Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, individual trust, autonomy, and satisfaction in virtual teams

Despite the benefits associated with virtual teams, many people on these teams are unsatisfied with their experience. The goal of this study was to determine how to better facilitate satisfaction through shared leadership, individual trust, and autonomy. Specifically, in this study we sought a better understanding of the effects of shared leadership, team members’ trust, and autonomy on satisfaction. We conducted a study with 163 individuals in 44 virtual teams. The results indicate that shared leadership facilitates satisfaction in virtual teams both directly and indirectly through the promotion of trust. Shared leadership moderated the relationships of individual trust and individual autonomy with satisfaction. Team‐level satisfaction was a strong predictor of virtual team performance. We discuss these findings and the implications for theory and design.

[1]  Larry E. Toothaker,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[2]  T. Golden.  Co-workers who telework and the impact on those in the office: Understanding the implications of virtual work for co-worker satisfaction and turnover intentions , 2007 .

[3]  Raymond T. Sparrowe,et al.  An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[4]  Isabell M. Welpe,et al.  The dynamics of shared leadership: building trust and enhancing performance. , 2014, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[6]  Shawn M. Bergman,et al.  The Shared Leadership Process in Decision-Making Teams , 2012, The Journal of social psychology.

[7]  Chieh-Wen Sheng,et al.  RELATIONSHIPS AMONG TEAMWORK BEHAVIOR, TRUST, PERCEIVED TEAM SUPPORT, AND TEAM COMMITMENT , 2010 .

[8]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  A meta-analysis of the consequences of virtualness on team functioning , 2012, Inf. Manag..

[9]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  A theory and measurement of meeting satisfaction , 2003, 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the.

[10]  Trust and Control in Virtual Teams: Unraveling the impact of Team Awareness Systems in Virtual Teams , 2013 .

[11]  Vincent Rousseau,et al.  Perceived organizational support and organizational commitment: The moderating effect of locus of control and work autonomy , 2007 .

[12]  Roberto J. Mejias.  The Interaction of Process Losses, Process Gains, and Meeting Satisfaction Within Technology-Supported Environments , 2007 .

[13]  Lionel P. Robert,et al.  A multi-level analysis of the impact of shared leadership in diverse virtual teams , 2013, CSCW.

[14]  Julia E. Hoch,et al.  Shared leadership in virtual teams: the impact of Cognitive, affective and behavioural team leadership on team performance , 2014, GeNeMe.

[15]  Joey F. George,et al.  IT Road Warriors: Balancing Work--Family Conflict, Job Autonomy, and Work Overload to Mitigate Turnover Intentions , 2007, MIS Q..

[16]  J. Cummings,et al.  Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[17]  N. Anderson,et al.  Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory , 1998 .

[18]  Julia E. Hoch,et al.  Shared leadership in enterprise resource planning and human resource management system implementation , 2013 .

[19]  Claus W. Langfred.  Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams , 2004 .

[20]  D. Ferrin,et al.  Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[21]  P. Blau.  Inequality and Heterogeneity: A Primitive Theory of Social Structure , 1978 .

[22]  Blake Ives,et al.  Trust and the Unintended Effects of Behavior Control in Virtual Teams , 2003, MIS Q..

[23]  Guido Hertel,et al.  Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research , 2005 .

[24]  Saonee Sarker,et al.  The Role of Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams: A Social Network Perspective , 2011, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[25]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Work Groups and Teams in Organizations , 2003 .

[26]  M. Bauer.  Exchange And Power In Social Life , 2016 .

[27]  Margaret A. Shaffer,et al.  Equity and relationship quality influences on organizational citizenship behaviors: The mediating role of trust in the supervisor and empowerment , 2005 .

[28]  M. Merry.  Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership , 2004 .

[29]  Bruce A. Reinig,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Satisfaction with the Process and Outcomes of Teamwork , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[30]  Julia E. Hoch,et al.  Is the most effective team leadership shared? The impact of shared leadership, age diversity, and coordination on team performance. , 2010 .

[31]  J. Vermunt,et al.  Individual autonomy in work teams: The role of team autonomy, self-efficacy, and social support , 2006 .

[32]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Individual Swift Trust and Knowledge-Based Trust in Face-to-Face and Virtual Team Members , 2009, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[33]  S. Kozlowski,et al.  Multilevel Theory, Research, a n d M e t h o d s i n Organizations Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions , 2022 .

[34]  Michael A. West,et al.  Job satisfaction and teamwork: The role of supervisor support , 2001 .

[35]  Roger C. Mayer,et al.  Empowerment in veterinary clinics: the role of trust in delegation† , 2016 .

[36]  Stephen E. Humphrey,et al.  Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: a meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[37]  J. Bishop,et al.  Support, Commitment, and Employee Outcomes in a Team Environment , 2000 .

[38]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Trust Is in the Eye of the Beholder: A Vignette Study of Postevent Behavioral Controls’ Effects on Individual Trust in Virtual Teams , 2022 .

[39]  R. Liden,et al.  Perceived Organizational Support And Leader-Member Exchange: A Social Exchange Perspective , 1997 .

[40]  P. Bliese.  Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. , 2000 .

[41]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[42]  Julia E. Hoch,et al.  Leading virtual teams: hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership. , 2014, The Journal of applied psychology.

[43]  Raymond T. Sparrowe,et al.  A Group Exchange Structure Approach to Leadership in Groups , 2003 .

[44]  B. Baltes,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication and Group Decision Making: A Meta-Analysis , 2002 .

[45]  Ning Li,et al.  The Theory of Purposeful Work Behavior: The Role of Personality, Higher-Order Goals, and Job Characteristics , 2012 .

[46]  J. Colquitt,et al.  KNOWLEDGE WORKER TEAM EFFECTIVENESS: THE ROLE OF AUTONOMY, INTERDEPENDENCE, TEAM DEVELOPMENT, AND CONTEXTUAL SUPPORT VARIABLES , 1997 .

[47]  Susanne Geister,et al.  Effects of Process Feedback on Motivation, Satisfaction, and Performance in Virtual Teams , 2006 .

[48]  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.

[49]  Claus W. Langfred.  Autonomy and Performance in Teams: The Multilevel Moderating Effect of Task Interdependence , 2005 .

[50]  S. Parker,et al.  Developing agency through good work: Longitudinal effects of job autonomy and skill utilization on locus of control , 2015 .

[51]  Thomas D. Kane,et al.  Effects of group goal content on group processes, collective efficacy, and satisfaction , 2016 .

[52]  J. M. de la Torre-Ruiz,et al.  Team Decision Making and Individual Satisfaction With the Team , 2014 .

[53]  T. Judge,et al.  The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: a qualitative and quantitative review. , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[54]  Amy C. Edmondson,et al.  Psychological Safety, Trust, and Learning in Organizations: A Group-Level Lens. , 2004 .

[55]  C. Pearce.  The future of leadership: combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work , 2004, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[56]  H. F. van Tuijl,et al.  The Big Five Personality Traits and Individual Satisfaction With the Team , 2006 .

[57]  D. Waldman,et al.  A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. , 2014, The Journal of applied psychology.

[58]  greg A. chung-YAn,et al.  The nonlinear effects of job complexity and autonomy on job satisfaction, turnover, and psychological well-being. , 2010, Journal of occupational health psychology.

[59]  J. Sinacore.  Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions , 1993 .

[60]  A. Tenbrunsel,et al.  Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 2013 .

[61]  Kathleen Bentein,et al.  Linking servant leadership to individual performance: Differentiating the mediating role of autonomy, competence and relatedness need satisfaction , 2016 .

[62]  Claus W. Langfred.  The Downside of Self-Management: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects tf Conflict on Trust, Autonomy, and Task Interdependence in Self-Managing Teams , 2007 .

[63]  David F. Larcker,et al.  Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics: , 1981 .

[64]  Jennifer A. Marrone,et al.  Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance , 2016 .

[65]  C. Pearce,et al.  Citizenship Behavior at the Team Level of Analysis: The Effects of Team Leadership, Team Commitment, Perceived Team Support, and Team Size , 2004, The Journal of social psychology.

[66]  Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa,et al.  Is Anybody Out There? Antecedents of Trust in Global Virtual Teams , 1998, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..