Leadership

PSYCH 485 blog

Shared Leadership in Virtual Teams

by

The continuous adaptation of flatter organizational structures and the concomitant rise of self-managing teams represents unique challenges to developing leadership that would enable team effectiveness (Carson, Tesluk, & Marrone, 2007). According to Day, Gronn, and Salas (2004) the complexity of team work environments coupled with the ambiguity of group tasks makes it “unlikely that a single external leader can successfully perform all necessary leadership functions” (as cited in Carson et al., 2007, p.1217). Furthermore, the rapid emergence of virtual teams as the extension of workplace globalization poses additional barriers to traditional applications of hierarchical leadership due to the lack of face-to-face contact (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). In addition, newly emergent factors such as geographic dispersion, often asynchronous communications, complex media applications, as well as cultural differentials are often misunderstood within the capacities of traditional leadership that originates from an assigned individual (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). As a consequence, traditional leadership behaviors including leader-member relationship development, group motivation, and social dynamics management become increasingly difficult, time consuming, and often ineffective. Given that the impacts of hierarchical leadership appear to be diminished within virtual team environments (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014), the emergence of these groups demands new solutions to leadership approaches. As one such approach, shared leadership might offer significant advantages in supplementing failures of traditional leadership, in particular when managing virtual teams.

According to early observations by Gibb (1954), “Leadership is probably best conceived as a group quality, as a set of functions which must be carried out by the group” (as cited in Carson et al., 2007, p.1217). Building upon this sentiment, the further research concluded that distributed, or shared leadership, where team members are open to reciprocal influence from each other, can add significantly to the team’s competitive advantage and the overall level of performance (Day et al., 2004 as cited in Carson et al., 2007). Given that leadership originates from multiple willing sources of influence, team members serve as both leaders as well as the followers in any given situation thus offering their unique talents and perspectives according to the needs of others. In other words, shared leadership arises from a collective responsibility in decision-making processes, whereby team members support each other towards given objectives (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). In virtual teams, shared leadership can compensate the lack of face-to-face communications by building trust from the perception of team support and cohesion (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014). From a practical standpoint, shared leadership necessitates initiative and innovation to manage challenges that cannot be addressed via traditional leadership. Therefore, as a collective behavior, shared leadership provides a stronger foundation for team development, especially when accounting for different levels of team virtuality (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014).

In my current academic experience, having numerous group assignments conducted via virtual teams has been an excellent exercise in shared leadership development. While normally I tend to initiate structure, I often fail to maintain the motivational force throughout the assignment. In one of my recent work teams I found that all members were willing to offer their own leadership throughout the project. As a result, all of us would gravitate towards moderating a specific behavior, whether it was task or relationship-based, which in turn facilitated the emergence of a more effective approach towards the given objectives. Being a task-oriented individual, I would focus on the primary objectives; meanwhile another team member would work on maintaining relationships, whereas the third would offer innovative problem-solving techniques. With the continuous support from various team members, I found that my own limitations as a leader were well compensated by other, equally capable individuals. Furthermore, despite the complexity of our virtual team environment where we would never meet in person, many communicative challenges were efficiently overcome via proactive involvement of all team members. As a result of shared leadership, I noticed greater engagement, positive and constructive exchanges, and the overall improved quality of performance of our team throughout the semester. While normally I would prefer working individually and rely on my own skills and efforts, based on my recent experience, I would certainly stress the importance of shared leadership development in academic teams.

To conclude, it is important to address the potential limitations of shared leadership within teams. First, little is known about the mechanisms of collective influence that link a variety of possible leadership styles and team performance (Carson et al., 2007). Put differently, future research needs to address how leader and follower roles interrelate and complement each other in shared leadership team environments. Second, a number of external factors, including the availability of outside mentorship, group size and maturity, job specifications, and cultural predispositions (Carson et al., 2007) might offer additional insights on emergence of shared leadership. Ultimately, teams appear to work more efficiently when all members share the responsibilities and joys of leadership. Given the pervasive presence of teams in most contemporary organizational activities, it would seem only reasonable to utilize the advantages that shared leadership has to offer.

 

References

Carson, J. B., Tesluk, P. E., & Marrone, J. A. (2007). Shared leadership in teams: An investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Academy of management Journal, 50(5), 1217-1234.

Hoch, J. E., & Kozlowski, S. W. (2014). Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 99(3), 390-403.

A Place and Time for Sharing

by

Did you know there is a difference between a team and group? The difference might be greater than you expected. I believe it is safe to say that mostly all individuals have been a part of some sort of team or group at a point in their life. I was talking to my wife the other day to see if she could guess the difference. Her response to the question was, “Um, I don’t know. I’d guess that a group is less personal and a team works better together doing the same task.” She was surprised when I told her the real differences, those that I learned in my #PSYCH485 course commentary this week.

A group involves a strong influence that is passed back and forth between two or more people that are working towards the same goal by completing the same task. It is possible for a person to be in multiple groups at a given time. A team is interdependent, and involves multiple people working towards one goal by each individual contributing in their own way. Although each member of a team is working on their own personal task, they still need one another to accomplish the main mission. (Lesson 9, p. 3). I was under the impression that I worked within a group at my workplace, but the understanding and knowledge I gained from my college course has made me aware that I work in a team because each of us have our own tasks that in the end complete a project.

Fun fact: it is possible for group and team members to share the role of leadership. This unique way of sharing leadership has a name that suits it better than any name could…Shared Leadership. As it might have become evident at this point, shared leadership involves all team members having equal say and contribution to ideas and final decisions. Research has found that shared leadership is more effective because each member has their own strengths to offer to the rest of the group. (Lesson 9, p. 10). In traditional leadership, there is one leader who directs the rest of the team. Traditional leadership shows a top-down model, where the leader tells his or her peers where to start and guides the process. At times there are leaders who are such by name only, and have their peers bring the ideas to them. This is referred to as the bottom-up model. The shared-leadership model creates equality in the organization, as each person brings their own influence to others.

I have not yet worked in an organization that offers shared leadership. It could be difficult having a management team sharing responsibility with a lower level employee within the company, but is that not the point of shared leadership – to have individuals from all walks of life to add value and new perspectives to accomplish the goal? Management that is willing to establish shared leadership would show they value their employees, as they would work together and build relationships rather than one person commanding and controlling their way through the project.

It seems that there is a place and time for shared leadership. For instance, when I was in the United States Marine Corps, we did not share leadership to advance in our missions. With the nature of our work, it was always time sensitive. Sitting down and collaborating and sharing thoughts, ideas and opinions would jeopardize mission success and who would be coming home safe or not. Sometimes, (in this particular situation) it is best to make a decision without hesitation and run with it. In this environment any decision is better than no decision. So case in point, uniformity was key for this employer. If there was any deviation there could be severe consequences. Now, there are R&D teams and course developers for schools within the Marine Corps that does take the collaborative approach to hear input from each field practitioner but that was the proper time and place. Overall, I believe shared leadership is beneficial to an organization since each member of the team can contribute their ideas and skills, but I do not think that every organization should adopt the concept of shared leadership for the business they are running.

References:

Farag, Walid (2014). Boost Potential with Shared Authority and Lean Management. Retrieved on March 20, 2016 from: http://www.infoq.com/articles/shared- leadership

Pennsylvania State University (2016). Leadership in Work Settings—PSYCH 485. Online course lesson. Penn State World Campus. The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved March 20, 2016 from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp16/psych485/002/content/09_lesson/10_page.html

Virtual Teams and Leadership

by

Virtual Teams Photo

With globalization has come the emergence of virtual teams.  Virtual teams are important for organizations that conduct business and connect with people all over the world.  Virtual teams use technology in order to communicate and attain goals, rather than the conventional face-to-face methods.  Because communication is such a viable part of team work, Hill’s Team Leadership Model becomes even more important when a dealing with virtual communication (PSU WC, 2014, L. 9).  This model illustrates that leaders of teams should continuously monitor and intervene in order to predict, diagnose, remedy, and prevent internal and external issues that could affect the efficiency and success of the team (Northouse, 2013).  This is more challenging for virtual teams than more conventional ones because communication does not always occur at the same time or place.  Sometimes, it can occur via email or discussion board, when team members participate at their leisure.  This can be due to the nature of the task or time differences of the different locations.  There are clear advantages and disadvantages to virtual team work; but none-the-less, the Team Leadership Model needs to be handled more delicately to ensure success and effectiveness.

There are numerous advantages of virtual teams.  First, it connects people all over the world.  Individuals from different cultures and beliefs are able to come together to share experiences and reach goals.  Second, it is convenient since communication does not have to be simultaneous.  It allows individuals’ to communicate at any time, whether they are at work, at home, on vacation, or travelling (PSU WC, 2014, L. 9).  With those advantages come a few disadvantages of virtual teams.  First, communication is difficult since it does not occur face-to-face.  Often times, communicating through text-based technologies is not as effective as verbally talking to team members.  Second, it is hard for leaders to emerge (PSU WC, 2014, L. 9).

There are five ways virtual teams can be as effective as more conventional teams.  The leader, or leaders, must be willing and able to change from the norms of single location leaders.  This stems from the fact that leading face-to-face is much different than leading in a virtual setting.  Virtual teams must also utilize the communication technologies to their advantage, figuring out what works best for them and making the best of it.  There must be a sense of trust between all the members.  Team work relies on interdependency; especially in virtual teams since the members do not get to spend much time together in a singular location (Northouse, 2013).  Thus, they need to trust that their fellow team members are capable and working hard enough.  The design of the team, or how they work, is also important.  The team needs to be designed based on individual strengths and weakness, as well as consideration of the context and different environments, in order to enhance the process of reaching the common goal.  Lastly, taking advantage of the cultural diversity in decision-making and creative processes will lead to stronger final outcomes (PSU WC, 2014, L. 9).

Based on the details about virtual teams, I think shared leadership is much more beneficial than individual leadership.  All of the team members need to follow the Team Leadership Model by continuously monitoring and intervening in order to produce the best results.  Shared, or distributed, leadership can benefit the group because they are all aware of the team’s strengths and weaknesses and the external factors affecting the team.  These issues can also be different for each individual in each different location, so it is important that all members are continuously creating mental models of the situation.  Northouse (2013) calls this mental model the first step of the Team Leadership Model.  Once all of the members of any virtual team led by shared leadership have an appropriate mental model, they can work together to make sure they are effective.

Virtual Teams Photo 2

References

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2014). Psych 485 Lesson 9: Team Leadership. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa14/psych485/001/content/09_lesson/printlesson.html

How Many Leaders Does It Take To Lead A Team?

by

Is it better for a team to have one strong leader or multiple leaders who work together?  Hill’s Model of Team Leadership doesn’t specify an individual leader or leaders in terms of team effectiveness (Northouse, 2013).  As long as the leaders are working together and not contradicting each other it shouldn’t effect team effectiveness negatively.

Shared leadership is defined as “an emergent team property that results from the distribution of leadership influence across multiple team members. It represents a condition of mutual influence embedded in the interactions among team members that can significantly improve team and organizational performance” (Hoch, 2010).  In today’s business culture of globalization, change, uncertainty and the need for teams that can handle increasingly more complex tasks, shared leadership is being looked at a better solution then traditional single leader formats used in the past.  Shared leadership consists of constructing a more comprehensive idea of leadership that goes beyond a singular appointed leader (Lindsay, 2011).  Shared leadership creates a more interactive work environment between team members as they work towards the goals of both the team and the organization. “Shared leadership differs from collective decisions, as it also includes the later phases following the decision processes, such as initiating action, taking responsibility for action and responsibility for outcomes, etc.  Shared leadership refers to a collective social influence process shared by team members and aimed toward the achievement of one or more common goals” (Hoch, 2011). 

In this day and age of multinational companies and telecommuting I think that we will see more and more companies moving towards a shared leadership approach to teams.  Since many teams can now consist of members who are not just separated by an office floor, but an ocean, a single leader doesn’t seem effective.  As I stated above, as long as the leaders have the same goals and have a mutual understanding of how the team should be run, I don’t think it would affect team effectiveness.

 

 

 

Hoch, J. E., Pearce, C. L., & Welzel, L. (2010). Is the most effective team leadership shared? the impact of shared leadership, age diversity, and coordination on team performance. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(3), 105-116.

Lindsay, D. R., Day, D. V., & Halpin, S. M. (2011). Shared leadership in the military: Reality, possibility, or pipedream? Military Psychology, 23(5), 528-549.

Northouse, P.G. (2013).  Leadership: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Skip to toolbar