What: IT World article on virtualizing work
Posts to which it is related: Leading in Face-to-Face Versus Virtual Teams
Bottom line: This is a short article on some of the benefits of virtualizing work, from the perspective that how people do their work is just as important as what people do. The author, Martha Young, suggests this is something that is lost on many managers and supervisors, particularly when economic times are tough. The good news is that virtualization of work in some ways forces managers not to employ counterproductive behaviors. For example, virtual work makes it almost impossible for managers to micro-manage their reports. Young makes some very astute points in this article, above and beyond the tagline seen in most media about the benefits of virtual teamwork.

What: STLtoday.com article on some positive uses of video games among seniors.
Posts to which it is related: Using Virtual Worlds for Leadership Development
Bottom line:  We have covered articles that talk about how video games and virtual worlds can help develop leadership and teamwork.  This article talks about how video games like Wii bowling can help seniors with physical limitations stay active.  One professor of geriatrics points out how much healthier it is for seniors to play a bowling game than to sit and play bingo.  The difference between the two is vast – Wii bowling has some level of physical activity, and keeps seniors more mentally active than Bingo.  Perhaps most important, in a video game the person playing has ownership of what happens – a senior playing Wii bowling is actively participating; a senior putting chips on a Bingo board is passively participating.  We notice this difference in seniors because we’re looking for it; perhaps we could investigate what a difference it makes in people of all ages.

What:  Adbusters article exploring whether moral rules exist in virtual worlds and video games.
Post to which it is related: The Mind Has a Body of Its Own
Bottom line:  Whether moral rules should or do apply to virtual environments is a truly intriguing question.  The article points out that some behaviors we find particularly unsavory in the “real” world tend not to be included in virtual worlds/games because they are so unsettling.  One argument might be that a person who would commit atrocities in a virtual world could be practicing for the “real” world.  On the other hand, perhaps people with taboo tendencies can work them out in a virtual space with almost no consequences, thereby avoiding the same behavior in the “real” world.  This becomes more complicated when a behavior is done to another living person’s avatar, rather than a computer.  So for example, behaving in a certain way to another person in Second Life might be very different than killing characters in a video game that is only run by a program.  I think before we can answer the question of virtual morality, we need to know more about what avatars represent to people, and how we connect to them.  Because virtual environments are extremely new, there has been little time to do research on this topic.  Yet it seems crucial before we can understand many things – what are the ramifications of deviant or violent behavior in a virtual setting?  How might some training be more effective than others in virtual environments, and why?