Advancing our Understanding of Team Motivation: Integrating Conceptual Approaches and Content Areas

10.1177/0149206312471389Journal of Management3951339-1379JOMA

Investigating the uniqueness and usefulness of proactive personality in organizational research: A meta-analytic review

Using meta-analysis (283 effect sizes from 122 studies), we extend prior qualitative and quantitative reviews of research on proactive personality in a number of meaningful ways. First, we examine the discriminant and incremental validity of proactive personality using meta-analytic regression analyses. Our results reveal that more than 50% of variance in proactive personality is unrelated to the Big Five personality traits collectively. Also, proactive personality accounts for unique variance in overall job performance, task performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors, even after controlling for the Big Five personality traits and general mental ability (for overall job performance and task performance). Moreover, we find no subgroup differences in proactive personality, highlighting its potential use in selection contexts. In conclusion, we discuss implications of our findings for research and practice

The Dark side of helping: Escalation of commitment

In the real world, employees may be presented with difficult tasks that could be tackled in multiple ways and with available resources. On top of this, with deadlines, few external resources, and other tasks that employees typically face, thinking tends to be narrowed and so do the actions that follow. This could lead to a persistent course of action that leads to failure. We call this situation escalation of commitment. When our coworkers offer help and we are stuck and have invested time and effort into near-impossible tasks, is it worth accepting this offer of help? Or, would we rather risk more time and resources and instead persist in solving this near impossible problem? In the latter option, the individual may experience burnout and stress. For the organization, deadlines would not be met, and objectives could not be accomplished. My research looks at these helping behaviours and whether they lead others astray in an escalation of commitment. Specifically, I predict that individuals who have invested in a failing course of action are less likely to abandon this path when they receive help from others. This intersection of escalation and helping behaviours are important because when employees attempt to help a coworker who is invested in an extremely difficult task, they may be doing more harm than good.</jats:p

Do they [all] see my true self? Leader's relational authenticity and followers' assessments of transformational leadership

Responding to calls for a more positive and holistic perspective on leadership, Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, and Walumbwa (2005), Ilies, Morgeson, and Nahrgang (2005), and Luthans and Avolio (2003) have discussed the concept of authentic leadership. However, up to this point, little is known on how leader authenticity influences leader relationships with followers. Consistent with the overall theme of this special issue, we seek to fill this gap by investigating empirically how leader authenticity predicts transformational leadership behaviours. Specifically, we focus on relational authenticity as a component of authenticity because it has been argued to be particularly salient for interpersonal relationships (Ilies et al., 2005). We further propose that leader authenticity is associated with a greater convergence of followers' perceptions of transformational leadership behaviours. Finally, we predict that not all group members will be influenced by leader authenticity to the same extent. Instead, we hypothesize and find that more critical group members are especially likely to be positively influenced by leader authenticity. © 2010 Psychology Press

Team Structure: Tight Versus Loose Coupling in Task-Oriented Groups

Abstract By definition, teams are made up of multiple, interdependent individuals. The individuals within a team are separate and holistic units with their own identity, but this interdependence also means that the team is a holistic unit with its own separate identity. The dual set of identities embodied in teams creates an inherent figure versus ground confusion. In this chapter we use the concept of loosely structured systems (Weick, 1976) to help unravel this figure versus ground paradox. We show how the literature has operationalized four specific dimensions of structural interdependence: (a) task allocation structure (horizontal interdependence), (b) decision-making structure (vertical interdependence), (c) reward structure (outcome interdependence), and (d) communication structure (spatial interdependence). The literature reveals that organizations can no longer compete successfully via uncoupled structures, but at the same time, organizations resist the formation of tightly coupled systems. We discuss the virtues and liabilities of each of the four types of interdependence in teams, and describe why loose coupling may be a normative, and not just a descriptive, practice of organizations.</jats:p

Measuring proactive and reactive helping ::development of a scale

We elaborate on the theoretical framework of proactive and reactive helping behavior by positing fou r dimensions. To construct a scale, we g enerated and tested items using an online sample. We established construct and discriminant validity with established constructs. We replicated item characteristics in a subsequent study

Managing team interdependence to address the Great Resignation

PurposeHybrid and virtual work settings offer greater flexibility and autonomy, yet they also have the paradoxical effect of weakening the connection of employees to each other and their identification with the organization. The purpose of this article is to discuss how to manage this paradox effectively. Design/methodology/approachLeveraging structural adaptation theory, the authors discuss hybrid and virtual work as one of five dimensions of team interdependence that collectively determine the tightness of coupling between team members.FindingsThe authors propose that the introduction of virtual and hybrid work can lead to a lower sense of belonging and identification with the organization that would need to be counteracted by respective increases in team interdependence in one or several of the remaining dimensions of team interdependence.Originality/valueThe authors apply research on team interdependence to develop a series of practical interventions that can address the Great Resignation. These interventions seek to enhance employees' experiences of belongingness after the shift to virtual and hybrid work. In doing so, the authors provide a toolkit that organizations can leverage to improve their employees' experiences in a post-COVID-19 workplace.</jats:sec