Leadership Ethics and Team Leadership

organizational groups with differing levels of support. The question becomes: to what degree does a leader purposefully create opportunities for highquality relationships based on subordinates' desires, potential, and competence versus as a function of social stratification? Table 6.1 identifies additional strengths and weaknesses.

TABLE 6.1 Strengths and weaknesses of LMX

Strengths Weaknesses

Recognizes and increases the importance of dyadic relationships in the process of leadership

Realistically assesses the influence of social stratification in organizations and states the importance of equitable opportunities to develop highquality relationships based on competence

Extensive empirical research establishes the validity of the theory and the positive impact of highquality relationships on leadership outcomes

Insufficient attention toward movement between phases of the leadership making process and how leaders cultivate mature, highquality relationships with followers

Research overemphasizes hierarchical and authoritative relationships with little focus on other types of relationships (e.g., peer, crossunit) that exist in organizations

Left unquestioned the roles of similarity and affinity create potential for inequitable approaches to leadership reinforcing dominant narratives

Making Connections

LMX does not hide how it can contribute to social stratification. How might organizational ideologies exacerbate the creation and maintenance of inequitable in and outgroups?

What stands out as useful about LMX? What do you think needs to be addressed in the deconstruction and reconstruction processes?

TEAM LEADERSHIP The study of small group dynamics and how teams function is the source of abundant research and theorizing across a wide range of disciplines, from industrial psychology to communications. Its purposeful connection to leadership, however, was largely implicit until more recently. Increased attention is driven at least in part by the critical role teams now play in the workforce as a necessary vehicle for accomplishing complex goals. Although there is no universal conceptualization of team leadership, a strong basis of theorizing exists from which

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

to examine common themes.

Overview Burke et al. (2006) argued that “at its most basic level, ‘team’ leadership is about what the leader or leaders do to facilitate team performance” (p. 303). It represents a shift away from solely examining linkages between leaders and subordinates and toward interactions between leaders and teams as well as the ways in which teams can be afforded greater agency for their collective work. Before we go deeper with our understanding of team leadership, let's make sure we have a common understanding of key concepts associated with it.

What exactly do we mean when we use the term team? Teams are defined as any grouping of two or more people with specifically defined roles, engaging in interdependent work to advance a set of shared goals (Salas, Goodwin, & Burke, 2009; Shuffler, Burke, Kramer, & Salas, 2013; Yukl, 2013). Teams can be further subdivided into varying types based on how authority influences the group's structure (e.g., selection of members, distribution of resources) and functioning (Hackman, 2002). Table 6.2 provides an overview of the key features of four different types of teams. Additionally, teamwork is the process of enacting collective team knowledge, skills, and abilities in service of a group's shared goals and differs from task work, which reflects capacities individuals need to complete responsibilities on their own (Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro, 2001; Salas, Rosen, Burke, & Goodwin, 2009). Thus, teamwork requires both individual task capacities and competencies related to social group functioning.

TABLE 6.2 Key features of different types of teams

Team Type

Locus of Authority

Role of Team Members Process Orientation

Influences on Structure

Manager Led

Formal leader Execute tasks Tight control by leader

Determined by authority

Self Managing

Team members with formal leader oversight

Execute tasks, make decisions, and monitor performance

Managed by team members

Determined by authority

Self Designing

Team members with limited oversight

Execute tasks, make decisions, and monitor performance

Managed by team members

Team members influence all but purpose of group

Self Governing

Team members Execute tasks, make decisions, and monitor performance

Managed by team members

Team members influence all aspects

Now that we have greater clarity about what teams are, let's turn our focus back to team leadership. Team leadership relies on the functional leadership perspective, which emphasizes that the role of leadership is “to do, or get done, whatever is not being adequately handled for group needs” (McGrath, 1962, p. 5). According to this perspective, a leader is any individual

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

working toward goal accomplishment and satisfaction of group needs, not just a formal leader holding authority (Morgeson, DeRue, & Karam, 2010; Shuffler et al., 2013; Wageman & Fisher, 2014; Zaccaro, Heinen, & Shuffler, 2009). Therefore, the focus is on leadership versus leaders acknowledging that multiple individuals may shift in and out of leader roles as a team works toward goal achievement. This is not, however, a rebuttal of formal leaders or authority. Indeed, team leadership in organizational practice most often takes the form of selfmanaged teams, with some level of formal authority or oversight (Wageman & Fisher, 2014). Thus, team leadership asks us to hold constant the seemingly contradictory ideas that (1) leaders exist both informally and formally in teams, and (2) leaders may influence teams either from within the team itself or from the external environment. Zaccaro, Rittman, and Marks (2001) pointed to the distinctiveness of the functional perspective as it defines team leadership “as social problem solving, where leaders are responsible for (a) diagnosing any problems that could potentially impede group and organizational goal attainment, (b) generating and planning appropriate solutions, and (c) implementing solutions within typically complex social domains” (p. 454). They go on to share that this uniqueness stems from at least three considerations. First, an important role of leaders becomes boundary spanning, which involves serving as a bridge to the external environment. The leader interprets and communicates to the team external factors that might influence the social problemsolving process. Second, if team leadership serves the function of problem solving, then those in formal leader positions must discern when and how to intervene in the team process. For example, when problems have relatively clear solutions that a team can negotiate collectively with minimal influence from external factors, there is less need for a formal leader to intervene. Finally, the functional perspective of team leadership is unique as it is does not attempt to determine a full range of behavioral styles that should be enacted for effectiveness. Thus, the practice of team leadership may involve the use of behavioral styles discussed in previous chapters (e.g., task, relational), more empowering styles that will be covered in future chapters (e.g., transformational, instrumental), or any combination of pertinent behaviors. This gives greater freedom to leaders to engage in team leadership using a variety of approaches given conditions vary from context to context, task to task, and team to team.

Applying the Concept Whether a leader is a formal authority or member acting as an informal leader within the group, creating “effective leadership processes represent perhaps the most critical factor in the success of organizational teams” (Zaccaro et al., 2001, p. 452). This requires providing considerable attention and resources to the collective while not losing site of individual needs along the way (Burke et al., 2006; Hackman & Walton, 1986; Morgeson et al., 2010; Shuffler et al., 2013). Integrating the mountain of literature on teams in general into a cohesive perspective on how best to do this is no small feat.

A number of scholars offer models operationalizing team leadership (Burke et al., 2006; Kogler Hill, 2016; Kozlowski, Watola, Jensen, Kim, & Botero, 2009; Morgeson et al., 2010; Zaccaro et al., 2001, 2009). Figure 6.2 provides an adapted conceptual model drawing heavily on Zaccaro et al.'s (2009) work as well as key elements from other models. This adaptation

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

consists of team leader functions, team interaction dynamics, teamwork, considerations associated with time, and leadership outcomes (which are discussed in the next section).

FIGURE 6.2 Adapted conceptual model of team leadership

Team Leader Functions There is extensive scholarship examining the functions that formal or informal team leaders should engage in to increase the likelihood that team leadership will emerge and contribute to group effectiveness (Burke et al., 2006; Fleishman et al., 1992; Hackman, 2002; Hackman & Walton, 1986; Kogler Hill, 2016; Kozlowski et al., 2009; Zaccaro et al., 2001, 2009). This scholarship converges around the four functions of planning, organizing, monitoring, and acting. Zaccaro et al. (2009) narrowed these further to three key functions:

Setting Direction

The directionsetting function sets the stage for team processes drawing heavily on a leader's responsibility for boundary spanning. Recall that this involves the process of analyzing the external environment in which the team is nested to gather information regarding potential influences on team processes and desired outcomes. It also includes developing a deep awareness of the team, its dynamics, and capacities. As a leader makes meaning of the information gained through boundary spanning, it serves as crucial data for team planning and action. Leaders must also engage in sensegiving, or translating this information to the team and helping them to see and understand external influences as well as how they influence collective actions.

Managing Operations

Managing operations serves as a coordinating function in which a leader supports the Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

actions of the group as they engage in leadership. This requires keen discernment about when to intervene versus share information versus allow the team to act independently. Of primary importance is providing a foundation that supports the ongoing creation, re examination, and upholding of group norms, particularly around expectations and communication dynamics. Managing operations also includes a wide array of behaviors that can vary based on the nature of the team, its primary tasks, and its context. These include, but are not limited to, selecting team members, aligning team member capacities with task requirements, monitoring actions and providing feedback, acquiring resources for the team, and representing the team to external constituencies.

Developing the Team's Capacity for SelfManagement

A key function of any formal or informal leader is to increase the capacity of members of the team to engage in these three functions on their own. This distributes the essential leader functions across a wider group of people. When a team does have a formal leader, this provides that person with more time to engage in boundary spanning efforts, acquisition of resources, and learning necessary to respond to crises or unique issues that may arise. Developing a team's capacity for selfmanagement typically involves coaching efforts that focus on enhancing motivation and commitment to the group and its goals, fostering innovation, and investing in the development of members' leadership capacities. The overarching goal, then, is to increase the efficacy and capacity for autonomy, self direction, and selfmanagement.

Team Interaction Dynamics Team leader functions directly influence team interaction dynamics shaping how the team functions. Interaction dynamics in turn play an important role in shaping how effective a team is in meeting leadership outcomes as well as the degree to which teamwork emerges. Zaccaro et al. (2009) emphasized three specific elements of team interaction dynamics, each of which influence one another. Key to understanding this is the recognition that each of its three elements reflects collective team perspectives that exist either consciously or subconsciously and inform how the team operates rather than characteristics of individuals within the team. Team interaction dynamics include the following:

Team Formation

Just because a group is referred to as a team does not mean that it operates as one. The development of a cohesive sense of team is formed over time through interaction dynamics. Tuckman's (1965) classic model of group development suggested a process of movement through predictable stages (e.g., forming, storming, norming, and performing) that shift the group's focus from individual goals, values, and needs to collective ones. Other scholars suggest the process is more complicated and less linear (Salas et al., 2009) but concur that the developmental formation of the team influences goal processes and emergent states and is influenced by them in return.

Goal Processes

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

Goal processes reflect the ways in which teams work collectively and interdependently to achieve outcomes. Marks et al. (2001) differentiated between transition processes in which the team engages in reflection and planning and action processes in which they actively work toward goals. Providing a foundation for both of these are interpersonal processes that involve navigating and negotiating team relationships. Each of the processes is associated with specific team behaviors. For example, key to transition processes are collective goal specification and planning, while key to action processes are collective performance monitoring and synchronization of activities. Examples of interpersonal processes include collective negotiation of conflict. Additionally, progress toward goals is not linear but episodic, with previous experiences often influencing future directions. Given most teams work toward multiple goals simultaneously, a team may experience action and transition phases concurrently.

Emergent States

Emergent states are characteristics of the group that surface through interaction dynamics, becoming properties of the team that can be leveraged in service of goals. As a team works together, enhanced cognitive states (i.e., mental models or understandings of the team, its purpose, norms, and goals) emerge. Motivational states include the development of greater team cohesion, group trust, and collective efficacy. Affective states reflect the collective emotional wellbeing of the group. Each of the emergent states is driven by goal processes and team formation, and influences them in return.

Teamwork Teamwork reflects the enactment of team knowledge, attitudes, and skills. It is the leveraging of collective assets in service of team goals. There are direct and reciprocal relationships between leadership functions, interaction dynamics, and teamwork. In other words, each of the constructs influences one another. As one increases, so may the other and, similarly, as one falters, so may the other. Additionally, outcome achievement influences teamwork with positive results contributing to important gains in team efficacy and learning.

Time A final consideration in the adapted model of team leadership is the representation of time. As noted in the previous sections, initial conceptualizations of elements such as team formation and group processes suggested linear understandings in which teams marched continuously forward. There is now, however, a recognition that aspects of team leadership can occur simultaneously, reflect regressions in progress, or involve revisiting previously resolved elements. The influence of time is illustrated in Figure 6.2 via the arrow, with the loops conveying its nonlinear nature and the complexity of its impact on team leadership.

How Research Evolves the Concept Despite the volume of research on teams in general, a great deal remains unknown about team leadership (Shuffler et al., 2013). Empirical research has contributed directly to the conceptual

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

model of team leadership presented in this chapter, with studies validating component parts as well as establishing links between various elements. Separate lines of inquiry also explore unique considerations associated with the application of team leadership with virtual teams consisting of members reliant on technology to engage across vast geographical distances as well as crosscultural teams based on global cultural differences. Both lines of inquiry stress the importance of formal leaders in providing structure, establishing norms, and emphasizing effective communication.

As is the case with most leadership theories, initial research on team leadership focused on establishing connections to leadership outcomes. However, many of these studies defaulted to the examination of a narrow set of behaviors established in prior theories rather than examining the unique effects associated with team leader functions, team interaction dynamics, and teamwork. Results do establish that the enactment of different types of leadership behaviors (e.g., task, relational, transformational) contribute to positive team dynamics as well as leadership outcomes such as team performance, productivity, and learning (Bass, Avolio, Jung, & Berson, 2003; Burke et al., 2006; Purvanova & Bono, 2009; Wu, Tsui, & Kinicki, 2010). Although this research is important, remember that one of the core tenets of team leadership is that there should be no universal set of leadership behaviors.

Finally, much of team leadership is predicated on the “turning over” of leadership responsibilities from a formal, authoritative leader to the team itself by increasing the team's capacity for selfmanagement. This is a key goal of team leader functions, and research largely demonstrates that when formal leaders engage in this, the result is a positive effect on the team's sense of empowerment and capacity for selfmanagement (Maynard, Gilson, & Mathieu, 2012; Maynard, Mathieu, Gilson, O'Boyle, & Cigularov, 2013). However, two studies found that formal leaders' use of team leader functions did not contribute to team empowerment when the organizational climate acted in supportive ways and team coaches (i.e., outside facilitators who support team empowerment but are disconnected from the authority structure) were employed (Mathieu & Taylor, 2006; Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy 2016). In other words, teams did develop empowering behaviors associated with self management, but the source of this was not their formal leader.

WrapUp Team leadership shifts the focus of groupcentered leadership theories from groups as a by product of multiple varying relationships with a formal leader to being purposefully created to better achieve organizational goals. The vast amount of research and theorizing on teams and teamwork in general is making its way into the literature on team leadership, although no universal agreement exists among scholars on its conceptualization. Table 6.3 offers additional strengths and weaknesses.

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

TABLE 6.3 Strengths and weaknesses of team leadership

Strengths Weaknesses

Allows for greater participatory involvement of everyone involved in leadership

States the importance of investing in both individual team members' development and collective development

Frames the enactment of leader behaviors broadly, allowing for a wide range of approaches rather than prescriptions

Typically remains reliant on a formal authority either inside or outside of the team

Research on outcomes largely replicates those in other research rather than examining unique contributions

Offers little attention to how team norms may reflect and reinforce dominant stocks of knowledge and ideologies

Making Connections

Consider past team experiences you've had. How did a formal leader with oversight for the team reduce dependency and create agency for the group? To what extent does team leadership address how to diminish dominant ideologies that may reinforce leadercentricity?

What stands out as useful about team leadership? What do you think needs to be addressed in the deconstruction and reconstruction processes?

SHARED LEADERSHIP Nearly every publication on shared leadership begins by positioning it as a necessary response to globalization, specialization of workers, and technological advances that require collaboration across great distances—all of which create compelling challenges that demand decentralized approaches to group leadership. Sometimes referred to as distributive leadership, shared leadership differs from team leadership in its shift away from a singular leader attempting to shepherd group effectiveness and toward the simultaneous emergence of multiple leaders in a group process. The importance of shared leadership in the broader leadership landscape is perhaps best evidenced by its application across a variety of fields, ranging from human resources and sales to nursing and education.

Overview Shared leadership is defined by Pearce and Conger (2003) as “a dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals” (p. 1). Its key distinguishing feature, then, is the

Dugan, J. P. (2017). <i>Leadership theory</i>. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from apus on 2017-06-23 08:23:10.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 7 . Jo

h n W

ile y

& S

o n s,

I n co

rp o ra

te d . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .