anizational research, especially as it relates to teams, is to identify the
factors and processes that give rise to increased performance.
What exactly constitutes a team? Similar to the definition deployed by other
researchers in the field, we define a team as two or more people, each with separate
responsibilities and/or assignments, working together for a common goal (Salas et al.,
1992). It is the latter part of the definition that is most critical as it helps to concretize
the dependent variable here. Achieving the team’s, and therefore, the organization’s
goal can be objectified by examining the team’s performance, usually through a
quantitative measure. By integrating the distinctive skills and characteristics of team
members, better performance is expected as compared to individuals working
independently to achieve the same goal (Naquin and Tynan, 2003).
Leadership本
Essay由
代写Essay网
www.51lunwen.org提供
When discussing a team, it seems contradictory to also talk about leadership.
If a team is truly working together, where is the place of a leader in such a situation?
Yet, even a team has a dominant person who, for our purposes, can be called a leader
who may very well play a central role in determining group performance. However,
little is known of the impact of this dominant team member. The studies on leadership
have avoided group performance and tended to focus on antecedents and outcomes
related to the individual (see Lim and Ployhart, 2004). In a meta-analysis of leadership
correlates, not a single study with a group measure of performance was included
(Judge et al., 2002). Usually, leadership is studied in the context of criteria such as of
individual characteristics and situational factors each of which may also affect team
performance (e.g., DeShon et al., 2004). Our purpose, here too, is to see if we can develop
a prediction equation consisting of various types of antecedents.
Several taxonomies for categorizing leaders by style have been suggested in the
literature. It would appear that the transactional/transformational leadership theory has
been the focus of most of the recent attention (see, for example, Judge and Bono, 2000).
Especially, with the modern organization and its complexities, this categorization has
allowed investigators to distinguish between meaningful, substantial and practical
techniques. Transactional leadership is associated with contingent reinforcement and
allows the worker freedom to perform as he/she sees fit with the leader intervening when
a problem occurs. Here, the leader and subordinate are involved in a series of exchanges
or bargains so as to assure goal attainment. In contrast, transformational leaders are not
involved in bargaining rather they motivate the worker to achieve transcendental,
longer-lasting goals instead of short-term ones. The latter leader is often viewed as
charismatic, a visionary who provides individual attention and intellectual stimulation.
The advantages of transformational leadership are obvious, especially at the top of the
organizational pyramid, and may be considered as fact as it has been observed across
many studies (Bass, 1990; Conger and Kanungo, 1988).
Although few studies have been done on the relationship between leaders and team
performance, two recent ones do indicate that transformational leadership is effective for teams. Bass et al. (2003) compa
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。