Article summary with The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and innovation in functionally heterogeneous teams by Somech - 2006

Introduction

The main question that the author is trying to answer is: How do participative versus directive leadership styles moderate the effects of functional heterogeneity on team reflection and processes?

Again, it is emphasized that functional heterogeneity can have both positive and negative effects on group performance. A situational factor that can influence the process and outcomes is leadership style.

The proposition in this article is that team reflection mediates the effects of functional heterogeneity and leadership style on team outcomes (that is: in-role performance and team innovation).

Conceptual background and hypotheses

Functional heterogeneity is defined as the diversity of organizational roles embodied in a team. For example when different professions from a multidisciplinary team work together. So, the heterogeneity is task-related which causes few personal conflicts.

Participative leadership is defined as a leadership style in which superiors and employees share influence in the decision making process. Directive leadership is defined as a leadership style in which the superior provides the team with a framework for decision-making based on his or her personal vision.

Team reflection is the extent to which team members reflect upon the team’s objectives, strategies and processes (e.g. questioning, debating, and reanalyzing). This serves as a tool to use the heterogeneity in knowledge to enhance team outcomes.

Team outcomes are split into two different concepts:

• Team in-role performance is the extent to which the team accomplishes its purpose

• Team innovation is out-of-the-box thinking: the introduction of new ideas that are designed to be useful for the team.

Hypotheses:

1. Participative leadership will moderate the relationship between heterogeneity and team reflection, such that the relationship becomes more positive when participative leadership is high. This is because participative leaders facilitate the open exchange of ideas.

2. Directive leadership will also moderate the relationship between team heterogeneity and team reflection, such that the relationship becomes more positive when directive leadership is high. This is because directive leaders ask more questions and repeat unshared information, and also because they provide information about a member’s competence which leads to more remarks, suggestions and solutions by the team.

3. Team reflection will be positively related to team in-role performance and team innovation. Debating improves the team’s ability to foresee costs, benefits, and side effects, which leads to better productivity. Reflection also improves the detection of problems and the production of solutions, which implies better team innovation.

4. a. Reflection will mediate the interactive effects of functional heterogeneity and participative leadership style on team in-role performance and innovation

b. Reflection will also mediate the interactive effects of functional heterogeneity and directive leadership style on team in-role performance and innovation.

Method

A sample of 140 primary care teams (with a total of 1292 people of different professions) was used. They all had the same goals for providing medical care and the teams were all depending on each member for knowledge and effort. Functional heterogeneity was measured with a team composition diversity index, team reflection and leadership style were measured with team member questionnaires. Finally, also team in-role performance and team innovation were measured with manager questionnaires. The analysis unit was the team, so reflection and innovation were aggregated to the team level.

Results

Hypothesis 1 was confirmed: there is an interaction between functional heterogeneity and participative leadership style on team reflection. High heterogeneity and high participative leadership results in high team reflection.

Hypothesis 2 was not confirmed, in fact, effects in the opposite direction were found. There is an interaction between functional heterogeneity and directive leadership style on team reflection, but it is not in the hypothesized direction. There is no difference in team reflection for high heterogeneity and high or low directive leadership. But: when there is low heterogeneity and high directive leadership, this results in high team reflection.

Hypothesis 3 was only partly confirmed: team reflection does not contribute to team in-role performance, but it does contribute to team innovation.

Hypothesis 4a was confirmed: team reflection fully mediated the interactive effects of heterogeneity and participative leadership style on team innovation.

Hypothesis 4b was no longer relevant, since the effects of directive leadership and heterogeneity were not in the predicted direction.

Additionally, the effects of leadership style on team in-role performance were investigated. It was found that high heterogeneity combined with low participative leadership style results in high in-role performance. Furthermore, high heterogeneity and high directive leadership style leads to high in-role performance. So, in order to perform well, directive leadership style is needed when there is high functional heterogeneity. While in order to innovate, participative leadership style is needed if there is high functional heterogeneity. So, it’s important to find out what the objectives are: innovation or performance?

Discussion

Translating functional heterogeneity into beneficial outcomes is quite complex. Participative and directive leadership styles could complement each other in a both/and approach (instead of an or/or approach). From this research, we can conclude that:

• For highly heterogeneous team, participative leadership style leads to better team reflection: the leader helps translate the heterogeneity in backgrounds into advantages for the team.

• For low heterogeneous teams, directive leadership leads to better team reflection: the leader advocates a position and voices disagreement to encourage critique.

• For team innovation, participative leadership and high heterogeneity lead to more team reflection and innovation.

• For team in-role performance, team reflection did not mediate the relationship. So, the type of task may be critical in determining the need for team reflection, which is more needed in complex tasks.

• Highly functionally heterogeneous teams with a participative leader show lower team in-role performance. So: it’s a trade-off, which outcome do you want?