프로젝트 팀 내 공유리더십(Shared Leadership)이 팀 효능감과 팀 몰입에 미치는 영향 -과업조정 및 업무분담의 매개효과 검증 - = The Effects of Shared Leadership on Team Efficacy and Team Commitment: Mediating Effects of Task Coordinations and Workload Sharing

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of shared leadership on team efficacy and team commitment. In addition, we attempt to verify the mediating effects of task coordinations and workload sharing on the relationships between shared leadership and team efficacy and team commitment. To test the proposed hypotheses in our study, we collected data via a survey with a sample of 77 university student teams, comprising 339 respondents (on average 4.4 per team).
Shared leadership was measured on the team member survey with 3 items used by Kent and Moss (1990). Response were provided on a 7-point Likert scale. Team efficacy was measured by scale from Riggs and Knight (1994) on a 7-point 3-item Likert scale. Team commitment were measured by scale from Van der Vegt, Emans, and Van De Viliert (2000) on a 7-point 4-item Likert scale. The level of analysis in this study is the team. To justify the aggregation of the responses of multiple respondents for obtaining measures at the team level, we used inter-rater agreement indices, rwg (James, Demaree, and Wolfe, 1984). In all cases, the rwg score provided support for combining team members’ perceptions to produce aggregated scores for the measures.
The major findings are as follows: First, shared leadership were positively associated with team efficacy and team commitment. The findings suggest that organizations should help develop strong shared leadership patterns within their teams to bolster effectiveness. Organizations can promote shared leadership by setting expectations and encouraging members when teams initially form to view themselves and their fellow team members as leaders and to engage in shred, mutual leadership. Second, task coordinations and workload sharing have turned out to have a partial mediation effect on the relationship between shared leadership and team efficacy. as well as the relationship between shared leadership and team commitment. That is, this result indicated that shared leadership indirectly effects on team efficacy and team commitment through task coordinations and workload sharing. Mangers should therefore ensure that each team has a clear and shared sense of direction, prepares working plans, prioritize and allocate team tasks and promote and establish norms of participations and workload sharing.
Our study makes key contribution to the literature on shared leadership. The findings extend previous research suggesting positive effects of shared leadership on team efficacy and team commitment using a network-based measure of shared leadership that better captures the patterns of mutual influence inherent in the construct. The findings of the mediation analyses are the primary contribution of this study since little research examined a mediation model. Specifically, the mediation analyses showed that even though the mediating effect of task coordinations and workload sharing on the relationship between shared leadership and team efficacy and team commitment. shared leadership still had some direct effects on outcome variables, suggesting the influence process of shared leadership on team outcomes could be more complicated than we originally proposed. This issue needs to be further clarified or even reconsidered.
Given the small number of samples from the student teams, this study constitutes an exploratory attempt in nature. Caution must be exercised in attempting to interpret findings and to generalize the recommendations. The results proposed in this study must be validated by further research in diverse research settings. Causality could not be claimed due to the cross-sectional nature of the data. Longitudinal and experimental designs are needed to settle the dynamic relationships between shared leadership and team efficacy and team commitment. Several studies have called for more research on potential conditions such as task type that influenced link between shared leadership and team efficacy and team commitment.
Such contextual varia...

국문 초록 (Abstract)

지금까지의 팀 리더십에 대한 연구는 한 개인의 리더십에 초점을 맞춰 개인의 특성 및 행동을 강조해 왔다(Bass, 1990). 리더 중심적인 관점은 리더십과 팀 성과 사이의 관계에 있어 많은 시사점을 제공하였지만(Guzzo and Dickson, 1996), 팀 환경에서 한 사람의 리더가 존재하는 것과 둘 이상의 리더가 공존하는 것 중에서 더 바람직한 것이 무엇인가에 대한 답을 얻기 위해 최근 연구자들은 공유리더십(shared leadership) 연구에 노력을 기울여 왔다(O’Toole et al., 2002).
본 연구는 지금까지 연구가 미흡했던 공유리더십이 팀 유효성에 미치는 영향과 함께 이들 사이의 관계에 있어 과업조정 및 업무분담 팀 프로세스의 매개효과에 대한 검증을 시도하였다. 본 연구는 선행 연구를 토대로 공유 리더십과 팀 유효성과의 관계를 77개 프로젝트 팀에 참여하고 있는 339명의 대학생을 대상으로한 설문조사를 통해 실증적으로 검증하고자 하였다. 가설 검증 결과 얻어진 몇 가지 사실에 대해 논의하면,첫째, 공유리더십은 팀 효능감 및 팀 몰입에 유의한 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 직무와 관련된 팀 프로세스, 즉 업무분담 및 과업조정은 공유리더십과 팀 효능감, 팀 몰입 간의 관계를 부분매개하고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 팀 내 공유리더십이 팀 효능감과 팀 몰입에 직접적인 영향을 주는 한편, 업무분담 및 과업조정이라는 팀 프로세스를 통해 팀 성과변수에 간접적으로 영향을 주고 있음을 시사해주고 있다. 연구결과를 토대로 연구의 시사점과 향후 연구방향을 제시하였다

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 임서영, "팀장의 리더십이 구성원의 경력몰입과 이직의도에 미치는 영향 -감성지능의 조절효과-" 한국기업경영학회 17 (17): 1-22, 2010

2 박동수, "팀 과정특성과 구성원 태도의 관련성에 관한 실증적 연구" 한국산업경영학회 13 (13): 1-30, 1998

3 김진희, "조직지원인식, 팀웍, 조직몰입의 관계와 조직 냉소주의에 대한 효과" 한국기업경영학회 18 (18): 1-16, 2011

4 방호진, "공유리더십의 효과에 대한 연구: 과업상호의존성과 리더십의존성의 조절효과를 중심으로" 195-212, 2008

5 Kozlowski, S. W. J., "Work groups and teams in organizations, In Comprehensive handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology" Wiley 333-375, 2003

6 Heller, M. F, "Who’s in charge here? : sources of leadership for change in eight schools" 96 : 65-86, 1995

7 O’Toole, J, "When two(or more)heads are betterthan one : The promise and pitfalls ofshared leadership" 44 (44): 65-83, 2002

8 Scheinheider, B, "When twelve heads are betterthan one: Implementing a shared eadershipconcept in a police agency" 2006

9 Cohen, S. G, "What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite" 23 : 239-290, 1997

10 Goodman, P. S, "Understanding groups in organizations, In Research in Organizational Behavior" JAI Press 1987

11 Ensley, M. E, "Top management team process, shared leadership, an new venture performance : A theoretical model and researchagenda" 13 : 329-346, 2003

12 Bantel, K. A, "Top management and innovations in banking : Does the composition of the top team make a difference?" 10 : 107-125, 1989

13 Katz, D, "The social psychology of Organizations(2nd ed.)" Willey 1978

14 Pearce, C. L, "The relative influence of vertical vs. shared leadership on the longitudinal effectiveness of change management teams" 6 : 172-197, 2002

15 Baron, R. M, "The moderator-mediator variable distinctionin social psychological research : Conceptual strategic and statistical considerations" 51 : 1173-1182, 1986

16 Hackman, J. R., "The interaction of task design and group performance strategies in determining group effectiveness" 16 : 350-365, 1976

17 Ensley, M. D, "The importance of verticaland shared leadership within new venturetop management teams : Implicationsfor the performance of startups" 17 : 217-231, 2006

18 Pearce, C. L, "The importance of self-and shared leadership in knowledge work" 34 : 130-140, 2005

19 Riggs, M, "The impact of perceived group success-failure on motivational beliefs and attitudes : A causal model" 79 : 755-766, 1994

20 Pearce, C. L, "The future of leadership : Combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work" 18 : 47-57, 2004

21 Larson, C. E, "Teamwork: what must go right, what can go wrong" Sage Publications 1989

22 Hoegl, M, "Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects : a theoretical concept and empirical evidence" 12 : 435-449, 2001

23 Guzzo, R. A., "Teams in organizations : recent research on performance and effectiveness" 47 : 307-338, 1996

24 Kozlowski, S. W. J, "Team leadership and development: Theory, principles, and guidelines for training leaders and teams, In Advances in Interdisciplinary Study of Work Teams: Team Leadership" JAI Press 253-292, 1996

25 Sparrowe, R. T., "Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups" 44 : 316-325, 2001

26 Wasserman, S, "Social network analysis: Methods and applications" Cambridge University Press 1994

27 Otte, E., "Social network analysis : a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences" 6 : 441-453, 2002

28 Nahapiet, J, "Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage" 23 : 242-266, 1998

29 Mayo, M, "Shared leadership in work teams: A socialnetwork approach, In Shared leadership:Reframing the hows and whys of leadership" Sage 193-214, 2003

30 Carson, J. B, "Shared leadership in teams : Aninvestigation of antecedent conditions andperformance" 50 : 1217-1234, 2007

31 Kent, R. L, "Self-monitoring as a predictor of leader emergence" 66 : 875-881, 1990

32 Oetzel, J. G, "Self-construals, communication processes, and group outcomes in homogeneous and hetrogeneous groups" 32 : 19-54, 2001

33 Bandura, A. A, "Self efficacy: The exercise of control" Freeman 1997

34 Stewart, R, "Role sharing at the top: a neglected aspect of studies of managerial behavior, In Executive behavior" Studia Oeconomiae Negotiorum 120-136, 1991

35 Campion, M. A, "Relationships between work group characteristics and effectiveness : implications for designing effective work groups" 46 : 823-850, 1993

36 Mowday, R., "Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational commitment" 8 : 387-401, 1999

37 Hirokawa, R, "Perceived facilitators and inhibitors of effectiveness in organizational work teams" 8 (8): 424-446, 1995

38 Locke, E. A, "Participation in decision-making: One more look, In Research in organizational behavior" JAI Press 265-339, 1979

39 Ancona, D. G., "Outward bound : Strategies for team survival in an organization" 33 : 334-365, 1990

40 Marsden, P. V, "Network data and measurement, In Annual review of sociology" 16 : 435-463, 1990

41 Barsness, Z. I, "Motivation and opportunity: The role of remote work, demographic dissimilarity, and social network centrality in impression management" 48 : 401-419, 2005

42 Alfred, A. R, "Members’ perceptions of co-leaders influence and effectiveness in group psychotherapy" 17 : 42-53, 1992

43 Van de Ven, A. H., "Measuring and Assessing Organizations" John Wiley and Sons, Inc 1980

44 Allison, P. D., "Measures of inequality" 43 : 865-880, 1978

45 Henderson, J. C, "Managing I/S design teams : a control theories perspective" 38 : 757-777, 1992

46 Kolb, J. A., "Let’s bring structure back : A commentary" 9 (9): 452-465, 1996

47 Hackman, J. R, "Leading groups in organization, In Designing effective work groups" Jossey- Bass 72-119, 1986

48 Pearce, C. L., "Leadership, social work and virtual teams: The relative influence of vertical vs. shared leadership in the nonprofit sector, In Improving leadership in nonprofit organizations" Jossey-Bass 180-203, 2004

49 Gibb, C. A, "Leadership, In Handbook of social psychology" Addison-Wesley 877-917, 1954

50 Yukl, C. A, "Leadership in Organizations,(4nd)" Prentice Hall 1998

51 Stewart, G. L, "Leadership for self-managing work teams : A typology and integrative model" 48 : 747-770, 1995

52 Day, D. V, "Leadership capacity in teams" 15 : 857-880, 2004

53 Vroom, V. H., "Leadership and decision making" University of Pittsburgh Press 1973

54 Blau, P. M., "Inequality and heterogeneity" Free Press 1977

55 Gallucci, S. L., "Increasing profits through teamwork" 39 : 56-67, 1985

56 Yeatts, D. E, "High-Performing Self-Managed Work Teams: A Comparison of Theory" Sage 1998

57 Bettenhausen, K. L., "Five years of groups research : What we have learned and what needs to be addressed" 17 : 345-381, 1991

58 James, L. R, "Estimating within-group interraterreliability with and without responsebias" 69 : 85-98, 1984

59 Kelly, J. R, "Entrainment in individual and group performance, In The social psychology of time: New perspectives" Sage 1988

60 Guinan, P. J, "Enabling software developmentteam performance during requirementsdefinition : a behavioral versus technicalapproach" 9 (9): 101-125, 1998

61 Perry, M. L, "Empowered selling teams : Howshared leadership can contribute to sellingteam outcomes" 19 : 35-51, 1999

62 Buller, P. T, "Effects of team building and goal setting on productivity : a field experiment" 29 : 305-328, 1986

63 Gibson, C. B., "Do they do what they believe they can? Group-efficacy and group performance across tasks and cultures" 42 : 138-152, 1999

64 Mehra, A, "Distributed leadership in teams : The network of leadership perceptionsand team performance" 17 : 232-245, 2006

65 Gronn, P., "Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis" 13 : 423-451, 2002

66 Ancona, D. G., "Demography and design : predictors of new product team performance" 3 : 321-341, 1992

67 Brass, D., "Centrality and power in organization, In Networks in organizations: Structure, Form, and Action" Harvard Business School Press 191-215, 1992

68 Manz, C. C., "Business without bosses: How Self-managing teams are building high-performance companies" Wiley 1993

69 Avolio, B. J, "Building highly developed teams: Focusing on shared leadership processes, efficacy, trust, and performance, In Advances in Interdisciplinary Study of Work Teams: Team Leadership" Free Press 173-209, 1996

70 Bass, B. M, "Bass and Stodgill's Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research and Managerial Applications(3rd ed.)" Free Press 1990

71 Freeman, K. A, "Attitudes toward work in project groups as predictors of academic performance" 27 (27): 265-282, 1996

72 Van der Vegt, G. S, "Affective responses to intragroup interdependence and job complexity" 26 : 633-655, 2000

73 Bedian, A. G, "Academic amnesia and vestigial assumptions of our forefathers" 17 : 190-205, 2006

74 Marks, M. A, "A temporally based frameworkand taxonomy of team processes" 26 : 356-376, 2001

75 Brass, D. J, "A social network perspective on human resources management" 13 : 39-79, 1995

76 Sivasubraminiam, N, "A longitudinal model of the effects of team leadership and group potency on group performance" 27 : 66-96, 2002