Communication Traps for Virtual Teams: II

Members of virtual teams see each other less often than do members of co-located teams. Often, they don't know each other as well, and they face numerous challenges in building and maintaining trust. These factors make virtual teams vulnerable to the tactics of political operators. Here's Part II of a catalog of those vulnerabilities. See "Communication Traps for Virtual Teams: I," Point Lookout for May 26, 2010, for more.

The unfair advantages of image management

Image management is the practice of managing perceptions of a policy, a system, an effort, a person, or just about anything else. When someone realizes that others' perceptions don't align with what he or she would wish, deceptions are available to bring about a more desirable alignment. These steps include spin, omissions, inappropriate emphasis, delays in disclosure, obstructions of various kinds, and simple lies.

In co-located teams, such deceptive methods are risky, because the audience usually has independent information sources, beyond the reach of image managers. In the co-located environment, another challenge for the aspiring image manager is frequency of refresh: the co-located audience can obtain independent information much more frequently than the virtual audience can. Thus, effective co-located image management requires continuous effort and considerable dedication. In the virtual environment, the image manager can be much more effective with a lot less effort.

To counter these deceptions, begin by identifying anyone who might be engaged in image management. Usually, image management creates counter-action from those who feel that the image manager is unfairly characterizing them or their work. Private conversations with those involved are often helpful in determining what's really happening.

The effect of mis-speaking on others' behalf

In virtual teams, more often than in co-located teams, occasions arise in which one person relays or represents the views of another, or the views of a group. This happens because the team is dispersed geographically, or because the limitations of telephone or video constrain the number of people who can participate in discussions. In co-located teams, groups do
send delegates to meetings, but
the temptation to misrepresent
is less intense than
in virtual teamsSometimes such representatives of others are tempted to misrepresent the views of those they represent. The misrepresentation can be subtle and almost innocent, or it can be blatant, but in any case it can create problems.

In co-located teams, groups do send delegates to meetings, but the temptation to misrepresent is less intense, because the loop back from the audience of the misrepresenter to the people being misrepresented is more likely to close. When it does, misrepresentations become obvious, and misrepresenters pay a high price.

Virtual teams can gain control over such misrepresentations by recording meetings and distributing the recordings, or by including in meeting minutes not only the usual decisions and actions items, but also any representations made by those in attendance. Either technique helps achieve the "closed loop" that deters misrepresentation in co-located teams.

To decrease vulnerability, virtual teams must enhance connections between their members, which requires time and resources, and — most important — conscious, purposeful attention.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Workplace Politics:

Why There Are Pet Projects

Pet projects are common in organizations, including organizations with healthy and mature planning processes. They usually consume resources at levels beyond what the organization intends, which raises the question of their genesis: Where do pet projects come from?

Reactance and Micromanagement

When we feel that our freedom at work is threatened, we sometimes experience urges to do what is forbidden, or to not do what is required. This phenomenon — called reactance — might explain some of the dynamics of micromanagement.

Grace Under Fire: II

When we debate at work, things sometimes turn unpleasant. Out of control, one party might maneuver the other into losing control. If we have better tools for recognizing these tactics, we're better able to maintain self-control. Here's Part II of such a toolkit.

Columbo Tactics: II

This is Part II of a series showing how the less powerful can adapt the tactics of TV detective Lt. Columbo when they're interacting with the more powerful.

Appearance Anti-patterns: II

When we make decisions based on appearance we risk making errors. We create hostile work environments, disappoint our customers, and create inefficient processes. Maintaining congruence between the appearance and the substance of things can help.

See also Workplace Politics and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development

Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.

And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law

When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info