Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine whether team potency moderates the effect of the leader member exchange (LMX) on the expatriate's creative work involvement such that the effect of leader member exchange on creative work involvement becomes less when team potency is high.

Data were gathered via a printed survey instrument, using a purposive sampling approach and administered directly to 150 expatriate (non-Emirate nationals) employees located in the Jabal Ali Dubai Free Zone of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Our findings indicate that the higher the level of team potency the less the effect of LMX on expatriate creative work involvement.

The findings suggest that, team potency, which is an asset in certain situations, can be a liability suppressing the effect of LMX on the expatriate employees creative work involvement. Expatriate employees experiencing satisfaction and fulfillment through the leadership exchange feel sufficiently empowered in their abilities to engage in creative work behaviors.

Testing a theoretical model within the intranational cultural diversity of an expatriate workforce may be a stronger source of diversity than other sources, providing for an original theoretical contribution to the extant literature. Moreover, the UAE, with its prominent network of expatriate employment integrated within the national economy presents a highly relevant contextual environment in which to study expatriate behavior.

This study aims to examine the mediating role of cooperative style to conflict resolution and team potency in the relationship between transactional leadership style and the success of international development projects (IDP). The study draws on full range leadership theory and contextualizes transactional leadership style to the IDP environment.

A questionnaire survey was administered to a convenience sample of 111 IDP managers in Benin. The data obtained from the survey were subjected to principal component analysis using the SPSS and confirmatory factor analysis using XLSTAT-PLSM. The research hypotheses are tested according to the partial least squares method.

The hypothesis test shows that transactional leadership has a direct and indirect positive influence (through team potency) on the success of IDP. Contrary to the cooperative style of conflict resolution, team potency plays a partial mediating role in the relationship between transactional leadership and the success of IDP. Also, considering the effect of the specific dimensions of transactional leadership on the success of IDP, only the “active management by exception” dimension influences directly and indirectly (through team potency) on the latter.

As a result, this research is of great value to IDP managers who are aware of the positive consequences associated with transactional leadership without knowing the role played by its dimensions. Indeed, it provides them with information necessary to identify the appropriate transactional leadership behaviors to improve the success of projects.

The relevance of this study is to consider team potency as intermediary mechanisms between transactional leadership and the success of IDP and examine the effect of the dimensions of transactional leadership on the success of IDP by integrating the mediating action of team potency. Besides, this research highlights a mechanism through which transactional leadership influences the success of IDPs and shows that the use of the construct of transactional leadership rather than its specific dimensions does not capture the specificities of the mechanism that links transactional leadership and its consequences.

Drawing on social capital theory and self‐identification theory, this study aims to examine the associations of two indicators of social capital, personal networks and deep‐level similarity, with team capability measures of team efficacy and team potency. The central focus of the study is to be the hypothesized mediating role of team learning behaviors.

Hypotheses were tested using questionnaire data obtained from 221 teachers working in 33 teams and data were analyzed using multilevel analyses.

Consistent with the hypotheses, the results supported the contention that team learning behaviors mediate the relationship between different types of social capital and team efficacy and team potency. Specifically, it was found that, in highly (deep‐level) similar teams, the level of team learning behaviors is higher than in diverse teams, and this is hardly dependent on the extent of social capital based on personal networks. For diverse teams (i.e. teams scoring low on deep‐level similarity) more social capital based on personal networks translates into more team learning behaviors. Finally, it was found that team learning behaviors mediate the influence of social capital on team efficacy and team potency.

The paper's findings suggest that it is important for managers not to focus exclusively on surface level characteristics but instead to attempt to facilitate the development of deep‐level similarity. Organizations can also encourage group social capital by allowing teams to develop a shared history, rather than change membership frequently, and by increasing contact among team members.

The paper examined exchange and identification processes that are important in generating resources to increase the development of team learning behaviors, thereby emphasizing the role of the interpersonal context for understanding how interaction processes between team members shape team learning behaviors and subsequently lead to more team efficacy and team potency.

To analyse the impact of change‐oriented leaders on group outcomes. An explanatory model is proposed, in which the team climate (in particular as it relates to innovation) mediates between change‐oriented leadership and group outcomes, while group potency reinforces this relationship.

This study is designed as a correlative and cross‐level research. The sample comprises 318 health‐care professionals in 78 health‐care teams at different public hospitals throughout Spain.

Hierarchical regression analysis was used to evaluate mediating and moderating effects. Results offer considerable empirical support for the proposed model.

It would be of interest to increase the sample, differentiate it by service, and to get samples from other sectors, as well as to carry out experimental and longitudinal research. It would also be interesting to further explore the conditions that implement change‐oriented leadership impact, analysing environment, external relations and so on, to examine the relationships between other variables and to study their effects on new forms of work organisation and on virtual teams.

To make more useful change‐oriented leader actions, it would be advisable to identify, modify or improve team climate, using strategies such as management by objectives, delegation and empowerment and so on. It would also be necessary to boost group potency before going ahead with change, for example, by developing the skills of team members, or by fostering the self‐confidence of the team.

This paper contributes to developing actual research about how change‐oriented leaders influence team outputs.

The purpose of this study is to examine the facilitating and inhibiting influence of team-level negative affectivity and conscientiousness on a dyad of emergent states, adopting and comparing both the composition and compilation perspectives.

Data were collected over three time points from 410 undergraduate students nested within cross-functional project teams (N = 62). The data, including individual self-reports and judges’ ratings of team performance, were aggregated to the team-level using both composition (mean) and compilation (skewness) approaches.

The findings indicate that mean-levels of negative affectivity were associated with decreased psychological safety. The use of skewed conscientiousness counterintuitively suggests too many highly conscientious members can also be detrimental to psychological safety. Psychological safety influences team potency and ultimately performance.

The results of this study highlight that the aggregation approach used is important. For example, the use of skewed (but not mean-level) conscientiousness brought an undetected and counterintuitive relationship to light. Future research should use compilation approaches in addition to composition approaches.

This study examines the motivational processes of charged behavior and collective efficacy driving interdependence and agency in new product development (NPD) teams and the moderating impact of team risk-taking propensity as affective, cognitive and behavioral social processes support team innovation.

Data were collected from 92 NPD teams engaged in B2C and B2B product and service development. Mediating and moderating effects are examined using partial least squares structural equation modeling, referencing social cognitive and collective agency theories as the research framework.

The analysis validates collective self-efficacy and charged behavior as interdependent motivational–affective processes that align cognitive resources and govern team effort toward innovativeness. Teams' risk-taking propensity regulates behavior, and collective efficacy facilitates self-regulated motivational engagement. Charged behavior cultivates the emotional contagion, team identification, cohesion and adaptation required for team functioning. Team potency fosters cohesiveness, while team learning improves adaptability along the innovation journey. The resulting theory asserts that motivational drivers enhance the interplay between cognitive and behavioral processes.

Managers should consider NPD teams as social systems with a capacity for collective agency nurtured through interdependence, which requires collective efficacy and shared competencies to generate motivational purpose and innovativeness. Managers must remain mindful of teams' risk tolerance as regulating the impact of motivational factors on innovativeness.

This study contributes to research on the motivational–affective drivers of NPD charged behavior and collective efficacy as complementary to cognitive and behavioral processes sustaining team innovativeness.

Due to the proliferation of measures (and conceptualisations) employed to assess shared leadership behaviours, it is unclear to researchers and practitioners which specific team behaviours should be encouraged and which measures should be included in research to enhance team effectiveness outcomes. To address this issue, this research tests 11 shared leadership scales to identify which measures and behaviours exhibit the strongest relationship with team effectiveness.

This research utilises survey methods (n = 328) to test the measurement of shared leadership using 11 previously validated scales. This novel approach uses structural equation modelling techniques (SEM) to compare and contrast multiple measures targeting a single underlying construct.

Across the 11 measures tested (drawn from three theoretical perspectives), no single scale demonstrated a superior ability to assess shared leadership (based on model-fit and effect size exhibited). Nevertheless, the results indicated that measures assessing shared transformational leadership were most highly related to team effectiveness; whilst the shared leadership density measure (using social network techniques) exhibited the weakest relationship.

Limitations of this research include the use of a student sample (although participants were screened based on their current employment in a team environment), and the individual assessment of shared leadership rather than team assessment. These findings indicate that shared transformational leadership behaviours are highly related to perceptions of team effectiveness. It is recommended future research define and delineate between constructs of interest, including general forms shared leadership (i.e. shared leadership broadly defined) and more specific forms of shared leadership (e.g. shared transformational leadership [narrowly defined]).

It is recommended that interventions and/or training designed to enhance team shared leadership outcomes should specifically target shared transformational leadership behaviours; especially when aiming to increase beneficial team outcomes such as effectiveness or potency.

This research is novel in both advancing our understanding of the shared leadership behaviours needed to enhance team effectiveness; and in methodological approaches comparing and contrasting multiple measures of a single latent construct.

To address the increasing need for novel approaches to leadership that deal with the challenges organizations face as they flatten, diversify, and confront increasingly complex problems.

A meso‐level theoretical model is developed that outlines the relationship between self‐ and shared leadership, focusing on the intermediary processes of trust, potency, and commitment that may lead to the development of shared leadership and ultimately more innovative knowledge creation.

Nine propositions are developed, addressing the relationships between self‐ and shared leadership, concluding with some of the theoretical and practical implications of the model and specific recommendations for future empirical work in this area.

An important boundary condition of the model is that it assumes team and organizational incentives are in place to encourage team building and the facilitation of team over individual achievements.

Conceptualizing leadership in this way leads to numerous unanswered questions regarding how team dynamics influence, and are influenced by, various forms of leadership (including lateral, upward, and downward influence attempts). Greater dialogue between the team dynamics literature and the leadership literature may lead to new insights into how shared leadership is influenced by a variety of team characteristics, including team ability, size, member maturity, familiarity, likeability, cohesion, etc., all of which are potential areas for future research.

Important research questions that stem from consideration of these two theories in concert will prove critical in understanding the complex interrelationships among self‐leadership, shared leadership, and the creation of new knowledge in today's complex and dynamic organizations.

The purpose of this paper is two-fold: first, to demonstrate that learning occurs as a collective process in addition to traditional individual learning and second, to identify its antecedents and consequences at the team level.

Data were gathered using questionnaires answered by 356 participants organized in 90 teams. Quantitative analytic strategies were applied to verify if individual answers of team members were similar enough to compound team scores and to measure the predictive power of the proposed model.

Results showed that team learning is a collective phenomenon: intra-team differences were small and differences between teams were significant. Additional results demonstrated that team learning is predicted by team potency (34%) and, at the group level, explains 5% of the team’s satisfaction.

The findings of the present research suggest that organizational managers can improve the results of teams by supporting the development of social processes such as potency and learning.

Learning in organizations has received close attention in recent years. However, publications are focusing mostly on the individual learning that occurs in teams and organizations. The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate what characterizes team learning as a collective process and which relations it maintains with other team processes.

This paper aims to explore the influence of collective orientation (CO) on coordination and team performance for interdependently working teams while controlling for person-related and team variables.

A total of 58 two-person-teams participated in a simulation-based firefighting task. The laboratory study took 2 h for each team. The effects of CO in tasks of increasing complexity were investigated under the consideration of control variables, and the relations between CO, coordination and team performance were assessed using a multivariate latent growth curve modeling approach and by estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models.

Team members high on CO performed significantly better than low-scoring members. The effect of CO on team performance was independent from an increasing task complexity, whereas the effect of CO on coordination was not. The effect of CO on team performance was mediated by coordination within the team, and the positive relation between CO and performance persists when including group efficacy into the model.

As CO is a modifiable person-related variable and important for effective team processes, additional research on factors influencing this attitude during work is assumed to be valuable.

CO is especially important for highly interdependently working teams in high-risk-organizations such as the fire service or nuclear power plants, where errors lead to severe consequences for human beings or the environment.

No other studies showed the importance of CO for coordination and team performance while considering teamwork-relevant variables and the interdependence of work.