or experience with the technology can affect both perceptions and
performance of teamwork. According
to Ocker and Fjermestad (2000), there
isahighcorrelationbetweenteamperformance and ability to adapt to the
technological medium. Students in our
courserevertedtothefamiliarandeasy
channelofe-mail,atechnologythatwas
betterknowntothemincomparisonto
theonlinediscussionboardusedinthe
course.Thetendencyofourstudentsto
rely on more familiar technology was
consistent with previously documented
patterns (Lurey & Raisinghani, 2001).
Therefore, we concluded that students
involvedinvirtualteamworkshouldbe
advised that they are expected to have
a certain level of computer skills (e.g.,
keyboarding, posting messages, using
e-mail)alongwithrealisticexpectations
ofdiscussionboardfunctionality.
Thequalitativeresultssuggestaturbulentteam-developmentprocesswhereinitialdissatisfactionledtogreaterstructure
(e.g.,adoptingschedulesandteamdiscussion leader roles). Students appeared to
hold the belief that such changes would
leadtoimprovedteamperformance.Team
assessment is pointless unless members
are motivated to resolve problems (Van
Aken,Groesbeck,&Coleman,2001).In
ourcourse,studentsweregradedonboth
awareness and understanding of process
and team outputs consisting of projects.
This provided the needed motivation to
resolveproblems.
StudentPerformanceProfiles
The content analysis summarized
in Table 1 was helpful in identifying
May/June2008
277
TABLE1.SummaryofStudents’PositiveandNegativeCommentsAbouttheCourse
Dimension
Academic
setting
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
Orientation
Technology
Teamprocess
Team
effectiveness
No.of
%ofpositiveand
comments negativecomments
269
13
35
190
159
Examplesofstudentcomments
Positive:35
Themidtermprojectwashighlyeffectiveingivingusdirectexperienceonthe
issuesaffectingvirtualteams.
Theteacherbeingavailableinansweringandclarifyingthequestionwasveryhelpfulinspeedingtherequirementsoftheproject.
Negative:65
Ididn’tseeanyonereallyplaytheirroleproperlybecauseofthepressuretohave
theassignmentsdoneplusthemidtermassignmentdoneeveryweek.Ibelievethat
beingunderthatpressuremakestheoneswithmoretimeavailabletologinhavean
advantageoverotherswithmorerestrictedtimeduetolongworkweekhoursand
familytotakecareof.
Onepersoninourgroupdidnotparticipateontheteamprojectbutreceiveda
grade.Ithinkthisisnotfair.
Positive:8
Ithinkthattheprojectlayoutwasfine.
Negative:92
Personallythestepswerenotclearlytiedtogether.Tome,eachstepseemedto
haveitsownseparateobjective,sowhenitcametimetowritethereportIwasnot
surewhatshouldhaveorshouldnotbeincluded.Andofcoursefearingevaluation
apprehension,Ididnotwanttoaskmyteammatesoryou.
Ithinkourteamdidnotbenefittothefullestpotentialthatwouldoccurifwe
understoodthefullprocesspriortocompletingeachstep.
Positive:9
Afterexploringothercommunicationsavailabletoourvirtualteam,Irealizedthat
thepagingfeaturewasoperationalandweallstartedusingit.
Itsurprisedmethatyoucouldgetarealfeelforaperson’spersonalitythrough
doingthisonlinewithoutevermeetingface-to-faceorspeakingtoeachother.
Negative:91
TheuseoftheWebBoardthreadeddiscussionsmadeitextremelydifficulttohavea
discussiononplanningthemidtermproject.
IntheverybeginningIwasnotveryfamiliarwithonlinestudyformatandwas
sufferingfrominformationoverloadduetothefactthatthevolumeofpostings
exceededmyprocessingcapacity.
Positive:59
Ourdifferentstrengths,perspectives,andideasaddedvalueanddimensiontoour
report.Duringthisprojectwesawemergingcreators,leaders,writers,organizers,
helpers,andadvisorscollaboratetoallownineindividualstofunctionasacohesive
team....Attheendoftheproject,allmembersfeltasenseofownershipandpride
inthefinalproduct.
Ibelievethemidtermprojecthelpedmeinsomewaystodeterminethefunctionof
ourteam.Byfillingouttheprocessthermometer,wesayeveryoneelse’sthoughts
aboutourgroupandwhereweneededtoimprove.
Negative:41
Clearlyitwasdifficulttoputtogetherateamofpeoplewhowerefromalloverthe
countryandhadneverworkedlikethisbefore.Ifoundtheexperiencefrustrating...
Ifeelourteamisdysfunctional,andIfeelthatthereareafewofustryingtokeepit
alive.
ThedesignofthiscourseisextremelydifferentfromtheusualCGAcourses(at
leastwhenIstudiedinthemid-80s),sothereissomelearningcurveinvolved.
Positive:78
Ithelpedmeevaluatethestrengthsandweaknessesthatwereapplicabletomyteam
andremindedmetobesupportive,tolistenandshareinformation,etc.Basically,it
helpedmeadjusttotheteamsetting,asitissomethingwearenotusedtothrough
theCGAcourses.
Thesethingswillbeinvaluableinmylifeandcanbeappliedtomyjob.
Negative:22
Butasthecoursewashalfoveralreadyandthegroupwasprobablysufferingfrom
postprojectburnout,therewasnotenoughtimetoimplementallthecoursesof
actioncompletely.
Itseemsthatmanymembersjointhegroupperiodically,participateintelligently,
andthendisappearforweeks.
Note.CGA=certifiedgeneralaccountant.
patternsacrossparticipants.Inthissection,weprovidethreeperformanceprofiles in which students describe their
278
JournalofEducationforBusiness
experiences with their team and the
team-building exercise. These descriptionsillustratetheteamprocesslearning
that was taking place. The themes of
adequatetaskstructure,clearroles,and
groupcohesionarenotable.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
The following remarks from one of
the respondents illustrate a negative
reactiontotheexercise.
I would like to say that we were not an
effective team during our midterm project.Gettingourgrouptoworkeffectively
wasveryfrustratingandcausedourgroup
alotofunnecessaryanxiety.Someofus
tried to get member participation started
early on in the project by designating
a discussion initiator who would keep
usontrackanddelegateresponsibilities.
However, the initiator we chose did not
have the leadership skills necessary to
keepusfocused.Theprojectwasvaluable
in helping me learn about the role that I
played.Iactedmoreastheharmonizer.I
assistedourdiscussioninitiatorandtried
to organize the group.As time went on,
it became quite clear what roles my fellow team members played. We quickly
learned the strengths and weaknesses of
all group members. The project taught
mealotaboutimprovingfutureteamperformance. Some of our group members
implemented our action plan and others
didnot.Thisisabigreasonwhyourteam
is still not very cohesive and why my
results on the process thermometer are
solow.Wecouldstillusesomeimprovement. I found that a lot of the time was
spent trying to get organized. Our group
lackedaneffectiveleader.
Thefollowingremarksillustrateapositiveexperience.
The midterm project was valuable in
helping me learn about several areas. I
have never worked as part of a virtual
teambeforethis.Theweeklyworkforced
metolearnhowtheteamfunctioned,my
role,theroleotherswerewillingtotake,
and how to motivate others a little. The
project expedited this process for those
of us that really worked hard to pull
things together. Unfortunately, a couple
of team members did not seem to place
much importance on this project, and
this lack of participation cost us in the
endwhenweonlyreceivedagradeof75
eventhoughweagreedtoachieveaminimum of 80 as a team. One thing worth
mentioningisthatmostvirtualteamsget
theopportunitytomeetface-to-facefrom
timetotime.Duringtheshortlifeofour
100% virtual team, this cannot happen.
I equate this to the task-based nature of
a short-term contract position versus the
more emotional and supportive basis of
a longer term relationship. One mistake
Imadewastowanttheteamrelationship
todeveloptoamorepersonallevel.Some
more regulation and direction (from the
course instructor), reducing the project
closertoataskbasis,wouldholdmembers
moreaccountable.Forme,theprojecthas
been a tremendous learning experience
aboutgroupprocess.Thenewknowledge
Ihaveoutofmyefforthasalreadybeen
usefulinpracticalsituations.
The following respondent remarks
areillustrativeofaverypositiveexperiencewiththeteam-buildingexercise.
The midterm project was effective in
that it exposed my team members and
I to working in a virtual environment
and demonstrated that it is possible to
work together toward a common objective without meeting face to face. Each
member’s participation was instrumental
in completing the project. The need for
careful and proper planning was emphasized by the instructions. Through such
tool as the process thermometer, I was
abletogetabetterunderstandingofeach
member’s thought processes. As a team
member, I realized that my participation
wasascriticalastheotherteammembers
in ensuring that we presented a quality
report.IrealizedthatIneededtoprovide
feedback and engage in discussions in
order to benefit the team.There was the
feeling of not wanting to let the team
down, and as one of the recorders I had
toprovideatimelydraftofthereportso
that team members could provide their
comments. On a project of this magnitude, the role of team members is very
criticalinthequalityofmaterialandthe
timelycompletionofthereport.Wewere
all required to research articles for this
project,andeachmemberoftheteamwas
able to contribute. In addition, the feedbackbyteammemberstothediscussion
process was invaluable. I learned from
this project that participation is the key
tothesuccessofanyteam.Backbenchersrarelyhelpateam,eachmemberhas
to engage in the discussion process by
presentinghisorherviewpointregardless
ofpopularity.
DISCUSSION
One immediate conclusion from the
findings was that an additional step
to monitor the implementation of the
actionplanshouldbeadded.Thedominant role of structure in online courses
(Lurey&Raisinghani,2001)meansthat
participantsrelyoninstructionstoguide
theirefforts.Studentswerenotaskedto
reflect on their implementation efforts
anddidnotdosospontaneously.Interestingly, students’ comments indicated
that they would like to see an extension of the project until the end of the
course by including follow-up reflectionanddiscussionontheiractionplan
strategies right up to the last course
module. We have since added a step
that requires students to reflect on the
impacttheactionplanhashadonteam
effectiveness. This added step is now
completed just prior the conclusion of
thecourse,afterstudentshavereceived
extensivefeedbackandgradesforteam
caseassignments.
We also recognized that the short
durationofthiscoursemaycreateadditional challenges. Changes in a team’s
style take time to implement and bear
fruit (Van Aken et al., 2001), but the
morecriticalissueiswhetherthegroup
task has been accomplished (Miller,
2003). For courses of short duration
(4 months), graduate online learners
concentrate their efforts on task and
knowledge mastery and less so on
social presence (Duncan, 2005). Three
months may seem too short a period
forateamtoform,establishandassess
itself, develop and implement a plan
to improve team-development process,
andachievethedesiredresults.Because
the current program structure does not
permit changes to the course duration,
thefocusforthesestudentsmustremain
on accomplishing their assigned tasks
withinthetimeallocated,supportedby
the exercises and experiences that are
built into the course to enhance teamworkskills.
Werecognizethatothercomplementary data should be collected. Ahuja
and Carley (1999) noted that a virtual
team’sperceptionofitsperformanceis
unlikely to be a good proxy for actual
performance. We only measured the
team’sself-reportedperceptionsofteam
interactionandperformance;additional
dimensions could be monitoring the
e-mailandotherelectronicmediaused
by the students and the team grade
received for assignments. These measureswouldcoverboththeteamprocess
andtheconsequences.
This course is in a constant state of
improvement, as feedback from each
delivery is assessed and determinations
are made regarding needed changes
thatcanbeintegratedimmediately,others that form part of a more extensive
course revision, and those left for the
major revision that occurs every 3 to 4
years. The addition of follow-up activities subsequent to the action plan and
moredetailedinstructionsthroughoutthe
team-buildingexercisewasanimmediate
May/June2008
279
changethatweexpectedwouldgivestudentsamorepositiveexperience.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
CONCLUSION
Several conclusions can be drawn
from the results of the initial delivery
of the online OB course and the teambuilding exercise. First, our experience
and findings contribute to the ongoing
discussions in the literature about the
Internet as an educational tool; more
precisely, team-based learning in online
management courses. Some educators
have displayed reticence in embracing
online teaching due to concerns about
the“validityoftheinternetasaneducational tool” (Parnell & Carraher, 2003,
p.435).Indesigningtheonlineversionof
theOBcourse,wesetouttoinclude,at
aminimum,thesamelevelofemphasis
onteamworkasfoundintheface-to-face
courseoncampus.Basedonourexperienceandthereactionsofstudentstothe
team-building exercise described in this
article, our conclusion is that the Internet can be a valid educational tool. To
maximize its effectiveness, this virtual
tool needs adequate support to enhance
thelearningexperienceforstudentsand
compensate for the absence of face-tofaceinteraction.Withtheimprovements
discussed earlier, we intend to continue
including the team-building exercise as
the focal team development activity in
ouronlineOBcourse.
Asecondthemeintheliteratureconcernstheoverallapproachtoteamwork
in management education. Although
teamwork skills are highly valued by
employers (Chowdhury, Endres, &
Lanis, 2002; Thacker & Yost, 2002),
employer dissatisfaction with the level
of teamwork skills of management
graduates points to potential weaknesses in the way teamwork skills are
developed. One critique of particular
interest centers on the emphasis given
to output at the expense of process in
teamwork skill development (McKendall, 2000). Student project teams are
prone to domination by task-centered
members, which results in virtually no
emphasisonteamprocessskilldevelopment(Holmer,2001).Theonlineformat
ofourOBcoursecreatedanopportunity
to monitor team process skill development and reward students accordingly,
280
JournalofEducationforBusiness
thus creating a better balance between
gradesbasedonprocessandoutcomes.
Positive student reactions to the team
development processes of the exercise
outnumbered negative reactions. Our
experiencewiththeteam-buildingexercise suggests that it can be effective in
emphasizingtheimportanceofprocess,
thus overcoming some of the concerns
expressedbyHolmer,amongothers.
Our findings and experiences also
relate to a third theme in the literature: team building for virtual teams
in the workplace.Workplace team performance is frequently dependent on
thedevelopmentofeffectivegroupprocesses(McFadzean,2001)andpositive
intragroup communication styles (Potter&Balthazard,2002a,2002b;Potter,
Balthazard&Cooke,2000).Theresults
of our team-building exercise support
the importance of these processes and
styles;theyprovideadditionalevidence
that students in an online course can
be experientially engaged to become
more aware of the importance of these
dynamics.
Trends in global Internet access and
deregulation in global education have
strengthenedtheinterestinonlineeducation among universities everywhere
(St. Amant, 2007). The use of digital
technologieshasprovidedgreateraccess
toeducationalcontentandchangedthe
way students learn (Sridhar, 2005). In
this context, developing effective skills
to maximize student learning becomes
paramount.Ouroverallconclusion,after
evaluation of the first course offering,
is that the team-building exercise was
a valuable learning experience for the
students despite the challenges posed
bytheonlineenvironmentandtherelativelyshorttimeperiod.Teamworkcan
be an effective learning activity in the
online environment, both in management education and in the workplace.
Asourresultssuggest,ateam-building
exerciseisusefulinteachingtheimportance of team process and developing
team process skills and can be a valuableresourceforonlineOBcourses.
NOTE
Dr.MauriceGrzedaisanassociateprofessor
of management at Laurentian University, where
he teaches organizational behavior and human
resources management and conducts research
in management development and education and
spiritualityinmanagementandcareers.
RanaHaq,lecturerintheSchoolofCommerce
andAdministrationatLaurentianUniversity,teachesorganizational behavior and human resources
managementandconductsresearchonworkforce
diversity,cross-culturalcommunications,training,
anddevelopment.
Rolland LeBrasseur, full professor of organizational behavior at Laurentian University, is
anaccomplishedresearcherinorganizationaland
community development and teaches organizationalbehaviorbothoncampusandonline.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Dr. Maurice Grzeda, Faculty
of Management, Laurentian University, Ramsey
LakeRoad,Sudbury,P3E2C6,Canada.
E-mail:mgrzeda@laurentian.ca
REFERENCES
Ahuja, M., & Carley, K. (1999). Network structureinvirtualorganizations.OrganizationScience,10,741–757.
Balthazard, P., Potter, R., & Warren, J. (2004).
Expertise, extraversion and group interaction
styles as performance indicators in virtual
teams. Database for Advances in Information
Systems,35(1),41–65.
Bigelow, J. D. (1999). The web as an organizational behavior learning medium. Journal of
ManagementEducation,23,635–650.
Carr-Chellman,A.,Dyer,D.,&Bremen,J.(2000).
Burrowing through the network wires: Does
distance detract from collaborative authentic
learning?JournalofDistanceEducation,15(1),
39–62.
Chowdhury, S., Endres, M., & Lanis, T. W.
(2002).Preparingstudentsforsuccessinteam
work environments: The importance of building confidence. Journal of Managerial Issues,
14,346–359.
Cohen,A.,Fink,S.,Gadon,H.,&Josefowitz,N.
(2001).Effectivebehaviorinorganizations(7th
ed.).Boston:McGraw-HillIrwin.
Conrad,D.(2002).Deepintheheartsoflearners:
Insights into the nature of online community.
JournalofDistanceEducation,17(1),1–19.
Conrad, D. (2005). Building and maintaining
community in cohort-based online learning.
JournalofDistanceEducation,20(1),1–20.
Drago,W.,Peltier,J.W.,Hay,A.,&Hodgkinson,
M.(2005).Dispellingthemythsofonlineeducation:Learningviatheinformationsuperhighway.
ManagementResearchNews,28(7),1–17.
Duncan, H. (2005). Online education for practicing professionals: A case study. Canadian
JournalofEducation,28,874–896.
Furst, S., Reeves, M., Rosen, B., & Blackburn,
R. (2004). Managing the life cycle of virtualteams.AcademyofManagementExecutive,
18(2),6–20.
Gabriel,M.(2004).Learningtogether:exploring
group interactions online. Journal of Distance
Education,19(1),54–72.
Hirsch, D (2001). Prepare for the global e-campus.OECDObserver,229,57–58.
Holmer,L.L.(2001).Willweteachleadershipor
skilledincompetence?Thechallengeofstudent
projectteams.JournalofManagementEducation,25,590–605.
Huang, H. (2000). Instructional technologies
facilitating online courses. Educational Technology,40(4),41–46.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J.
(1993). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of
experience.Homewood,IL:RichardD.Irwin.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
Iverson, K. M., Colky, D. L., & Cyboran, V.
(2005).E-learningtakesthelead:Anempirical
investigation of learner differences in online
andclassroomdelivery.PerformanceImprovementQuarterly,18(4),5–18.
Lock, J. (2002). Laying the groundwork for the
development of learning communities within
online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education,3,295–308.
Lurey, J. S., & Raisinghani, M. S. (2001). An
empiricalstudyofbestpracticesinvirtualteams.
Information&Management,38,523–544.
McFadzean, E. (2001). Supporting virtual learning groups: Part 1. A pedag
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Team Building in an Online Organizational
Behavior Course
Maurice Grzeda , Rana Haq & Rolland LeBrasseur
To cite this article: Maurice Grzeda , Rana Haq & Rolland LeBrasseur (2008) Team Building in
an Online Organizational Behavior Course, Journal of Education for Business, 83:5, 275-282,
DOI: 10.3200/JOEB.83.5.275-282
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.83.5.275-282
Published online: 07 Aug 2010.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 79
View related articles
Citing articles: 5 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:12
TeamBuildinginanOnlineOrganizational
BehaviorCourse
MAURICEGRZEDA
RANAHAQ
ROLLANDLEBRASSEUR
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
FACULTYOFMANAGEMENT
LAURENTIANUNIVERSITY
SUDBURY,CANADA
ABSTRACT.Theauthorsdescribethe
developmentanddeliveryofateam-building
exerciseinanonlineorganizationalbehaviorundergraduatecourse.Qualitativedata
ofstudentperceptions,collectedatthe
endofthecourse,revealedbothpositive
andnegativereactionstovariousaspects
oftheteam-buildingexercise.Basedon
thesereactions,theauthorsdiscussneeded
improvementsintheassignment.Theyconcludebyconsideringhowtheirexperience
withtheteam-buildingexercisecontributes
toongoingdiscussionsaboutteamworkin
managementeducationandteambuilding
forvirtualteams.
Keywords:online,teaching,teambuilding,
teamwork
Copyright©2008HeldrefPublications
I
nthisarticle,wedescribethedevelopment of a team-building exercise
for an online, undergraduate organizational behavior (OB) course in an
Honors Bachelor of Commerce degree
program. Our purpose in sharing these
experiences is to demonstrate one case
oftransferringteachingtechniquesfrom
the traditional classroom to the online
teachingenvironment.Thesignificance
of the Internet for education and traininghasbeenwidelyrecognized(Hirsch,
2001; Pantazis, 2002), yet necessary
supportsforbothinstructorsandlearnersareoftenlacking(Teghe&Knight,
2004). In describing our experiences,
wehopetosupporteffectiveuseofthe
Internet as a teaching tool and to contributetothediscourseonteamsinmanagement education (Tonn & Milledge,
2002), virtual teams in the workplace
(Lurey&Raisinghani,2001),andWebbasedteachingofOB(Bigelow,1999).
Educational researchers have demonstrated that a successful Web-based
course depends on both course design
(Huang, 2000) and student interaction
andcollaboration(Stacey,1999).Thelatter increasingly involves virtual groups.
Course projects completed by virtual
groupstendtoenhancestudentlearning
(Carr-Chellman,Dyer,&Bremen,2000)
and perceptions of efficacy (Gabriel,
2004).Thesocialinteractionofthesevirtualgroupshighlightstheimportanceof
communityforonlinestudents(Conrad,
2002; Lock, 2002; O’Reilly & Newton,
2002). Conrad (2005) defined community as “a sense of connection, belonging,andcomfortthatdevelopsovertime
among members of a group who share
apurposeorcommitmenttoacommon
goal” (p. 2). In the online environment,
Conradlinkedcommunitytoasenseof
safety,trust,andsharing.Focusingmore
onprocess,Locklinkedasenseofcommunitytocommunication,collaboration,
interaction,andparticipation.Incontrast,
the management literature has tried to
understand virtual groups in terms of
team-buildingandteamlifecycle(Furst,
Reeves,Rosen,&Blackburn,2004).The
team perspective has the advantage of
covering both the task and relationship
dimensionsofgroupwork.
Weofferevidencethateffectiveexperiential teaching practices can be transferred from the physical to the virtual
classroombyincludingadequatesupports
forstudents.Asaresult,ourresearchbolstersthepositiontakenbysomescholars
that online education is not inferior to
the traditional classroom (Drago, Peltier,Hay,&Hodgkinson,2005;Iverson,
Colky,&Cyboran,2005).
Webeginthisarticlebydescribingthe
developmentoftheteam-buildingexerciseinouronlineOBcourse.Wepresentstudentperceptionsofteamworkclimatebasedonqualitativedatacollected
at the end of the course and describe
student suggestions for improving
May/June2008
275
onlineteamdevelopment.Wethendiscussourperceptionsofneededimprovements based on these reactions. Our
conclusions focus on the challenges of
teamwork in management education
andthevalidationofteambuildingwith
virtualteams.
METHOD
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
CreatinganOnlineCourse
Theteam-buildingexercisedescribed
inthisarticlewasdevelopedasateam
assignment in an online undergraduate
OB course, part of a new online honors management program. The adult
learners targeted by this program had
acquired,throughpostsecondarystudies
and practical work experience, a wide
range of competencies in the area of
financial management. However, they
hadlittleornoexposuretotopicsusually covered in an undergraduate OB
course or to teaching methods such as
experiential learning and team-based
courseprojects.
The course itself was organized
into 12 modules, each one consisting
of assigned readings and explanatory
notes covering a key OB topic (e.g.,
leadership), review questions for studentself-assessmentpurposes,andone
ormoreteamassignmentsdesignedfor
teamsof10students.Anasynchronous
communication platform was selected
for the course, and teams were given
at least 5 days to complete the online
discussions of assigned questions. At
the conclusion of the discussion, each
teamwasrequiredtosubmitaresponse
to the assigned questions. Teams were
expected to self-manage the team processes necessary for completing these
weeklyteamassignments.
Team-BuildingExercise
By integrating a team-building exercise,weintendedtohelpstudentsdevelop team process skills in support of
effective execution of the team-based
course requirements.We drew on various management education and practice sources to guide the development
of the team-building exercise. In particular, questions about the quality of
team learning experiences (Thacker &
Yost, 2002) and the impact of student
276
JournalofEducationforBusiness
performance assessments on team processes (McKendall, 2000) were most
compelling.We believe that the online
environment offered an opportunity to
emphasize team-process skill development(Holmer,2001).
The team-building exercise relied
on OB concepts such as team dynamics covered in the course readings, the
team effectiveness model (TEM) shown
in Figure 1, and the Process Thermometer Questionnaire (PTQ; Cohen, Fink,
Gadon,&Josefowitz,2001),atoolused
tostimulatereflectiononteamprocesses.
(Copies of the Instructions to Students
andthePTQareavailableonrequestfrom
the first author.) Hughes, Ginnett, and
Curphy (1993) provide a more detailed
description of the TEM and its applications.TheOBtextadoptedforthiscourse
(McShane, 2001) dealt extensively with
theTEM in the chapter devoted to team
dynamics. By applying the TEM as the
conceptualframeworkfortheassignment,
we expected the relevance of the text
materialtoincreaseforstudents.
In our adaptation of the model two
categories, team environment and team
design, corresponded to structural
parameters over which students had no
control. Team environment comprised
the academic setting, the orientation to
theassignment,andthetechnologyplatform(seeFigure1fordefinitions).Team
design included team size and composition, which were predetermined with
the intent of maximizing student learning.AccordingtotheTEM,theseinputs
influence the team processes described
Team
environment
•Academic
setting—online
coursedelivery
andframework
•Orientation—
instructions
providedto
completethe
assignment
•Technology—
technologyusedin
assignmentsand
course
by Tuckman’s (1965) stages of group
development (forming, storming, norming,andperforming).Theteamprocessesparameterwascapturedbythefirst11
dimensionsofthePTQ,andteameffectiveness outcomes (i.e., goal achievement,membersatisfaction,andlearning)
werecoveredbythe12thdimension.
StepsintheTeam-Building
Exercise
We expected students to complete the
team-building exercise steps in the first
half of the course. The second course
module introduced students to the teambuildingexercise,givingthemadetailed
outlinethatincludedtheassignmentpurpose and objectives, assignment weight,
andascheduleofteam-buildingactivities,
deliverables,andduedates.Bytheendof
Module2,teamsdraftedateamcontract
including team goals and commitments
(Cohen et al., 2001) and completed the
PTQ. In Module 6, halfway through the
course, students prepared a final report
coveringteamworkclimateandanaction
plan for improving team effectiveness,
submitting it to the instructor by e-mail.
Attheconclusionofthecourse,students
againcompletedthePTQ,butwithadditionalopen-endedquestionstappingperceptions of the team’s effectiveness and
theteam-buildingexercise.
AssessingStudentPerformance
The team-building exercise sought to
emphasize both the process of teambuilding and team outputs consisting of
Teamdesign
•Teamsize(7–10students)
•Teamcomposition(students
areassignedtoteams
randomly)
Teamprocesses
•Creatingandmodifyingthe
teamcontract(development
ofteamnormsandroles)
•Monitoringteamdevelopment
withtheprocessthermometer
Team
effectiveness
Threeoutcomesof
teamprocesses
•Achievedteam
goals
•Satisfiedmember
needs
•Facilitated
learningand
development
FIGURE1.TeamEffectivenessModel.AdaptedfromHughesetal.(1993).
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
the project reports. The course authors
designed the assessment framework to
shape effective individual participation
in the teamwork process. The first part
of the course shaped participation. Students received participation marks for
theircontributiontothediscussionbased
on the instructor’s assessment of individual contributions to the online discussions of assigned questions or short
cases.Theroleofinitiator/recorder(IR),
whose responsibilities included initiatingtheteamdiscussionanddraftingand
submittingawrittendiscussionsummary
inresponsetotheassignment,wasrotated among team members. In addition
to grades, students whose performance
didnotmeetexpectationsreceivedfeedbackandcoachingfromtheinstructorto
improvetheircontributiontoteamwork.
Theteam-buildingexerciseculminated
inateamreportevaluatingteamworkprocess during the first half of the course
and the team’s consensus about needed improvements for the last half of the
course.Theteam-buildingreportrequired
studentstoanalyzetheirownteam’sprocess;thus,studentsrealizedthatthepath
toasatisfactorygradeinthisassignment
wasagoodunderstandingofprocessand
asoundapplicationofteam-processskills.
Thereportgradeearnedbytheteamwas
an indicator of how aware the team was
of its process strengths and weaknesses
and how well the team understood what
improvements were needed. The second
halfofthecoursedidnotincludeateambuildingcomponentandfollowedamore
traditional grading approach in which
teamwork outputs, consisting of case
reports,wereassessedwithnoreflection
ontheteamprocesses.
RESULTS
We consider the effectiveness of the
team-building exercise based on qualitative data collected from students who
completedthefirstofferingoftheundergraduateOBcourse.Thequalitativedata
werecollectedattheendofthecourseand
consisted of students’ comments on and
reactionstotheoveralleffectivenessofthe
team-building exercise (i.e., its experientialvalueinlearningaboutteamfunctioning,teammemberroles,andactionsthat
result in improved team performance).
Although all students participated in the
team-buildingexerciseandcompletedthe
PTQ questionnaire at the conclusion of
thecourse,theopen-endedquestionseliciting the qualitative data on the exercise
anditseffectivenesswereoptional.Useof
thisqualitativedataforresearchpurposes
alsorequiredthestudent’swrittenconsent.
Afterdiscardingcasesinwhichthefinal
questionnairewasnotreturnedorwritten
consent was not provided, we were left
with89participants(i.e.,aresponserate
of68%).
StudentPerformanceonTeamBuildingExercise
Theresponsestotheopen-endedquestionswerecodedusingtheNUDISTsupportedNvivosoftware.Theanalysisidentified five keywords/nodes corresponding
tofivedimensionsoftheTEMshownin
Figure 1: academic setting, orientation,
technology, team processes, and team
effectiveness.Eachnodereceivedapositiveornegativeattributetoreflectthetone
of student responses to the item.A total
of 423 comments were coded, giving an
average of 4.8 comments per participant.
Ofthese423comments,59%werepositive and 41% were negative. The results
of the content analysis in Table 1 were
organizedtocorrespondtothedimensions
of the TEM in Figure 1. Team environment,includingacademicsetting,orientation, and technology, received a total of
73 comments, of which only 16% were
positive. Participants did not control the
team environment, which was entirely
determinedbythecoursedesigners.Team
processreceived190comments,ofwhich
59% were positive; it appears that the
majorityofparticipantsexperiencedsome
successasateammember.Similarly,team
effectivenessaccountedfor159comments,
of which 78% were positive. This statistic suggests that most of the participants
appreciated what they had learned about
team-buildinginavirtualenvironment.
Welearnedthatthereweresignificant
challenges in team development given
thetimeconstraintscreatedasaresultof
the12-weekcourseduration.Thevirtual
teamsinthiscourseappearedtorequire
additionaltimetointeractthroughmany
more message posts before team members knew each other well enough to
begindevelopingpositiveworksynergies
and adequate structure for weekly task
accomplishment.Virtualteamstypically
require more structure to perform their
work; they benefit from more explicit
identificationofmemberroles,expectations,andprimarytaskobjectives(Lurey
&Raisinghani,2001).Ateam’sinteraction style is one of the most important
predictors of effectiveness (Balthazard,
Potter,&Warren,2004)andneedstime
tobecomeestablished.
Most students were accustomed to
working independently and were new
to online teamwork. Comments suggested that the technical aspects of the
communication platform were largely
foreign to many students. Not having
skills or experience with the technology can affect both perceptions and
performance of teamwork. According
to Ocker and Fjermestad (2000), there
isahighcorrelationbetweenteamperformance and ability to adapt to the
technological medium. Students in our
courserevertedtothefamiliarandeasy
channelofe-mail,atechnologythatwas
betterknowntothemincomparisonto
theonlinediscussionboardusedinthe
course.Thetendencyofourstudentsto
rely on more familiar technology was
consistent with previously documented
patterns (Lurey & Raisinghani, 2001).
Therefore, we concluded that students
involvedinvirtualteamworkshouldbe
advised that they are expected to have
a certain level of computer skills (e.g.,
keyboarding, posting messages, using
e-mail)alongwithrealisticexpectations
ofdiscussionboardfunctionality.
Thequalitativeresultssuggestaturbulentteam-developmentprocesswhereinitialdissatisfactionledtogreaterstructure
(e.g.,adoptingschedulesandteamdiscussion leader roles). Students appeared to
hold the belief that such changes would
leadtoimprovedteamperformance.Team
assessment is pointless unless members
are motivated to resolve problems (Van
Aken,Groesbeck,&Coleman,2001).In
ourcourse,studentsweregradedonboth
awareness and understanding of process
and team outputs consisting of projects.
This provided the needed motivation to
resolveproblems.
StudentPerformanceProfiles
The content analysis summarized
in Table 1 was helpful in identifying
May/June2008
277
TABLE1.SummaryofStudents’PositiveandNegativeCommentsAbouttheCourse
Dimension
Academic
setting
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
Orientation
Technology
Teamprocess
Team
effectiveness
No.of
%ofpositiveand
comments negativecomments
269
13
35
190
159
Examplesofstudentcomments
Positive:35
Themidtermprojectwashighlyeffectiveingivingusdirectexperienceonthe
issuesaffectingvirtualteams.
Theteacherbeingavailableinansweringandclarifyingthequestionwasveryhelpfulinspeedingtherequirementsoftheproject.
Negative:65
Ididn’tseeanyonereallyplaytheirroleproperlybecauseofthepressuretohave
theassignmentsdoneplusthemidtermassignmentdoneeveryweek.Ibelievethat
beingunderthatpressuremakestheoneswithmoretimeavailabletologinhavean
advantageoverotherswithmorerestrictedtimeduetolongworkweekhoursand
familytotakecareof.
Onepersoninourgroupdidnotparticipateontheteamprojectbutreceiveda
grade.Ithinkthisisnotfair.
Positive:8
Ithinkthattheprojectlayoutwasfine.
Negative:92
Personallythestepswerenotclearlytiedtogether.Tome,eachstepseemedto
haveitsownseparateobjective,sowhenitcametimetowritethereportIwasnot
surewhatshouldhaveorshouldnotbeincluded.Andofcoursefearingevaluation
apprehension,Ididnotwanttoaskmyteammatesoryou.
Ithinkourteamdidnotbenefittothefullestpotentialthatwouldoccurifwe
understoodthefullprocesspriortocompletingeachstep.
Positive:9
Afterexploringothercommunicationsavailabletoourvirtualteam,Irealizedthat
thepagingfeaturewasoperationalandweallstartedusingit.
Itsurprisedmethatyoucouldgetarealfeelforaperson’spersonalitythrough
doingthisonlinewithoutevermeetingface-to-faceorspeakingtoeachother.
Negative:91
TheuseoftheWebBoardthreadeddiscussionsmadeitextremelydifficulttohavea
discussiononplanningthemidtermproject.
IntheverybeginningIwasnotveryfamiliarwithonlinestudyformatandwas
sufferingfrominformationoverloadduetothefactthatthevolumeofpostings
exceededmyprocessingcapacity.
Positive:59
Ourdifferentstrengths,perspectives,andideasaddedvalueanddimensiontoour
report.Duringthisprojectwesawemergingcreators,leaders,writers,organizers,
helpers,andadvisorscollaboratetoallownineindividualstofunctionasacohesive
team....Attheendoftheproject,allmembersfeltasenseofownershipandpride
inthefinalproduct.
Ibelievethemidtermprojecthelpedmeinsomewaystodeterminethefunctionof
ourteam.Byfillingouttheprocessthermometer,wesayeveryoneelse’sthoughts
aboutourgroupandwhereweneededtoimprove.
Negative:41
Clearlyitwasdifficulttoputtogetherateamofpeoplewhowerefromalloverthe
countryandhadneverworkedlikethisbefore.Ifoundtheexperiencefrustrating...
Ifeelourteamisdysfunctional,andIfeelthatthereareafewofustryingtokeepit
alive.
ThedesignofthiscourseisextremelydifferentfromtheusualCGAcourses(at
leastwhenIstudiedinthemid-80s),sothereissomelearningcurveinvolved.
Positive:78
Ithelpedmeevaluatethestrengthsandweaknessesthatwereapplicabletomyteam
andremindedmetobesupportive,tolistenandshareinformation,etc.Basically,it
helpedmeadjusttotheteamsetting,asitissomethingwearenotusedtothrough
theCGAcourses.
Thesethingswillbeinvaluableinmylifeandcanbeappliedtomyjob.
Negative:22
Butasthecoursewashalfoveralreadyandthegroupwasprobablysufferingfrom
postprojectburnout,therewasnotenoughtimetoimplementallthecoursesof
actioncompletely.
Itseemsthatmanymembersjointhegroupperiodically,participateintelligently,
andthendisappearforweeks.
Note.CGA=certifiedgeneralaccountant.
patternsacrossparticipants.Inthissection,weprovidethreeperformanceprofiles in which students describe their
278
JournalofEducationforBusiness
experiences with their team and the
team-building exercise. These descriptionsillustratetheteamprocesslearning
that was taking place. The themes of
adequatetaskstructure,clearroles,and
groupcohesionarenotable.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
The following remarks from one of
the respondents illustrate a negative
reactiontotheexercise.
I would like to say that we were not an
effective team during our midterm project.Gettingourgrouptoworkeffectively
wasveryfrustratingandcausedourgroup
alotofunnecessaryanxiety.Someofus
tried to get member participation started
early on in the project by designating
a discussion initiator who would keep
usontrackanddelegateresponsibilities.
However, the initiator we chose did not
have the leadership skills necessary to
keepusfocused.Theprojectwasvaluable
in helping me learn about the role that I
played.Iactedmoreastheharmonizer.I
assistedourdiscussioninitiatorandtried
to organize the group.As time went on,
it became quite clear what roles my fellow team members played. We quickly
learned the strengths and weaknesses of
all group members. The project taught
mealotaboutimprovingfutureteamperformance. Some of our group members
implemented our action plan and others
didnot.Thisisabigreasonwhyourteam
is still not very cohesive and why my
results on the process thermometer are
solow.Wecouldstillusesomeimprovement. I found that a lot of the time was
spent trying to get organized. Our group
lackedaneffectiveleader.
Thefollowingremarksillustrateapositiveexperience.
The midterm project was valuable in
helping me learn about several areas. I
have never worked as part of a virtual
teambeforethis.Theweeklyworkforced
metolearnhowtheteamfunctioned,my
role,theroleotherswerewillingtotake,
and how to motivate others a little. The
project expedited this process for those
of us that really worked hard to pull
things together. Unfortunately, a couple
of team members did not seem to place
much importance on this project, and
this lack of participation cost us in the
endwhenweonlyreceivedagradeof75
eventhoughweagreedtoachieveaminimum of 80 as a team. One thing worth
mentioningisthatmostvirtualteamsget
theopportunitytomeetface-to-facefrom
timetotime.Duringtheshortlifeofour
100% virtual team, this cannot happen.
I equate this to the task-based nature of
a short-term contract position versus the
more emotional and supportive basis of
a longer term relationship. One mistake
Imadewastowanttheteamrelationship
todeveloptoamorepersonallevel.Some
more regulation and direction (from the
course instructor), reducing the project
closertoataskbasis,wouldholdmembers
moreaccountable.Forme,theprojecthas
been a tremendous learning experience
aboutgroupprocess.Thenewknowledge
Ihaveoutofmyefforthasalreadybeen
usefulinpracticalsituations.
The following respondent remarks
areillustrativeofaverypositiveexperiencewiththeteam-buildingexercise.
The midterm project was effective in
that it exposed my team members and
I to working in a virtual environment
and demonstrated that it is possible to
work together toward a common objective without meeting face to face. Each
member’s participation was instrumental
in completing the project. The need for
careful and proper planning was emphasized by the instructions. Through such
tool as the process thermometer, I was
abletogetabetterunderstandingofeach
member’s thought processes. As a team
member, I realized that my participation
wasascriticalastheotherteammembers
in ensuring that we presented a quality
report.IrealizedthatIneededtoprovide
feedback and engage in discussions in
order to benefit the team.There was the
feeling of not wanting to let the team
down, and as one of the recorders I had
toprovideatimelydraftofthereportso
that team members could provide their
comments. On a project of this magnitude, the role of team members is very
criticalinthequalityofmaterialandthe
timelycompletionofthereport.Wewere
all required to research articles for this
project,andeachmemberoftheteamwas
able to contribute. In addition, the feedbackbyteammemberstothediscussion
process was invaluable. I learned from
this project that participation is the key
tothesuccessofanyteam.Backbenchersrarelyhelpateam,eachmemberhas
to engage in the discussion process by
presentinghisorherviewpointregardless
ofpopularity.
DISCUSSION
One immediate conclusion from the
findings was that an additional step
to monitor the implementation of the
actionplanshouldbeadded.Thedominant role of structure in online courses
(Lurey&Raisinghani,2001)meansthat
participantsrelyoninstructionstoguide
theirefforts.Studentswerenotaskedto
reflect on their implementation efforts
anddidnotdosospontaneously.Interestingly, students’ comments indicated
that they would like to see an extension of the project until the end of the
course by including follow-up reflectionanddiscussionontheiractionplan
strategies right up to the last course
module. We have since added a step
that requires students to reflect on the
impacttheactionplanhashadonteam
effectiveness. This added step is now
completed just prior the conclusion of
thecourse,afterstudentshavereceived
extensivefeedbackandgradesforteam
caseassignments.
We also recognized that the short
durationofthiscoursemaycreateadditional challenges. Changes in a team’s
style take time to implement and bear
fruit (Van Aken et al., 2001), but the
morecriticalissueiswhetherthegroup
task has been accomplished (Miller,
2003). For courses of short duration
(4 months), graduate online learners
concentrate their efforts on task and
knowledge mastery and less so on
social presence (Duncan, 2005). Three
months may seem too short a period
forateamtoform,establishandassess
itself, develop and implement a plan
to improve team-development process,
andachievethedesiredresults.Because
the current program structure does not
permit changes to the course duration,
thefocusforthesestudentsmustremain
on accomplishing their assigned tasks
withinthetimeallocated,supportedby
the exercises and experiences that are
built into the course to enhance teamworkskills.
Werecognizethatothercomplementary data should be collected. Ahuja
and Carley (1999) noted that a virtual
team’sperceptionofitsperformanceis
unlikely to be a good proxy for actual
performance. We only measured the
team’sself-reportedperceptionsofteam
interactionandperformance;additional
dimensions could be monitoring the
e-mailandotherelectronicmediaused
by the students and the team grade
received for assignments. These measureswouldcoverboththeteamprocess
andtheconsequences.
This course is in a constant state of
improvement, as feedback from each
delivery is assessed and determinations
are made regarding needed changes
thatcanbeintegratedimmediately,others that form part of a more extensive
course revision, and those left for the
major revision that occurs every 3 to 4
years. The addition of follow-up activities subsequent to the action plan and
moredetailedinstructionsthroughoutthe
team-buildingexercisewasanimmediate
May/June2008
279
changethatweexpectedwouldgivestudentsamorepositiveexperience.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
CONCLUSION
Several conclusions can be drawn
from the results of the initial delivery
of the online OB course and the teambuilding exercise. First, our experience
and findings contribute to the ongoing
discussions in the literature about the
Internet as an educational tool; more
precisely, team-based learning in online
management courses. Some educators
have displayed reticence in embracing
online teaching due to concerns about
the“validityoftheinternetasaneducational tool” (Parnell & Carraher, 2003,
p.435).Indesigningtheonlineversionof
theOBcourse,wesetouttoinclude,at
aminimum,thesamelevelofemphasis
onteamworkasfoundintheface-to-face
courseoncampus.Basedonourexperienceandthereactionsofstudentstothe
team-building exercise described in this
article, our conclusion is that the Internet can be a valid educational tool. To
maximize its effectiveness, this virtual
tool needs adequate support to enhance
thelearningexperienceforstudentsand
compensate for the absence of face-tofaceinteraction.Withtheimprovements
discussed earlier, we intend to continue
including the team-building exercise as
the focal team development activity in
ouronlineOBcourse.
Asecondthemeintheliteratureconcernstheoverallapproachtoteamwork
in management education. Although
teamwork skills are highly valued by
employers (Chowdhury, Endres, &
Lanis, 2002; Thacker & Yost, 2002),
employer dissatisfaction with the level
of teamwork skills of management
graduates points to potential weaknesses in the way teamwork skills are
developed. One critique of particular
interest centers on the emphasis given
to output at the expense of process in
teamwork skill development (McKendall, 2000). Student project teams are
prone to domination by task-centered
members, which results in virtually no
emphasisonteamprocessskilldevelopment(Holmer,2001).Theonlineformat
ofourOBcoursecreatedanopportunity
to monitor team process skill development and reward students accordingly,
280
JournalofEducationforBusiness
thus creating a better balance between
gradesbasedonprocessandoutcomes.
Positive student reactions to the team
development processes of the exercise
outnumbered negative reactions. Our
experiencewiththeteam-buildingexercise suggests that it can be effective in
emphasizingtheimportanceofprocess,
thus overcoming some of the concerns
expressedbyHolmer,amongothers.
Our findings and experiences also
relate to a third theme in the literature: team building for virtual teams
in the workplace.Workplace team performance is frequently dependent on
thedevelopmentofeffectivegroupprocesses(McFadzean,2001)andpositive
intragroup communication styles (Potter&Balthazard,2002a,2002b;Potter,
Balthazard&Cooke,2000).Theresults
of our team-building exercise support
the importance of these processes and
styles;theyprovideadditionalevidence
that students in an online course can
be experientially engaged to become
more aware of the importance of these
dynamics.
Trends in global Internet access and
deregulation in global education have
strengthenedtheinterestinonlineeducation among universities everywhere
(St. Amant, 2007). The use of digital
technologieshasprovidedgreateraccess
toeducationalcontentandchangedthe
way students learn (Sridhar, 2005). In
this context, developing effective skills
to maximize student learning becomes
paramount.Ouroverallconclusion,after
evaluation of the first course offering,
is that the team-building exercise was
a valuable learning experience for the
students despite the challenges posed
bytheonlineenvironmentandtherelativelyshorttimeperiod.Teamworkcan
be an effective learning activity in the
online environment, both in management education and in the workplace.
Asourresultssuggest,ateam-building
exerciseisusefulinteachingtheimportance of team process and developing
team process skills and can be a valuableresourceforonlineOBcourses.
NOTE
Dr.MauriceGrzedaisanassociateprofessor
of management at Laurentian University, where
he teaches organizational behavior and human
resources management and conducts research
in management development and education and
spiritualityinmanagementandcareers.
RanaHaq,lecturerintheSchoolofCommerce
andAdministrationatLaurentianUniversity,teachesorganizational behavior and human resources
managementandconductsresearchonworkforce
diversity,cross-culturalcommunications,training,
anddevelopment.
Rolland LeBrasseur, full professor of organizational behavior at Laurentian University, is
anaccomplishedresearcherinorganizationaland
community development and teaches organizationalbehaviorbothoncampusandonline.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be addressed to Dr. Maurice Grzeda, Faculty
of Management, Laurentian University, Ramsey
LakeRoad,Sudbury,P3E2C6,Canada.
E-mail:mgrzeda@laurentian.ca
REFERENCES
Ahuja, M., & Carley, K. (1999). Network structureinvirtualorganizations.OrganizationScience,10,741–757.
Balthazard, P., Potter, R., & Warren, J. (2004).
Expertise, extraversion and group interaction
styles as performance indicators in virtual
teams. Database for Advances in Information
Systems,35(1),41–65.
Bigelow, J. D. (1999). The web as an organizational behavior learning medium. Journal of
ManagementEducation,23,635–650.
Carr-Chellman,A.,Dyer,D.,&Bremen,J.(2000).
Burrowing through the network wires: Does
distance detract from collaborative authentic
learning?JournalofDistanceEducation,15(1),
39–62.
Chowdhury, S., Endres, M., & Lanis, T. W.
(2002).Preparingstudentsforsuccessinteam
work environments: The importance of building confidence. Journal of Managerial Issues,
14,346–359.
Cohen,A.,Fink,S.,Gadon,H.,&Josefowitz,N.
(2001).Effectivebehaviorinorganizations(7th
ed.).Boston:McGraw-HillIrwin.
Conrad,D.(2002).Deepintheheartsoflearners:
Insights into the nature of online community.
JournalofDistanceEducation,17(1),1–19.
Conrad, D. (2005). Building and maintaining
community in cohort-based online learning.
JournalofDistanceEducation,20(1),1–20.
Drago,W.,Peltier,J.W.,Hay,A.,&Hodgkinson,
M.(2005).Dispellingthemythsofonlineeducation:Learningviatheinformationsuperhighway.
ManagementResearchNews,28(7),1–17.
Duncan, H. (2005). Online education for practicing professionals: A case study. Canadian
JournalofEducation,28,874–896.
Furst, S., Reeves, M., Rosen, B., & Blackburn,
R. (2004). Managing the life cycle of virtualteams.AcademyofManagementExecutive,
18(2),6–20.
Gabriel,M.(2004).Learningtogether:exploring
group interactions online. Journal of Distance
Education,19(1),54–72.
Hirsch, D (2001). Prepare for the global e-campus.OECDObserver,229,57–58.
Holmer,L.L.(2001).Willweteachleadershipor
skilledincompetence?Thechallengeofstudent
projectteams.JournalofManagementEducation,25,590–605.
Huang, H. (2000). Instructional technologies
facilitating online courses. Educational Technology,40(4),41–46.
Hughes, R. L., Ginnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J.
(1993). Leadership: Enhancing the lessons of
experience.Homewood,IL:RichardD.Irwin.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:12 11 January 2016
Iverson, K. M., Colky, D. L., & Cyboran, V.
(2005).E-learningtakesthelead:Anempirical
investigation of learner differences in online
andclassroomdelivery.PerformanceImprovementQuarterly,18(4),5–18.
Lock, J. (2002). Laying the groundwork for the
development of learning communities within
online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance
Education,3,295–308.
Lurey, J. S., & Raisinghani, M. S. (2001). An
empiricalstudyofbestpracticesinvirtualteams.
Information&Management,38,523–544.
McFadzean, E. (2001). Supporting virtual learning groups: Part 1. A pedag