Introducing a Short Measure of Shared Servant Leadership Impacting Team Performance through Team Behavioral Integration

Sousa, Milton; Dierendonck, Dirk van

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02002

Cited by 47 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Teams were exposed either to a leader using inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, or a control condition. Our findings reveal important differences between leadership styles in communication and team outcomes (objective task performance and creativity), Sousa and Van Dierendonck (2016), Neil, Wagstaff, Weller, and Lewis (2016), Liu et al (2015), Zhang, Cao, and Tjosvold (2011), and Hoch and Kozlowski (2014). All of these studies concluded that team performance is directly linked to leadership, especially transformational leadership, but none of them evaluated the difference in this performance in projects with distinct management methods, that is, traditional and agile.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…Our findings reveal important differences between leadership styles in communication and team outcomes (objective task performance and creativity) verified that communication and trust are essential for leadership, specifically for the transformational style. Sousa and Van Dierendonck (2016) identified leadership shared by the leader as having a strong influence on team integration, increasing team performance due to the sharing of information. Neil, Wagstaff, Weller, and Lewis (2016) studied the transformational leadership style, indicating that the way the team works to achieve important goals and the use of the emotional intelligence of team members have a direct impact on performance.…”

Section: Team Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Leadership and Performance of the Software Development Team: Influence of the Type of Project Management

Garcia¹,

Russo²

2019

RBGN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-The objective of this article is to identify the influence of the type of leadership on the performance of the project team, according to the methods applied in the management of software development projects. Design/methodology/approach-We used a quantitative method, applying a survey to project practitioners in software development teams. The sample consisted of 245 valid answers, divided into traditional and non-traditional methods. The responses were analyzed through structural equation modeling using a confirmatory methodological approach. Findings-We identified that the three styles of leadership evaluated (transactional, transformational, and empowering) are positively related to team performance, as already identified in previous studies. However, the project management method does not influence the relationship between leadership and team performance. Originality/value-The theoretical and practical contribution of this article is the finding that the type of project management used in software development (agile or traditional method) is not relevant to the choice of team leader, emphasizing that the important thing is the investment in the development of this leadership, as a measure to increase team performance, allowing flexibility in the performance of managers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Section: Team Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership and Performance of the Software Development Team: Influence of the Type of Project Management

Garcia¹,

Russo²

2019

RBGN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Integration is higher if leaders exhibit an empowering leadership style in which they “communicate confidence that the team can accomplish ambitious collective goals,” “model collaborative behaviors and encourage followers to be more collectively committed to group objectives,” and “promote cooperative behavior among team members through verbal suasion and persistent appeals for collaboration” (Carmeli et al, , p. 401). Leadership styles related to empowering leadership, such as servant leadership (Sousa & Van Dierendonck, ) and transformational leadership (Friedman et al, ), also positively influence group behavioral integration. A common characteristic underlying these styles is humility, which is “a self‐view of accepting that something is greater than the self, and manifests in self‐awareness, openness to feedback, appreciation of others, low self‐focus, and self‐transcendent pursuit”; humility is positively related to empowering leadership, which, in turn, positively predicts behavioral integration (Ou et al, ).…”

Section: Theory Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do we Lead Together? Leadership Behavioral Integration and Coordination in Entrepreneurial Ecosystems

Roundy

2020

J of Leadership Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Entrepreneurial ecosystems are the systems of forces that encourage and sustain entrepreneurship in geographic areas. Vibrant entrepreneurial ecosystems exhibit coordination—participants engage in explicit attempts to organize, develop, and promote the ecosystem. Coordination involves ecosystem leaders; however, there is not a theory explaining the linkages between ecosystem leadership and coordination. To understand how ecosystem leaders promote coordination, the current paper proposes a model of entrepreneurial ecosystem behavioral integration. It is theorized that entrepreneurial ecosystem behavioral integration is influenced by leader and leadership‐group characteristics and, in turn, influences an ecosystem's cognitive, social, and cultural coordination. The model contributes to research at the intersection of leadership and entrepreneurship by delineating a precise and theoretically grounded conception of the connections between ecosystem leadership and coordination. A more nuanced understanding of coordination is provided by identifying its mechanisms and sub‐dimensions. The proposed theory charts a path for interdisciplinary research on leadership and entrepreneurial ecosystems and identifies practical implications for ecosystem leaders.

show abstract

“…(3) The third stage, which we will call model development, where we can find many works which represent sophisticated models which can be used to analyze the background of servant leadership, its relationship with performance and even the analysis of mediation and/or moderation factors. In this stage, the works of Liden et al (2014), Flynn et al (2016), Sousa and van Dierendonck (2016), Sendjaya et al (2019) are particularly noteworthy.…”

Section: Servant Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third Sector entities are not unaware of these changes, so it is necessary to analyze whether this new approach can be used by Third Sector entities to improve their performance. Although the relationship between servant leadership and performance has been studied in other sectors (see Liden et al, 2008;Overstreet et al, 2014;Huang et al, 2016;Sousa and van Dierendonck, 2016;Hoch et al, 2018;Lee et al, 2019) it has not been addressed in Third Sector entities. In this sense, this work attempts to respond to the call from authors such as Ronquillo (2011) and Allen et al (2018) to analyze servant leadership in Third Sector entities, raising the following research question: Does servant leadership influence the performance of Third Sector entities?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Servant Leadership, Innovative Capacity and Performance in Third Sector Entities

Perlines

Araya-Castillo

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses the relationship between servant leadership, innovative capacity and performance in Third Sector entities and proposes a mediation model. This research is based on a twofold theoretical approach: the servant leadership approach and the resource-based approach. The data have been obtained through a survey sent to territorial and functional managers of Third Sector entities. The fieldwork ran from June to September 2019. At the end of the entire process, 85 valid questionnaires were obtained. For the analysis of the results, a double methodology has been used: (1) a method of second order structural equations (PLS-SEM) and, (2) qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). The main contributions of this work are: 1) a double theoretical approach has been applied in this work, which has allowed to adequately define the relationships between servant leadership, innovation capacity and performance in Third Sector entities; (2) the application of a double data analysis methodology has allowed us to obtain robust and reliable results; (3) the measures of the three composites used (servant leadership, innovative capacity and performance) have adequate reliability and validity values; (4) the servant leadership positively influences the performance of Third Sector entities being able to explain the 35.6% of the variation of the performance of these entities and besides, it is a necessary condition for this performance to take place, (5) the average innovative capacity in the influence of the servant leadership in the performance of the entities of the Third Sector, being a necessary condition. Mediation is total, eliminating the direct effect of servant leadership on the performance of third Sector entities and increasing the capacity to explain the variation in the performance of Third Sector entities up to 44.7%.

show abstract

Introducing a Short Measure of Shared Servant Leadership Impacting Team Performance through Team Behavioral Integration

Cited by 47 publications

References 41 publications

Leadership and Performance of the Software Development Team: Influence of the Type of Project Management

Leadership and Performance of the Software Development Team: Influence of the Type of Project Management

Do we Lead Together? Leadership Behavioral Integration and Coordination in Entrepreneurial Ecosystems

Servant Leadership, Innovative Capacity and Performance in Third Sector Entities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About