Subgroup Formation in Diverse Virtual Teams: The Moderating Role of Identity Leadership

Background: As today’s organizations are becoming increasingly globalized and adding the impetus to a more remote form of working due to the present COVID-19 pandemic, new ways of collaboration—like virtual teams—have gained importance. In the present study, we aim to investigate how virtual team outcomes are linked to perceived diversity and subgroup formation and attempt to gain some initial insight into the role of the social identity approach to leadership in virtual teams.Method: In the present cross-sectional study, a total of 102 virtual team members participated in an online survey measuring perceived diversity, identity leadership, subgroup formation, perceived performance, and team satisfaction, to examine the factors moderating the relationship between perceived diversity and subgroup formation as well as between perceived diversity and team performance and satisfaction.Results: Moderation analysis revealed that perceived diversity had a negative influence on performance ratings when subgroups were highly perceived to be present, but not if subgroup formation was rated as low. The relationship between perceived diversity and team satisfaction was not moderated by perceived subgroup formation. Furthermore, identity leadership was found to be positively related to team satisfaction and perceived performance, while subjective diversity was negatively associated with both team outcomes. Identity leadership moderated the relationship between perceived diversity and subgroup formation, in that high levels of identity leadership weakened the positive relationship.Conclusion: This study provides first evidence to the importance of the team leader’s role as a manager of a shared social identity in virtual teams where perceived differences can lead to subgroup splits, as identity leaders may hinder the emergence of subgroups in virtual teams.

Examining Goal Congruence on Engineering Design and Innovation Student Teams

Goal congruence, defined as agreement by all members of a team on a common set of objectives, has been positively associated with team cohesion, team performance and team outcomes, including grades earned. Yet there is little in-depth study at scale and across types of engineering design and innovation classes in higher education that examines the goals students set for their work together. This research explores goal congruence in 857 teams involving 1470 students across 18 classes over four years. To examine goal congruence, we use student assessments of their level of agreement on their goals as well as evaluations of their written goal statements. Machine learning techniques are used to automatically identify goal types and congruence between goals. We find that goal congruence on student teams is relatively low, even when they assess it as high, partly due to variety in the types of goals they identify. We categorize the goals students articulate for their teams into grade-, completion-, teaming-, learning-, problem-, output- and outcome-oriented goals and report variance in the types of goals identified in different pedagogical settings. Our findings have implications for how faculty design their classes, link learning outcomes to team projects and facilitate goal setting on student teams.

In Leaders We Trust, or Should We? Supervisors’ Dark Triad Personality Traits and Ratings of Team Performance and Innovation

Our study tests in a sample of 87 organizational groups (297 employees and 87 supervisors) the mediating role of leader-member exchange (LMX) and collective narcissism in the relationship between supervisors’ dark triad (SDT) personality traits and ratings of team outcomes made by supervisors and team members. We show that LMX mediates the association between SDT and team performance and innovation as rated by team members, while collective narcissism mediates the association between SDT and supervisory ratings of team innovation and team performance. Moreover, collective narcissism also mediates the association between SDT and team innovation as rated by team members. Results show that team-level performance appraisal is influenced by supervisory attributes and that the quality of relational exchanges and collective narcissism are plausible mechanisms explaining this association. The use of supervisory ratings of team outcomes in empirical research should also account for the supervisory attributes.

Learning teamwork through a computer game: for the sake of performance or collaborative learning?

Our study examined using a computer-based learning game as a tool to facilitate teaching and learning teamwork skills. The game was applied to an undergraduate level human resource management course at a business school in Finland. We focused on students’ experiences and key learning outcomes of collaborative learning of teamwork skills through the game, and our analysis highlighted two key features of learning outcomes. First, the computer-based learning game promoted students’ self-reflection and evaluation of their individual team roles. Second, although the game taught students the importance of continuous information sharing in teamwork, their evaluation of team outcomes was performance driven; students predominantly took team efficiency as a sign of good teamwork. This case revealed the benefits and challenges of using computer-based learning games as a pedagogical tool. We identified what is required from lecturers and students for the game to be successful, and how team values other than performance could be learned through the game.

Empowering and Directive Leadership: The Cost of Changing Styles

We examine the cost of leaders changing between empowering and directive leadership styles on team outcomes. In a laboratory experiment, we collected data from 240 participants in 80 teams. Confederates enacted different leadership styles and led teams of participants in performing a series of tasks. When leaders changed their style from directive to empowering, teams took time to respond in terms of higher satisfaction with leader and affective commitment. However, when leaders changed their style from empowering to directive, the deterioration of satisfaction with leader and reduction in affective commitment were immediate. Moreover, teams of leaders who had been consistently directive showed higher affective commitment as compared to teams of leaders who had a history of being empowering but later shifted to being directive. First time managers can get inputs on how they should enact their leadership style and be aware that switching between styles may impose long-term costs on the team’s affective commitment and satisfaction with the leader.

Doing it for the team: Soccer coaches’ identity leadership predicts players’ effort, turnover intentions, and performance

Objectives: The present research investigates how coaches’ identity leadership predicts individual and team outcomes in soccer. Specifically, we tested hypotheses that coaches’ identity leadership would be associated with players’ perceptions of (a) higher team effort, (b) lower turnover intentions, (c) better individual performance, and (d) better team performance. In addition, we aimed to examine the relationship between coaches’ identity leadership and increased team identification of players and the degree to which the associations of identity leadership with these various outcomes were mediated by players’ strength of team identification.Design: We conduced a cross-sectional study of male soccer players in Germany.Method: The final sample consisted of 247 male soccer players nested in 24 teams that completed measures of their coaches’ identity leadership, team identification, team effort, turnover intentions, and individual/team performance.Results: Analysis revealed a positive relationship between coaches’ identity leadership and team effort, as well as individual and team performance. Moreover, coaches’ identity leadership was associated with lower turnover intentions. There was also evidence that the relationships between identity leadership and the investigated outcomes were mediated by team identification.Conclusions: These findings support claims that coaches’ identity leadership is associated with better individual and team outcomes because it helps to build a sense of ‘we’ and ‘us’ in the team they lead.

Cooperative, Competitive and Hybrid Motivated Information Processing in Teams

<p></p><p>Currently, there is a proliferation of studies examining group and team dynamics, as an increasing number of organizations are incorporating group and team-based structures. Extant literature has provided mixed findings regarding the influence of reward structures on various team outcomes. E.g., More rapid activity in teams has been found for competitive reward structure, with diminishing quality of work (Mailer, 1929). Which type of reward structure (competitive, cooperative or hybrid) has the best implication for team performance in organizations? This paper aims to address this question by incorporating the mechanism (i.e., epistemic and social motivation) and moderating variable (i.e., need for affiliation). Understanding the motivated information processing in groups model (MIP-G) and antecedents of team performance has important managerial implications. This moderator (i.e., need for affiliation) has not been examined in relation to all three types of reward structures in past studies. This paper hopes to extend the literature of reward structures and motivated information processing model by encompassing this new boundary condition. It is essential to incorporate novel contexts while examining relationships among variables as this approach further develops existing theories.</p><br><p></p>

Cooperative, Competitive and Hybrid Motivated Information Processing in Teams

<p></p><p>Currently, there is a proliferation of studies examining group and team dynamics, as an increasing number of organizations are incorporating group and team-based structures. Extant literature has provided mixed findings regarding the influence of reward structures on various team outcomes. E.g., More rapid activity in teams has been found for competitive reward structure, with diminishing quality of work (Mailer, 1929). Which type of reward structure (competitive, cooperative or hybrid) has the best implication for team performance in organizations? This paper aims to address this question by incorporating the mechanism (i.e., epistemic and social motivation) and moderating variable (i.e., need for affiliation). Understanding the motivated information processing in groups model (MIP-G) and antecedents of team performance has important managerial implications. This moderator (i.e., need for affiliation) has not been examined in relation to all three types of reward structures in past studies. This paper hopes to extend the literature of reward structures and motivated information processing model by encompassing this new boundary condition. It is essential to incorporate novel contexts while examining relationships among variables as this approach further develops existing theories.</p><br><p></p>

The Effects of Extra-Team Goal Disclosure on Team Performance, Viability, and Satisfaction

In addition to the team’s shared goals, team members also often hold goals unrelated to the team. Research about such goals, which we call “extra-team goals” (ETGs), has been limited. In the current research, we examine how awareness of a team member’s ETGs affects team outcomes. A laboratory experiment examines the effects of disclosure of different types of ETGs by one team member (target) on team performance, team viability, and team satisfaction while engaging in a brainstorming task. Our findings suggest that there are significant positive effects of ETG disclosure on team performance, team viability, and team satisfaction, and that these effects are mediated by perceptions of the target’s commitment to the team’s goal.