43

Chapter 3
Providing a Model for Virtual
Project Management with an
Emphasis on IT Projects
Hamed Nozari Meisam Jafari-Eskandari
Islamic Azad University, Iran Payam Noor University, Iran

Seyed Esmaeil Najafi Alireza Aliahmadi

Islamic Azad University, Iran Iran University of Science and Technology, Iran

ABSTRACT
With globalization of economy and increase of global competition to acquire rare resources, the organiza-
tions have moved towards geographical distribution to achieve competitive advantage. Users and project
teams at various places within various countries with different national and local cultures throughout
the world work on projects at the environment concerning geographical distribution. On the other hand,
with increase of advancements in communication, the distributed project teams have been witnessed
with more expansion, known with “virtual teams”. When members of virtual project team from various
organizations and time zones attend in the projects, they will be more likely affiliated to electronic media
such as email. With regard to virtualization of IT projects, the present study aims to develop a model
for virtual project management with an emphasis on information technology projects, including several
elements in geographically distributed environments. The final model of virtual project management of
information technology projects was represented.

INTRODUCTION

Advancements in information technology together with rapid growth of internet have led to develop-
ment of globalization. These advancements have caused failure of time and geographical barriers to
the organizations which seek business and economic growth (Guillen, 2001). Progressive realization of
world economy has led to increase of interaction and cohesion of economic systems which generally do
not enable to coexist due to time and place limitations. As the result of increasing interactions in these

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-9688-4.ch003

Copyright © 2016, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

systems, most of organizations have developed flexible and dynamic structures which can be immediately
adjusted with customers’ needs (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1994). Information technology plays a major role
in this transfer, which emerges as an enabler in new organizational form. Currently, information technol-
ogy which has been considered as a substantial element in organizational processes has infiltrated most
organizations, emerging in the global work teams (Armin. B. Cremers et al, 2005). Emergence and use
of work teams have caused a substantial change at work environment. Global work teams which rely on
information technology for their interactions are recognized as virtual teams. Through virtual teams,
organizations enable to share experts’ and personnel’s skills and knowledge beyond time and place
barriers. Project managers might be at a position enabling to select the best resources for their project
at any place (Goiuld, 2004). Virtual teams might be distributed at building, region and/or countries.
In point of view of Gold (2005), virtual teams imply the teams from individuals who firstly interact
with each other through electronic devices, but they might need face-to-face sessions later. Anyhow,
the team members might never have a face-to-face interaction among the geographically distributed
organizations. In general, it can define the virtual teams as a group of individuals who work in the
same projects but in more than one workplace, and severly adhere to information and communication
technologies (Guido Hertel, 2005). Enviornmental changes have taught the organizations to search for
the best resources around the world for the purpose of acquiring the competitive advantage (Canie L.
et al, 2004). Mergers and acquisitions, emerging markets in different geographic locations, needing to
reduction of cost, needing to reduction of time to enter into the market, and production cycle time are
the reasons which justify the need to virtual teams. Today, virtual project teams have become an integral
part of management forms, and the organizations are required ensuring achievement of project goals
concerning the new environment. Virtual project teams require organizing their team to the full extent
of organizing in traditional teams. These teams have raised a new challenge for the project managers for
delivery of high-quality products (Bruce J., Arolio G., 2002). Kenneth David Strong (2004) in a study
at the area of leadership in the virtual environment has more likely strived to identify the leadership
roles and behaviors. For this purpose, he has referred to the leadership components including common
vision and electronic monitoring. In his study, he has examined various types of behavioral leadership
models concerning virtual teams.
Hertdeller (2005) has proposed a model for life cycle of virtual teams, and also has pointed out ele-
ments of their life cycle by dividing the stages of virtual teams’ life cycle to various phases.
Yuhyunge Shin (2004) in a model well known with “person-environment fit model” within virtual
organizations has examined virtual environment and behaviors of the members in the virtual teams.
However, the components such as confidence, independence, diversity, virtual communication, and
knowledge and job satisfaction have been pointed out in this model, this research has been firstly fulfilled
at the area of virtual organization and the concepts defined in his model have been secondly classified at
the area of characteristics of members, where the major elements such ascyberculture, virtual leadership
and other elements have not been pointed out in this model. Louise (2004) in a model well known with
“I-P-O” has classified operation of virtual teams in terms of inputs, outputs and processes.
Terri Williard (2001) has examined the elements such as virtual communication and cyberculture,
and emphasized on the relationship between these two elements in this research. Ultimately, despite the
previous studies, this study has aimed to propose a conceptual model for the virtual project manage-
ment at the area of information technology. With regard to the studies represented to date concerning
the investigations into the elements and components of virtual project management, this study has aimed

44

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

to represent the elements and components of virtual project management in form of a model. Further,
this study specifically has focused on the areas of information technology projects, where this can be a
different point compared to previous studies.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND OF RESEARCH

Working in a distributed team in different places with different time zones is not considered as a new
phenomenon. There are a large body of evidences which show how people have cooperated with each other
in long distances far from each other in the long past. (Bruce J. et al, 2003; Cathrine Darnell Crampton,
Sheila S., 2005; B. Parkinson, P. Hudson, 2001). Anyhow, with rapid development of information and
communication technology in the long lost past, Working in a distributed team can be fulfilled rapider
and simpler. Virtualization is the main feature of working in a distributed team, which has been grounded
on the basis for information and communication technologies. Various forms of virtualization for work-
ing in a distributed team can be separated from each other by means of the number of individuals and
the extent to which they have interaction with each other. In this regard, firstly telecommuting is taken
into account that a part or full extent of it is fulfilled out of organization by means of information and
communication services (Frank, 2002). In following, virtual group is taken into account in which sev-
eral different types of telecommuting are combined with each other from remote area and each member
presents report to a manager. In contrast, there is a virtual team in which the members of virtual group
interact with each other to achieve a common goal. This differentiation exists between virtual team and
virtual group in parallel with each other in differentiation between traditional group and traditional team.
Ultimately, the virtual communicates are a larger entity for working in a distributed team in which the
members cooperate with each other via internet by means of common goals, roles and norms. In the
virtual teams, virtual communities are not handled by a virtual structure, yet they are developed by means
of their members(Cristina Anna et al, 2004).
Separate from the aforementioned differences, certain definitions have not been proposed for virtual
teams on whom researchers agree. Based on an investigation into the literature review of virtual teams
and the definitions proposed by researchers, the definition of virtual teams include the characteristics
below: 1-virtual teams consists of two or more individuals, 2-they cooperate with each other to achieve
general goals, 3-the relationship and coordination among them is fulfilled based on information and
communication technologies (Hy Ung Jan Ann, Hong Joo Lee, 2005). On the other hand, the projects
have been considered as one of the reasons for formation of virtual teams.
Krill and Jól (2006) have defined virtual projects as an effort and collaboration to achieve particular
aims or fulfill duties based on telecommuting. Formation of virtual teams has made the possibility of
fulfillment of virtual projects close to the reality (O’Sallivan, 2003). In point of view of Aniston and
Miller (2002), virtual teams are similar to traditional teams, with this difference that the members of
team in the beginning of project interact with each other via electronic devices. There are several reasons
which have led to increasing use of virtual teams. In point of view of the researchers such as Garcı´a-
Parıs, & Wake, 2007; Gould, 2002; McNamara & Swenson, & Walsh, 2005, the most important reason
for increasing use of virtual teams can be reduction of costs for fulfillment of virtual projects. Virtual
teams use the electronic techniques which cause reducing the travel by the memerbers of the project,
reducing overhead costs, reducing project scheduling, improving decision making (Evie Tastoglou,
Evangelou Milious, 2005).

45
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Outsourcing and the advantage of use of cheap labor market are accounted as the policies relating to
the reduction of cost. Cheap labor market has caused the intra-organizational business processes which
are fulfilled via traditional techniques within organizations, are fulfilled by the contractors in most
of organizations. Globalization is another reason that induces the organizations to use virtual teams
throughout the world (Collines, 2002).
Most of organizations have used the advancements in the information technologies as much as possible.
Emergence of such an environment requires the inter-organizational cooperation for competition with
the other networks developed by the competitors. In the global market, by increasing competition, the
organizations require hiring the best labor forces that might not be necessarily in a geographic location
(Edward F. Mcdonough, Kenneth B, 2001). In a slow movement of organization towards use of human
resources distributed by means of virtual teams, the advantages such as overcoming time barriers and
obtaining the best specialists are regarded (Evie Tastoglou, Evangelou Milious, 2005).
On the other hand, the same as the policies used in use of human resources in different geographic
locations, the outcomes from hiring virtual teams can be analyzed at three levels: personal, organizational
and social levels (Could, 2005). At the personal level, the potential advantages such as high flexibility
and time control with top accountability, motivation at work, and strengthening and empowering team
members will be followed. At this level, a challenge which is felt is witnessed in isolation and reduc-
ing interpersonal interactions, increasing misunderstanding, emergence of conflict, role ambiguity and
conflict in goals. At organizational level, the virtual teams specifically enjoy strategic advantages. For
instance, teams can hire the individuals based on their skills rather than their availability. Team can have
a high flexibility in responsiveness to the market demand and set closer relationships with customers
and suppliers. The potential challenge at this level includes the problems in supervision on the activities
of members in virtual project, prevention from the effective development at time zone, additional costs
for suitable technologies and further education programs. Ultimately, at social level, employing virtual
teams can result in development of regions with low sub-structures and increase of their employment
rate, cohesion of individuals with low movement capability, and reduction of environmental limitations
by means of reducing air pollution and traffic (Durate, 2001). Stephen (2004) has represented a model
describing the processes of creating successful virtual teams for virtual project managers. In his opinion,
the managers who are in virtual teams know that creating successful virtual teams requires the leaders
who not just create a view but also create a sub-structure to support working processes and communica-
tions. He has emphasized on the concepts such as creating a shared vision, establishing a sub-structure,
assessment of members and selection appropriate reward system in his model (Joyce A. Thompson, 2006).
According to Stephen’s model, two other models have been also developed which are suggested to create
effective distributed teams. These models include maturity and coordination models. The coordination
model will help the managers to evaluate and select the members of team for performing their tasks in
the best sub-structure and current organization. Maturity model displays a framework for transfer to the
more advanced sub-structures which allows the virtual teams to acquire the highest performance level.
Access to the highest performance level requires the teams concerning their aims, processes and skills
(Bradford S. et al, 2002). In another research, the lifecycle model has been represented for the virtual
project teams, that this model is associated to the virtual project teams concerning various areas.
Lifecycle indicates that the disadvantages due to new communication technologies can have a different
dependence on phases of working teams; in this model, it is argued about human resource management
problems which can affect high level of virtualization. In contrast to input-process-output (IPO) model,
the lifecycle model specifies five phases with certain management tasks which are described in virtual

46

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

work teams. The represented phases include preparation, start, performance management, training and
development of team, closure and reintegration. This model is a dominant framework which has been
represented to study the virtual project teams and cohesion of literature review on them. The input for
representation of a group’s conditions such as human or materials resources and processes indicates the
interactions between members of project teams to fulfill their tasks. Outcomes represent the functional
or non-functional consequences from the operations of a group (Hackman, 2002). McMahon in “virtual
project management” has proposed an 8-step program for implementation of virtual project management.
This framework includes the steps including creating top level of the project, architecture, breaking work
and duties, planning, project rules, detailed planning, testing the concept of operations and implementa-
tion. McMahon (2001) in an article has represented a four-level framework for the cyberculture in the
virtual project management, which is considered as the basis for this research, due to attention to the
information technology projects. In this framework, the organization displays the first level. This level
represents the first level of 8-step processes described previously. The second level represents the major
layer of cyberculture in which the major elements below is are provided: breaking work, creating and
regulating filtered project memory, definitions of product planning matrix, product deployment matrix,
component deployment matrix. This level associated to steps, 2 and 3 has been defined in the process.
The third layer represents the intermediate cyberculture layer which has been provided in the models of
task, sub-structure and project rules. Finally, the fourth layer represents operational models and Conflict
Management (Jeremy S. Laurey, Manesh S. Raisinghani, 2001).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK OF RESEARCH

With regard to overview of literature review and the related works at the area of information technology
virtual teams and virtual projects, the elements and components below have been identified.

1. Virtual Leadership: leadership is the main challenge in virtual teams because managers of these
teams are not in a place together with members. Hence, understanding various types of direct
control seems difficult. The consequence of delegation management principles is considered as a
part of classical management functions for the members of teams. Members of virtual teams just
accept such management functions, due to the fact that access to the goals is much more difficult
in virtual teams (Bruce J., Arolio G., 2002). The results of studies on virtual teams are character-
ized in three leadership attitudes that are different in the extent of independence of members of
team: 1- electronic monitoring as an attempt to direct leadership beyond the physical distance,
2- Management by objective as an example for delegating leadership principles, 3- self- managing
teams as an example of autonomous work teams (Zigaras, 2003).The components associated to
virtual leadership include as follows:
a. Team Solidarity: Team solidarity at virtual environment implies recruitment of members to
team. In a study by Bruce et al.(2003), it can say that a higher level of team solidarity is seen
in traditional teams rather than virtual teams. In virtual teams, team solidarity comes to real-
ize by means of higher satisfaction level, more cohesive groups and the ability for knowledge
sharing. On the other hand, team solidarity positively associates to the effectiveness of team
(Bruce J. et al, 2003).

47
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

b. Receive Continuous Feedback: The performance associated to continuous feedback is one

of major elements within project teams which is prioritized under distributed work environ-
ments and virtual work conditions, and this is due to the fact that receiving information on
achievement of goals of other members of virtual team is much more difficult (D.kissler,
Gray, 2000). Indeed, introducing continuous feedback especially graphical feedback on actual
performance results in high performance in electronic brainstorming groups(Bruce J., Arolio
G., 2002).
c. Building Trust: Trust is important for teams to achieve their goals, but importance of trust
is much more among virtual teams due to their less face-to-face communications (Cathrine
Darnell Crampton, Sheila S., 2005). The processes of building and maintaining trust is similar
in all teams. In virtual teams, trust comes to realize by means of members’ expectations and
then delivery of consistent results that meet expectations. Nature of virtual environment is in a
way that organizing accurate expectations from traditional teams will be much more difficult,
and naturally there will be less control over revision of expectations of project stakeholders,
whereby this will be the biggest challenge for virtual leaders (Durate, 2001).
d. Development of Cooperation: Cooperation in virtual environment associates to the tasks
which have been structured, whereby division of tasks for the members of virtual team will
be easier. In point of view of Strijbos(2004), development of cooperation and coordination in
virtual team implies involving the members of virtual team in tasks to achieve a common goal,
acquiring a decision and/or solution which can be repeated. Development of cooperation and
coordination requires companionship, understanding, and trust (Cathrine Darnell Crampton,
Sheila S., 2005).
e. Delegation of Authority: Although direct leadership strategies are possible in traditional
teams, delegation of management functions to the members is more suitable in virtual teams.
This attitude causes changing the role of team manager from traditional control to mediation
and coaching functions. Management by objective is an example for the concept of delegative
leadership which emphasizes on setting goals, cooperation and feedback (Bruce J., Arolio G.,
2002).
f. A Clear Definition of Objectives: A clear definition of objectives is of planning processes
which focuses on team effort. Research indicate that there is a positive relationship between
setting clear goals and team unity, cooperation, the quality of decisions and the number of
generated alternatives. In the virtual environment, due to time and place distance between
members of team despite use of communication technologies, development of clear goals is
much more difficult (Cathrine Darnell Crampton, Sheila S., 2005).
g. Motivation of Team Members: Lack of physical contact in virtual teams can result in various
challenges in members’ motivation, which can be due to difficulty in understanding common
goals, feeling of lack of independence and low social control, low feedback, and difficulty of
the trust. Processes of motivation of virtual team members can be measured based on model
(concept of value*expectation)(Guido Hertel, 2005).
h. Existential Philosophy: Expressing existential philosophy of formation of virtual teams is one
of factors which can be effective in the beginning of virtual project and formation of virtual
teams (Edward F. Mcdonough, Kenneth B., 2001). This causes formation of team solidarity
and clear understanding of the objectives and the reason for formation of virtual team. The

48

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

importance of this issue derives from this fact that expressing existential philosophy of virtual
team can reduce ambiguity in team’s objectives and tasks, due to geographical distribution
of members (Collines, 2002).
i. Knowledge Sharing: Most of virtual projects especially information technology projects
require different specialties. To reduce risk at virtual projects, individuals’ experiences and
skills at different geographical locations by means of the concepts such as virtual culture and
formation of knowledge bank must be shared between members in project (David, 2004).
j. Electronic Performance Monitoring (EPM): Using network technologies, EPM systems
allow the managers to control the employees and examine the accuracy degree of log-in and
log-out times. EPM, instead of Taylor principle, emphasizes on standardization, separation,
and ease of work processes. Furthermore, EPM increases speed at performance of workers
with high skills, yet it decreases speed at performance of workers with low skill (Bruce J., et
al, 2003).
k. Rewarding Systems: Development of motivation and rewarding systems is one of the im-
portant issues in the beinging of vritual projects. The same as traditional teams, the team-
based incentives are important for an emphasis on the importance of cooperation in virtual
teams(O’Sallivan, 2003). team-based rewards can result in strong motivation of virtual team
members. In point of view of Lawler (2002), rewarding system must be in consistent with
certain aspects of the virtual project, including objectives, tasks, interdependence, autonomy,
diversity and degree of virtualization. The main purpose of this process is granting reward to
the behaviors which are in line with strategy of virtual organization (Zigaras, 2003).
2. Virtual Communication: Virtual communication is one of the most fundamental activities which
is fulfilled by virtual team. Virtual communications will be followed by challenges for the virtual
project managers in implementation of virtual work environment (Bent, 2004). Project managers
require having access to efficient instruments so as to maximize their relationship with members of
virtual team. As members of virtual team are not in a certain location, use of new communication
technologies seems essential. Previous studies indicate that virtual teams have desire to effective
communications the same as traditional teams. If virtual teams dedicate sufficient time to set rela-
tionship and adapt themseleves with virtual communication media, their proccesses will be more
effective(D. Kissler Gray, 2000). Virtual communications include the components as follows:
a. Geographical Distribution of Members: Geographical distribution of members are clas-
sified into two groups: 1-teams with members who fulfill their tasks in a certain location or
office, 2- teams with members who have been distributed at geographic locations and remote
organizations in which at least 30% of members fulfill most of their tasks in more than one
location or more locations (Ann Hong Joo Lee, 2005).
b. Time Difference between the Teams: Time difference between the teams is considered
as one dimension of virtual environment, which is attributed to a degree that members of
virtual teach work non concurrently together and do their tasks(Cathrine Darnell Crampton,
Sheila S., 2005). Due to time distribution of virtual team members, time management and its
skills must be trained to the virtual project managers, in order that they must be able to use
nonconcurrent communication technologies.
c. Communication Patterns: Communication patterns imply key design elements which
guarantee support systems from virtual teams properly. They can be defined as a set of com-

49
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

munication workflows and normative definitions that are favorable and acceptable for virtual
team. These patterns also include the meta-norms including the do’s and don’ts actions (Fang
Chon, et al, 2003).
d. Synchronous Communication Technology: Diversity in group decision support systems
which has been developed in recent years supports cooperation between members of virtual
teams, and being used as a tool for communication, sharing and learning (David, 2004).
Synchronous communication technologies pave the way to set relationship between members
of virtual teams at different geographical locations. These technologies include the tools such
as group tools, video conferencing, electronic meeting systems, electronic brainstorming.
e. Asynchronous Communication Technology: With regard to distributed nature of vir-
tual teams, the possibility to use synchronous communications will not be always possible.
Asynchronous communication technologies pave the way to set low-cost and easy relationship
as well as knowledge sharing between members of virtual team. Asynchronous communica-
tion technologies include the tools such as email, group calendar, and asynchronous database
(Francis Lau, S. Sarker, 2004).
f. Face-to-Face Meetings: Due to distributed nature of virtual teams, the possibility to develop
face-to-face meetings among members of virtual project goes beyond. Yet, the researchers
believe that a face-to-face meeting must be developed in the beginning of the project in order
to let the members get familiar with each other (Edward F. Mcdonough, Kenneth B., 2001).
3. Cyberculture: Cyberculture is a simple concept which has been drawn into attention by schoars
at the age of communication. Cyberculture view is called to a framework which supports effective
communications across sites on a single but distributed project (Cathrine Darnell Crampton, Sheila
S., 2005). Cyberculture despite traditional culture is product-oriented, which is not supposed to be
replaced with traditional culture. Cyberculture refers to the culture for special sites which provides
the required information for setting relationship between information on tasks of sites. Cyberculture
can be applied through website or joint directory system. It is worthwhile that the key difference
between a Cyberculture and traditional culture lies on officialism. Experience indicates that an
effective Cyberculture cannot be informal, i.e. it must be in written form (Durate, 2001) (Could,
2005).
a. Diversity: Virtual teams consist of the members with different cultural background. Hence,
diversity is regarded as an important issue. Diversity associates to synergy with the hope that
various skills and attitudes increase the effectiveness of team (D. Kissler, Gray, 2000).
b. Language: Virtual teams might be in different countries and locations with different lan-
guages. Any location, with respect to its language, uses its own symbols, which can result in
unwanted conflict and improper understanding from each other (Cristina Anna, et al, 2004).
c. Filtered Project Memory: Filtered project memory refers to a method which employs a
part of Cyberculture, aiming at providing special and important information of project to set
coordination. The information include necessary information on how to do tasks, updated
information on approaches of virtual organization, key words used in communications, iden-
tifying key problems at virtual project and strategies associated to it (Collines, 2002).
d. Rules of Project: Any project has its own rules, which includes the rules of communication
and leadership and develops the basis for Cyberculture. The rules of project can be considered
as a part of filtered project memory (M. Macmahon, 2004).

50

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

e. Architecture and Breaking Work: Here, architecture implies components of a system and
the rules which define the relationship between these components based on Cyberculture.
When the term “breaking work” is used, it implies allocation of responsibilities across
separate physical sites and organizations. Breaking work can be fulfilled through devolving
responsibility across the site, where technical architecture can provide one of the best com-
munications and coordination techniques. The team acquires a required attitude through an
informal architecture so as to achieve the work expectations without special expectations.
Yet, concerning effective architecture as the work communications, definition of work gap
across separate sites must follow the definition of architecture (M. Macmahon, 2004; Bruce
J., Arolio G., 2002).
f. Component-Product Development Matrix: Component-product development matrix is
conveyed as a strong communication tool to support improvement of the definition for work
appointments, which is determined in the Cyber culture. These tools include a table in which

Figure 1. Conceptual model of research

Source: Researchers.

51
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

a list of special consequences of project has been represented. This technique is specifically
used in the information technology projects. The information of this matrix is not generally
found in the virtual project processes (Larsline, 2006).
g. Operational Model: This refers to the sub-cyberculture which uses a strong mechanism in
relation to the work expectations within organization (Collines, 2002).
h. How to Determine Duty: Virtual project managers must pay a particular attention to how
to break duties and their ownership across virtual team boundaries. The important point lies
on the risk that exists in improper understanding and wrong interpretation of duties. Use of
electronic written communication at this area is the idea proposed at this area. Nature of certain
duties such as cohesion of deliveries to another virtual team requires cooperation between
members of virtual teams (Joe Nandhakumar, R. Baskervil, 2001).
i. The Planning of the Project: The points such as definition of duties and appointment of
them to the members of special teams must be considered in planning for a virtual project.
These duties require a high coordination to use the resources which have been geographically
distributed. The planning of the project is determined based on cyberculture (B. Parkinson,
P. Hudson, 2001).
j. Conflict: These processes focus on conflict, informal behavior between members, trust be-
tween individuals and team solidarity (Edward F. Mcdonough, Kenneth B., 2001). Researchers
believe that conflict is an important process which helps the virtual teams for a better deci-
sion making due to determination of further alternatives. According to the comparison of
traditional teams with virtual teams, it has been specified that conflict more likely occurs in
virtual teams rather than traditional teams (Evie Tastoglou, Evangelou Milious, 2005).

Research Method

In the present study, the researcher firstly investigated and collected the literature review concerning
the subject area of research. In the next step, using the findings from literature review, the elements and
components were identified, and then a questionnaire was designed for the research sample by design-
ing a conceptual model for the research. In following, after distribution and collection of questionnaires
as well as analysis of data, the conclusion and suggestions were represented. In Figure, 2, the stages to
conduct this study have been represented:

Research Objectives

Major objectives of research include:

• Identifying the elements and components of virtual project management at the area of information
technology projects.
• Comparing elements and components of virtual project management with traditional project
management.

The results of this study can be used by service and manufacturing organizations which involved in
big projects including gas and oil projects as well as software production, and can be also a guidance for

52
 

Table 1. An overview on literature review of research

Joe Nandhkumar, Richard Susan Vonsild, Phillip D. Yuhyung Shin, Louis Martin, G. Susanne Francis Lou, Jarvenpea & William M. Louce A. Parsert
Basekerville, 2001 2000 Elis, 1999 2004 Lay L. Gilson, Geister, Udo Suprateek Leidner, 1998 Hugnes, 2003 Thompson, 2005 Kanawattana-
M. Travis Konradt, 2005 Sarker, chai, Yaun, Jin
Mayrar, 2005 Sundeep Yoo, 2004
Sanay, 2000

Dimen- Component Di- Com- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Second- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Second-
sions men- po- ma- ond- mary ond- mary ond- mary ond- mary ond- ma- ond- ma- ary mary ond- mary ond- mary ary
sion nent ry ary ary ary ary ary ry ary ry ary ary

Virtual Ensuring * * * * * * * * * * *
Leadership
Knowledge
* * * * * * *
sharing

Team cohe-
* * *
sion

Setting
* * * * * * *
Goals

Continuous
* * *
feedback

Motivation * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * *
Reward
* * * *
Systems

Shared
* * * *
vision

Existential
* * * * *
philosophy

Delegate * *

Electronic
monitoring *
function

virtual Terms of
* * * * * *
Communi- Contact
cations
Communica-
* * * * * * *
tion patterns
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Commu-
nication * * * * *
technologies
* * *
Time differ-
* * * * * * * * * * *
ence

Geographi-
cal distribu- * * * * * *
tion

Face to face
* * * * *
meetings

53
continued on following page
54
Table 1. Continued

Joe Nandhkumar, Richard Susan Vonsild, Phillip D. Yuhyung Shin, Louis Martin, G. Susanne Francis Lou, Jarvenpea & William M. Louce A. Parsert
Basekerville, 2001 2000 Elis, 1999 2004 Lay L. Gilson, Geister, Udo Suprateek Leidner, 1998 Hugnes, 2003 Thompson, 2005 Kanawattana-
M. Travis Konradt, 2005 Sarker, chai, Yaun, Jin
Mayrar, 2005 Sundeep Yoo, 2004
Sanay, 2000

Dimen- Component Di- Com- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Second- Pri- Sec- Pri- Sec- Pri- Second-
sions men- po- ma- ond- mary ond- mary ond- mary ond- mary ond- ma- ond- ma- ary mary ond- mary ond- mary ary
sion nent ry ary ary ary ary ary ry ary ry ary ary

Cybercul- Conflict * * * * * *
ture
Architecture * * * * * *

The time * * * * *

Diversity * * * * * * * * *

Language * * * * * *

Geographi-
cal distribu- * * * * * * *
tion
* * * * *
Project rules * * * * *

The plan-
ning of the * * * *
project

Conflict * * * * *

Breaking the
* *
work

Operational
* * * *
Model

Source: Researchers.
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects


Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Figure 2. The stages to conduct this study

Source: Researchers.

further studies and research institutes to get familiar with various sections in uses of information tech-
nology in project management (virtual project) and continue their investigations at the area of building
a virtual environment for such projects.

Research Questions

With regard to the advantages of virtual project management which can cause reducing costs, increasing
communication and coordination between members, the need to use virtual systems is felt in large and
distributed projects around the world, especially at the area of information technology, as the result the
present study aims to propose a suitable model for virtual project management at the area of information
technology. The questions concerning the research subject are proposed as follows:
The main research question is as follows:

• What is the suitable model for virtual project management at the area of information technology?

The secondary research questions are as follows:

• What are the components of virtual project management at the area of information technology?
• Is there a difference between components of virtual project management at the area of information
technology and common project management?

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

With regard to the proposed model, the research hypotheses are defined as follows:

• Virtual project management model at area of information technology has been developed from
various components.
• There is a significant difference between some components of virtual project management at area
of information technology and common project management.

55
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Data Analysis

Descriptive demographic statistics: here, with regard to the information obtained through questionnaire,
demographic analysis of the sample group has been acquired, and represented in Tables, 2 and 3.

Testing Research Hypotheses

With regard to the variables identified in the research model, the major research hypothesis is transformed
to primary and secondary hypotheses. For instance:

First Hypothesis: Virtual leadership is one of the major elements of virtual project management at the
area of information technology. With regard to the five-point Likret scale and mean of score(3),
the research hypotheses concerning the research data using the statistical hypotheses can be rep-
resented as follows:

H  : µ ≤ 3


H  : µ > 3


According to the statistical characteristics of this study, binomial test is used to test statistical hy-
potheses of research.
As shown in Table 4, as the significance level is less than error level(0.05), thus H0 is rejected and
H1 is confirmed, and the first, second and third hypotheses of research have been accepted. Hence, it
can deduce that virtual leadership, virtual communications and cyberculture are of the components of
virtual project management in the field of information technology.

Table 2. Overview of frequency of sample group based on their education status

Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Frequency

8/10 8/10 11 Bachelor
4/80 6/69 71 Master degree
0/100 6/19 20 PhD
0/100 102 Sum

Table 3. Overview of frequency of sample group based on their experience

Cumulative Frequency Percent Percent Frequency

9/4 9/4 5 Less than one year
2/38 3/33 34 1-3 year
5/77 2/39 40 3-5 year
0/100 5/22 23 Over 5 years
0/100 102 sum

56

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Table 4. Results from analysis of binomial test

Result Type of Test Research Hypotheses

Rejecting H0 Binomial test Virtual leadership
Rejecting H0 Binomial test Virtual communications
Rejecting H0 Binomial test Cyberculture
Significance level (0.01).

Second Hypothesis: With regard to the components identified for each of dimensions, similar sub-
hypotheses below are defined that binomial test has been used to test them. For instance, the
hypotheses of this section are described as follows:

Trust is one of the leading components of virtual leadership.

With regard to the response spectrum to six-option questions and mean of score (2.5), it can test the
research hypotheses by generalizing sample group to the population. The statistical hypotheses relating
to the hypotheses above can be defined as follows:

H  : µ ≤ 2.5




H  : µ > 2.5


Results of binomial test for sub-hypotheses indicate that function electronic monitoring among the
components of virtual leadership is rejected as the significance level for this component is greater than
0.05, and the rest of components are confirmed. Thereby, components of time difference, communica-
tion rules, face-to-face meetings in virtual communications and component of language in cyberculture
cannot be considered as the components of research.

Third Hypothesis: With regard to the identified elements, the hypothesis “there is a significant difference
between some components of virtual project management at the area of information technology
and common project management”. Thereby, there will be similar hypotheses as follows:

There is a significant difference between virtual project management and traditional project management.
Here, the statistical hypothesis below has been represented below for which Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon
test has been used to test it.

H0: There is not a significant difference between virtual project management and traditional project
management.
H1: There is a significant difference between virtual project management and traditional project man-
agement.

With regard to the obtained results, there is a significant difference on the identified elements (Virtual
leadership, Virtual communications and cyberculture) at virtual and traditional environment. In follow-
ing, using Friedman test, priority of elements of virtual leadership in virtual project management and
traditional project management is represented as follows:

57
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Table 5. Result of binomial test for sub-hypotheses

Element Hypothesis Significance Level Result

Virtual leadership Creating a shared vision is one component of virtual 0.000 Rejecting
leadership
0.122 Confirming
function electronic monitoring 0.000 Rejecting
Team Solidarity 0.000 Rejecting
Receive continuous feedback 0.000 Rejecting
Trust 0.000 Rejecting
Develop collaboration and coordination 0.000 Rejecting
Delegation of authority 0.000 Rejecting
A clear definition for objectives 0.000 Rejecting
Motivation of team members 0.000 Rejecting
Existential philosophy 0.000 Rejecting
Virtual communications Knowledge sharing 0.000 Rejecting
Geographical distribution of members 0.141 Confirming
Time difference 0.000 Rejecting
Communication patterns 0.000 Rejecting
Synchronous communication technology 0.000 Rejecting
0.142 Confirming
Asynchronous communication technology 0.071 Rejecting
Cyberculture 0.000 Rejecting
Communication rules 0.101 Confirming
Face-to-face meetings 0.000 Rejecting
Diversity 0.000 Rejecting
Language 0.000 Rejecting
filtered project memory 0.000 Rejecting
Architecture 0.000 Rejecting
product planning matrix, product deployment 0.000 Rejecting
matrix, component deployment matrix
How to determine duty 0.000 Rejecting
Rules of project 0.000 Rejecting
The planning of project 0.000 Rejecting

H  : µ1 = µ2 = ......µ1




H1 :

There is a significant difference between at least each mean and other means.
The results of Friedman test indicate that there is a difference between calculated x 2 between each
pair. As the result, hypothesis H  is rejected. In other words, cyberculture and virtual communications
enjoy a high importance at virtual and traditional environment.

58

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Table 6. Result of Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test

Result of Test Significance Level Value of Type of Type of Test

Statistics Statistics

Rejecting 0.032 453/8- Z Wilcoxon Virtual leadership

H

Rejecting H 0.043 278/8- Z Wilcoxon Virtual communication

Rejecting H 0.043 641/8- Z Wilcoxon Virtual culture

Table 7. Results of Friedman test

Chi-Squared Test Freedom Degree Error Level Result of Test Hypothesis

11/64 10 05/0 Rejecting Leadership in virtual project
H management

801/146 10 05/0 Leadership in traditional project

Rejecting H management
07/44 6 05/0 Communications in virtual
Rejecting H project management
585/189 6 05/0 Communications in traditional
Rejecting H project management
741/108 10 05/0 cyber Culture in virtual project
Rejecting H management
270/173 10 05/0 Cyberculture in traditional
Rejecting H project management
Significance level: 0.00.

Furthermore, results of Friedman test indicates difference between calculated x 2 in components of

traditional and virtual environment. These results indicate that the priority is given to the existential
philosophy, creating a shared vision, and knowledge sharing in virtual leadership, yet the priority is
given to the components of motivation of team members, existential philosophy and creating a shared
vision in traditional environment. The first priority is given to the component of synchronous commu-
nication technology in virtual communications, yet the third priority is given to this component in tra-
ditional environment. Thereby, differences are seen in the priority of components in cyberculture.

Results of Research

Results of this study have been formulated based on the goals as follows:

• Identify effective elements and components in virtual project management at the area of informa-
tion technology.
• Represent a model based on identified elements and components.
• Compare the elements and components in virtual project management and traditional project
management.

59
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Table 8. Results of Friedman test

Leadership Component
Components Average Ranking Priority
Virtual Traditional Virtual Traditional
Creating a shared vision 94/6 41/7 Second Third
Team Correlation 23/5 76/5 Tenth Eighth
Continuous feedback 57/6 75/5 Fourth Ninth
Ensure 20/6 21/5 Seventh Tenth
Delegation of authority 62/5 31/6 Ninth Sixth
entrusting 53/6 98/5 Fifth Seventh
Clearly definition of objectives 06/6 93/6 Eighth Fourth
Motivation of team members 32/6 63/7 Sixth First
Philosophy of existence 96/6 43/7 First Second
Knowledge sharing 67/6 56/6 Third Fifth
Components of the Virtual Community
Geographical Distribution 16/4 99/1 Third Fourth
Communication patterns 40/4 98/5 Second First
Synchronous communication technology 74/4 96/4 First Third
Asynchronous communication 07/4 48/5 Fourth Second
technology
Components of Cyberculture
Diversity 06/6 48/6 Sixth Second
Filtered Memory Project 50/6 41/5 Third Fourth
Architecture and breaking of work 09/6 73/3 Fifth Third
Development component Matrix 61/6 88/3 Second Seventh
-product
assigning 39/6 30/5 Fourth Fifth
Conflict 09/7 35/7 First First
Operational Model 98/5 97/3 Seventh Sixth

In this regard, an overview on research generalities and literature review was represented so as to
specify the importance of the issues such as virtual teams and virtual projects and identify the elements
and components of virtual project management at the area of information technology projects and deter-
mine the early scenario of model which has been the major aim of researcher. The final model of research
consists of three major elements including virtual leadership, virtual communications and cyberculture.
According to the results obtained from research, virtual leadership has been recognized as one the
leading elements of virtual project management at the area of information technology which includes
the components such as: A clear definition for objectives, Receive continuous feedback, Creating a
shared vision, Trust, Motivation, Team Solidarity, Develop collaboration and coordination, Delega-
tion of authority, Existential philosophy and Knowledge sharing. Further, it is deduced that there is no

60

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

significant difference on leadership in traditional project management and virtual project management,
i.e. leadership is considered as a leading element in both traditional project management and virtual
project management.
Findings of this research indicate the priority of components of virtual leadership in both traditional
project management and virtual project management at the area of information technology.
Results of research indicate that there are significant differences on components identified in tradi-
tional and virtual project management, so that higher priority is given to knowledge sharing and receive
continuous feedback in virtual project management rather than traditional project management, and
this derives from this fact that due to distributed nature of virtual project management and remote com-
munication between members of virtual team, leadership requires receiving continuous feedback from
members of team for the purpose of controlling effectiveness and reaching to the determined goals.
Further, as individuals with high skills have little interaction with each other, higher priority is given
to knowledge sharing in virtual project management. On the other hand, with regard to the results of
research, virtual communications has been recognized as one of leading elements in virtual project
management, including the components such as Geographical distribution of members, Communication
patterns, Synchronous communication technology, Asynchronous communication technology. Findings
of research indicate that communication in both traditional project management and virtual project
management at the area of information technology is considered as one of leading elements of project
management at the area of information technology.
The results of this research lie on the priority of components obtained in traditional project manage-
ment and virtual project management at the area of information technology, so that the priority is given
to the Synchronous communication technology, Communication patterns, Geographical distribution of
members and Asynchronous communication technology in virtual project management, yet the highest
priority is given to face-to-face meetings in traditional project management.
Hence, it can perceive that the communication technologies play a major role in reducing low in-
teractions between members in virtual team, yet a high priority is given to communication patterns in
traditional project management. Cyberculture is the last element which has been confirmed in this study.
The importance of Cyberculture lies on its documentary nature in virtual project management, which
causes creating a knowledge database during the project. This element includes the components such
as Operational model, The planning of project, filtered project memory, Architecture, product planning
matrix, product deployment matrix, component deployment matrix, Conflict, Breaking works, Rules of
project, How to determine duty, Diversity, Language.
As seen, most of components obtained in Cyberculture associate to documentation of projects and the
rules on how to fulfill the activities of project. In this regard, diversity is recognized as a factor which
is more likely witnessed in trans boundary and international projects that experts from various regions
with cultural, language, time and place diversities help for achievement of goals of project.
In this project, it was specified that a different priority is given to culture in both virtual project man-
agement and traditional project management. Yet, there is a great difference on understanding culture in
both virtual project management and traditional project management. In this regard, conflict has been
recognized as a component with the same priority in both virtual project management and traditional
project management. Yet, the next priority is given to the product planning matrix, product deployment
matrix, component deployment matrix and filtered project memory in virtual project management, yet
the least priority is given to these component in traditional project management.

61
 
Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

REFERENCES

Laurey & Raisinghani. (2001). An impirical study of best practices in virtual team. Information &
Management, 523–544.
Ann & Lee. (2005). Utilizing knowledge context in virtual collaborative works. DSS Journal, 35.
Anna et al. (2004). Building a project ontology with extreme collaboration and virtual design &construc-
tion. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 71-83.
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. (2002). A Typology of virtual teams:omplications for effective leadership.
Group & Organization Management, 27(1), 14–49. doi:10.1177/1059601102027001003
Bruce, J., & Arolio, G. (2002). E-Leadership:implications for theory, research and practices. Leadership
Quarterly, 11(4).
Bruce, J. et al. (2003). Adding the “E” to leadership: How it may impact your leadership. Organizational
Dynamics, 31(4).
Canie, L. et al. (2004). Would the real project management language please stand up? International
Journal of Project Management, 22-43.
Chaur, Paul, & Chillarege. (1996). Virtual project management for software. NSF Workshop on Workflow
&Process Automation.
Chon, F. (2003). A collaborative project management architecture. In Proceeding of the 36th Hawaii
International Conference on System Science.
Collines. (2002). Virtual & networked organizations. Express Exec.
Could, D. (2005). Virtual team. Retrieved from www.seanet.com/~daveg/vrteams.html
Crampton & Sheila. (2005). Relationships among geoghraphical dispersion,team processes and effec-
tiveness in software development work team. Journal of Business Research.
Cremers. A., Kahler. H., & Rittenbruch. M. (2005). Supporting cooperation in a virtual organization.
Proceeding pf ICIS (pp. 3-38).
Damm & Schindler. (2002). Security issue of a knowledge medium for distributed project work. Inter-
national Journal of Project Management, 37-48.
David, K. (2004). Examining effective technology project leadership traits &behavior. Computers in
Human Behavior.
Durate. (2001). Mastering virtual team: Strategies, tools, and techniques the succeed. Academic Press.
Evaristo, R., & Muntvold, E. (2002). Collaborative infrastructure formation in virtual projects. Journal
of Global Information Technology Management, 5(2), 29–47. doi:10.1080/1097198X.2002.10856324
Garden & Bent. (2004). Working together, apart the web as project infrastructure. Retrieved from www.
intranetjournal.com/feathures/idmo398.html

62

Providing a Model for Virtual Project Management with an Emphasis on IT Projects

Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual team:a review of current empirical re-
search. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 69–95. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002
Jacobs, J. (2005). Exploring defect causes in product developed by virtual team. Information and Soft-
ware Technology, 47–60.
Jones. (1997). Virtual culture: Identity &communication in cyber society. Sag Press.
Kissler & Gray. (2000). E-leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2).
Larsline. (2006). Virtual engineering teams: Strategy and implementation. Retrieved from www.
itcon,org/1007/3/paper.html
Lau & Sarker. (2004). On managing virtual teams. HCSM, 2nd quarter.
Levin, G., & Rad, P. (2007). Key people skills for virtual project managers. Retrieved from www.aapm.com
MacMahon. (2004). Virtual Project Management for software. McGraw-Hill.
Martins. (2004). Virtual team: What do we know and where do we go from here. Journal of Manage-
ment, 30-41.
McDonough & Kenneth. (2001). An investigation of the use global virtual and collocated new product
development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management.
Nandhakumar & Baskervil. (2001). Trusting online:nurturing trust in virtual teams. The 9th European
Conference on Information Systems. Slovenia.
Noll & Scachi. (1999). Supporting software development in virtual enterprise. Journal of Digital In-
formation, 1(4).
O’sallivan. (2003). Dispersed collaboration in a multi-firm, multi-team, product-development projects.
Journal Technology Management, 93-116.
Parkinson & Hudson. (2001). Extending the learning exprence using the web &a knowledge –based
virtual environment. Computer &Education, 95-101.
Reich. (2000). Knowledge traps in IT projects. CACM, 36, 63-77.
Sulonen & Alho. (2000). Supporting virtual software project on the web. Computer in Industry.
Tastoglou & Milious. (2005). Virtual culture: Work and play on the internet. Social Computer Review.
Thompson. (2006). Leading virtual team. Retrieved from www.qualitydiyst.com/septoo/teams.html
Ulrich. (2002). Managing virtual web organization in the, 20th century: Issues & challenges. Ipea Great
Press.
Zigaras, I. (2003). leadership in virtual team:oxymoron or opportunity. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4).

63