Fluent Essays

Respond to two (2) Colleagues see attachment for detail instructions:  * 3 - 4 paragraphs per colleagues  * No plagiarism * APA citing    48 hours Discussion 1: Reflection and Shared Practice Working in teams, in general, can be challenging. Because of the global transformation of business, virtual teams have become more common. The success of this type of collaboration is dependent upon not only technology, but on team members’ ability to adopt new ways of thinking and working. In addition, managing intercultural communication may become more profound in this type of environment. An effective virtual team aligns its mission, clarifies team members’ roles, and understands differing communication styles as a means to optimize its virtual workspace. To prepare for this Discussion: Review this week’s Learning Resources, especially: · Quintanilla, K. M., & Wahl, S. T. (2020). Business and professional communication: KEYS for workplace excellence (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. · Chapter 5, “Getting to Know Your Diverse Workplace” · Lepsinger, R. (2012). The virtual challenge: Its more than cultural differences. See attachment · Radovic-Markovic, M., Grozdanic, R., & Markovic, D. (2012). The impact of virtual culture See attachment TED. (Producer). (2017, October). Rocío Lorenzo: How diversity makes teams more innovative [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/rocio_lorenzo_want_a_more_innovative_company_hire_more_women Assignment: Respond to at least two of your peers postings in one or more of the following ways: · Share an insight about what you learned from having read your peers’ postings and discuss how and why your peer’s posting resonated with you professionally and personally. · Offer an example from your experience or observation that validates what your peer discussed. · Offer specific suggestions that will help your peer build upon his or her own virtual communication. · Offer further assessment or insight that could impact your peer’s future communications. · Share how something your peer discussed changed the way you view virtual teams. · 3 – 4 paragraph response per each colleagues · No plagiarism · APA citing Bottom of Form 1st Colleague – Natasha Mills  Discussion 1 - Week 6 Natasha Mills  Reflection and Shared Practice Top of Form The Covid-19 pandemic made it almost impossible for any organization to avoid the use of virtual teams to conduct some, if not most, of its operations. It is during this time that the use of video conferencing became paramount, mainly through the widely known Zoom video calls. Whereas I had some experience with virtual teams before the pandemic, these experiences were occasional. This made the shift to a virtual environment feel like starting a new job. As Quintanilla & Wahl posit, such changes come with many emotional ups and downs (Quintanilla & Wahl, 2020). I can relate to this claim because my shift to a virtual team environment came with feelings of frustration and doubt, among other emotions. These emotions were substantially related to whether or not my team and I would effectively meet company goals within such an environment. As a result, as the leader of the team, I would find myself micro-managing the team members, an approach that has been identified to have its share of disadvantages (Radovic-Markovic et al., 2012). Further, the virtual environment made us spend a lot of time in meetings planning and coordinating, which we would have otherwise spent on the completion of tasks. The frustration did not only relate to my skepticism in meeting organizational goals. It also stemmed from challenges that the team experienced using web-based collaboration tools, especially during the early stages of the transition. Radovic-Markovic et al. state that it is essential for employees in a virtual work environment to know how and when to use the systems and tools set in place for operational purposes (Radovic-Markovic et al., 2012). This was not the case for all members of my team. Most of them experienced difficulties navigating the organization’s system and the designated web-based collaboration tool, Zoom. Experiences such as team members not turning off their microphones when not speaking, leading to distractions, or members not knowing how to turn on their cameras were common. Such instances were significantly caused by diversity in the age element that made navigating these systems and tools more technical for some of the team members than others. Further, the occurrences hindered efficient information flow, which, in turn, made it difficult for the team to plan and coordinate effectively. Without effective planning and coordination, completing tasks and realizing company goals were compromised since sharing information in these domains is a necessary precedent to meeting goals (Radovic-Markovic et al., 2012). The above-mentioned were the most severe challenges that I experienced with virtual teams and web-based collaboration tools. The first strategy that I deployed as the team leader was to conduct a training session on the use of web-based collaboration tools, with a particular focus on Zoom and the company’s online system. Lack of training on how to use virtual tools is one of the leading causes of mishaps and overall frustration among virtual teams (Lyons et al., 2009). Implementing this strategy took time due to Covid-19 restrictions, but eventually, I ensure that every team member knew how to use these platforms. Another critical strategy that I used was incorporating additional communication tools to increase the efficiency of information sharing, including email, phone calls, and instant messaging. This strategy was the most effective in achieving adaptability, forcing me to agree with Lepsinger that leveraging synchronous tools is one of the actions used by effective virtual team leaders because it increases spontaneous communication (Lepsinger, 2012). Also, the incorporation of this strategy presented a comfortable midpoint that accommodated the diversity of the team members, making it easy to share information and make decisions (Lepsinger, 2012). Virtual teams lack human behaviors common among non-virtual teams, making them lack a social context (Radovic-Markovic et al., 2012). This was the same experience I had with my virtual team. For example, our interactions were considerably formal and impersonal, which was different from how we interacted in a co-location. The latter was often filled with spontaneous conversations during coffee breaks or lunch, whereas the former was characterized mainly by specific information sharing about tasks and projects. Co-location interactions also had conversations accompanied by noticeable non-verbal cues. With virtual teams, the only visible non-verbal cues were occasional nods, making it hard to know a team member’s actual reactions about a piece of information shared or a decision made. Therefore, I observed an apparent difference between virtual interactions and co-location interactions. Lepsinger, R. (2012). The virtual challenge: Its more than cultural differences. People and Strategy, 35(1), 10–11. Lyons, R., Priest, H. A., Wildman, J. L., Salas, E., & Carnegie, D. (2009). Managing virtual teams: strategies for team leaders. Ergonomics in Design, 17(1), 8-13. Quintanilla, K. M., & Wahl, S. T. (2020). Business and professional communication: KEYS for workplace excellence (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Radovic-Markovic, M., Grozdanic, R., & Markovic, D. (2012). The impact of virtual culture on effective communication in virtual organizations. Metalurgia International, 17(10), 172–175. Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form 2nd Colleague – Theresa Jno Baptiste - Bruno  RE: Discussion 1 - Week 6 Reflection & Shared Practice Original Post Top of Form           With the growth of technology work environments have changed significantly.  The use of emails and teleconferencing allowed for long distance communication. In the business world we have seen that increase especially as economies around the world became intertwined. In health care it is customary to utilize these technologies i.e. emails, telephone conversations and teleconferencing among colleagues, departments and organizations to enhance care delivery. The use of telemedicine has transformed care to remote communities and has provided healthcare providers opportunities for collaboration around the world. None of that however would have prepared us for the explosion of technology in healthcare and the transformation of health organizations into the generalized virtual workplaces they have become due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Healthcare providers pride themselves on collaboration and communication. Many of the organizations have meeting rooms, boardrooms and hold in-person conferences to foster that face-to face sharing and networking. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen the boardrooms and meeting rooms emptied and conferences cancelled all replaced with computer and telephone screens, Zoom and Microsoft Teams. The usually filled offices are bare vacated by individuals working from home. For example while the directors, managers and frontline staff work in the hospitals, the executive leadership teams, their assistants and even the directors’ assistants all are conducting business from home.  Lepsinger (2012) outlines that one of the characteristics of the virtual work place is the lack of face-to-face communication.   Lepsinger’s work was from 2012; but in our present state we have advance technology that allows for visual conferencing. With Microsoft teams and Zoom you can now see your colleagues during a conversation.   For example a few weeks ago I needed to connect with my colleague who was the interim manager for my portfolio; I called her through Microsoft teams and we were able to have a virtual conversation for about 15 minutes.              The literature this week focused on effectiveness in communication and team building within virtual organizations. Radovic-Markovic et al, ( 2012) outlines the features that virtual organizations need to consider as part of their culture. They explain that managers need to trust that members will do their jobs and companies need to foster connectedness. All that remain true, but as we have found with this pandemic, the improvement in technology has made these features easier to accomplish. I work in a multisite organization and email communication is the channel of choice. However what the newer technology such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom has done, they have allowed us to have meetings without having to waste time traveling. While we have seen benefits, there are some challenges such as the non-engaged colleagues. For example with larger group meetings some individuals can be seen checking emails or answering the phones.  Yael Zofi (Lepsinger, 2012) told us that if we do not get to know someone, our natural instinct is to withdraw. Connectedness is essential as Radovic-Markovic et al, ( 2012) points out.  It is very obvious in many of the Zoom or Microsoft Teams meetings that many people are disengaged.  The reality is however, that behaviour is part of the organizational culture. (Quintanilla & Wahl, 2020).             As much as the technology has transformed organizations especially in the last year and a half, a meeting with individuals sharing and interacting is much more engaging and can be more productive. For example presenting Anthony’s Orchard’s incorporation of social media and having the quarterly meeting in a colocation, would allow for team building and in person information sharing. Quintanilla & Wahl (2020) outlines that we miss the non-verbal messages that is present with face-to-face communication. Organizations thrive on their culture especially if they have a healthy work culture. Being in a colocation allows for practicing and enforcing cultural rituals, (Quintanilla & Wahl, 2020) which allows an organization to thrive.  Connected with organizational culture is organizational diversity. The organization I work with embraces and incorporates diversity as part of its strategic objectives. There is time reserved at our monthly leadership meetings for discussion on inclusion, diversity and antiracism.  The leadership structure models the organizational commitment to diversity. Lorenzo (2017) informs us that although diverse teams require much more effort, they generally have creative and fresher ideas. The organization has made it a priority to embrace diversity.    Lepsinger, R. (2012). The Virtual Challenge: Its Mort Than. Perspectives - Counterpoints , 35(1). Mirjana Rodovic-Markovic, P. R. (2012). The Impact fo Virtual Culture on Effective Communication in Virtual Organizations. XV11(10).  Wahl, K. M. (2020). Business and Professional Communication Keys for Workplace Excellence (Fourth ed.). Los Angeles, Califonia, USA: SAGE Publications .   Bottom of Form Top of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form Bottom of Form 10 PEOPLE & STRATEGY perspectives – counterpoints In some ways, communicating through technology can help. For example, we learn to be more explicit and direct on conference calls, and people who have a more limited capability in the common language often prefer written communication such as email because it allows them more time to check the vocabulary and think about a response. However, working through technology robs us of a lot of nonverbal communication and can undermine trust through misunder- standings. Because of this, successful virtual teams tend to adopt some shared explicit behaviors and mechanisms. For example, silence cannot indicate consent on a conference call. Because you cannot really read expressions and iden- tify levels of commitment, you need some mechanism for making this explicit — for example, by polling each individual, asking them to commit formally to what they’re going to do. One way I do this is to ask each individual to summarize whether they agree and what they will do as a result of this decision. It is important to listen carefully to the answers; any evasion or indirectness in the answer shows a lack of real commitment to the implementation of the decision. Sometimes I ask people in webinars to type in the number in a poll between one and 10 that indicates their agreement to implement the decision immediately. If anyone scores below seven, I don’t take this as a decision that has really been made. Kevan Hall is the CEO of Global Inte- g r a t i o n , s p e c i a l i s t s i n m a t r i x management, virtual teams and global working. He trains his clients through his method of Speed Lead: Faster, Sim- pler Ways to Manage People, Projects and Teams in Complex Companies and he consults with major multinationals around the world. The Virtual Challenge: It’s More Than Cultural Differences By Richard Lepsinger A s Yael Zofi observes, virtual team- work is on the rise, which creates a variety of challenges for team mem- bers and leaders. As virtual teams cross time zones, communication and coordination become much more difficult. While cross- cultural issues impact communication and collaboration in a virtual setting, they are just one hurdle that virtual teams face. regardless of their location. Different time zones, the third characteristic, make it more difficult to collaborate and to involve people in decisions that affect them. It also makes scheduling team virtual meetings difficult (someone has to get up early or stay up late) and inhibits spontaneous interactions. The challenge for virtual leaders and teams is to use technology and a shift in their behavior and habits to bridge this “virtual gap” and diminish the impact distance has on collabo- ration and communication. Examples of actions used by the most effective virtual leaders and teams in our study to close the virtual gap include: A study conducted by our firm, OnPoint Con- sulting, found that more than 25 percent of virtual teams were not fully performing. But why is that the case? We believe there are three characteristics of working in a virtual setting that impact the ability of employees and team leaders to “just do what they’ve always done.” First, the lack of face-to-face contact makes it more difficult to build personal relationships and establish trust. A great deal of the knowl- edge we have about people and their values is gained through spontaneous, informal interac- tions during a coffee break, lunch or through informal breaks when we visit with people to chat. Unfortunately, that type of spontaneous informal interaction is absent in a virtual set- ting and can be difficult to replicate. Technology, the second characteristic, has been a significant catalyst for virtual teams, but it creates challenges of its own. No matter how “rich” the technology is, it is not as rich or natural as face-to-face communication because a lot of information is lost in a vir- tual setting. One advantage of virtual teams is that orga- nizations can leverage the best talent • Meet face-to-face at least once early on in the team’s formation to build relationships and learn about team members’ capabilities. • Use tools such as an electronic team page and bulletin boards to create a sense of shared space. • Find a comfortable midpoint for informa- tion sharing and decision making that ac- commodates the cultures represented on the team. • Partner team members at different loca- tions and rotate these periodically. • Leverage synchronous tools (e.g., instant messaging) to increase spontaneous com- munication. • Choose communication technologies that are most appropriate to the task (e.g., email for information sharing, conference calls for interactive discussion). • Make wider use of videoconferencing for more complex decisions or discussions. • Share the inconvenience. Rotate the time of virtual meetings so no one person always has to get up early or stay up late. • Make work visible. Use SharePoint or some other collaborative software and Successful virtual teams adopt shared explicit behaviors. VOLUME 35/ISSUE 1 — 2012 11 perspectives – counterpoints or foe. And here’s the challenge: People you don’t know tend to be classified as foes until proven otherwise, and a virtual environment offers little opportunity to connect enough with people to dampen down this natural threat response we have of strangers. Which kind of people you non-consciously think you are surrounded by has a big impact on brain functioning. You use one set of brain circuits for thinking about people whom you believe are like you, a friend, and a different set for those whom you view as different from you, a foe. When your brain decides someone is a friend, you process your interactions using a similar part of the brain you use for thinking about your own experience. And when people in your in- group experience pain, you relate to this using a different brain region than when people are in your out-group. When you interconnect your thoughts, emo- tions and goals with other people in your in-group, you release of oxytocin, a pleasur- able chemical. It’s the same chemical experience that small children get when they make physical contact with their mothers. In a paper published in Nature in June 2005, a group of scientists found that giving people a spray containing oxytocin increased their lev- els of trust. The paper reports that in nonhuman mammals, “oxytocin receptors are distributed in various brain regions asso- ciated with behavior, including pair-bonding, maternal care, sexual behavior and normal social attachments. Thus, oxytocin seems to permit animals to overcome their natural avoidance of proximity and thereby facili- tates approach behavior.” Our animal instincts seem to naturally cause us to withdraw and treat others as foes, unless a situation arises that generates oxytocin. This phenomenon makes sense: It explains why facilitators and trainers insist on “icebreakers” at the start of workshops and why “establish rapport” is the first step in any counseling, customer service or sales training manual. And it explains why things can go so wrong in virtual teams with- out good leadership. When you sense someone is a foe, all sorts of brain functions change. You don’t interact with a perceived foe using the same brain regions you would use to process your own experience. One study showed that when you perceive someone as a competitor, you don’t feel empathy with him or her. Less empathy equals less oxytocin, which means a less pleasant sensation of collaboration overall. Thinking someone is a foe can even literally make you less smart, according to one paper published in 2002. When you think someone is a foe, you don’t just miss out on feeling his or her emotions; you also inhibit yourself from thinking his or her ideas, even if that person is right. Think of a time you were angry with someone. Was it easy to see things from his or her perspec- tive? When you decide someone is a foe, you tend to discard his or her ideas — sometimes to your detriment. All of this points to the need to be more aware of the automatic nature of this friend/foe response and more consciously question whether our automatic reactions to other people are always in our best interests. In a virtual environment, where there are fewer smiles and pleasant faces to dampen our natural threat response, we have to work even harder to ensure that everyone on the same team actually treats each other as truly on the same team. Dr. David Rock is the founder and CEO of the NeuroLeadership Group, a global consulting and training firm with operations in 24 countries. Rock coined the term “NeuroLeadership” and co-founded the NeuroLeadership Institute, a global initiative bringing neuroscientists and leadership experts together to build a new science for leadership development. post work and action plans so team mem- bers can check on progress. • Clarify decision authority so action can be taken in a timely manner even when time zones make inclusion difficult or im- possible. Rick Lepsinger is the president of OnPoint Consulting. The focus of Lepsinger’s work has been on helping leaders and organizations close the gap between strategy and execution, work effectively in a matrix organization, and lead and collaborate in a virtual environment. His most recent book is “Virtual Team Success: A Practical Guide for Working and Leading from a Distance,” which is co-authored with Darleen Derosa. Virtual Teams from the Neuroscience Lab By David Rock Y ael Zofi’s article touches on many issues that researchers are studying in the neuroscience lab, in particular within a field called Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (or SCAN for short) — a new field that has emerged in the last decade. In the SCAN field, researchers study issues such as persuasion, automatic bias and preju- dice, attitudes and stereotypes, empathy, theory of mind and in-group/out-group the- ory. This last area is of great importance for the whole issue of virtual teams. It turns out that the brain classifies every person you meet as similar to or different from you, as friend When you decide someone is a foe, you tend to discard his or her ideas — sometimes to your detriment. Copyright of People & Strategy is the property of HR People & Strategy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holders express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. 172 vol. XVII no. 10 (2012) METALURGIA INTERNATIONAL These journals are included on ISI Web of knowledge regional Journal Expansion European Union 2010, multidisciplinary fields http://isiwebofknowledge.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/contentexp/eu/   THE IMPACT OF VIRTUAL CULTURE ON EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IN VIRTUAL ORGANIZATIONS Mirjana RADOVIC-MARKOVIC1, Radmila GROZDANIC2, Dusan MARKOVIC1 1Akamai University ,USA, 2College of Business Economics and Entrepreneurship ============================================================================================= Key words: Communication, virtual organizations,virtual culture, information systems ,technological change Professor Ph.D Professor Ph.D Lecturer Mirjana RADOVIC-MARKOVIC Radmila GROZDANIC Dusan MARKOVIC Abstract. This paper explores the impact of virtual culture on effective communication in virtual organizations.The authors conluded that despite the technology as an important aspect of a virtual firm, there is still a human component that serves as the decision-making aspect and deals with judgment activities .They also pointed out that with the development of new technologies, can be expected that communication will continue to experience radical changes within modalities of communication in virtual enterprises. In their opinion it is not easy to predict in advance the direction in which these changes will be oriented. However, what is certain is that they will depend not only on technological change but also on the change in the employee awareness in virtual firms. 1. INTRODUCTION Information systems play a vital role in the e-business and e-commerce operations, enterprise collaboration and management, and in the strategic success of businesses that must operate in an Internetworked global environment. The Internet services, in conjunction with the existing and more widely used communication media, provide the broadest enhancement of information and communication resources [12]. 1.1.Definision of Virtual Organizations “Virtual organization is a temporary network of independent business units – suppliers, customers, and even rivals – linked by information and communication technology to share skills, costs and access to different markets. This organizational model is flexible – groups of collaborators quickly unite to exploit a specific opportunity. In its most elementary form, the concept depicts any organization that interacts with other organizations to create a virtual corporation and that contributes only within the scope of its core competence. Central in the development of virtual organization is technology. Teams of people in different companies work together, via a computer network in real time.“[3] This definition provides a clear structural perspective and a detailed picture of what makes a virtual organization. 1.2.Characteristics of virtual organizations Virtual organizations are characterized by (a) highly dynamic processes, (b) contractual relationships among entities, (c) edgeless, permeable boundaries, and (d) reconfigurable structures [4]. As the virtual organization consists of a network of independent companies, each of these companies contributes with its core competence. The organization that initiates the cooperation defines the most appropriate business processes which in turn are complementary with the business skills of different firms. The synergy effect that is the result of combining all the core competences allows for creating an organization that meets the customer requirements in a flexible manner. According to [1], a virtual organization has to have its own identity. If the identity of a partner remains visible alongside the identity of the organization, it is defined as a “loosely coupled virtual organization“ whereas a “tightly coupled virtual organization“ appears to customers as a joint organization. The development of information and communication technologies allowed for the differencies in distances between virtual organizations to be solved so they can work together. The partners in the virtual organization are equal, hence it is the organization without hierarchy. A favourable effect of such an architecture results in an improved organizational efficiency and responsibility [2] The organizations consist of a network of autonomous companies, hence such an architesture is also known as a network architecture. It differs from a hierarchy architecture by a large number of lateral communications that make this organizational structure highly coordination-intensive (Figure 1). METALURGIA INTERNATIONAL vol. XVII no. 10 (2012) 173 These journals are included on ISI Web of knowledge regional Journal Expansion European Union 2010, multidisciplinary fields http://isiwebofknowledge.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/contentexp/eu/   Figure 1. Matrix structure [9] There are different virtual organization networking modalities depending on the needs and possibilities for creating a degree of collaboration and management, and hence different types of information to be shared. The types of necessary information to be shared in a manageable virtual organization on an e-level are the following:  Planning (P): information used in defining a common purpose, in determining the scope and orientation of work of the entire virtual organization.  Operational (O): information on the activities to be performed on a daily basis for each member.  Coordinating (C): information flows to ensure that operational activities achieve their goal effectively. 2. VIRTUAL CULTURE AS BASIS FOR EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IN VIRTUAL ORGANIZATIONS An organization that has a large proportion of employees working in the virtual workplace faces distinct challenges related to building an organizational culture.When building a culture within a virtual firm, managers have numerous tools at their disposal to compensate for the lack of social context, geographical location, and the normal behaviours of a non-virtual firm. Managers of a virtual firm need to focus on results since they may not be able to see all of the work that is being done. They also need to be able to delegate and keep track of projects and work. Managers of a virtual firm should not be micro-managers as this style will most likely not be effective. Another requirement for a manger in a virtual organization is that he or she needs to be able to motivate his or her employees to go online. Since the majority of the firm’s work will be online it is important for the employees to be able to access the information they will need to do their jobs. This can be done by putting important news and updated online matter at a place where the employees will also find other job-related information. If the majority of the firm’s work will be online it is important to have an easy-to-use system. Employees will not want to go online or use systems that are hard to use and take too much time. When building a system it is important to get opinions from the people who will be using it. In addition, with all of the tools and systems that will be in place for a virtual firm, it is important that the employees know when and how to use the tools and systems they have access to. Sometimes it makes a better business sense to meet a person face-to-face that try to communicate via e-mail. This needs to be understood by everyone, especially when dealing with clients. Managers also need to be able to communicate through multiple channels on both formal and informal levels. There is a number of features of a virtual firm that should be considered as part of the culture to successfully run and manage the firm. The first feature of the culture of a virtual firm is trust [15]. Since a manager cannot always see his or her employees they have to be able to trust that they are doing the work that they are supposed to be doing. It should also be noted that since the majority of work will be done online, most of this work can be easily monitored and employees may worry about being spied on. The second feature of a virtual firm is leadership. It is important that a company’s leaders show the behavior that they want their employees to exhibit. These are the role models of the firm that will set the tone for the entire company. The third feature is that a virtual company needs to be OK with being different and doing things differently. Virtual companies will always be different from the traditional company and the culture needs to account for that. In addition, the employees need to be able to work in an environment that they may not be used to. The fourth feature of a virtual company is that there will be some positions within the company that do very boring work, for example, an employee who works in a call center or at a help desk [15]. These employees will most likely be low paid so rewards and incentives need to be considered to reduce the turnover and increase efficiency. The fifth feature of a virtual company is communication. All the employees of a virtual company need to have good communication skills, including the upper level management. In a virtual company, employees do not have the ability to stop by a coworker’s office to quickly discuss a project. Instead, they will need to pick up the phone or send an e- mail, neither having the same effect as a face-to-face meeting. It is also difficult to show emotions over an e-mail and sometimes over the phone. Because of this, employees need to learn to express themselves effectively and to really listen. This includes discussions during group meetings or when working on team projects. The sixth feature of a virtual company is the need for connectedness within the company .Since employees do not see each other regularly as in a traditional company, it is important to establish a connectedness of employees. This will make the company have more of a family feel and improve motivation. The seventh feature is shared values. In order to have a successful virtual company, everyone involved needs to share the same values. This is even more important in a virtual company because the company’s values cannot be instilled on a daily basis as in the traditional company due to the lack of physical connection. The eighth feature is that virtual companies will have slightly different jobs in comparison with the traditional companies. For example, a traditional secretary may be replaced by a virtual assistant. In addition, a larger number and more varied IT responsibilities may be required and employees may be needed to command knowledge in more than one areas. 3. COMMUNICATION IN VIRTUAL ORGANIZATIONS Communication plays a key role in the work of virtual 174 vol. XVII no. 10 (2012) METALURGIA INTERNATIONAL These journals are included on ISI Web of knowledge regional Journal Expansion European Union 2010, multidisciplinary fields http://isiwebofknowledge.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/contentexp/eu/   organizations. Without communication, the boundaries of operations of a virtual entity would be impossible to determine at any level [4] Electronic communication allows for the distance connectedness of employees, regardless of time differences, of the culture and the language and of the jobs they perform, contrary to traditional organizations where all the jobs are performed at the same place and at the same time (Figure 2). It also allows for a fast and easy flow of information between distant organizational entities, however, also among all the participants in the business chain – distributors, customers, etc. Besides, electronic communication can contribute significantly through forming its varied modalities, by innovation processes in the virtual firms operations. This is where its importance is crucial [5]; [6],[7]; [11];[14]. 3.1.Implications of electronic communication upon virtual organizations The research into six areas of electronic communication have ensured a better insight into the four major aspects of the virtual organization: (a) a highly dynamic process, (b) contractual relations between entities, (c) permeable boundaries, (d) reconfigurable structures [4] Figure 2. Communication at any place and at any time [10] In surveying these four areas, it is important to bear in mind that a majority of findings were obtained on the basis of the study of electronic mail and e-conferencing, other forms of electronic communication, such as group voting, documentation management systems, or electronic data exchange not included. Furthermore, a large amount of research compares the modalities of electronic communication with oral speech, especially with a direct, face-to-face communication, despite the fact that electronic communications display a large number of properties similar to the written form of communication. Similarly to the face- to-face communication, electronic communication is interactive. The result is that the behaviour in electronic communication takes on the characteristics of both the documents – the written and the informal speech [13] For the communication to be successful, it is necessary that communicators should have equal levels of knowledge which is difficult to achieve without physical and linguistic presence. This means that the lack of the face-to-face contact in electronic communication may have a negative impact upon understanding the message, however, the literature is rather ambiguous as regards this issue. The research on understanding electronic communication has concluded that there are a number of difficulties to understand the meaning of the information as well as to manage the feedback information during a discussion. Regardless of the advantage in terms of the speed of exchange of information electronically and to larger distances, electronic communication revealed some additional misconceptions, e.g., the tasks will not be solved faster if set electronically. It has also been proven, however, that the lack of visualization has not significantly disturbed the control of conversation and its comprehensibility in case of synchronous communication via discussion groups [8]. Visualization is necessary, however, in resolving certain conflicting situations and complex activities, as well as in overcoming certain social and cultural differences. The inter-organizational communication among virtual organizations assumes that the major portion of communication is conducted through transaction exchange within the network, which allows for a faster and larger information flow, especially in task setting, whereas a smaller amount of information is related to hierarchal flows. The communication among the departments of equal rank within the organization is conducted via synchronous technologies. In case more consensus among the participants on different levels is required, and in case non-synchronous communication is pursued, the result may be a highly intensive exchange of messages in order that a more detailed harmonization and understanding should be achieved. 4. CONCLUSION Communication is fundamental to any form of organizing, however, it is especially important for virtual organizations. Relative to more traditional settings, communication processes that occur in virtual contexts are expected to be rapid, customized, temporary, larger in volume, more formal, and more relationship-based [4]. While technology is an important aspect of a virtual firm, there is still a human component that serves as the decision-making aspect and deals with judgment activities. With these components there is definitely a shift in the structure of a virtual firm. For instance, there seems to be less middle management within a virtual firm in comparison with a traditional firm. Some firms have developed employee orientation tools to guide them through the virtual work .This can include written guidelines, training, and networks for colleagues. Virtual firms should consider a computer-based chat room, where employees can work on projects with other team members and get information on the work they are doing. They should also have a social protocol for employees and teams that have information on common cultural values. In addition to email, a virtual firm needs to have access to video and audio conferencing. This will allow employees and managers to work with one another from a distance and have the effect of working from the same location. A virtual firm needs to be able to balance the virtual with the face-to-face. It should also make sure it can manage schedules online and require employees to be on time even though they do not have to physically show up. In addition to attendance, it is important to make sure that employees participate in meetings and in work in a virtual setting. Many virtual firms METALURGIA INTERNATIONAL vol. XVII no. 10 (2012) 175 These journals are included on ISI Web of knowledge regional Journal Expansion European Union 2010, multidisciplinary fields http://isiwebofknowledge.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/contentexp/eu/   are sharing the corporate information and even financial information with all their workers. This ensures a better relationship between the upper level management and employees. In addition, there seems to be a more even division of power. This is linked directly to the virtual culture of empowerment and self-control. We would like to point out that a virtual company needs a technology infrastructure to survive, but there is also a need to have a solid cultural infrastructure in place that not only deals with the human aspect but with the technology aspect as well. With the further development of new technologies, we expect that communication will continue to experience radical changes within modalities of communication in virtual enterprises. It is not easy to predict in advance the direction in which these changes will be oriented, however, what is certain is that they will depend not only on technological change but also on the change in the employee awareness in virtual firms. In other words, they will depend on their ability to oversome the present differences (gender, language, emotional, cultural, perceptional and other) and create an efficient communication in virtual firms. There fore, the human factor will play a role in improving communication in virtual firms as important as that of the development and improvement of the present technologies. 5. REFERENCES [1] Aken, J. van, Hop, L., and Post, G.J.J. (1998). The Virtual Organization: a special mode of strong interorganizational cooperation, in: Hitt, M.A., Ricart I Costa, J.E., Nixon, D. (eds), Managing Strategically in an Interconnected World, Chicester, John Wiley & Sons. [2] Bultje, R. and Van W. J. (1998). Taxonomy of Virtual Organisations, based on definitions, characteristics and typology. VoNet: The Newsletter http://www.virtual- organization.net, 2(3), 7-20. [3] Byrne J. A. (1993). The virtual corporation, Business Week. Feb.8, 98-102. [4] DeSanctis G .and Monge P., Communication Processes for Virtual Organizations, JCMS 3(4):1998 [5] DeSanctis, G., and Fulk, J. (Eds.) (1999). Shaping organization form: Communication, connection, and community. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. [6] Karsten, H. (1995). Converging Paths to Notes: in search of computer-based information systems in a networked company, Information Technology and People, 8(1), 7-34. [7] Lucas, H.C., Jr. (1996). The T-form organization: Using technology to design organizations for the 21st century. San Franciso: Jossey-Bass. [8] Marshall, C., and Novick , D. (1995). Conversational effectiveness and multi-media communications. Information Technology and People, 8 (1), 54-79. [9] Mowshowitz, A. (1999). The Switching Principle in Virtual Organization, Electronic Journal of Organizational Virtualness. [10] O’Hara-Devereaux,M. & Johansen,R. (1994). Global Work: Bridging Distance, Culture and Time. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. [11] Orlikowski, W. J., and Robey, D. (1991). Information technology and the structuring of organizations. Information Systems Research, 2(2), 143-169.. [12] Radović-Marković,M.(2011b), Organizational behavour and culture:globalization and the changing environment of organizations.VDM Verlag Dr. Muller,pp.348 [13] Wilkins, H. (1991). Computer talk: Long-distance conversations by computer. Written Communication, 8, 56- 78. [14] Valacich, J. S., and Schwenk, C. (1995). Devils advocacy and dialectical inquiry effects on face-to-face and computer-mediated group decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(2), 158-173. [15] Van de Bunt-Kokhuis,S .(2000).The virtual workplace and the company culture Employee oriented tools to build a corporate web culture. Available on the Internet: http://www.managementsite.com/261/The-virtual-workplace- and-the-company-culture.aspx Correspondence to: Mirjana Radovic-Markovic [email protected], Akamai University Radmila Grozdanic [email protected], College of Business Economics and Entrepreneurship, Belgrade Dusan Markovic [email protected], Akamai University Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.