A Longitudinal Comparison of Leader-Follower Relationships between High and Low Performing Self-Managed Work Teams in Virtual Settings

We conducted a semester-long study that examined the influence of emergent leaders' behaviors on followers' behaviors in high- and low-performing teams over time. Our results indicated that in high-performing teams, followers engaged in greater adaptive, goal and stability behaviors solely as a function of time. Neither the virtualness nor the behaviors of leaders influenced the behaviors of followers in high performing teams. In contrast, in low-performing teams, leaders played an important role in facilitating followers to engage in more leadership behaviors. Generally, over time, in response to the increasing virtualness and behaviors of the leaders, followers responded by engaging in similar behaviors. Following the leader's behavior, however, was dysfunctional for team performance. Our findings suggest that mimicking the task behaviors of emergent leaders who are virtual is not necessarily a formula for successful team performance, especially in self-managed work teams Instead, as shown by the high-performing teams, behaviors that are self-initiated and autonomous-regardless of the leaders' behaviors or virtualness-are what lead to success.

[1]  Judd Harrison Michael,et al.  Unlocking the Influence of Leadership Network Structures on Team Conflict and Viability , 2009 .

[2]  Gregory B. Northcraft,et al.  Organizational Behavior: A Management Challenge , 1990 .

[3]  Lucy Gilson,et al.  Virtual Teams: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go From Here? , 2004 .

[4]  R. Liden,et al.  Social Loafing: A Field Investigation , 2004 .

[5]  J. Nunnally Psychometric Theory (2nd ed), New York: McGraw-Hill. , 1978 .

[6]  Gary Garrison,et al.  Research Note - A Model of Conflict, Leadership, and Performance in Virtual Teams , 2008, Inf. Syst. Res..

[7]  Gerald E. Ledford,et al.  A HIERARCHICAL CONSTRUCT OF SELF‐MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO QUALITY OF WORK LIFE AND PERCEIVED WORK GROUP EFFECTIVENESS , 1997 .

[8]  R. Kelley,et al.  The power of followership , 1992 .

[9]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1999 .

[10]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams , 2008, Inf. Syst. J..

[11]  David J. Pauleen,et al.  An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[12]  Ronald E. Riggio,et al.  Improving Leadership in Nonprofit Organizations , 2003 .

[13]  Saonee Sarker,et al.  Emergence of leaders in virtual teams: what matters? , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  H. P. Sims,et al.  The roles of vertical and shared leadership in the enactment of executive corruption: Implications for research and practice , 2008 .

[15]  Robert Heckman,et al.  Patterns of Emergent Leadership in Virtual Teams , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[16]  Jennifer L. Gibbs,et al.  Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of , 2022 .

[17]  S. Taggar Individual Creativity and Group Ability to Utilize Individual Creative Resources: A Multilevel Model , 2002 .

[18]  Kenneth McBey,et al.  Gender, Perceived Competence, and Power Displays , 2004 .

[19]  Jane M. Howell,et al.  Shared leadership and group interaction styles in problem-solving virtual teams , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[20]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  Human and Technology Leadership Roles in Virtual Teams , 2008 .

[21]  J. Singer,et al.  Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis , 2003 .

[22]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Emergent leadership in virtual teams: what do emergent leaders do? , 2004, Inf. Organ..

[23]  M. Frese,et al.  4. Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century , 2001 .

[24]  I. Zigurs Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? , 2003 .

[25]  David Barry,et al.  Managing the bossless team: Lessons in distributed leadership , 1991 .

[26]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Leadership, Social Work, and Virtual Teams: The Relative Influence of Vertical Versus Shared Leadership in the Nonprofit Sector. , 2004 .

[27]  John E. Sawyer,et al.  Virtualness and Knowledge in Teams: Managing the Love Triangle of Organizations, Individuals, and Information Technology , 2003, MIS Q..

[28]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[29]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Leadership Effectiveness in Global Virtual Teams , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[31]  C. Gersick Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development , 1988 .

[32]  D. S. Derue,et al.  Leadership in Teams: A Functional Approach to Understanding Leadership Structures and Processes , 2010 .

[33]  Joseph B. Walther,et al.  Perceived Behaviors of Emergent and Assigned Leaders in Virtual Groups , 2007, Int. J. e Collab..

[34]  Edwin P. Hollander,et al.  Leaders, groups, and influence. , 1965 .

[35]  A. Pescosolido,et al.  Informal Leaders and the Development of Group Efficacy , 2001 .

[36]  A. Erez,et al.  EFFECTS OF ROTATED LEADERSHIP AND PEER EVALUATION ON THE FUNCTIONING AND EFFECTIVENESS OF SELF‐MANAGED TEAMS: A QUASI‐EXPERIMENT , 2002 .

[37]  A. Todd Rivetti Beyond rational management, by Robert E. Quinn, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1988, 199 pp. , 1990 .

[38]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  The Impact of Knowledge Coordination on Virtual Team Performance Over Time , 2007, MIS Q..

[39]  Charles C. Manz,et al.  The New Silver Bullets of Leadership:: The Importance of Self- and Shared Leadership in Knowledge Work , 2005 .

[40]  C. Cramton The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[41]  E. A. Locke,et al.  A theory of goal setting & task performance , 1990 .

[42]  Albert V. Carron,et al.  Team Cohesion and Individual Productivity , 2001 .

[43]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Getting a Clue , 1996 .

[44]  E. Mannix,et al.  The Dynamic Nature of Conflict: A Longitudinal Study of Intragroup Conflict and Group Performance. , 2001 .

[45]  J. F. Veiga,et al.  The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions: does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? , 2008, The Journal of applied psychology.

[46]  Anu Sivunen,et al.  Strengthening Identification with the Team in Virtual Teams: The Leaders' Perspective , 2006 .

[47]  John M. Jermier,et al.  Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and measurement , 1978 .

[48]  J. D. Jong,et al.  How leaders influence employees' innovative behaviour , 2007 .

[49]  D. Jung,et al.  Transformational and Transactional Leadership and Their Effects on Creativity in Groups , 2001 .

[50]  L. Smircich,et al.  Leadership: The Management of Meaning , 1982, The Journal of applied behavioral science.

[51]  D. Denison,et al.  Paradox and Performance: Toward a Theory of Behavioral Complexity in Managerial Leadership , 1995 .

[52]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  Group Development (II): Implications for GSS Research and Practice , 1997 .

[53]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams , 2002, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[54]  H. Klein,et al.  Emergent Leadership in the Group Goal-Setting Process , 1995 .

[55]  J. McGrath Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP) , 1991 .

[56]  Robert Hooijberg,et al.  A Multidirectional Approach Toward Leadership: An Extension of the Concept of Behavioral Complexity , 1996 .

[57]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Is Out of Sight, Out of Mind? An Empirical Study of Social Loafing in Technology-Supported Groups , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..