Self-reflection of the Learning Journal of Collaboration by Tiffany Lee (52692384)

In virtual collaboration, it should not resolve conflicts only via e-mail    

Introduction 

After having the virtual collaboration with the morning class in the past three months, various experiences are gained.  One of them, that I have never had before, is we just relied on using electronic communication to complete the project in the whole collaboration. In this journey, we were sharing ideas, negotiating and making decision and etc. thru e-mails. E-mail was the main tool to organize meetings and co-ordinations of the works in our collaboration. There are no time and location limitations (we can respond each other’s ideas and questions anytime and anywhere) for discussion of the work. Nevertheless, it should not resolve conflicts only via e-mails.

Gibbs’ model o f reflective Writing on the Learning Journal of Collaboration

 

Description

Our virtual teammates approached our team first and agreed to use e-mail as the tool for communication. The first thing we had to do it to comprise what the two ideas should be presented in the coming class in a week time. We flow two ideas (about fashion) and they had one (about flight app). We thought their idea of this kind of virtual service was already existed in the market and might not be innovative enough. However, they still insisted that their idea was attractive. Therefore, we had to provide many proofs to show them that their idea was not be feasible. During the discussion with various correspondences, finally in 3 days before the presentation of the ideas, we were advised that we were confused and misunderstood their idea. However, we finally comprised to use the two ideas about fashion due to the time limit.
 

After presenting the two ideas, it was found that improvements were required. Therefore, we suggested using one of the ideas as basis for improvement and adjustment.  They responded with more suggestions. Since our team was still struggling and hesitating how to improve the idea, we had not get back until they sent us a  reminder that decision had to be made. Our team finally had a face-to-face meeting and came up a new idea shortly.  We proposed to our virtual team members the new idea which they also found it was feasible and accepted to send the idea for seeking comments from professor. The feedbacks were positive which we thought that we could start working on each of our group’s perspective. However, it seemed that our virtual teammates were still having questions on the agreed idea and suggesting the use of different community. As the time limit, we again had to spend time to convince them it’s better to follow the advices from professor in order to ensure we were in the right track.  At last, they agreed to that but the whole journey took us more than 10 days for making the final decision.

 

Feelings

Initially, I felt pleased with our collaboration was going smoothly as our virtual teammates had quick responds to our e-mails. However, I was disappointed when they insisted their idea were good in which we found it was not something new. Also, I became tense as we had to spend time to discuss and convince them not to use it but the first presentation of the ideas was just in few days.  After the long negotiation, I was frustrated as we were confused by their proposed idea. 


After having the first presentation, I was lost as we had to make adjustments and improvements for the ideas where we did not know how to so.  I fretted about this and stopped thinking of this for few days.  After resting, it was good that a new idea came up with positive feedbacks.  However, I felt frustrated again as our virtual teammates wanted to change the idea on using different community as we had to spend time on exhorting them. Finally, although they agreed to use our idea, I felt tired and found it was really difficult to resolve the conflicts and problems by e-mails as the unique way for communication. 

 

Evaluation

At the beginning, I felt our collaboration was good because both of our groups were highly responsive where the other groups kept complaining that their virtual teammates were no responds. However, since e-mail communication lacks the six tools (copresence, visibility, audibility, cotemporality, simultaneity and sequentially) in face-to-face conversation (Friedman & Currall, 2003), we had to spend more extra time to explain our perspectives by e-mails, especially I was occupied by my full time job as well. Therefore, I (and my teammates) felt disappointed and tense because of their insistence on using an idea which had already existed in the market and pressure of time was not allowed us to keep discussing what should be used. This also made me felt frustrated as we finally found we were confused and misunderstood their idea after having a long run of discussion due to the high “understanding costs” by using e-mail communication as stated by Friedman & Currall (2003).

Our conflict was still not resolved after presenting the two initial ideas of the project which made me lost as we still had different point of views and suggestions by after having few e-mail correspondences.  Friedman & Currall (2003) point out that “using e-mail to resolve conflicts carries a major risk: that disputes will escalate to irresolvable levels”.  Therefore, both groups rested the discussion for trying to avoid the conflict for a while. I thought that was then excellent because we resolved the conflict by selecting a better alternative idea. Finally, it was also good that at least our virtual teammates comprised to our idea which the conflict was resolved.  However, I felt exhausted because it took much more time to make it by e-mails.

Analysis

In this collaboration, it took a long journey for making a final decision which was because we only relied on e-mails for communication. The situation was coming in the sequence of Sunshine, Fog, Lightening, Rain, Sunshine, Lightening and Sunshine according to the Weather Model. At the first stage, we had brainstormed and exchanged our ideas promptly.  It came with Sunshine that the correspondences between two groups were going well and smoothly.  Hence, we believed that e-mail would be a good communication tool for our collaboration.

However, after having the long negotiation of the ideas to be used and presented, we were lost in the Fog. We did not understand that why our virtual teammates insisted to use their idea which was already existed in the market. Finally, it was found that we were confused and had misunderstood their ideas which made the Lightening happened. Since we had been “chatting” and discussing for a long while, time was not allowed us to adjust and revise the concepts of their idea. Time was wasted for having such a long discussion and struggling in the wrong track. And we had to prepare the presentation materials in a short period of time as the final decision was made in the last minute.  It came as shock. Since by using e-mail for communication, it leads to the “the lack of contextual clues (due to a lack of contemporarily and sequentially) impose high “understanding costs on participants in e-mails interactions” (Friedman & Currall, 2003).

After presenting the ideas, it was going to have Rain. We needed to make adjustments for our ideas. Yet, it seemed no conclusion had made after having few correspondences as the suggestions from both group were still not attractive and creative enough.  The progress had not been proceeding and had rested for few days. In this stage, we intended to avoid the conflict.

At last, our group thought it should have a face-to-face discussion before replying to the virtual teammates as it was realized that “escalation of disputes is more likely during electronic communication than during face-to-face conversation”(Johnson 2002). We thought that it would be better to give up the existing idea and brainstorming a different one. Therefore, we selected a better alternative to resolve the conflict. The new idea was decided by our group in an hour and was sent to the virtual teammates immediately. The decision made shortly due to “in face-to-face meetings, all members are “linked in all modalities with 0 time lags” (Friedman & Currall, 2003). The Sunshine came again as both the virtual teammates and professor found the idea was good and in the right track. Then we thought we could start working on the final presentation and project in our own.

However, suddenly, our virtual teammates suggested changing the idea. It brought us to the Lightening again because we had to take time to make them understand it was better and safe to follow professor’s advice due to the time constrained us to keep changing the idea. At last, in order to arrive at expedient solutions under time pressure, the conflict was resolved by comprising from our virtual teammates.

 

Conclusion

In retrospect, I would do several things differently. I should have face-to-face or telephone discussion with my teammates to conclude our point of views before replying to the other group’s comments and suggestion. As “lengthy, one-directional communications, which are more likely when conflicts are handled via e-mails (compared with face-to-face and phone interactions), increase the likelihood conflict escalation” (Friedman & Currall, 2003). This can shorten the length of the e-mail correspondences. Moreover, every e-mail sent from one of us would be treated as team decision and suggestion.  It could also reduce the time to wait for every member’s comments and advices as Friedman & Currall (2003) point out that “timing is critical for understanding and feedback”.   Furthermore, since English is not the first language for both of our group members, I should use Chinese (our first language) for expressing and explaining the important ideas in order to reduce the confusion made.

Sometimes, the misunderstandings may be due to cultural differences (our virtual team mates are from mainland China). The conflict escalated because only e-mail communication was relied on. This made me understand the use of other communication tools which can enable the group members to interact at the same time, such as face-to-face (if allowed) or telephone conversations, which was important and helpful when there was a time pressure to make decision. It could not only shorten our responding time but also avoid misunderstandings as everything would be clarified instantly which could reduce the “understanding costs” (Friedman & Currall, 2003).  

 

Action Plan

In future, if virtual collaboration is required, I will ensure that do not only rely on using e-mail only for communication, especially, for making important decision and complicated issues. Before proceeding to work on the project, I will organize a face-to-face (or videoconferencing) or telephone meeting. As Siebdrat et al. (2009) point that “a project kick-off meeting, can be used to bring everyone together in one location” which can help the team members sharing their understandings of the task and beginning to identify with the team. It will ensure the people in the team have the same comprehension of the task and working in the right track. This would also help the members of the team to understand each other’s cultural practices.

Moreover, besides kick-off meeting, regular meetings will also be arranged. As stated by Siebdrat et al. (2009) that periodic meetings of dispersed team members will encourage the informal communication, team identification and cohesion. As when there are conflicts arose, it may be due to the misunderstandings or misinterpretations of one’s e-mails.  It should not continue to discuss the issues via e-mails as it will escalate the disputes.  Therefore, meetings will the team members to solve any problem faced or mange disputes during the meeting.  If face-to-face meeting is not allowed, phone call will be encouraged to discuss disputes.  We cannot deny that e-mail is an extremely convenient and useful tool for communication with group of people involved and over great distance. However, it should not be relied on for managing disputes in order to prevent the escalation of conflicts.

 

 

References:

Friedman, R. A. & Currall, S. C. (2003). E-Mail Escalation: Dispute Exacerbating Elements of Electronic Communication. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(11), 1325 – 1347.

Johnson, L. K. (2002). Does E-Mail Escalate Conflict? MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(1), 14 – 15.

Siebdrat, F., Hoegl, M. & Ernst, H. (2009).  How to Manage Virtual Teams.  MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(4), 63 – 68.