由於全球化正在興起，世界各地的人才需求已不同以往，不再一昧的嚮往前進大都市尋找工作，虛擬團隊便因而成立。虛擬團隊的出現創造了不同以往的價值，團隊的負責人不僅要確保團隊能夠如期達到預定的目標，更需要謹慎的思考如何完善的分配份內的工作內容，讓整個團隊依舊合作，也因此科技的發展變成了關鍵的助力。科技發展與進步增進了虛擬團隊的合作模式，適用的程式也須考量使用上的變異性。所以當團隊的負責人在選擇所需的協作軟體時, 顧慮的層面往往大不相同, 也會依據長遠的計畫列為選擇的重點,決定團隊如何進行日常工作的運作和協作以及確定團隊如何實現其長期目標至關重要。
本次研究的主要目的是探討虛擬團體如何利用不同資訊科技來完成各類型的團隊任務。過往的研究主要探討如何選擇通信技術來支持虛擬團隊，但隨著時代的改變更具效益的程式軟體也因而延伸發展，這無疑增加了團隊的工作效益。對於先前團隊合作的目的只是在於資源分享與傳遞訊息，虛擬團隊團隊合作過程中，人力资源管理與項目管理兩大合作工作系統也應該進一步地進行研究探討延伸，因這也是相當重要的部分，這也與Joseph E. McGrath所提論全面性的小組任務類型決策相呼應。
在這次的研究當中，針對了三組類型不同的虛擬團體進行深度訪談，了解軟體是否在促進團隊活動中有所效益。訪談結果證明，專案管理系統、知識管理系統與合作工作系統的相互補助是虛擬團體持續運作中不可或缺的因素，這尤其反映在計劃, 決策, 認知衝突時或執行和績效相關的活動中呈現。

The days of big business being conducted in a centralized location are over, globalization is on the rise, and today’s top talents are thinking twice before relocating to large cities in search of work. Virtual teams are here to stay, and team leaders must give careful consideration on how their distributed teams will collaborate to meet the team’s goals. Technology plays a key role in allowing virtual teams to collaborate, and the software utilized by a virtual team must facilitate the team's. A team leader’s choice in selecting software is critical in deciding how the team will collaborate daily, as well as defining how the team will work towards their long-term goals.
The objective of this study is to explore how different Information Technology (IT) systems are utilized by virtual teams to complete different types of group tasks. Previous studies have explored how team leaders go about selecting communication technologies to support virtual teams, but in the time since these studies took place, new technologies have emerged and become key facilitators in virtual team collaboration. In addition to cooperative work systems, this study looks to expand on those studies by discussing the role of project and resource management and knowledge management systems in virtual team collaboration. This study explores the roles that these three IT systems play in completing group tasks, as laid out in Joseph E. McGrath’s comprehensive group task typology.
For this study, in-depth interviews were conducted with members of three different virtual teams to understand the role that software plays in facilitating their team’s activities. The findings indicate that project management and knowledge management systems, along with cooperative work systems, do play a key role in virtual team activities. This is especially true within planning, intellective, decision-making, cognitive conflict, and performance related tasks.

Table of Contents
論文審定書 i
摘要 ii
Abstract iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Figures v
List of Tables v
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
1.1 Research Background & Motivation 1
1.2 Research Significance 2
Chapter 2: Literature Review 3
2.1 Virtual Teams 3
2.2 Task Typology: McGrath’s Typology of Group Tasks 5
2.3 Information Technology Systems 8
2.3.1 Project (and Resource) Management Systems 9
2.3.2 Knowledge Management Systems 10
2.3.3 Cooperative Work Systems 11
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 13
3.1 Research Approach 13
3.2 Participants 13
3.2.1 Team A 15
3.2.2 Team B 16
3.2.3 Team C 17
3.3 Procedure for Data Collection 18
3.4 Procedure for Data Analysis 19
3.4.1 Validation Strategies 21
Chapter 4: Data Analysis 23
4.1 Team A Analysis 23
4.2 Team B Analysis 31
4.3 Team C Analysis 37
4.4 Discussion 44
Chapter 5: Conclusions 51
5.1 Research Findings 51
5.2 Academic Implications 52
5.3 Practical Implications 52
5.4 Limitations & Future Research 55
References 56
Appendix A 62
Appendix B 144

Aiken, M., Gu, L., & Wang, J. (2013). Task Knowledge and Task-Technology Fit in a Virtual Team. International Journal of Management,30(1), 3-11.
Badrinarayanan, V., & Arnett, D. B. (2008). Effective virtual new product development teams: An integrated framework. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,23(4), 242-248.
Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. S. (2002). Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,87(1), 156-179.
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2002). A Typology of Virtual Teams. Group & Organization Management,27(1), 14-49.
Bos, N., Olson, J., Gergle, D., Olson, G., & Wright, Z. (2002). Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Changing Our World, Changing Ourselves - CHI 02.
Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2007). Group Decision Making Under Conditions of Distributed Knowledge: The Information Asymmetries Model. Academy of Management Review,32(2), 459-479.
Clear, T., & Macdonell, S. G. (2011). Understanding technology use in global virtual teams: Research methodologies and methods. Information and Software Technology,53(9), 994-1011.
Colbert, A., Yee, N., & George, G. (2016). The Digital Workforce and the Workplace of the Future. Academy of Management Journal,59(3), 731-739.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ebrahim, N. A., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2009). Virtual Teams: A Literature Review. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences,3(3), 2653-2669.
Forsyth, D. R. (2010). Group Dynamics (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Germain, M., & Mcguire, D. (2014). The Role of Swift Trust in Virtual Teams and Implications for Human Resource Development. Advances in Developing Human Resources,16(3), 356-370.
Gibson, C., & Cohen, S. G. (2003). Creating conditions for effective virtual teams. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.
Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Young, N. C., Vartiainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2014). Virtual Teams Research: 10 Years, 10 Themes, and 10 Opportunities. Journal of Management,41(5), 1313-1337.
Griffith, T. L., Sawyer, J. E., & Neale, M. A. (2003). Virtualness and Knowledge in Teams: Managing the Love Triangle of Organizations, Individuals, and Information Technology. MIS Quarterly,27(2), 265.
Großer, B., & Baumöl, U. (2017). Why virtual teams work – State of the art. Procedia Computer Science,121, 297-305.
Hackman, J., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group Tasks, Group Interaction Process, and Group Performance Effectiveness: A Review and Proposed Integration. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 8,45-99.
Hein, S. F., & Austin, W. J. (2001). Empirical and hermeneutic approaches to phenomenological research in psychology: A comparison. Psychological Methods,6(1), 3-17.
Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review,15(1), 69-95.
Huber G. (2015) Transfer of Knowledge in Knowledge Management Systems: Unexplored Issues and Suggested Studies. In: Edwards J.S. (eds) The Essentials of Knowledge Management. OR Essentials Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London
Jensen, C., Farnham, S. D., Drucker, S. M., & Kollock, P. (2000). The effect of communication modality on cooperation in online environments. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI 00.
Johnson, M. H. (2017). Trello. Journal of the Medical Library Association,105(2).
Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2007). The Impact of Knowledge Coordination on Virtual Team Performance over Time. MIS Quarterly,31(4), 783.
Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). The Dimensions and Antecedents of Team Virtuality. Journal of Management,31(5), 700-718.
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Gibson, C. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Mcpherson, S. O. (2002). Five challenges to virtual team success: Lessons from Sabre, Inc. Academy of Management Perspectives,16(3), 67-79.
Laughlin, P. R. (1996). Group decision making and collective induction. In E. H. Witte & J. H. Davis (Eds.), Understanding group behavior: Consensual action by small groups (Vol. 1, pp. 61– 80). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,22(3), 177-189.
Lin, B., Zagalsky, A. E., Storey, M., & Serebrenik, A. (2016). Why Developers Are Slacking Off: Understanding How Software Teams Use Slack. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing Companion - CSCW 16 Companion.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publ.
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (1997). Virtual teams: Reaching across space, time, and organizations with technology. New York, NY: Wiley.
Londer, O., & Coventry, P. (2016). Microsoft SharePoint 2016 step by step. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Dechurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,94(2), 535-546.
Moore, D. A., Kurtzberg, T. R., Thompson, L. L., & Morris, M. W. (1999). Long and Short Routes to Success in Electronically Mediated Negotiations: Group Affiliations and Good Vibrations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,77(1), 22-43.
Morley, S., Cormican, K., & Folan, P. (2015). An Analysis of Virtual Team Characteristics: A Model for Virtual Project Managers. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation,10(1), 188-203.
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Pandey, S., & Patnaik, S. (2014). Establishing Reliability and Validity In Qualitative Inquiry: A Critical Examination. Jharkhand Journal of Development and Management Studies,12, 5743-5753.
Pavlou, P. A., & Sawy, O. A. (2006). From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development. Information Systems Research,17(3), 198-227.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R.S. Valle & S. Hailing, Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology (pp. 41-60). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Prasad, K., & Akhilesh, K. (2002). Global virtual teams: What impacts their design and performance? Team Performance Management: An International Journal,8(5/6), 102-112.
Robinson, J., Dusenberry, L., & Lawrence, H. M. (2016). Collaborative strategies for distributed teams: Innovation through interlaced collaborative writing. 2016 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC).
SharePoint Your mobile, intelligent intranet. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2018, from https://products.office.com/en-us/sharepoint/collaboration
Shen, Z., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2015). Time and information technology in teams: A review of empirical research and future research directions. European Journal of Information Systems,24(5), 492-518.
Sivunen, A., & Valo, M. (2006). Team Leaders Technology Choice in Virtual Teams. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication,49(1), 57-68.
Slack. (n.d.). Slack - Features. Retrieved May 5, 2018, from https://slack.com/features
Straus, S. G. (1999). Testing a Typology of Tasks. Small Group Research,30(2), 166-187.
Straus, S. G., & McGrath, J. E. (1994). Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology,79(1), 87-97.
Trello: Simple on the surface, with more under the hood. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2018, from https://trello.com/tour
Warkentin, M., Sayeed, L., & Hightower, R. (1997). Virtual Teams versus Face-to-Face Teams: An Exploratory Study of a Web-Based Conference System. Decision Sciences,28(4), 975-996.
Wittenbaum, G. M., & Max, E. J. (2018). Group Process. In Getting grounded in social psychology: The essential literature for beginning researchers. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Zigurs, I., & Buckland, B. K. (1998). A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness. MIS Quarterly,22(3), 313-334.