This article expands on the global virtual team literature and the knowledge sharing literature by developing a conceptual model of the relationships among cultural distance, cultural intelligence, communication frequency, and communication quality on effective knowledge sharing within global virtual teams. It is posited that cultural distance will have a negative impact on communication frequency. Communication frequency will have a positive influence on communication quality and this relationship will be moderated by media channel richness and cultural intelligence. Furthermore, the higher levels of communication quality will increase knowledge sharing within teams. Propositions are developed drawing on the literature in communications, virtual teams, and knowledge sharing. Organizations can use the information presented here to structure global virtual teams for effective knowledge sharing and consider utilizing training programs to more effectively share knowledge.
AdairW. L.OkumuraT.BrettJ. M. (2001). Negotiation behavior when cultures collide: The United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.371
2.
AdenfeltM. (2010). Exploring the performance of transnational projects: Shared knowledge, coordination and communication. International Journal of Project Management, 28(6), 529–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2009.10.004
3.
AhmedZ.MansorZ.AhmadK.ZafarullahM. (2025). Enhancing team-related knowledge sharing in agile virtual teams: Social, psychological and trust enablers for distributed collaboration - KSAVT framework. TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 32, 680–684.
4.
Al-AlawiA. I.Al-MarzooqiN. Y.MohammedY. F. (2007). Organizational cultures and knowledge sharing: Critical success factors. Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 22–42.
5.
Al-KandariA. A.Al-AlawiA. I.Al-BassamS. A. (2022). Factors affecting knowledge sharing among governmental employees abroad: Case of a Kuwaiti embassy. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2412
6.
AlexandraV. (2018). The roles of social complexity belief and perceived contact characteristics in cultural intelligence development among individuals receiving contact-based training. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(8), 1283–1301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022118779743
7.
AliN.LaiR. (2017). A method of software requirements specification and validation for global software development. Requirements Engineering, 22(2), 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-015-0240-4
8.
AllisonB. B.ShufflerM. L.WallaceA. M. (2015). The successful facilitation of virtual team meetings. In AllenJ. A.Lehmann-WillenbrockN.RogelbergS. G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of meeting science. (pp. 680–705). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107589735.029
9.
AlsharoM.GreggD.RamirezR. (2017). Virtual team effectiveness: The role of knowledge sharing and trust. Information and Management, 54(4), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.10.005
10.
AnandA.MuskatB.CreedA.ZutshiA.CsepregiA. (2021). Knowledge sharing, knowledge transfer and SMEs: Evolution, antecedents, outcomes and directions. Personnel Review, 50(9), 1873–1893. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2020-0372
11.
AngS.Van DyneL.KohC. (2006). Personality correlates of the four factor model of cultural intelligence. Group & Organization Management, 31(1), 100–123.
12.
ArfiW. B.SahutJ.-M.HikkerovaL. (2023). Virtual teams and knowledge sharing via digital platforms: Evidence from an inter-organizational network context. Management International / International Management / Gestiòn Internacional, 27(6), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.59876/a-n1ve-zm1e
13.
AroraA. S.AroraA.TarasV. (2019). The moderating role of culture in social media-based spatial imagery, consumer xenocentrism, and word-of-mouth for global virtual teams. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 19(2), 160–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470595819856379
14.
BalbinotZ.FarrellW.JohnsonW. H. A.PissarisS.CohenE. D.JiangC.VasT. (2022). Creating a better workplace for global virtual teams: The influence of the “Strongest Link”. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 2022(1), 1481–1481. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.12970abstract
15.
BarryP.KaneB. (2023). Global virtual team working during the-Covid-19 pandemic. Interacting with Computers, 35(5), 681–690. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwad029
16.
Bartel-RadicA.MoosJ. C.LongS. K. (2015). Cross-cultural management learning through innovative pedagogy: An exploratory study of globally distributed student teams. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 13(4), 539–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12076
17.
BatarsehF. S.UsherJ. M.DaspitJ. J. (2017). Absorptive capacity in virtual teams: Examining the influence on diversity and innovation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(6), 1342–1361. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-06-2016-0221
18.
Ben SedrineS.BouderbalaA.NasraouiH. (2021). Leadership style effect on virtual team efficiency: Trust, operational cohesion and media richness roles. Journal of Management Development, 40(5), 365–388. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-10-2018-0289
BockG.-W.ZmudR. W.KimY.-G.LeeJ.-N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87–111. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148669
21.
Bosch-SijtsemaP. M.SivunenA. (2013). Professional virtual worlds supporting computer-mediated communication, collaboration, and learning in geographically distributed contexts. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 56(2), 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2012.2237256
22.
BrandlJ.NeyerA.-K. (2009). Applying cognitive adjustment theory to cross-cultural training for global virtual teams. Human Resource Management, 48(3), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20284
BuiH.ChauV. S.Degl’InnocentiM.LeoneL.VicentiniF. (2019). The resilient organisation: A meta-analysis of the effect of communication on team diversity and team performance. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 68(4), 621–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12203
25.
ByrneD. (1997). An overview (and underview) of research and theory within the attraction paradigm. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(3), 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407597143008
26.
CastanedaD. I.CuellarS. (2020). Knowledge sharing and innovation: A systematic review. Knowledge & Process Management, 27(3), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1637
27.
CastellanoS.DavidsonP.KhelladiI. (2017). Creativity techniques to enhance knowledge transfer within global virtual teams in the context of knowledge-intensive enterprises. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9509-0
28.
CavusgilS. T.CalantoneR. J.ZhaoY. (2003). Tacit knowledge transfer and firm innovation capability. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 18(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620310458615
29.
CeciF.LazoiM.LezziM.MohammadH. (2021). Fostering knowledge sharing in the innovation process: Information and communication technology-based versus face-to-face relationships. Knowledge & Process Management, 28(3), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1668
30.
CerchioneR.EspositoE. (2017). Using knowledge management systems: A taxonomy of SME strategies. International Journal of Information Management, 37(1b), 1551–1562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.10.007
31.
CollinsN.ChouY.-M.WarnerM.RowleyC. (2017). Human factors in East Asian virtual teamwork: A comparative study of Indonesia, Taiwan and Vietnam. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(10), 1475–1498. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1089064
32.
ConnaughtonS. L.ShufflerM. (2007). Multinational and multicultural distributed teams. Small Group Research, 38(3), 387–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496407301970
33.
Correa da CunhaH.FarrellC.AnderssonS.AmalM.FlorianiD. E. (2022). Toward a more in-depth measurement of cultural distance: A re-evaluation of the underlying assumptions. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 22(1), 157–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958221089192
34.
CrowneK. A. (2009). The relationships among social intelligence, emotional intelligence and cultural intelligence. Organization Management Journal, 6, 148–163.
35.
CrowneK. A. (2020). Does national culture influence peer evaluations on global virtual teams?Journal of Teaching in International Business, 31(3), 191–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2020.1831421
36.
CrowneK. A.LoK. (2023). Chapter 4: Reexamining social intelligence, emotional intelligence, and cultural intelligence, for congruence and divergence: Does social intelligence still exist? In ThomasD.LiaoY. (Eds.), Handbook of cultural intelligence research (pp. 45–58). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800887169.00012
37.
DavenportT. H. (1994). Saving IT’s soul: Human-centered information management. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 119–131.
38.
DeNisiA.HittM. A.JacksonS. E. (2003). The knowledge-based approach to sustaining competitive advantage. In JacksonS. E.HittM. A.DeNisiA. (Eds.), Managing knowledge for sustained competitive advantage (pp. 3–33). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
39.
DervenM. (2017). Enhancing global virtual teams through training. Training, 54(1), 18–20.
40.
DibbleR.HendersonL. S.BurnsZ. C. (2019). The impact of students’ cultural intelligence on their psychological safety in global virtual project teams. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 30(1), 33–56. http://doi.org/10.1080/08975930.2019.1627980
41.
DryerD. C.HorowitzL. M. (1997). When do opposites attract? Interpersonal complementarity versus similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 592–603. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.592
42.
DunningJ. H.LundanS. M. (2008). Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4), 573–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-007-9074-z
43.
Durnell CramtonC.HindsP. J. (2005). Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning?Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231–263.
44.
EarleyP.AngS. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Standford University Press.
45.
EarleyP. C.AngS.TanJ.-S. (2006). CQ: Developing cultural intelligence at work. Stanford Business Books.
46.
EisenbergJ.MattarelliE. (2017). Building bridges in global virtual teams: The Role of multicultural brokers in overcoming the negative effects of identity threats on knowledge sharing across subgroups. Journal of International Management, 23(4), 399–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2016.11.007
47.
EspinosaJ. A.SlaughterS. A.KrautR. E.HerbslebJ. D. (2007). Familiarity, complexity, and team performance in geographically distributed software development. Organization Science, 18(4), 613–630. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0297
48.
FausettC. M.KorentsidesJ. M.MillerZ. N.KeeblerJ. R. (2024). Adaptive leadership in health care organizations: Five insights to promote effective teamwork. Psychology of Leaders and Leadership, 27(1), 6–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/mgr0000148
49.
FordR. C.PiccoloR. F.FordL. R. (2017). Strategies for building effective virtual teams: Trust is key. Business Horizons, 60(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.08.009
50.
GibsonC. B.GibbsJ. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451–495. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.51.3.451
51.
GliksonE.ErezM. (2020). The emergence of a communication climate in global virtual teams. Journal of World Business, 55(6), Article 101001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2019.101001
González-RomáV.HernándezA. (2014). Climate uniformity: Its influence on team communication quality, task conflict, and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(6), 1042–1058. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037868
54.
GriffithD. A.DimitrovaB. V. (2014). Business and cultural aspects of psychic distance and complementarity of capabilities in export relationships. Journal of International Marketing, 22(3), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.14.0019
55.
HänninenN.KarjaluotoH. (2017). The effect of marketing communication on business relationship loyalty. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 35(4), 458–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-01-2016-0006
56.
HaoQ.YangW.ShiY. (2019). Characterizing the relationship between conscientiousness and knowledge sharing behavior in virtual teams: An interactionist approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.09.035
57.
HaoQ.ZhangB.ShiY.YangQ. (2022). How trust in coworkers fosters knowledge sharing in virtual teams? A multilevel moderated mediation model of psychological safety, team virtuality, and self-efficacy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 899142. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899142
58.
HassellM. D.CottonJ. L. (2017). Some things are better left unseen: Toward more effective communication and team performance in video-mediated interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 200–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.039
59.
HelmstadterE. (2003). The institutional economics of knowledge sharing. Basic issues. In HelmstadterE. (Ed.), The economics of knowledge sharing. A new institutional approach (pp. 11–38). Edgard Elgar.
60.
HofstedeG. H. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
HorwitzS. K.SantillanC. (2012). Knowledge sharing in global virtual team collaboration: Applications of CE and thinkLets. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 10(4), 342–353. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2012.39
63.
HutzschenreuterT.KleindienstI.LangeS. (2016). The concept of distance in international business research: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18(2), 160–179. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12065
64.
IvanL. (2023). Interpersonal communication in the information age: Opportunities and disruptions. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(7), 885–897. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221092801
65.
JarvenpaaS. L.KeatingE. (2021). When do good communication models fail in global virtual teams?Organizational Dynamics, 50(1), Article 100843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2021.100843
66.
JarvenpaaS. L.LeidnerD. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.791
67.
JohansonJ.VahlneJ.-E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm–A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490676
68.
KillingsworthB.XueY.LiuY. (2016). Factors influencing knowledge sharing among global virtual teams. Team Performance Management, 22(5/6), 284–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-10-2015-0042
69.
KirkmanB. L.CorderyJ. L.MathieuJ.RosenB.KukenbergerM. (2013). Global organizational communities of practice: The effects of nationality diversity, psychological safety, and media richness on community performance. Human Relations, 66(3), 333–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712464076
70.
KlitmøllerA.LauringJ. (2013). When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.07.023
71.
KlitmøllerA.SchneiderS. C.JonsenK. (2015). Speaking of global virtual teams: Language differences, social categorization and media choice. Personnel Review, 44(2), 270–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-11-2013-0205
72.
KogutB.SinghH. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490394
73.
KogutB.ZanderU. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science: A Journal of the Institute of Management Sciences, 3(3), 383–397.
74.
KreijnsK.XuK.WeidlichJ. (2022). Social presence: Conceptualization and measurement. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 139–170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09623-8
75.
LamA. (2000). Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: An integrated framework. Organization Studies, 21(3), 487–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840600213001
76.
Leal-RodríguezA. L.RoldánJ. L.LealA. G.Ortega-GutiérrezJ. (2013). Knowledge management, relational learning, and the effectiveness of innovation outcomes. Service Industries Journal, 33(13–14), 1294–1311. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2013.815735
77.
LengelR. H.DaftR. L. (1988). The selection of communication media as an executive skill. Academy of Management Executive, 2(3), 225–232. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.1988.4277259
78.
Li-YuehL.Phuoc-ThienN. (2019). Knowledge sharing, relational capital and expatriate performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Economic & Management Perspectives, 13(1), 47–59.
79.
LiY.LiH. (2024). Examining the relationship between emotional intelligence and tacit knowledge sharing using a moderated mediation model. SAGE Open, 14(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241285331
80.
LiY.RauP.-L. P.LiH.MaedcheA. (2017). Effects of a dyad’s cultural intelligence on global virtual collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2016.2632842
81.
LievreP.TangJ. (2015). SECI and inter-organizational and intercultural knowledge transfer: A case-study of controversies around a project of co-operation between France and China in the health sector. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(5), 1069–1086. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-02-2015-0054
82.
LippertH.DulewiczV. (2018). A profile of high-performing global virtual teams. Team Performance Management, 24(3/4), 169–185. http://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-09-2016-0040
83.
LiuL. A.ChuaC. H.StahlG. K. (2010). Quality of communication experience: Definition, measurement, and implications for intercultural negotiations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(3), 469–487. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019094
84.
Magnier-WatanabeR.WatanabeY.AbaO.HerrigH. (2017). Global virtual teams’ education: Experiential learning in the classroom. On the Horizon, 25(4), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-02-2017-0007
MarlowS. L.LacerenzaC. N.PaolettiJ.BurkeC. S.SalasE. (2018). Does team communication represent a one-size-fits-all approach?: A meta-analysis of team communication and performance. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 144, 145–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.001
87.
MasseyG. R.DawesP. L. (2007). The antecedents and consequence of functional and dysfunctional conflict between marketing managers and sales managers. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(8), 1118–1129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.05.017
88.
McLarnonM. J. W.O’NeillT. A.TarasV.LawD.DoniaM. B. L.SteelP. (2019). Global virtual team communication, coordination, and performance across three peer feedback strategies. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 51(4), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000135
89.
MenneckeB. E.TriplettJ. L.HassallL. M.CondeZ. J.HeerR. (2011). An examination of a theory of embodied social presence in virtual worlds. Decision Sciences, 42(2), 413–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2011.00317.x
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013773
92.
Mesmer-MagnusJ. R.DeChurchL. A.Jimenez-RodriguezM.WildmanJ.ShufflerM. (2011). A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 214–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.002
93.
MiesingP.KrigerM. P.SloughN. (2007). Towards a model of effective knowledge transfer within transnationals: The case of Chinese foreign invested enterprises. Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(1–2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-006-9006-y
94.
MolinskyA. L.DavenportT. H.IyerB.DavidsonC. (2012). 3 Skills every 21st-Century manager needs. Harvard Business Review, 90(1/2), 139–143.
95.
MorganL.Paucar-CaceresA.WrightG. (2014). Leading effective global virtual teams: The consequences of methods of communication. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 27(6), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-014-9315-2
96.
MorganN. A.PiercyN. F. (1998). Interactions between marketing and quality at the SBU level: Influences and outcomes. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(3), 190–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070398263002
97.
MoustaghfirK. (2009). How knowledge assets lead to a sustainable competitive advantage: Are organizational capabilities a missing link?Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 7(4), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2009.26
98.
MukherjeeD.NatrajanN. S. (2017). Comparative analysis of social media tool used in software projects deploying virtual teams. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 21(4), 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262917733180
99.
NewmanS. A.FordR. C.MarshallG. W. (2020). Virtual team leader communication: Employee perception and organizational reality. International Journal of Business Communication, 57(4), 452–473. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419829895
100.
NguyenT.-M.NhamT. P.FroeseF. J.MalikA. (2019). Motivation and knowledge sharing: A meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(5), 998–1016. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2019-0029
101.
NisarT. M.PrabhakarG.StrakovaL. (2019). Social media information benefits, knowledge management and smart organizations. Journal of Business Research, 94, 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.005
102.
O’HaganS. B.GreenM. B. (2002). Tacit knowledge transfer via interlocking directorates: A comparison of Canada and the United States. Geografiska Annaler Series B: Human Geography, 84(1), 49–63.
103.
OlsonJ.OlsonL. (2012). Virtual team trust: Task, communication and sequence. Team Performance Management, 18(5/6), 256–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527591211251131
104.
OshriI.van FenemaP.KotlarskyJ. (2008). Knowledge transfer in globally distributed teams: The role of transactive memory. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 593–616. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00243.x
105.
PangilF.ChanJ. M. (2014). The mediating effect of knowledge sharing on the relationship between trust and virtual team effectiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(1), 92–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-09-2013-0341
106.
ParkJ.-G.LeeH.LeeJ. (2015). Applying social exchange theory in IT service relationships: Exploring roles of exchange characteristics in knowledge sharing. Information Technology & Management, 16(3), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-015-0220-x
107.
ParkJ.-G.LeeJ. (2014). Knowledge sharing in information systems development projects: Explicating the role of dependence and trust. International Journal of Project Management, 32(1), 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2013.02.004
108.
PaulS.SeetharamanP.SamarahI.MykytynP. P. (2004). Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the performance of synchronous global virtual teams. Information & Management, 41(3), 303–321.
109.
PaulinD.SunesonK. (2012). Knowledge transfer, knowledge sharing and knowledge barriers—three blurry terms in KM. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 81–91.
110.
PetersonB. (2004). Cultural intelligence: A guide to working with people from other cultures. Intercultural Press.
111.
PinjaniP.PalviaP. (2013). Trust and knowledge sharing in diverse global virtual teams. Information & Management, 50(4), 144–153.
112.
PrasadA.DeRosaD.BeyerleinM. (2017). Dispersion beyond miles: Configuration and performance in virtual teams. Team Performance Management, 23(3/4), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-06-2016-0026
113.
RamseyJ. R.LorenzM. P. (2016). Exploring the impact of cross- cultural management education on cultural intelligence, student satisfaction, and commitment. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 79–99. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.0124
114.
RavlinE. C.WardA.-K.ThomasD. C. (2014). Exchanging social information across cultural boundaries. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1437–1465. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314531623
115.
RenS.IslamM. T.ChadeeD. (2023). Career adaptability of international hospitality management students during the COVID-19 pandemic: Focus on the role of language communication competence. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 54, 231–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2022.12.019
116.
ReusT. H.LamontB. T. (2009). The double-edged sword of cultural distance in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(8), 1298–1316. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.25
117.
RugmanA. M. (1982). Internalization and non-equity forms of international involvement. In RugmanA. M. (Ed.), New theories of the multinational enterprise (pp. 9–23). Croom Helm.
SauterD. A.EisnerF.EkmanP.ScottS. K. (2015). Cross-cultural recognition of basic emotions through nonverbal emotional vocalizations: Correction. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(23), E3086.
120.
ShachafP.HaraN. (2007). Behavioral complexity theory of media selection: A proposed theory for global virtual teams. Journal of Information Science, 33(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551506068145
121.
ShanJ.KonishiM.PullinP.Lupina-WegenerA. (2021). Effects of cultural intelligence on multicultural team effectiveness: The chain mediation role of common ingroup identity and communication quality. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 5(4), 519–529. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts5.115
122.
ShaoL. H.Bouzdine-ChameevaT.LunardoR. (2020). The interacting effect of business and cultural distances on relationship management and export performance: The case of wine export between France and China. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 35(11), 1659–1672. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-04-2019-0142
123.
ShenkarO.LuoY.YeheskelO. (2008). From “distance” to “friction”: Substituting metaphors and redirecting intercultural research. Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 905–923. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.34421999
124.
ShockleyK. M.AllenT. D.DoddH.WaiwoodA. M. (2021). Remote worker communication during COVID-19: The role of quantity, quality, and supervisor expectation-setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(10), 1466–1482. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000970
125.
SilbyA.WattsM. (2015). Making the tacit explicit: Children’s strategies for classroom writing. British Educational Research Journal, 41(5), 801–819. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3176
126.
SinghG. (2021). Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Web 2.0 Applications among engineering students: Implications for academic libraries. International Journal of Information Studies & Libraries, 6(1), 43–50.
127.
SinghR. (2021). Information exchange at a distance: Examining the influence of leadership on knowledge sharing in virtual teams. Journal of the Australian Library & Information Association, 70(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750158.2020.1761090
128.
TangarajaG.RasdiR. M.SamahB. A.IsmailM. (2016). Knowledge sharing is knowledge transfer: A misconception in the literature. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(4), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2015-0427
129.
TarofderA. K.HaqueA.NawazN.RaisalI.MusahA. A.KassimA. A. M. D. (2023). Determinants of instant messenger (IM) adoption and its effect on team performance: Mediating role of knowledge creation and quality communication. PLoS One, 18(11), Article e0289168. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289168
130.
TavolettiE.TarasV. (2022). From the periphery to the centre: A bibliometric review of global virtual teams as a new ordinary workplace. Management Research Review, 46(8), 1061–1090. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-12-2021-0869
131.
TeeceD. T. (1987). Capturing value from technological innovations: Integration, strategic partnering, and licensing decisions. In GuileB. R.BrooksH. (Eds.), Technology and global industry (pp. 65–95). National Academy Press.
132.
TenzerH.PudelkoM.Zellmer-BruhnM. (2021). The impact of language barriers on knowledge processing in multinational teams. Journal of World Business, 56(2), Article 101184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2020.101184
133.
ThomasD. C. (2006). Domain and development of cultural intelligence: The importance of mindfulness. Group & Organization Management, 31(1), 78–99.
134.
ThomasD. C.InksonK. (2004). Cultural intelligence: People skills for global business. Berrett-Koehler.
135.
VallsV.González-RomáV.TomásI. (2016). Linking educational diversity and team performance: Team communication quality and innovation team climate matter. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 89(4), 751–771. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12152
136.
Velez-CalleA.SosaS.LargeJ. (2021). Cultural communication style and international joint venture contract length. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 21(3), 491–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958211055683
137.
VermeulenF.BarkemaH. (2002). Pace, rhythm, and scope: Process dependence in building a profitable multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(7), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.243
138.
WaitituP.BarkerR. (2023). Employees’ perceptions on the use of online internal communication for knowledge sharing. Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(2), 13–113. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejkm.21.2.2947
YangJ.FangH. (2024). Integrating embodied social presence theory and process virtualization theory to assess business process virtualizability: The mediating role of embodied co-presence. PLoS One, 19(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305423
141.
YoganathanV.OsburgV.-S.KunzW. H.ToporowskiW. (2021). Check-in at the Robo-desk: Effects of automated social presence on social cognition and service implications. Tourism Management, 85, Article 104309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104309
ZakariaN.Ab Rahman MutonN. (2022). Cultural code-switching in high context global virtual team members: A qualitative study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 22(3), 487–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/14705958221137256
144.
ZakariaN.AmelinckxA.WilemonD. (2004). Working together apart? Building a knowledge-sharing culture for global virtual teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2004.00290.x
145.
ZanderL.MockaitisA. I.HarzingA.-W. (2011). Standardization and contextualization: A study of language and leadership across 17 countries. Journal of World Business, 46(3), 296–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2010.07.009
146.
ZhouQ.DengX.HwangB.-G.MahmoudiA.LiuY. (2023). Integrating the factors affecting knowledge transfer within international construction projects: Individual and team perspectives. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 149(11), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-13299
147.
ZhuY.SmithS. A. (2025). Information and communication technology support for contextualization, polychronic values, and job satisfaction: Evidence from virtual teams. International Journal of Business Communication, 62(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419832075
148.
ZuofaT.OchiengE. G. (2017). Working separately but together: Appraising virtual project team challenges. Team Performance Management, 23(5/6), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-06-2016-0030
