Team engagement

The projects of the case organization are realized in teams that work mainly virtually. When analyzing the data, certain issues related to team engagement emerged. These were shared values and trust among team members, and management and leadership practices in teams.

A successful team is often said to consist of different people having multiple points of view and different backgrounds, sharing common goals and trusting each other.

Especially in virtual teams, strong leadership is needed, too. In a team, engagement level is often high when there is a shared goal that connects people

at emotional level and raises their personal aspirations (Holbeche & Springett 2003).

“In general, the success factor of a problem-solving project is the multidisciplinarity or the interdisciplinarity (of the team). Because the most difficult problems are the most complex as well.”

“When people with different educational backgrounds work together, it is important to have a common goal. I haven´t met anyone who is not used to working in multidisciplinary teams. I think there are not that kind of people anymore.”

5.3.1 Shared values

“I believe everyone is interested in improving environment in some way.”

Today, many people want to work according to their personal values and interests, and with tasks they find important. Value-based working is said to be especially important for the younger generation, the millennials, born after 1980. However, I find it to be increasingly important for older generations, too.

The data showed that all experts shared the same green values. Sustainable problem-solving, new clean technology solutions and their conseptualisation, were mentioned in most of the interviews as the main purpose and the most important aspect of work.

“The problems are similar all over the country and these (solutions) could be copied. You could even make a product out of it. You should have... a holistic concept using green values.”

“This is just what the world needs, responsibility of the new layers, not of reporting.”

In addition to environmental values, also social responsibility was emphasized. At local level environmental solutions made in the projects and the effects the projects had on local employment were found especially important.

“Our commitment level is high, and we have had expert projects around the same subject. We are interested to see whether they (projects) would bring something concrete to our region”.

At global level, there were high and ambitious goals such as saving the world by solving global environmental problems and conceptualizing those solutions. At some cases personal strive for common good even seemed to exceed competition and personal profit.

“I do not see any reason to not to share ideas if I may foster some things… Isn´t it the idea here that this is a many-sided benefit... it may not be one´s own benefit but the benefit of the business of the region, and that is of course valuable, too. “

“I am not afraid of someone stealing them (ideas). If they are good, I hope they are copied in order to make the world a better place.”

Experts working for the case company appreciated green values and felt social responsibility towards their communities and the whole world. These values were at the same time personal and shared with other experts in teams. Also the aims of the cleantech-related projects of the case company were in accordance with these values. Shared values also connected the experts to each other and enhanced team engagement. In a team, shared values are also likely to increase mutual trust.

5.3.2 Trust

“(Trust has based on) the fact that I know the level of the knowledge of the experts, and I know they will tell the others whether they are serious or not… If they say they are serious, they are.”

Like engagement, trust is often studied as a psychological or behavioral phenomenon. According to the classic definition by Rousseau et al. (1998), trust is

“a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another” (Rousseau et al.

1998, 395). There are also other valid definitions for trust. Blomqvist (2002) defines trust as “the expectation on the capability, goodwill and self-reference visible in mutually beneficial behavior enabling cooperation under risk” (Blomqvist 2002, 175).

An individual may have a natural disposition to trust. He or she then believes that other people are generally reliable, good-willing, and trustworthy (McKnight et al.

2002). Trust may also be built between individuals. Interpersonal trust relationships start from pure calculation of the benefits of the relationship (Rousseau et al. 1998). Hence, the first stage of interpersonal trust is calculus-based. When the parties get to know each other and are able to predict the other party´s behavior and intentions, trust is knowledge-based (Lewicki et al. 2006).

Identification-based trust is about knowing the other party´s deepest thoughts and feelings. It is rare and intimate, and requires a strong affect between the parties (Lewicki et al. 1998).

One of the key ingredients of trust is vulnerability. Trusting on someone means settling oneself vulnerable in relation to the other. According to Gillespie (2012) this kind of trust may be divided into reliance and disclosure. Reliance refers to professional trust, the willingness of an individual to rely on another’s professional skills, knowledge, judgments, and actions including delegating and giving autonomy. Disclosure is about personal trust, the willingness of an actor to

disclose work-related and/or personal information, often of a sensitive nature, to another. (Gillespie 2012; Kemppinen 2015.)

Many types of trust were found in the interviews. Conspicuous was the trust the interviews felt towards the founders of the case company. By the time of the interviews, the company was strongly personalized to the three founders of the company. The informants trusted both the founders as persons, and the experts chosen by them. Trust was personalized and often related to earlier experiences.

Most informants had worked with the founders and/or other experts before and had good experience of that. Trust was thus based on knowledge.

“I really trust them… The company has chosen all the experts. I happen to know some of them personally, and I can testify that they are well chosen.”

“I have known him (one of the founders) for a long time and we have talked about this (company) and he has presented it to me, and we have worked together before, too.”

“We have known each other for such a long time that it is easy for me to throw ideas.”

The experts also trusted the other experts in the network. This could be called role-based trust or reliance (Gillespie 2012), since the experts trusted the professionality and knowledge of other experts in a team. Cleantech industry is a special industrial branch in Finland, and many experts had worked together before as well. The common working history made trusting the other easier for the experts, so trust was mainly knowledge-based.

“You have to see who else is there, and on the other hand the references, the cases done.”

Trust is also cultural. Finland is often said to have a culture of trust. People trust each other and the society. Since all informants were Finnish, these cultural elements were present and may have affected the trusting stance. Trust is essential in teamwork. The informants trusted not only themselves but also the other experts in a team, and the owners of the company. In some cases, trust was a disposition, but more often based on good experiences from earlier cooperation with other experts. According to the data, a project was successful and problem-solving fast when the members of a team knew each other beforehand and had already worked together before. Trust was thus knowledge-based. Also trust in other experts´ knowledge and skills (reliance), and good references were often mentioned in the interviews. Trust and respect the team members had towards other team members´ professionality in interdisciplinary teams was remarkable.

5.3.3 Management and leadership

Alongside shared values and trust, certain management and leadership practices were found important in team engagement. The data showed that good management practices are needed in order to engage experts to projects and to teams. When solving complicated problems at virtual platform, good scheduling, clear rules, goal and task clarity, and quality control were seen as essential to succeeding.

Scheduling was found essential since most experts worked for several projects and needed to divide their time between them.

“You may spend time (at the platform) when you want to, and comment whatever you want to, but it does not solve (the problem) if you do not have a deadline when you have to fill it, and certain questions.”

When working at virtual platform the rules have to be clear to get the project going on as scheduled and to avoid misunderstandings caused by virtuality. Complex problem-solving is faster when the goal of the project and the tasks of each expert are clear.

“The degree of difficulty is a lot bigger than if it (the project) was done in one organization led by a clear project organization that has clear rules to assure the quality (of the project).”

“In the project where I was actively involved in we had clear tasks.”

Virtuality was both a challenge and a possibility.

“For silent and shy people virtuality may be even better than the traditional office environment and face-to-face meetings.”

Alongside practical issues, the way the leaders handled their job was found important and engaging. Team leaders, who in this case were the founders of the case company, were found encouraging, inspirational and trustworthy as persons.

This had a strong effect on the engagement of the experts to what the leaders represented, the team and the case company.

“They have shown example of the principles of good leadership, fairness and justice.”

“They are so nice, easy-going and appreciative. Their style is so lovely… They neither force nor command people, it´s more about cooperation like: what could we do now and what would you think?”