Shared Leadership and Team Performance

Barnett, Robert C.; Weidenfeller, Nancy K.

doi:10.1177/1523422316645885

Cited by 38 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study demonstrated all forms of leadership emerged from a number of team members beyond the dominant leader, which has not previously been quantified in HCATs. When considering sharing, which leadership functions should be shared, and with whom they should be shared to optimise performance, is yet to be determined 31. Some authors argue that certain functions should not be shared because doing so may result in significant negative effects on performance 32.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership sharing in maternity emergency teams: a retrospective cohort study in simulation

Janssens

Simon

Barwick³

et al. 2019

BMJ STEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundShared leadership is associated with improved team performance in many domains, but little is understood about how leadership is shared spontaneously in maternity emergency teams, and if it is associated with improved team performance.MethodsA video analysis study of multidisciplinary teams attending a maternity emergency management course was performed at a simulation centre colocated with a tertiary maternity hospital. Sixteen teams responding to a simulated postpartum haemorrhage were analysed between November 2016 and November 2017. Videos were transcribed, and utterances coded for leadership type using a coding system developed a priori. Distribution of leadership utterances between team members was calculated using the Gini coefficient. Teamwork was assessed using validated tools and clinical performance was assessed by time to perform a critical intervention and a checklist of required tasks.ResultsThere was a significant sharing of leadership functions across the team despite the traditional recommendation for a singular leader, with the dominant leader only accounting for 58% of leadership utterances. There was no significant difference in Auckland Team Assessment Tool scores between high and low leadership sharing teams (5.02 vs 4.96, p=0.574). Time to critical intervention was shorter in low leadership sharing teams (193 s vs 312 s, p=0.018) but checklist completion did not differ significantly. Teams with better clinical performance had fewer leadership utterances beyond the dominant two leaders compared with poorer performing teams.ConclusionsLeadership is spontaneously shared in maternity emergency teams despite the recommendation for singular leadership. Spontaneous leadership emerging from multiple team members does not appear to be associated with the improvements in team performance seen in other domains.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership sharing in maternity emergency teams: a retrospective cohort study in simulation

Janssens

Simon

Barwick³

et al. 2019

BMJ STEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although shared leadership research has traditionally not differentiated between these two aspects of leadership (Carson et al., 2007, Chiu et al., 2016; Drescher et al., 2014), they might meet different team needs as the team progresses through its life cycle. Clarifying these potentially different aspects of shared leadership and their role over time might bring clarity to the questions of what exactly is shared (Barnett & Weidenfeller, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead, the vast majority of the literature has adopted a static approach (e.g., Carson et al., 2007; Chiu, Owens, & Tesluk, 2016; Ensley, Hmieleski, & Pearce, 2006), conceptualizing shared leadership as a one‐time, static antecedent to different team outcomes (Contractor, DeChurch, Carson, Carter, & Keegan, 2012; Pearce & Conger, 2003. Thus, scholarly understanding of the interplay between time and shared leadership is still limited, despite recent work cautioning that shared leadership may take time to develop (Barnett & Weidenfeller, 2016). In fact, in their review work, Wassenaar and Pearce (2012) pose the question “… can a group develop shared leadership from its inception?” (p. 379) and identify the “life‐cycle of the group or the project” (p. 379) as a potential factor influencing shared leadership.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shared leadership development and team performance: A new look at the dynamics of shared leadership

Lorinkova

Bartol

2020

Personnel Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study offers new theoretical insights into the dynamics of shared leadership. Integrating arguments from shared leadership and team development theory, we examine how shared leadership changes over the course of a project team's life cycle and how this pattern of change relates to team performance. Guided by shared leadership theory and project team literature, we also explore team‐level factors, which may alter the pattern of shared leadership development. In particular, we propose that in project teams shared leadership develops in a nonuniform way, approximating an inverted U‐shaped pattern, increasing early in the team's life cycle, peaking around the midpoint, and then decreasing in the later phase. In turn, this development pattern relates positively to team performance. We also extend theory by explaining how specific team characteristics influence the pattern of shared leadership development. Using a three‐study approach, we empirically examine the hypothesized relationships and conclude with a general discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of our findings.

show abstract

“…Researchers identify shared mental models of psychological ownership of team outcomes and they identify processes that support continuous learning and that promote heedful interaction as underlying success in terms of team process and outcomes. Barnett and Weidenfeller (2016) similarly note the importance of shared cognition. Shared mental models have likewise been found to affect team success in virtual teams (Maynard & Gilson, 2014).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 91%

Functional and Visionary Leadership in Self-Managing Virtual Teams

Eseryel

Crowston

Heckman

2020

Group & Organization Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this conceptual article, we present a theory of leadership in self-managing virtual teams. We describe leadership in this setting as a process that results in the creation, reinforcement, and evolution of shared mental models and shared norms that influence team member behavior toward the successful accomplishment of shared goals. We distinguish two types of leadership. We identify leadership that works within and reinforces existing models and norms to influence team contributions as “functional” leadership. We identify leadership that results in changes in models and norms as “visionary” leadership. We propose that successful self-managing virtual teams require both types of leadership and that they will exhibit a paradoxical combination of shared, distributed functional leadership complemented by strong, concentrated, and centralized visionary leadership and that visionary leadership is enabled by functional leadership in the form of substantive team member contributions.

show abstract

Shared Leadership and Team Performance

Cited by 38 publications

References 47 publications

Leadership sharing in maternity emergency teams: a retrospective cohort study in simulation

Leadership sharing in maternity emergency teams: a retrospective cohort study in simulation

Shared leadership development and team performance: A new look at the dynamics of shared leadership

Functional and Visionary Leadership in Self-Managing Virtual Teams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About