[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

RE: Virtual Teams

Subject: RE: Virtual Teams
From: Chris <cud -at- telecable -dot- es>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 10:03:08 +0100

As a person who works exclusively on virtual teams (telecommuting from another country), I have to differ with the following statement:

OTOH, the value of
virtual teams is not AS strong for small/medium companies. It is
still useful, but it isn't a cheap process if you don't want it to
get in the way of getting something done.

I almost always work for smaller companies, and I like to think I provide value. At any rate, I get paid for what I do, and I haven't heard anybody complain about that yet. I would say virtual teams are quite valuable for smaller companies because the company can include specialists via telecommute when a relocation package/ or 6-month hotel bill is out of the question.
I do second the suggestion to keep it low-budget. The issue is communication. I have worked for people who used Web-distributed presentations (slides in real time - Holy Moly!!), electronic white-boards (circles and arrows, oh my!), and the like. Without exception, the cost and hassle of getting these to work exceeded even my wildest expectations, while their utility was invariably lackluster. Again, I'm talking about small companies that lack resources such as private tele-broadcast studios, projectors, etc.
Simple email, phone calls and phone meetings, PDF, and attention to doing your homework before a meeting or deadline go a long way. And decent band-width is important. But then, I don't think many of my situations included anybody who used the term "Virtual Team". We spoke more in terms of just getting the job done. Any team-like relationships grew spontaneously, based on the way we all took advantage of each others' expertise. Not very warm and fuzzy, but it works. Or it has for the last 3 years.

Sorry if this isn't very helpful for your syllabus.

--
Chris Despopoulos, maker of CudSpan Freeware...
Plugins to Enhance FrameMaker & FrameMaker+SGML
http://www.telecable.es/personales/cud/
cud -at- telecable -dot- es



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Attention ForeHelp and Doc-to-Help Users! Upgrade your existing product to
RoboHelp for only $299, through January 31st. RoboHelp can import your
existing Help projects! Learn how else RoboHelp can benefit you. www.ehelp.com/techwr

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Previous by Author: Re: FrameMaker and MS Word
Next by Author: Re: A grammer question: "associated with" or "associated to"
Previous by Thread: RE: Virtual Teams
Next by Thread: Re: Virtual Teams

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads