From Temtim:

Hi Clint

It is nice to start the virtual global team in new
form.

I will try to answer the two questions>

Question 1 - what type of miscommunication ...

I personally accostomed with more structured project
activities. I am more comfortable with more structured
activities for our Virtual team. I am new to the
research topic, when I joined the team I am expecting
to learn more from you as well as from others.
Unfortunately while we are on the process, I feel that
our team doesnot have very clear direction and
expected outputs. As a result communication among the
team members was limited.

The problem - what I learnt- our expectation to get
from this project can not match with each other -
diversified needs. As a result our effort could not be
channeled to one direction and output. As a result,
commitments are gradually getting fade away.

Question 2 - What tools

I don't think that it is a problem of technology. The
poor communication among the team falls on other
aspects - on social aspects of the team. In this
regard it is good to look at Structuration model of
technology by Orlikwiski (1992). We can design very
nice communication network but it does not bring
effective communicaiton among the team. Whether we use
Skype or Adobe Connect, if we have the real need to
communicate with each other, the available
technologies can satisfy our needs.

Best regards
Temtim

From Clint:

 Hi Temtim,

I realized I never sent you an email with my initial ideas for these
two questions. Here they are - and I will post both of our responses to
the research space.

1. What types of miscommunication can occur within international virtual teams?

Obviously on a basic level people need to be able to share a common language or have some reliable translation source.
I think you are right about the purposes and objectives need to be as
clear as possible - and that can be helpful in reducing
miscommunication.
I put down in the examples that miscommunication might occur when
people do not share common assumptions. By assumptions, I mean the
things that are usually assumed - without us necessarily being
conscious that we even assume them. This can include assumptions about:

• content - (the substance of what is being talked about. With any
  number of topics, people make assumptions about their importance and
  meaning. As an easy example, if I talk about "Benedict Arnold" most
  U.S. citizens would know what I was talking about. Many things related
  to history, culture, business, media, and even education often carry
  assumptions that are not shared throughout the world)
• context - (by this, I mean that even the content can mean
  different things, depending on the context it is framed in. There are
  many subtle and strong assumption tied with context that can easily go
  unrecognized by either the sender or receiver, and so thus engendering
  miscommunication)
• relationships - (I think this is a big one too. Very frequently
  assumptions exist regarding the way people see their relationships with
  others (teachers, students, friends, strangers, colleagues, business
  men, politicians, etc...), and set their expectations accordingly. When
  the reality of the other persons actions does not match your
  expectations (or even if it does, but for different reasons), then it
  is easy to see how miscommunication (by that I mean misunderstanding)
  can occur).
• what establishes trust/credibility - (in Japan, for example, you
  establish credibility in giving a speech by first telling the audience
  that you do not know very much and apologizing for taking their time.
  If you were Japanese and took that same approach in the U.S. or much of
  Europe, you would not get the trust that you expected)
• what grabs attention - (in Chinese web sites there is a lot of
  motion, sounds and moving things. People in the U.S. automatically see
  that as poor design, reminding them of amature earlier websites in the
  US. There is evidence, however, that Chinese users might actually
  prefer these designs - that they are better at grabbing and keeping
  attention, when that probably would not be the case in the U.S.)

2. What (a) techniques and (b) technological tools (both existing
and ones we can imagine) improve collaborations of international
virtual teams?
(e.g. reducing miscommunication by attributing
correct meaning to actions/words of others, establishing trust, even
fostering innovation and inspiration)

• I think that perhaps more time needs to be spent up-front in
  people getting to know and trust each other? There must be some
  understanding that people really care about each other - and are
  willing to put the interests of the other and understanding and
  respecting the other people as priority.
• There are already quite a few existing tools which make
  international collaboration so much easier than it would have been even
  5 or 10 years ago. E-mail, VOIP (voice over IP) tools like Skype, and
  computer sharing platforms (like Adobe Connect) - all increase the
  ability to make contact and communicate with people all over the world.
  The biggest issues with many of the existing tools I think maybe are
  bandwidth and cost (both of which deal with access).
• I would like to see more tools that allow for meta-communication
  - allowing for further questioning, explaining, and talking about the
  meaning behind what has been said by either party in a conversation.
• I think if there was some knowledge base of common
  mis-communication, then perhaps a system could tag information sharing
  in a way that would indicate it needs further discussion.
• I also think that as bandwidth increases, the current mode of
  writing will more easily expand to sharing visual images together, and
  that will stimulate interesting interactions.
• Any time that interactions can be recorded, I think that would
  help people to go back and reflect on their own and others' comments
  and reactions.
• The easier it is for people to take things and adapt them, I
  think the more valuable those tools will be in international contexts.
• Ultimately I don't think any tools will help if people do not
  have any reason to trust or respect others. I consider that a
  pre-requisite for any existing or future tools being of value.

Well, those are some of my initial thoughts of the top of my head. Any comments in reaction to them?

Thanks,
Clint