Search results

This paper aims to provide a deeper understanding of what collaborative leadership in interorganizational systems entails.

The empirical basis consists of the dynamics observed during two behavioral simulations involving seven stakeholders with managers and professionals as participants, dealing with a complex regional development issue.

The authors describe what functions collaborative leadership in multiparty collaboration serve by discussing relevant literature and introducing a system psychodynamic perspective on leadership that focuses on the emerging dynamics between a leading party and other stakeholders. The relational dynamics between the leading party on the one hand and the other stakeholders on the other, are described and interpreted, taking the larger systemic context into account.

The authors discuss some important group dynamics aspects that emerge in a multiparty context that can be used by participants in and facilitators of such complex systems in order to foster effective collaboration.

Multiparty systems are set up to deal with some important societal challenges that require the integration of insights, resources and interests across several organizations and societal actors, therefore this study provides important insights into the complexity of collaborative leadership emergent in such contexts in which position power is lacking.

The study provides a qualitative, in depth analysis of the collaborative leadership as it emerges in a multiparty context simulated by an experiential learning context.

This study aims to explore the role of team personality and leader’s humor style on the use of humor in group communication and the extent to which group humor mediates the association between team personality on the one hand, psychological safety, collective emotional intelligence and group satisfaction on the other hand.

The authors used a survey to collect data from 304 employees nested in 83 groups working in organizations from various sectors in Romania.

The study results show that extraversion is positively associated with group affiliative humor, while neuroticism has a positive association with group aggressive humor. The leader’s affiliative humor style had a significant positive effect on group affiliative humor, while the effect of leader’s aggressive humor style on the use of aggressive humor in groups was not significant. Furthermore, the authors examined the mediation role of group humor in the relationship between team personality and team emergent states and satisfaction. The authors found that group aggressive humor mediates the association between neuroticism and group emotional intelligence, psychological safety and satisfaction, while affiliative humor mediates the association between extraversion and emotional intelligence and team satisfaction.

The study reports one of the first attempts to explore the multilevel interplay of team personality and humor in groups as they relate to emergent states.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between different styles of humorous communication (i.e. controlling and liberating) and conflict transformation in groups, in particular the transformation of task and process conflicts into relationship conflict. This study also examines the extent to which power distance moderates the association between controlling humor and relationship conflict.

The authors collected data using a survey from 536 participants from two different countries varying in power distance (Romania and The Netherlands) working in groups in organizations from various sectors.

Supporting the hypotheses presented in this study, multi-level data analyses showed that liberating humor has a positive association with task conflict, while controlling humor has a positive association with both process and relationship conflict. Moreover, task and process conflict mediate the relationship between liberating and controlling humor (predictors) and relationship conflict (outcome). The hypothesis regarding the moderating effect of power distance was not fully supported by the data.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to explore the multilevel interplay of humor and intragroup conflict in cross-cultural settings and shows how various types of humor can shape the emergence of conflict and its transformation.

This paper aims to report the development of the multiparty collaborative leadership scale (MCLS) that assesses four dimensions of collaborative leadership that have been defined in the literature regarding the functions of collaborative leadership in intra- and interorganizational settings.

The authors have tested the validity and reliability of the MCLS in a sample of 110 managers and professionals who participated in five multiparty collaboration workshops, each lasting for two days. The authors used multilevel analyses to test the construct, discriminant and predictive validity of the MCLS.

The results generally supported the reliability and validity of the MCLS. The scale has good internal consistency and in terms of validation, the authors show that MCLS negatively predicts the conflictuality and positively predicts the collaborativeness of the leading party as well as trust in the multiparty system and its entitativity.

The MCLS can be used to extend literature on collaborative leadership and generate insights on the antecedents and consequences of effective collaborative leadership in multiparty systems.

Multiparty systems are set to deal with important societal challenges and mediators involved in multiparty issues are asked to settle important international disputes and conflicts. Understanding collaborative leadership in such systems and its role in establishing effective multiparty collaboration is key. The MCLS can be used as a research instrument and as a development tool toward realizing much-needed collaboration.

The authors present a first attempt to develop a short scale to assess collaborative leadership in complex systems in which participating stakeholders lack position power.

Our study aims to explore the interplay between dysfunctional cognitive schemas and rationality for decision comprehensiveness in organizational strategic decisions.

We used a cross-sectional design in which we evaluated individual decision rationality using an objective decision competence test and dysfunctional cognitive schemas in a sample of 270 managers (145 women with an average age of 41 years old). In addition, we asked managers to rate the decision comprehensiveness of their organization’s strategic decision processes.

Our findings support the detrimental impact of dysfunctional cognition in strategic decision-making in such a way that the association between individual managerial rationality and the comprehensiveness of organizational strategic decisions was positive only when managers reported low dysfunctional cognition, while when managers reported high levels of dysfunctional cognitive schemas, the association between rationality and comprehensiveness was negative.

Our study provides initial empirical evidence for the interplay between dysfunctional cognition and managerial rationality in strategic decision processes, and it opens venues for future research to explore the detrimental role of dysfunctional cognitive schemas in strategy processes.