An examination of when and how leader political skill influences team performance in China: A cultural value perspective

The team cohesion-performance relationship: A meta-analysis exploring measurement approaches and the changing team landscape

Team cohesion is an important antecedent of team performance, but our understanding of this relationship is mired by inconsistencies in how cohesion has been conceptualized and measured. The nature of teams is also changing, and the effect of this change is unclear. By meta-analyzing the cohesion-performance relationship ( k = 195, n = 12,023), examining measurement moderators, and distinguishing modern and traditional team characteristics, we uncovered various insights. First, the cohesion-performance relationship varies based on degree of proximity. More proximal measures –task cohesion, referent-shift, and behaviorally-focused– show stronger relationships compared to social cohesion, direct consensus, and attitudinally-focused, which are more distal. Differences are more pronounced when performance metrics are also distal. Second, group pride is more predictive than expected. Third, the cohesion-performance relationship and predictive capacity of different measures are changing in modern contexts, but findings pertaining to optimal measurement approaches largely generalized. Lastly, important nuances across modern characteristics warrant attention in research and practice.

Plain Language Summary

Team cohesion is an important antecedent of team performance, but our understanding of this relationship is mired by inconsistencies in how cohesion has been conceptualized and measured. The nature of teams has also changed over time, and the effect of this change is unclear. By meta-analyzing the cohesion-performance relationship ( k = 195, n = 12,023), examining measurement moderators, and distinguishing between modern and traditional team characteristics, we uncovered various insights for both research and practice. First, the cohesion-performance relationship varies based on degree of proximity. Measures that are more proximal to what a team does – those assessing task cohesion, utilizing referent shift items, and capturing behavioral manifestations of cohesion – show stronger relationships with performance compared to those assessing social cohesion, utilizing direct consensus items, and capturing attitudinal manifestations of cohesion, which are more distal. These differences are more pronounced when performance metrics are also more distal. Second, despite being understudied, the group pride-performance relationship was stronger than expected. Third, modern team characteristics are changing both the overall cohesion-performance relationship and the predictive capacity of different measurement approaches, but findings pertaining to the most optimal measurement approaches largely generalized in that these approaches were less susceptible to the influence of modern characteristics. However, in some contexts, distal cohesion metrics are just as predictive as their more proximal counterparts. Lastly, there are important nuances across different characteristics of modern teams that warrant additional research attention and should be considered in practice. Overall, findings greatly advance science and practice pertaining to the team cohesion-performance relationship.

Differential Relationship of Person- and Task-Focused Leadership to Team Effectiveness: A Meta-Analysis of Moderators

Building on previous findings of C. S. Burke et al. and Ceri-Booms et al., this meta-analytic review aims to investigate the moderating impact of team size, interdependence, power distance culture, effectiveness criteria, and study settings on the differential relationship of person- and task-focused leadership with team effectiveness. Based on 52 studies with 4,958 teams, results suggested that the differential effects of leadership were moderated by effectiveness criteria and the interaction between team characteristics and culture in societies. In high power distance societies, the relationship between person-focused leadership and team effectiveness was stronger in small teams that were characterized by high interdependence. In low power distance societies, the larger effect size of a person-focused leader was found in small teams, while task-focused leadership emerged as a stronger predictor of team effectiveness than person-focused leadership in large teams. Results can be used to guide leader development programs needed to enhance team effectiveness.

How humble leadership fosters employee innovation behavior

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between humble leadership and employee innovation behavior and to investigate the mediating effects of core self-evaluation (CSE) and the moderating effects of leader political skill in this relationship.

Design/methodology/approach

Questionnaire data from a sample of 169 employee-leader dyads from technology enterprises in China were employed in this research.

Findings

The results show that humble leadership positively affects employee innovation behavior; moreover, employee CSE and leader political skills play partial mediating and moderating roles, respectively, in the relationship between humble leadership and employee innovation behavior.

Research limitations/implications

This study considered only the positive role of humble leadership and not its negative effects in extreme cases, such as the perceived weakness and inferiority of a humble leader, which may inhibit leadership effectiveness. Future research may examine the excessive and/or negative effects of humble leadership in an organization.

Practical implications

The findings of this study suggest that leaders should maintain humility, develop certain political skills, and enhance employee CSE to stimulate employee innovation behavior.

Originality/value

Although humility has been understood as the core trait of servant leadership, level-five leadership and participative leadership, humble leadership as a new type of independent leadership style has yet to be thoroughly investigated. In particular, there is limited empirical research examining the link between humble leadership and employee innovation behavior.

Modeling Team Performance

Drawing on social identity theory and conflict theory, this study develops a research model that explains the development of team performance. In the model, team performance is indirectly related to authentic leadership and empathy via the full mediation of team identity and relationship conflict. Meanwhile, the positive relationship between team identity and team performance and the negative relationship between relationship conflict and team performance are hypothetically moderated by passion. Empirical testing of this model, by investigating team personnel from high-tech firms, confirms the integrative applicability of social identity theory and conflict theory for improving team performance. Last, the managerial implications and limitations of this study based on its empirical findings are provided.