Virtual teams are characterized by geographical dispersion, organizational, and cultural heterogeneity, and their members have little history and lateral and weak relationships. Literature denotes the importance of expectations in virtual settings, but individual expectations of virtual team members are hardly investigated. In this article, the author discusses the presence of different kinds of expectations and the impact of mismatches of individual expectations within virtual teams. Psychological contract literature states that expectation mismatches result in negative outcomes, whereas learning literature posits that mismatches enhance learning. These concepts addressing mismatches of expectations are discussed as a theoretical paradox.
Adler, P.A., & Adler, P. (1994). Observational techniques. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 377-393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D.A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4.
Armstrong, D.J., & Cole, P. (2002). Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. In P. J. Hinds & S. Kiesler (Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 167-186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Bell, B.S., & Kozlowski, S.W. (2002). A typology of virtual teams. Implications for effective leadership. Group & Organization Management, 27, 14-49.
6.
Bosch-Sijtsema, P.M. (2003). Virtualness: A new organisational dimension. The relationship between virtualness and knowledge. Capelle a/d Ijssel, the Netherlands: Labyrint.
7.
Bruner, J. (1983). Actual minds, possible worldsCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
Cramton, D.C. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12, 346-371.
9.
DeSanctis, G., Staudenmayer, N., & Wong, S.S. (1999). Interdependence in virtual organizations. In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), Trends in organizational behavior (pp. 81-104). New York: John Wiley.
10.
Doz, Y. (l996 ). The evolution of co-operation in strategic alliances: Initial conditions or learning processes? Strategic Management Journal , 17, 55-83.
11.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
12.
Galegher, J., Kraut, R., & Egido, C. (1990). Intellectual teamwork. Social and technological foundations of cooperative workHillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Griffith, T.L., Sawyer, J.E., & Neale, M.A. (2003). Virtualness and knowledge in teams: Managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly, 27, 265-287.
14.
Håkansson, H. (1992). Corporate technological behavior—Co-operation and networksLondon: Routledge.
Hinds, P.J., & Bailey, D.E. (2003). Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams. Organization Science, 14, 615-632.
17.
Hinds, P.J., & Kiesler, S. (1995). Communication across boundaries: Work, structure and use of communication technologies in a large organization. Organization Science, 6, 373-393.
18.
Inkpen, A.C., & Crossan, M.M. (1995). Believing is seeing: Joint ventures and organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 23, 595-617.
19.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (1998). Communication and trust in global virtual teams . Organization Science, 10, 791-816.
20.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Shaw, T.R. (1998). Global virtual teams: Integrating models of trust . In P. Sieber & J. Griese (Eds.), Organizational virtualness (pp. 35-52). Bern, Switzerland: Simowa Verlag.
21.
Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-286.
22.
Jehn, K.A., & Mannix, E.A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 238-251.
23.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R.L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations. New York: John Wiley.
24.
Kotter, J.P. (1973). The psychological contract: Managing the joining-up process. California Management Review, 15(3), 91-99.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams. Reaching across space, time, and organizations with technology. New York: John Wiley.
27.
Locke, K. (2001). Grounded theory in management researchLondon: Sage.
28.
Majchrzak, A., Ronald, E.R., Malhotra, A., King, N., & Ba, S. (2000). Technology adaptation: The case of a computer-supported inter-organizational virtual team. MIS Quarterly, 24, 569-600.
29.
Maznevski, M.L., & Chudoba, K.M. (2000). Bridging space over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science, 11, 473-792.
30.
Meyerson, D., Weick, K.E., & Kramer, R.M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166-195). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Mohrman, S.A. (1999). The contexts for geographically teams and networks . In C. L. Cooper & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The virtual organization (pp. 63-80). New York: John Wiley.
32.
Mortensen, M., & Hinds, P.J. (2001). Conflict and shared identity in geographically distributed teams. International Journal of Conflict Management , 12, 212-238.
33.
Mowshowitz, A. (1997). Virtual organization. Communications of the ACM, 40(9), 30-37.
34.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation . Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.
35.
Poole, M.S., & van de Ven, A. (1989). Using paradox to build management and organization theories. Academy of Management Review, 14, 562-578.
36.
Ring, P.S., & van de Ven, A.H. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 19, 90-118.
37.
Rizzo, J.R., House, R.J., & Lirtzman, S.I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly,15, 150-163.
38.
Robinson, S.L. (1996). Trust and breach of the psychological contract . Administrative Science Quarterly,41, 574-599.
39.
Rousseau, D.M. (2001). Schema, promise and mutuality: The building blocks of the psychological contract. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 511-541.
40.
Schein, E.H. (1993). How can organizations learn faster. The challenge of entering the green room. Sloan Management Review, 34(2), 85-92.
41.
Silverman, D. (1994). Interpreting qualitative data. Methods for analyzing talk, text and interactionLondon: Sage.
Stephan, W.G. (1985). Intergroup relations. In L. Gardner & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology II, 3 (pp. 599-658). New York: Random House.
44.
Vroom, V.H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York : John Wiley.
45.
Weber, C., & Berthoin Antal, A. (2001). The role of time in organizational learning. In M. Dierkes, A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child , & I. Nonaka (Eds.), Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge (pp. 351-368). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
46.
Weick, K.E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
Wiessenfeld, B.M., Raghurum, S., & Garud, R. (1999). Communication patterns as determinants of organizational identification in a virtual organization. Organization Science , 10, 777-790.
48.
Wong, S.-S., & Burton, R.M. (2000). Virtual teams: What are their characteristics, and impact on team performance? Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, 6, 339-360.
