Beyond personal Leader Member Exchange (LMX) quality:the effects of perceived LMX variability on employee reactions

A fundamental tenet of Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) theory is that leaders develop different quality relationships with their employees; however, little research has investigated the impact of LMX differentiation on employee reactions. The current research investigates whether perceptions of LMX variability (the extent to which LMX relationships are perceived to vary within a team) affects employee job satisfaction and wellbeing beyond the effects of personal LMX quality. As LMX variability runs counter to principles of equality and consistency, which are important for maintaining social harmony in groups, it is hypothesized that perceptions of LMX variability will have a negative effect on employee reactions, via its negative impact on perceived team relations. Two samples of employed individuals were used to investigate the hypothesized relationships. In both samples, an individual's perception of LMX variability in their team was negatively related to employee job satisfaction and wellbeing (above the effects of LMX), and this relationship was mediated by reports of relational team conflict.

Intergroup conflict in organisations:predictors and relationships with team working effectiveness

This thesis begins with a review of the conflict literature. It continues with an illustration of the nature of intergroup conflict between British health care teams, by presenting results from an interview study using the critical incident technique. Within the theory testing part, drawing upon a sample of 53 British health care teams from five organisations, an empirical test of both intergroup contact and social identity theory is provided. In a next step, a measure of intergroup effectiveness, the effectiveness with which dyads of groups perform on collaborative tasks, is developed. Finally, the moderating role of both resource interdependence and group boundary spanners’ negotiation style for the relationship between intergroup competition and longitudinal change in group and intergroup effectiveness is examined.

Leadership clarity and team innovation in health care

The relationships among leadership clarity (i.e., team members' consensual perceptions of clarity of and no conflict over leadership of their teams), team processes, and innovation were examined in health care contexts. The sample comprised 3447 respondents from 98 primary health care teams (PHCTs), 113 community mental health teams (CMHTs), and 72 breast cancer care teams (BCTs). The results revealed that leadership clarity is associated with clear team objectives, high levels of participation, commitment to excellence, and support for innovation. Team processes consistently predicted team innovation across all three samples. Team leadership predicted innovation in the latter two samples, and there was some evidence that team processes partly mediated this relationship. The results imply the need for theory that incorporates clarity and not just style of leadership. For health care teams in particular, and teams in general, the results suggest a need to ensure leadership is clear in teams when innovation is a desirable team performance outcome. © 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Intergroup conflict and intergroup effectiveness in organizations:theory and scale development

Many see the absence of conflict between groups as indicative of effective intergroup relations. Others consider its management a suitable effectiveness criterion. In this article we demarcate a different approach and propose that these views are deficient in describing effective intergroup relations. The article theorizes alternative criteria of intergroup effectiveness rooted in team representatives' subjective value judgements and assesses the psychometric characteristics of a short measure based on these criteria. Results on empirical validity suggest the measure to be a potential alternative outcome of organizational conflict. Implications for both the study of intergroup relations and conflict theory are discussed. © 2005 Psychology Press Ltd.

Fostering team creativity:perspective taking as key to unlocking diversity's potential

Despite the clear importance of team creativity for organizations, the conditions that foster it are not very well understood. Even though diversity, especially diversity of perspectives and knowledge, is frequently argued to stimulate higher creativity in teams, empirical findings on this relationship remain inconsistent. We have developed a theoretical model in which the effect of a team's diversity on its creativity is moderated by the degree to which team members engage in perspective taking. We propose that perspective taking helps realize the creative benefits of diversity of perspectives by fostering information elaboration. Results of a laboratory experiment support the hypothesized interaction between diversity and perspective taking on team creativity. Diverse teams performed more creatively than homogeneous teams when they engaged in perspective taking, but not when they were not instructed to take their team members' perspectives. Team information elaboration was found to mediate this moderated effect and was associated with a stronger indirect effect than mere information sharing or task conflict. Our results point to perspective taking as an important mechanism to unlock diversity's potential for team creativity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)