Face to Face VS. Virtual Communication: The Ultimate Blood Wrenching Showdown
There have been several arguments on which type of communication is better, and many have just blurted out their points without hard facts, but this time, we have all the proof that your mind desires. Piotr Z., Ravi V., Karan W., Kiera Z., and Cory W. have done extensive research on these two topics to bring you the first "A+" standard project. Our researchers have examined the pros and the cons of both types of communications with no bias, and have listed all the points and facts one may want to know. We will first analyze face to face communication and virtual communication after that. We will also be giving our decision on which type of communication might be better and much more efficient. STAY TUNED!!!
Face to Face Communication:
There are many methods of communication in today's society. Many of us communicate via mobile phones, emails, video conferences, social net-working sites, internet, and old-fashion mail. One particular communication method which we engage in every day is Face-To-Face communication. F-T-F communication is a method which allows us to physically communicate with one another. It allows us to view the person we are communicating with and see their expressions. Many people believe F-T-F communication is being replaced my modern technology and is old-fashioned, but we must not underestimate the effectiveness of F-T-F communication. F-T-F communication will always be around and can perform functions that no other communication method can.
Pros of face-to-face communication
Coach K talks about how face to face communication differs from an online way to communicate. He talks about how eye contact, touch, and human emotion play a vital role in the success of his team.
Before I start analyzing any primary and secondary sources, I would like to present my point of view on pros and cons for face-to-face versus online communication. I feel that nowadays the world markets, workplaces and people are too diverse and complex, and therefore we cannot definitely state that one type of communication is better than the other. Every school, work, business or family situation should be analyzed separately and evaluated based on its specific circumstances. In my opinion, in most life situations face-to-face communication is much better than online communication because it is much more direct, personal and natural for us as human beings. In face-to-face communication we can express additional non-verbal clues and there is no space for any kind of confusion if we only know how to properly send a message. Besides, the world today is very obsessed with technology and Internet, therefore face-to-face communication is just disappearing. Because of that obsession we might get to the point where majority of people around the world will not be able to communicate with other human beings without technology intervention. In the long run Internet might change our socio-psychological world, which I think will not have a positive effect on our society.
On the other hand, I do realize that in many instances face-to-face communication is not always possible in the 21st century as large corporations are spread out all over the world. In many cases we have to communicate being in different places and time zones, which makes face-to-face communication almost impossible. Also, face-to-face communication is neither cost nor time efficient and in today’s world economy everybody tries to save as much as they possibly can.
Online or face-to-face ? Students' experiences and preferences in e-learning. - Manuela Paecher, Brigitte Maier
I’d like to start my with the article that tests whether students prefer face-to-face or online learning. The articles’ subject matter is closely related to our hybrid class; as for many of us it might be the first time we ever experience an online teaching. The article is closely related to communication in general, as learning is mostly about the communication between the student, his professor and classmates. In addition, our college learning is the first step into the real corporate world or for some people enterprise world, where we further decide on the form of communication we use, partially based on our college experience and partially based on our company preferences and culture. The article describes that over past decade online learning became more and more popular, yet nobody really analyzed when and why students would ever choose e-learning vs. physical college experience. The author analyzes which learning contributes more to student satisfaction. Our study found that when it comes to clarity and clearly organized structure as well as cost-benefit ratio to effort, online learning is an absolute winner. Students also established that fast feedback of the instructor and fast distribution of information are highly superior when it comes to online learning. There is clearly a direct connection between these results and our future work assignments. We have learned in class that whenever a company works on the long project, where a lot of feedback is necessary it is much better to use online communication, as constant face-to-face meeting might be very problematic. Furthermore when we consider a project, where everyone knows his role and his task, online communication would be perhaps a satisfactory option as it presents the framework more clearly. Students also agreed that online communication gives us more flexibility, which is necessary in today’s diverse world. With online communication we can do our project at our own free time being wherever we have to be at the time. On the other hand, the article found that in order to establish any positive relation with either our professor or our classmates, face-to-face communication is the only way to do it. This is a huge advantage, as networking became part of our business world. Social capital is perhaps as important as human capital. It today’s world it really makes a difference of who you know on the personal level, as these people can very easily help you in the future. Moreover, a lot of companies want to establish a personal level relationship with other companies that they work with, which could be achieved by meetings between executives. A personal lever relation is associated with more trust and partnership. Besides, we learn from the article that face-to-face communication is much better when “knowledge and skills in the subject matter, in scientific work routines, in the application of one’s knowledge, or in communication and cooperation are to be acquired”. As we apply the above to the business world it simply means that whenever people need to constantly cooperate with each other, while working on some project, face-to-face communication is much more efficient. Also, whenever people are working on something complicated when they have to combine they knowledge and perform explanatory tasks– face-to-face is the only way to go.
Conclusively, students prefer e-learning method when the material is easier and they can clearly understand the subject matter just by studying it, as online communication is more coherent. In most cases, however students prefer face-to-face learning as it can provide additional socio-emotional information. Author argues that face-to-face communication is preferable in situations when “ the interaction goes beyond the mere dissemination of information, such as when learners have to agree on a shared meaning and/or to come up with a joint solution, or when social relations with other course participants are established”. Many students also argues that direct communication with your professor servers to develop more knowledge, similarly as direct communication with your manager or boss seems to create better connection and provide you with the better explanation of a job. Also, the author underlines that direct connection with your professor tend to give students more learning motivation. I think seeing your boss on regular basis puts you under more pressure, therefore you become more productive and hardworking person.
Finally the author criticizes online learning arguing that it leads to surface learning and shallow processing strategies. On the contrary, “ when conceptual knowledge in the subject matter, skills in the application of one’s knowledge and skills in using scientific work routines are to be acquired, students favored face-to-face learning over online learning”.
In conclusion when we deal with basic information, we need constant feedback or the job requires flexibility on both sides, online communication is perhaps more efficient. In the situations when the team creativity is needed, we deal with complicated conceptual and methodical knowledge and we need a personal connection, face-to-face communication is highly favorable. Based on this article I feel that whenever work is distributed between lower lever employees, it is perfectly acceptable to use online means of communication. On the other hand when upper level management needs to deal with more serious, long-term decisions or come up with joint solutions, they should meet up physically in order to achieve better results.
"Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitalizing world ?" - Alan R. Wagner
Alan R. Wagner is an author of the second article: Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitizing world? Alan argues that in the future we might observe the situation where face-to-face communication will almost disappear and people will work and play where they please, as far as they have an access to the Internet and the computer. As of today however, the face-to-face communication still matters when we conduct much of our business, especially on the executive level. The author examines economic factors and their importance on face-to-face communication.
At the beginning of the article author explains how communication became more important as we approached the 20th century. Specialization is the major economic change that evolved with the industrial revolution. Simply as workers became specialized there had to be someone above them, that coordinates, distributes and monitors their work, making sure that the final outcome is cohesive and there are no mistakes. When we entered the 21st century communication became even more complex as the speed of communication increased drastically. Author argues that the future communication will incorporate rational thought and calculation combined with essential creativity. Because of the competitiveness of the world markets firms need to quickly adopt technologies that will help them to improve competitive position. While the above is taking place, we still observe that, “there seems to be no significant diminution in the importance of face-to-face communication in critical aspects of the operations of many businesses”. The above fact only indicates that there is something unique in the face-to-face communication that cannot be easily replaced by the technology. Wagner argues, that productivity is the reason of why face-to-face communication is still important and popular in today’s business world. Interpersonal communication has its unique characteristics like smell, touch, voice and other nonverbal messages that are considered useful, when it comes to communicating. Secondly, although nowadays technologies are really advanced, face-to-face communication is still much faster, as we have direct response from the other source. Along with richness and speed, we also deal with the unique aspect of human emotions, which affect our rationality and also speed up the process of achieving final results. Because emotions can influence the message but also because people’s messages can be very vague and tricky, it is necessary sometimes to meet up with someone face-to-face in order to make sure that the person is being completely honest. The power of face-to-face communication is presented all over the world in places like Silicon Valley or Washington, DC. The advantage of having your co-workers by your side provides less uncertainty and change. Another interesting aspect of described by Wagner is human psychology when it comes to communication. For centuries, humans try to understand of how we develop and grow by communicating with one another. Many people tried to discover whether human beings have a social side, which comes down to the issue about nature vs. nurture. Recent studies reveal that human genes can be changed by experience; therefore our growth depends partially on interaction with other human beings. Moreover, evolutionary psychologists discovered that our social bonding and a need for visual communication is necessary for the survival but it is also instinctive. Finally, the author underlines that the communication is much more effective when people have the same physical location. This could be the result of our past and thousands of years of face-to-face communication or just a need for a social life, which explains the popularity of coffee lounges, smoke rooms and offices without walls. Although, human beings clearly prefer face-to-face communication when it comes to a serious business, going into cyberspace in unavoidable, as economical factors are the priority. The change will not happen overnight, however eventually we will fully adapt to new technologies. In addition, technology will perhaps grow to the point where we would be able to transfer our physical experiences into cyberspace including touch, feel and sound. Wagner speculates that it could be something about face-to-face communication that hasn’t been discovered and cyberspace future might bring less productivity and lower level innovations. The author also underlines that dispersion will not happen very soon and we will still to some extend interact with each other. I believe there is something about human experience that cannot be replaced by any kind of technology. Besides, large cities are still growing, as we are just simply social animals.
Given the many advantages of Face-to-Face communication in the business environment there are several disadvantages one should consider when analyzing how effective F-T-F communication can be. Many theorists imply face-to-face discussion is the gold standard of communication (Nardi & Whittaker, 2002, p83). Nardi and Whittaker discuss many advantages of face-to-face communication but there are some disadvantages we must acknowledge when analyzing the effectiveness of F-T-F communication.
Interruptions: People need time alone to concentrate better. One can easily be interrupted in the office. For example sometimes I would have a meeting with my manager at his desk, the people in the surrounding cubicles would either have random conversations, meetings with other people, conference calls on the phone, etc. All of these interruptions make it hard for my manager and me to have an F-T-F meeting.There are also interruptions that take place during formal meetings. In my workplace I have been in meetings where people are on their laptops or are using their blackberry constantly during the meeting.
F-T-F commnication can put a constraint on time. F-T-F communication such as meetings can be very time consuming. I have been in many lengthy meetings where I felt like I could have used that time towards valued work. Meetings should be concise and to-the-point. Too many meetings can be non-value added work.
Many companies are moving into a Global Market, no longer do companies have just one office in one location, many companies have different offices all around the world. In a Global Market, F-T-F communication can be rather costly when people have to travel to a different location to conduct F-T-F meetings. In regards to F-T-F communication, it can not connect people all around the world such as virtual communication such as email, telephone, or video conference (Duke, 2001, p3).
Unlike Virtual meetings where there are many records, there are very few options in F-T-F communication to keep records. In a distributed workforce its is important to keep records. I had a situation in my company where my company was unable to charge a client because there was no record on file because the client relationship manager had a verbal agreement via F-T-F meeting, legally we needed a record of the agreement. If the client manager recorded the meeting or got confirmation in writing we would have been able to charge the client.
F-T-F communication does not allow people to communicate whenever they wants as compared to email. F-T-F requires the two parties to be available at the same time (Duke, 2001, p3). When I set up meetings with client relationship managers in my company, I can not just walk over to their desk and conduct a meeting. Formal F-T-F meetings require me to set up a meeting request on a calendar and to match a time in which me and the client relationship manager are free. This method of setting up a formal meeting can be time consuming and inconvenient if the person is not available at a certain time.
Another disadvantage which was interesting was the level of self-disclosure people have during online communication vs. F-T-F communication. Self-Disclosure in this case is the comfort level one has with other people.There was a study conducted amongst 58 undergraduate students attending a small liberal arts college in the Midwest.The 58 students were split up into two groups, online communication group and F-T-F communication group. Each student was paired to another student who they did not know on a personal level. Each pair was given five questions to discuss and these topics encouraged self-disclosure.The mean personal self-disclosure level was a 5.30 and F-T-F mean personal self-disclosure level was 4.88. The study showed that student's self-disclosure levels were higher online than F-T-F (Bruss & Hill, 2010). This study highlights F-T-F meetings between strangers could be less effective than online communication between strangers. In my experience I am more comfortable with having F-T-F meetings with people I know such as my managers or people on my team than people I have not met before.
Virtual Communication:
In today’s day and age, being efficient is the way to go. Not only is it important in the corporate or the job world, but also something to be adapted in our daily lives as well. Competent and goal-orientated individuals and teams that have the capability to complete tasks in the least amount of time with the utmost quality are the ones who excel and reach the top of the corporate “food chain” as we can call it. A virtual team comes closest to meeting the given criteria above. They are a group of individuals who work across time, space and organizational boundaries with links strengthened by webs of communication technology.
THE PRO SIDE OF VIRTUAL TEAMS
A Personal Story
My mother who works at GE manages a virtual team with members in several countries from Europe (Sweden, France, Germany etc.) and India. She was one of my main sources of information because she is part of a team that collaborates on a daily basis and makes use of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) to stay in contact and complete tasks. When I interviewed her, she said that virtual team’s success greatly relies on every members’ contribution to a project. An article on bnet.com adds, “members are geographically dispersed and are working in different time zones and environments” (http://www.bnet.com/article/leading-teams-across-continents/95585). She said that lot of the work she manages with her team tends to be completed before the given dead line as her team mates are dispersed over varied time zones where every member gets a chance to analyze and continue to work on a project without stopping. An informative blog by Craig Landes, an entrepreneur writes, “One group works a typical business day, then closes down and hands off the project to the next time zone. That group also works a natural business day before handing off to the next time zone, and so forth. The end result is a 24-hour virtual business day” (http://www.cheaprevolution.com/the_cheap_revolution/2008/07/the-advantages.html). When members from Europe go home from work, members in India come to work and vice versa. She also has been a part of a face to face team that operated in a meeting room with members working on the same floor. She said that these types of teams don’t tend to be as efficient and as creative when compared to the other.
Example
Darlene Lee who is involved in VIP marketing and strategic initiatives at Experian Research Services talks about how getting involved with a group of virtual assistants at Globetask helped them manage their costs and reach their goals.
A Reading Reference
As we all know by now, virtual team members are usually dispersed around the world, and have to collaborate to finish a certain task. Leadbeater's article, "You are What You Share" was read by us in the first week of class, and this reading stuck with me because people who don't even know each other on a personal level work together to solve a problem. Members of a virtual team usually never familiarize themselves on a face to face level with their group members, but still somehow are driven towards working together. Leadbeater gave an example of a group of people who didn't even know each other working together to solve a puzzle for an upcoming video game called "Halo 2" a few years ago on a website called www.ilovebees.com. The website mysteriously shown after the Halo 2 TV spots gained much needed attention. Even though, this site was mainly to keep the video game fans busy until the game released, it symbolized something much more than that. The website consisted of puzzles which needed people from all around the country to solve it because the pieces of that puzzle were spread out at different coordinates. One may take this lightly and just a mere diversion, but millions of fans joined together and successfully solved the puzzle. In a strange way, virtual team members are like online multiplayer video gamers who despite their cultural and physical differences work together to reach an objective in an allotted time. I personally play multiplayer games, and i have my own team online where we communicate together to finish certain goals and get rewarded for it, and i find that we are very much close knit together even if i haven't even seen most of my online friends that i play with physically.
Pros
1) Virtual Teams, which are dispersed all over the world have a varied cultures which most of the time account for a variety of constructive ideas. An article on an MIT news research article writes, “In addition, virtual team members are often diverse in nationality. Although such diversity may complicate team dynamics, it can also enhance the overall problem-solving capacity of the group by bringing more vantage points to bear on a particular project.” (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2009/summer/50412/how-to-manage-virtual-teams/). Members from these types of teams have diversity of knowledge because they have different experiences from which they can come up with creative ways to take the company excel in a positive direction.
2) Virtual teams are less expensive as outsourcing a lot of their employees proves to be cheaper and allows for more efficiency and productivity. Duarte & Snyder in their book write, “The team members had continually moved from site to site for activities such as status reviews, design meetings, and prototyping sessions. The cost of the travel was tremendous, not only for hotels and airline tickets, but also in terms of the human costs of being away from home and lost work time and productivity” (“Mastering Virtual Teams” by Duarte and Snyder. Chapter 1, pg.3). Why not place employees in countries where there is no need of traveling and getting work done from them is easier and cheaper. Countries like India for example have capable and hard working professionals that are work for a lesser salary.
3) As a result of the physical separation of members, it has been found that virtual teams tend to work harder and more diligently than other teams. A news article from the MIT news research article writes, “Specifically, virtual teams that had processes that increased the levels of mutual support, member effort, work coordination, balance of member contributions and task-related communications consistently outperformed other teams with lower levels” ((http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2009/summer/50412/how-to-manage-virtual-teams/). Virtual teams tend to collaborate more than other teams because they understand the issues related with a whole group located in different parts of the world, and try to combat that by working harder and responding to e-mails as soon as possible.
4) Dispersion of employees creates a positive name for the corporation because many notice people being employed from diverse countries. In a way, other companies and job hunters are likely to choose that particular corporation before preferring some other company which employees people in the national area, rather than international.
5) Members of these types of teams get an exposure to a wide variety of technological means of communication. Duarte and Snyder write, "The role of technology in virtual teamwork is one of overcoming the complexities of time and distance in communication and collaboration" ("Mastering Virtual Teams" by Duarte and Snyder. Chapter 2, pg.24). It helps them familiarize themselves with a lot of technologies giving them a upper hand on employees who probably are a part of a face to face team.
6) Many corporations who operate globally by trading and exporting with other countries benefit from employees located there. The research article from MIT writes, “Managers at Nestlé S.A., for instance, are expected to move to another country every three or four years so that they can learn about the specifics of each of those markets and develop a global mind-set from their experiences” (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2009/summer/50412/how-to-manage-virtual-teams/). Nestle, GE and IBM are just examples of some corporations who do that. In this way, a global alliance is formed with other international companies who turn to you for business.
If in the right hands of a potentially aspiring leader, a virtual team has the tendency to beat any counterpart and finish tasks and give a good name to its employers.
Cons
(Google Images)
Communication, used in virtual teams, places constraints on the communication process. You don’t have all the cues that face to face groups have, these cues include paraverbal or the tone of voice. There are also nonverbal cues which include facial expressions and gestures as well as body language. These cues regulate the flow of conversation, feedback, and bring subtle meanings to the table(Warkentin). “The crucial requirements for community and richer interpersonal communication are very often badly supported by online tools: we cannot hear voices or tones of voice to convey emotion”(Redfern). Body language in communicating is an important aspect to cover when discussing virtual communication. Although virtual communication can be fast and easily accessible, it can’t take the place of face-to-face communication. Virtual communicating has no real-life feeling to it. Tones of voices become irrelevant and emotions become emoticons.
Virtual teams have a hard time duplicating the normal give and take process of a face to face meeting. The technology used can cause great problems with virtual teams. For example delays in posts on a discussion board could have people taking in a lot of information and posting on the same topic making it less effective(Warkentin). Collaborating through different ICTs has been convenient for many, but has also failed many as well. Relying on virtual communication can’t be 100%. There can always be a problem with technology, but a meeting face-to-face is almost guaranteed to be successful.
Research shows that virtual interaction usually adds time to a project getting done. Some reasons include that typing and computer mediated communication takes longer than just meeting face to face. That a lot of the time virtual team members are working on other things at the same time and thus their attention might be distracted off the team’s task.
Furthermore, its takes a computer, cellphone, webcam, and internet to virtually communicate, but face-to-face communication involves practice, skill, and perseverance. Virtual communication can eventually diminish our social skills, and it will become harder for people to use face-to-face communication successfully.
Conclusion-Our Stance
We carefully analyzed both topics, and came up with a collaborative decision on which we think is the right one. Both, virtual teams, and face to face teams, had their fair share of advantages and disadvantages.It would normally be hard for one to take a side, but we added the digital age factor in the mix. The technological world is changing, and especially in the corporate world in this scenario. Every month, there is a new invention to make life easier for us, and virtual communication is a new addition to the corporate world. It may seem that virtual teams have been around for ages, but not as long as face to face teams. Virtual means of communication is still small fish in the big sea, and it needs to evolve and grow for it to be perfect.Technology has made communicating easier, but the human touch is what sets face-to-face and virtual teams apart. Face-to-face communication has its fair share of flaws, but it is a proven method that has been around for ages which works and gets the job done. A team works on trust and they are less likely to trust and rely on each other when the members are dispersed in different countries.Face to Face on the other hand promotes a sense of compatibility with the group as you have physically seen them and know a little bit about them. Right now, we choose Face-to-Face communication as a more efficient and a successful way of communicating because it has been a part of our lives for years, and virtual communication has not really seen its full potential yet. Maybe a few years later virtual communication will be much more favored, and face to face communication might be dismissed of any use.
Hinds, P., & Kiesler, S. (2002). Distributed work. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Duke, Shearlean. 2001. E-Mail: Essential in Media Relations, But No Replacement for Face-To-Face Communication, Public Relations Quarterly, Winter 2001.
Bruss, O, & Hill, J. (2010). Tell me more: online versus face-to-face communication and self-disclosure. Psi CHI JOURNAL OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH, 15, 1-6.
Alan R. Wagner. Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in digitalizing world?. Business Horizons (2005) 48
Manuela Paecher, Brigitte Maier. Online or face-to-face? Students' experiences and preferences in e-lerning. Internet and Higher Education, 13 (2010)
Redfern, Sam. Collaborative Virtual Environments to Support Communication..National University of Ireland. 2002.
Warkentin, L SayeedVirtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-based Conference System*[PDF] from stevens-tech.edu- Decision Sciences, 1997 - interscience.wiley.com
Face to Face VS. Virtual Communication: The Ultimate Blood Wrenching Showdown
There have been several arguments on which type of communication is better, and many have just blurted out their points without hard facts, but this time, we have all the proof that your mind desires. Piotr Z., Ravi V., Karan W., Kiera Z., and Cory W. have done extensive research on these two topics to bring you the first "A+" standard project. Our researchers have examined the pros and the cons of both types of communications with no bias, and have listed all the points and facts one may want to know. We will first analyze face to face communication and virtual communication after that. We will also be giving our decision on which type of communication might be better and much more efficient. STAY TUNED!!!
Face to Face Communication:
There are many methods of communication in today's society. Many of us communicate via mobile phones, emails, video conferences, social net-working sites, internet, and old-fashion mail. One particular communication method which we engage in every day is Face-To-Face communication. F-T-F communication is a method which allows us to physically communicate with one another. It allows us to view the person we are communicating with and see their expressions. Many people believe F-T-F communication is being replaced my modern technology and is old-fashioned, but we must not underestimate the effectiveness of F-T-F communication. F-T-F communication will always be around and can perform functions that no other communication method can.
Pros of face-to-face communication
Coach K talks about how face to face communication differs from an online way to communicate. He talks about how eye contact, touch, and human emotion play a vital role in the success of his team.
Before I start analyzing any primary and secondary sources, I would like to present my point of view on pros and cons for face-to-face versus online communication. I feel that nowadays the world markets, workplaces and people are too diverse and complex, and therefore we cannot definitely state that one type of communication is better than the other. Every school, work, business or family situation should be analyzed separately and evaluated based on its specific circumstances. In my opinion, in most life situations face-to-face communication is much better than online communication because it is much more direct, personal and natural for us as human beings. In face-to-face communication we can express additional non-verbal clues and there is no space for any kind of confusion if we only know how to properly send a message. Besides, the world today is very obsessed with technology and Internet, therefore face-to-face communication is just disappearing. Because of that obsession we might get to the point where majority of people around the world will not be able to communicate with other human beings without technology intervention. In the long run Internet might change our socio-psychological world, which I think will not have a positive effect on our society.
On the other hand, I do realize that in many instances face-to-face communication is not always possible in the 21st century as large corporations are spread out all over the world. In many cases we have to communicate being in different places and time zones, which makes face-to-face communication almost impossible. Also, face-to-face communication is neither cost nor time efficient and in today’s world economy everybody tries to save as much as they possibly can.
Online or face-to-face ? Students' experiences and preferences in e-learning. - Manuela Paecher, Brigitte Maier
I’d like to start my
Our study found that when it comes to clarity and clearly organized structure as well as cost-benefit ratio to effort, online learning is an absolute winner. Students also established that fast feedback of the instructor and fast distribution of information are highly superior when it comes to online learning. There is clearly a direct connection between these results and our future work assignments. We have learned in class that whenever a company works on the long project, where a lot of feedback is necessary it is much better to use online communication, as constant face-to-face meeting might be very problematic. Furthermore when we consider a project, where everyone knows his role and his task, online communication would be perhaps a satisfactory option as it presents the framework more clearly. Students also agreed that online communication gives us more flexibility, which is necessary in today’s diverse world. With online communication we can do our project at our own free time being wherever we have to be at the time.
On the other hand, the article found that in order to establish any positive relation with either our professor or our classmates, face-to-face communication is the only way to do it. This is a huge advantage, as networking became part of our business world. Social capital is perhaps as important as human capital. It today’s world it really makes a difference of who you know on the personal level, as these people can very easily help you in the future. Moreover, a lot of companies want to establish a personal level relationship with other companies that they work with, which could be achieved by meetings between executives. A personal lever relation is associated with more trust and partnership. Besides, we learn from the article that face-to-face communication is much better when “knowledge and skills in the subject matter, in scientific work routines, in the application of one’s knowledge, or in communication and cooperation are to be acquired”. As we apply the above to the business world it simply means that whenever people need to constantly cooperate with each other, while working on some project, face-to-face communication is much more efficient. Also, whenever people are working on something complicated when they have to combine they knowledge and perform explanatory tasks– face-to-face is the only way to go.
Conclusively, students prefer e-learning method when the material is easier and they can clearly understand the subject matter just by studying it, as online communication is more coherent. In most cases, however students prefer face-to-face learning as it can provide additional socio-emotional information. Author argues that face-to-face communication is preferable in situations when “ the interaction goes beyond the mere dissemination of information, such as when learners have to agree on a shared meaning and/or to come up with a joint solution, or when social relations with other course participants are established”. Many students also argues that direct communication with your professor servers to develop more knowledge, similarly as direct communication with your manager or boss seems to create better connection and provide you with the better explanation of a job. Also, the author underlines that direct connection with your professor tend to give students more learning motivation. I think seeing your boss on regular basis puts you under more pressure, therefore you become more productive and hardworking person.
In conclusion when we deal with basic information, we need constant feedback or the job requires flexibility on both sides, online communication is perhaps more efficient. In the situations when the team creativity is needed, we deal with complicated conceptual and methodical knowledge and we need a personal connection, face-to-face communication is highly favorable. Based on this article I feel that whenever work is distributed between lower lever employees, it is perfectly acceptable to use online means of communication. On the other hand when upper level management needs to deal with more serious, long-term decisions or come up with joint solutions, they should meet up physically in order to achieve better results.
"Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitalizing world ?" - Alan R. Wagner
Alan R. Wagner is an author of the second article: Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitizing world? Alan argues that in the future we might observe the situation where face-to-face communication will almost disappear and people will work and play where they please, as far as they have an access to the Internet and the computer. As of today however, the face-to-face communication still matters when we conduct much of our business, especially on the executive level. The author examines economic factors and their importance on face-to-face communication.Author argues that the future communication will incorporate rational thought and calculation combined with essential creativity. Because of the competitiveness of the world markets firms need to quickly adopt technologies that will help them to improve competitive position. While the above is taking place, we still observe that, “there seems to be no significant diminution in the importance of face-to-face communication in critical aspects of the operations of many businesses”. The above fact only indicates that there is something unique in the face-to-face communication that cannot be easily replaced by the technology.
Wagner argues, that productivity is the reason of why face-to-face communication is still important and popular in today’s business world. Interpersonal communication has its unique characteristics like smell, touch, voice and other nonverbal messages that are considered useful, when it comes to communicating. Secondly, although nowadays technologies are really advanced, face-to-face communication is still much faster, as we have direct response from the other source. Along with richness and speed, we also deal with the unique aspect of human emotions, which affect our rationality and also speed up the process of achieving final results. Because emotions can influence the message but also because people’s messages can be very vague and tricky, it is necessary sometimes to meet up with someone face-to-face in order to make sure that the person is being completely honest.
The power of face-to-face communication is presented all over the world in places like Silicon Valley or Washington, DC. The advantage of having your co-workers by your side provides less uncertainty and change.
Another interesting aspect of described by Wagner is human psychology when it comes to communication. For centuries, humans try to understand of how we develop and grow by communicating with one another. Many people tried to discover whether human beings have a social side, which comes down to the issue about nature vs. nurture. Recent studies reveal that human genes can be changed by experience; therefore our growth depends partially on interaction with other human beings. Moreover, evolutionary psychologists discovered that our social bonding and a need for visual communication is necessary for the survival but it is also instinctive.
Finally, the author underlines that the communication is much more effective when people have the same physical location. This could be the result of our past and thousands of years of face-to-face communication or just a need for a social life, which explains the popularity of coffee lounges, smoke rooms and offices without walls.
Although, human beings clearly prefer face-to-face communication when it comes to a serious business, going into cyberspace in unavoidable, as economical factors are the priority. The change will not happen overnight, however eventually we will fully adapt to new technologies. In addition, technology will perhaps grow to the point where we would be able to transfer our physical experiences into cyberspace including touch, feel and sound. Wagner speculates that it could be something about face-to-face communication that hasn’t been discovered and cyberspace future might bring less productivity and lower level innovations. The author also underlines that dispersion will not happen very soon and we will still to some extend interact with each other. I believe there is something about human experience that cannot be replaced by any kind of technology. Besides, large cities are still growing, as we are just simply social animals.
Here are some useful links if you'd like to know more about F-T-F:
Useful advices for face-to-face networking !
Why face-to-face are here to stay !
Cons of face-to-face communication
Given the many advantages of Face-to-Face communication in the business environment there are several disadvantages one should consider when analyzing how effective F-T-F communication can be. Many theorists imply face-to-face discussion is the gold standard of communication (Nardi & Whittaker, 2002, p83). Nardi and Whittaker discuss many advantages of face-to-face communication but there are some disadvantages we must acknowledge when analyzing the effectiveness of F-T-F communication.
Many companies are moving into a Global Market, no longer do companies have just one office in one location, many companies have different offices all around the world. In a Global Market, F-T-F communication can be rather costly when people have to travel to a different location to conduct F-T-F meetings. In regards to F-T-F communication, it can not connect people all around the world such as virtual communication such as email, telephone, or video conference (Duke, 2001, p3).
Unlike Virtual meetings where there are many records, there are very few options in F-T-F communication to keep records. In a distributed workforce its is important to keep records. I had a situation in my company where my company was unable to charge a client because there was no record on file because the client relationship manager had a verbal agreement via F-T-F meeting, legally we needed a record of the agreement. If the client manager recorded the meeting or got confirmation in writing we would have been able to charge the client.
Virtual Communication:
In today’s day and age, being efficient is the way to go. Not only is it important in the corporate or the job world, but also something to be adapted in our daily lives as well. Competent and goal-orientated individuals and teams that have the capability to complete tasks in the least amount of time with the utmost quality are the ones who excel and reach the top of the corporate “food chain” as we can call it. A virtual team comes closest to meeting the given criteria above. They are a group of individuals who work across time, space and organizational boundaries with links strengthened by webs of communication technology.
THE PRO SIDE OF VIRTUAL TEAMS
A Personal Story
Example
Darlene Lee who is involved in VIP marketing and strategic initiatives at Experian Research Services talks about how getting involved with a group of virtual assistants at Globetask helped them manage their costs and reach their goals.
A Reading Reference
Leadbeater gave an example of a group of people who didn't even know each other working together to solve a puzzle for an upcoming video game called "Halo 2" a few years ago on a website called www.ilovebees.com. The website mysteriously shown after the Halo 2 TV spots gained much needed attention. Even though, this site was mainly to keep the video game fans busy until the game released, it symbolized something much more than that. The website consisted of puzzles which needed people from all around the country to solve it because the pieces of that puzzle were spread out at different coordinates. One may take this lightly and just a mere diversion, but millions of fans joined together and successfully solved the puzzle. In a strange way, virtual team members are like online multiplayer video gamers who despite their cultural and physical differences work together to reach an objective in an allotted time. I personally play multiplayer games, and i have my own team online where we communicate together to finish certain goals and get rewarded for it, and i find that we are very much close knit together even if i haven't even seen most of my online friends that i play with physically.
Pros
2) Virtual teams are less expensive as outsourcing a lot of their employees proves to be cheaper and allows for more efficiency and productivity. Duarte & Snyder in their book write, “The team members had continually moved from site to site for activities such as status reviews, design meetings, and prototyping sessions. The cost of the travel was tremendous, not only for hotels and airline tickets, but also in terms of the human costs of being away from home and lost work time and productivity” (“Mastering Virtual Teams” by Duarte and Snyder. Chapter 1, pg.3). Why not place employees in countries where there is no need of traveling and getting work done from them is easier and cheaper. Countries like India for example have capable and hard working professionals that are work for a lesser salary.
3) As a result of the physical separation of members, it has been found that virtual teams tend to work harder and more diligently than other teams. A news article from the MIT news research article writes, “Specifically, virtual teams that had processes that increased the levels of mutual support, member effort, work coordination, balance of member contributions and task-related communications consistently outperfo
4) Dispersion of employees creates a positive name for the corporation because many notice people being employed from diverse countries. In a way, other companies and job hunters are likely to choose that particular corporation before preferring some other company which employees people in the national area, rather than international.
5) Members of these types of teams get an exposure to a wide variety of technological means of communication. Duarte and Snyder write, "The role of technology in virtual teamwork is one of overcoming the complexities of time and distance in communication and collaboration" ("Mastering Virtual Teams" by Duarte and Snyder. Chapter 2, pg.24). It helps them familiarize themselves with a lot of technologies giving them a upper hand on employees who probably are a part of a face to face team.
6) Many corporations who operate globally by trading and exporting with other countries benefit from employees located there. The research article from MIT writes, “Managers at Nestlé S.A., for instance, are expected to move to another country every three or four years so that they can learn about the specifics of each of those markets and develop a global mind-set from their experiences” (http://sloanreview.mit.edu/the-magazine/articles/2009/summer/50412/how-to-manage-virtual-teams/). Nestle, GE and IBM are just examples of some corporations who do that. In this way, a global alliance is formed with other international companies who turn to you for business.
If in the right hands of a potentially aspiring leader, a virtual team has the tendency to beat any counterpart and finish tasks and give a good name to its employers.
Cons
Communication, used in virtual teams, places constraints on the communication process. You don’t have all the cues that face to face groups have, these cues include paraverbal or the tone of voice. There are also nonverbal cues which include facial expressions and gestures as well as body language. These cues regulate the flow of conversation, feedback, and bring subtle meanings to the table(Warkentin). “The crucial requirements for community and richer interpersonal communication are very often badly supported by online tools: we cannot hear voices or tones of voice to convey emotion”(Redfern). Body language in communicating is an important aspect to cover when discussing virtual communication. Although virtual communication can be fast and easily accessible, it can’t take the place of face-to-face communication. Virtual communicating has no real-life feeling to it. Tones of voices become irrelevant and emotions become emoticons.
Virtual teams have a hard time duplicating the normal give and take process of a face to face meeting. The technology used can cause great problems with virtual teams. For example delays in posts on a discussion board could have people taking in a lot of information and posting on the same topic making it less effective(Warkentin). Collaborating through different ICTs has been convenient for many, but has also failed many as well. Relying on virtual communication can’t be 100%. There can always be a problem with technology, but a meeting face-to-face is almost guaranteed to be successful.
Research shows that virtual interaction usually adds time to a project getting done. Some reasons include that typing and computer mediated communication takes longer than just meeting face to face. That a lot of the time virtual team members are working on other things at the same time and thus their attention might be distracted off the team’s task.
Furthermore, its takes a computer, cellphone, webcam, and internet to virtually communicate, but face-to-face communication involves practice, skill, and perseverance. Virtual communication can eventually diminish our social skills, and it will become harder for people to use face-to-face communication successfully.
Conclusion-Our Stance
Bibliography