Campbellsville University Team Productivity Management Discussion Discuss how to access team productivity: What conditions need to be in place for teams t

Campbellsville University Team Productivity Management Discussion Discuss how to access team productivity:

What conditions need to be in place for teams to excel and why?

Suggestion ways to design teamwork so that threats to performance is minimized

As a manager, how would you reward teamwork?

Please provide your response with minimum of 1200 words. Please use APA format throughout. Human Relations
http://hum.sagepub.com/
The role of transformational leadership in enhancing team reflexivity
Michaéla C. Schippers, Deanne N. Den Hartog, Paul L. Koopman and Daan van
Knippenberg
Human Relations 2008 61: 1593
DOI: 10.1177/0018726708096639
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://hum.sagepub.com/content/61/11/1593
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
The Tavistock Institute
Additional services and information for Human Relations can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://hum.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://hum.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://hum.sagepub.com/content/61/11/1593.refs.html
>> Version of Record – Oct 10, 2008
What is This?
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
Human Relations
DOI: 10.1177/0018726708096639
Volume 61(11): 1593–1616
Copyright © 2008
The Tavistock Institute ®
SAGE Publications
Los Angeles, London,
New Delhi, Singapore
http://hum.sagepub.com
The role of transformational leadership
in enhancing team reflexivity
Michaéla C. Schippers, Deanne N. Den Hartog,
Paul L. Koopman and Daan van Knippenberg
A B S T R AC T
Team reflexivity, or the extent to which teams reflect upon and
modify their functioning, has been identified as a key factor in the
effectiveness of work teams. As yet, however, little is known about
the factors that play a role in enhancing team reflexivity, and it is thus
important to develop theorizing around the determinants of
reflexivity. From an applied perspective, leadership is a very relevant
factor. The current study is a first step in the development of such
a model, and addresses this important gap in our understanding of
team reflexivity by focusing on the role of leader behavior. We
examined the extent to which transformational leadership influences
team reflexivity, and in turn, team performance, in a field study
conducted among 32 intact work teams from nine organizations.
Team members rated reflexivity and leadership, while external
managers rated team performance. We hypothesized and tested a
mediational model proposing that transformational leadership is
related to the adoption of a shared vision by the team. This in turn
relates to team reflexivity, which leads to higher team performance.
Results support this model.
K E Y WO R D S
learning performance reflexivity transformational
leadership vision
1593
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
1594
Human Relations 61(11)
Teams have become the basic organizing structure for accomplishing work
in many firms, especially for the increasing numbers of organizations
operating in dynamic and complex environments (e.g. Edmondson, 1999).
A growing number of teams in the workplace perform intellectual and
cognitive tasks (Cooke et al., 2000; Hinsz et al., 1997; Salas et al., 1992),
with information processing as a central aspect of their work, making it
important to identify factors that influence effectiveness of those teams.
Recently, reflexivity (a concept related to team learning) has been identified
as a key factor in the effectiveness of work teams (e.g. Schippers, 2003;
Schippers et al., 2003, 2007; West, 2000).
At the same time, scholars have noted that individuals and teams rarely
reflect spontaneously; rather, teams tend to behave in habitual ways, even
when presented with evidence that this behavior might be dysfunctional
(Gersick & Hackman, 1990). However, research and theory regarding the
determinants and outcomes of reflexivity is still scarce. Therefore, given the
importance of reflexivity for the effective functioning of teams, it is crucial
to understand what factors motivate teams to become more reflexive, and to
develop theory about the determinants of reflexivity. In the present study, we
focused on a factor that may be of particular importance in this respect: team
leadership (see Bass, 2000; Hirst et al., 2004). More specifically, we examined
how leadership may motivate group members to become more reflexive. We
tested the hypothesis that transformational leadership is positively related to
team reflexivity and team performance, and that this relationship is mediated
by a shared vision within the team. We expect that transformational leadership will enhance a common goal and shared vision in the team. Having the
shared frame of reference inherent in such a shared team vision will enhance
teams’ ability to collectively reflect on team objectives and the strategies used
to reach them and, in turn, this should enhance team effectiveness.
Team reflexivity, transformational leadership and a shared
vision
The concept of reflexivity is rooted in ancient philosophy and is seen by Greek
philosophers such as Socrates and Epicures as seeing the world and oneself in
a dialectical manner. In developmental and educational psychology, a related
concept is metacognitions, referring to reflecting on the learning process (e.g.
Brown, 1978; Flavell, 1979), whereas in medicine the same concept is used
to refer to a reflective approach involving stepping back from the problem at
hand in order to examine and reflect on the thinking process. In a work
context, reflexivity has taken on the meaning of both sensemaking and
learning from actions (Senge, 1990; see Daley, 2001). For instance, Schön
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
Schippers et al. Transformational leadership and team reflexivity
(1983) coined the term ‘reflection in action’ to describe the interwoven cycle
of reflection and action of professionals completing complex tasks. At the
team level, reflexivity is defined as ‘the extent to which group members overtly
reflect on, and communicate about the group’s objectives, strategies (decisionmaking) and processes (communication), and adapt these to current or
anticipated circumstances’ (West, 2000: 3). A critical difference between individual reflexivity and team reflexivity is that reflexivity at the team level
necessarily involves discussion and is thus observable behavior, and so can
be seen as a relational activity (Barge, 2004). According to Barge (2004: 92),
‘the latter recognizes that managers are continually co-creating conversational
texts with others and that the tactics they employ influence the shape and
form of the emerging text’. In this view, reflexive practice involves making
sense of situations together in a continually changing environment. In the
current research, we focus on reflexivity in a relational way, entailing
communicating views and ideas within a team.
Research has consistently found reflexivity to be positively related to
subjective as well as objective measures of team performance (Carter & West,
1998; Hirst et al., 2004; Schippers et al., 2003; Somech, 2006; Tjosvold
et al., 2004). For example, in a study among 19 BBC production teams,
Carter and West (1998) found that reflexivity predicted team effectiveness.
A study among three-person experimental groups showed that teams in the
reflexivity condition performed better than teams in the control condition
(Gurtner et al., 2007), and a field study among 59 work teams found that
team reflexivity mediated the (moderated) relationship between diversity and
team performance, commitment, and satisfaction (Schippers et al., 2003).
The converging evidence that reflexivity enhances team performance
suggests that organizations may improve team performance by fostering
team reflexivity. This gives rise to the question of how team reflexivity may
be stimulated, and an obvious route would be through team leadership. Team
leaders carry the responsibility for the day-to-day functioning of the team
and should be especially well positioned to influence team processes like
reflexivity. Although it seems an obvious relationship, and some authors hint
at the relationship between transformational leadership and learning
(e.g. Bass, 2000), empirical evidence regarding the relation between transformational leadership and reflexivity (i.e. team learning) is still lacking. In
a similar vein, Gersick and Hackman (1990) suggested that a team leader
might help the team to develop meta-routines, which prompt members to
initiate re-evaluation of first level routines in a regular and timely fashion,
and thus become more reflexive. Indeed, others also mention collective information processing and team metacognition (i.e. reflexivity) as important
mediators between leadership processes and team effectiveness (e.g. Zaccaro
et al., 2001).
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
1595
1596
Human Relations 61(11)
First evidence for the role of team leadership in engendering team
reflexivity may be found in studies by Hirst et al. (2004), who found that
facilitative leader behaviors were positively related to team reflexivity, which
in turn affected customer ratings of team performance, and Somech (2006),
who found that both directive and participative leadership moderated the
relationship between functional heterogeneity and team reflexivity, and that
team reflexivity, in turn, influenced innovation in a sample of health care
teams. However, the notion that leaders may engender rethinking or reflexivity by fostering a shared vision is found in theories of transformational
leadership (e.g. Bass, 1985, 2000; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Berson et al., 2001).
For example, this literature suggests that leaders present a vision that raises
followers’ awareness of and dedication to the ideals of the group and that
may help them see old problems in a new light.
Transformational leadership is a style of leadership that transforms
followers by stimulating them to go beyond self-interest through altering
their morale, values and ideals, and motivating them to perform above expectations (Bass, 1985; Yukl, 1999). Since its introduction, transformational
leadership has been strongly emphasized in the management literature (Bass,
1985; Bass & Avolio, 1990; Burns, 1978; House, 1996; Lowe et al., 1996;
Sashkin, 1988; Yukl, 1998). It is often suggested, but hardly ever tested, that
transformational leadership is related to a shared vision and learning among
followers. Communicating a compelling vision is seen as an important part
of transformational leadership, which is supposed to be related to a shared
vision among followers (e.g. Berson et al., 2001). Our central argument is
that transformational leader behavior will enhance the development of a
shared vision among team members and that this shared vision in turn affects
reflexivity. The inspirational motivation, charismatic, and intellectual stimulation aspects of transformational leadership seem especially important for
team reflexivity. For instance, through intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders encourage followers to consider new points of view and
question old assumptions (Bass, 1985).
Prior research has shown that transformational leadership is a higherorder construct comprising several components. However, even after decades
of research little consensus exists in the literature about the exact
components comprising transformational leadership. An often used questionnaire to measure transformational leadership is the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) as developed by Bass and associates (e.g. Avolio
et al., 1999), although other dimensional measures (e.g. Podsakoff et al.,
1990) or combined scales (e.g. De Hoogh et al., 2005) have also been used.
Here, such a shorter, combined scale was used. Several reviews and metaanalyses showed that the subscales of transformational leadership are highly
intercorrelated (often around or even above .80), and that transformational
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
Schippers et al. Transformational leadership and team reflexivity
leadership can also be seen as one higher-order construct (e.g. Den Hartog
et al., 1997; for reviews, see Avolio et al., 1999; Lowe et al., 1996). Although
often used as a unidimensional scale, sometimes subscales have been used in
prior research. For example, in recent MLQ research on the factor structure
of this instrument a five-factor model emerged (Antonakis et al., 2003).
In much of the research on transformational leadership to date, three
subcomponents are discerned: a combined scale of charisma/inspirational, as
well as intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. Charisma/
inspirational leadership entails appealing to a collective identity and expressing an energizing vision. Intellectual stimulation is expressed by encouraging
followers to see things in a new light, and to question the status quo. Individualized consideration entails understanding follower’s needs, and helping
them to grow to their full potential. Since this latter construct is more on the
dyadic level, and can be different for followers from the same team with the
same leader, we decided to focus on the transformational leadership aspects
that we expected to be positively related to team level reflexivity. Furthermore,
individualized consideration is not always included in operationalizations of
transformational leadership. For example, in their meta-analysis, Avolio et al.
(1999) report a higher-order factor of transformational leadership, consisting
of charisma, inspirational and intellectual stimulating leadership, while individualized consideration and contingent reward (an aspect of transactional
leadership) comprise a second higher-order factor.
Transformational leaders articulate a vision that describes a better
future and is congruent with the values of followers. The leader’s personal
example serves as a model of the kind of behavior required to attain the
vision. Visioning is not only seen as crucial to arouse followers in the leadership literature, the importance of having a shared vision as a motivating
force is also found in the team literature (e.g. West, 2000). Where the team
literature focuses on the sharedness of the team vision, which is held to be
important for the achievement of a long-term orientation and longer-term
goals of the team (see Guzzo & Dickson, 1996), the leadership literature
addresses leader’s capacity to develop and communicate such a vision, which
is attractive and motivating for followers, and which they collaboratively will
try to attain (e.g. Bass, 1985; see Conger & Kanungo, 1987; Tourish &
Pinnington, 2002). However, few studies have tested whether such a communicated vision indeed becomes a shared vision in the team.
We argue that having a shared, overarching goal or vision of the future
ensures a shared frame of reference for team members, which makes it easier
for teams to reflect effectively on their functioning. If teams have a clear team
goal (i.e. a shared vision), they will be better able to reflect, because they will
have more of an idea if they are on track in reaching the goal (see Locke &
Latham, 1990). The goal will aid the reflective team in deciding if they are
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
1597
1598
Human Relations 61(11)
on the right track or need to adapt. A transformational leader will aid this
process by regularly promoting the goal to the team (i.e. enhancing a shared
vision) and thus stimulate reflexivity in an indirect way. Thus, we test
whether transformational leadership (i.e. charisma/inspiration and intellectual stimulation) is positively related to reflexivity and performance through
its relationship with a shared vision. In other words, we test whether leaders
who engender shared norms, aspirations and ideals and show team members
how this new frame of mind helps to look at problems from new angles, will
stimulate the formation of a shared vision within teams and, subsequently,
increase reflexivity within teams.
Hypothesis 1. Transformational leadership is positively related to team
reflexivity.
Hypothesis 2. A shared vision mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and team reflexivity.
Besides the proposed relationship with team process, many researchers argue
that a link between transformational leadership and team performance should
exist (Yukl, 1998), and several studies have tested this link. For instance, Lim
and Ployhart (2004) examined the impact of transformational leadership on
team performance in combat teams and found a positive relationship. Another
study found that transformational leadership positively affected group
potency, and in turn group effectiveness (Sosik et al., 1997). Furthermore, a
study among 47 intact teams found that transformational leadership was
related to group effectiveness, through the effect on group cohesion,
empowerment and collective efficacy (Jung & Sosik, 2002). It is important to
note that, although we do expect a relationship between transformational
leadership and team performance, other variables that are not measured in
the current study, such as motivation, group cohesion and collective efficacy,
are also likely to influence team performance (e.g. Jung & Sosik, 2002; Sosik
et al., 1997; West, 2000). We thus expect reflexivity (and a shared vision) to
partially mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and
team performance. This line of thinking also assumes that reflexivity mediates
between a shared vision on the one hand, and team performance on the other
hand. The research model is depicted in Figure 1. Thus, we expect:
Hypothesis 3. A shared vision and reflexivity both partially and
sequentially mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and team performance.
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
Schippers et al. Transformational leadership and team reflexivity
H3
H1/H2
Shared
vision
Transformational
leadership
Figure 1
Team
reflexivity
Team
performance
Hypothesized direct and indirect relationships in this study
Note: Hypotheses in bold are the hypotheses including the mediator(s)
Method
Participants and procedure
Thirty-two teams from nine different organizations participated in this study.
The teams included management teams, service teams, production teams,
teams in government service, and facilitating teams. The teams came from
companies in the IT, insurance and banking sector, government and chemical
industry. Following Hackman (1987), we considered teams as composed of
individuals who both see themselves and are seen by others as an interdependent social entity. Furthermore, teams are embedded in a larger
organization, and the team’s performance affects others, for instance
suppliers or customers. Only teams that met these criteria were considered
for participation. In most cases team members were assigned to the teams
when they were first formed; teams did not select members themselves. We
purposely sought teams with different, but relatively knowledge-intensive,
tasks to include in the study. Teams with very routine jobs were not
considered for inclusion in the study, as reflexivity is likely to be less relevant
for such teams. The team tasks of the participating teams differed widely,
from administrative or production work (production teams) to leading a
company (management teams).
Teams were recruited by phone. For all teams, questionnaire packages
were mailed to the team leaders who had agreed to participate in the study.
These team leaders then handed the questionnaires to their team members,
and ensured that these questionnaires were completed in private. A cover
letter described the purpose of the study and guaranteed the respondents
confidentiality. Instructions for completion of the questionnaire were given
Downloaded from hum.sagepub.com at LIBERTY UNIV LIBRARY on August 17, 2012
1599
1600
Human Relations 61(11)
on the first page…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment