The Journal of applied psychology
-
Team trust has often been discussed both as requirement and as challenge for team effectiveness, particularly in virtual teams. However, primary studies on the relationship between trust and team effectiveness have provided mixed findings. The current review summarizes existing studies on team trust and team effectiveness based on meta-analytic methodology. ⋯ Findings from 52 studies with 54 independent samples (representing 12,615 individuals in 1,850 teams) confirmed our assumptions. In addition to the positive overall relationship between team trust and team effectiveness criteria (ρ = .33), the relationship between team trust and team performance was stronger in virtual teams (ρ = .33) as compared to face-to-face teams (ρ = .22), and weaker when team interactions were documented (ρ = .20) as compared to no such documentation (ρ = .29). Thus, documenting team interactions seems to be a viable complement to trust-building activities, particularly in virtual teams. (PsycINFO Database Record
-
Although interdependence is a central aspect of team design, there has been a lack of clarity regarding the meaning and impact of different forms of interdependence. To provide theoretical clarity and to advance research on team interdependence, we develop an organizing, conceptual framework of interdependence in teams and test it using meta-analysis. We first review and tie together different conceptualizations of interdependence in the literature and illustrate how they converge around 2 major constructs: task interdependence and outcome interdependence. ⋯ We test these differential effects using a meta-analytic database of 107 independent samples and 7,563 teams. The meta-analytic path model provides strong support for our hypotheses. Implications and future directions for the study of interdependence in work teams are discussed.
-
We examined the relationships between the Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality traits and three forms of organizational commitment (affective, normative, and continuance commitment) and their variability across individualistic and collectivistic cultures. Meta-analytic results based on 55 independent samples from 50 studies (N = 18,262) revealed that (a) all FFM traits had positive relationships with affective commitment; (b) all FFM traits had positive relationships with normative commitment; and (c) Emotional Stability, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience had negative relationships with continuance commitment. ⋯ The results also showed that Agreeableness had stronger relationships with affective and normative commitment in collectivistic cultures than in individualistic cultures. We provide theoretical and practical implications of these findings for personality, job attitudes, and employee selection and retention.
-
Meta Analysis
Modeling reciprocal team cohesion-performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members' competence.
Despite the lengthy history of team cohesion-performance research, little is known about their reciprocal relationships over time. Using meta-analysis, we synthesize findings from 17 CLP design studies, and analyze their results using SEM. Results support that team cohesion and performance are related reciprocally with each other over time. ⋯ Finally, we conducted and report a replication using a second sample of students competing in a business simulation. Our earlier substantive relationships were mostly replicated, and we illustrated the dynamic temporal properties of shared leadership. We discuss these findings in terms of theoretical importance, applied implications, and directions for future research.
-
Meta Analysis
Absence of malice: a meta-analysis of nonresponse bias in counterproductive work behavior research.
Despite the alleged frequency of counterproductive work behavior (CWB) in the population, most samples exhibit exceedingly low base rates. One potential explanation for this incongruence is nonresponse bias, which leads to range restriction in the CWB distribution. ⋯ Our primary findings are that reported response rates for studies containing CWB measures are substantially lower (37%) than response rates reported within the general management literature (53%) and that range restriction is likely present in the CWB literature, resulting in low base rates and attenuated relations to CWB. In addition, tests of publication bias indicated that low response rates are less likely to be reported, and the true response rate within the CWB literature may be considerably lower.