This study puts a core assumption of the recently-emerged concept of transformational leadership (TFL) climate under direct empirical scrutiny; namely, that it is not only the average level (i.e., the mean perceptions among employees), but also the level of homogeneity (i.e., the variance in perceptions) which is important for understanding the effect of TFL climate on organizational outcomes. By developing and testing an interaction hypothesis in a dual-source dataset containing 107 small- and medium-sized organizations, we extend previous knowledge in two important ways. First, we extend the limited
empirical evidence on TFL climate by relating it for the first time to organizational performance. Second, we test the previously assumed, but never investigated, assumption of homogeneity for the TFL climate construct at the organizational level. Our results show that it is important to investigate such underlying core assumptions, as the average level of TFL climate was found to relate more strongly to organizational performance with increasing levels of homogeneity in TFL climate.
Following recent interest in contextual factors and how they might influence the effects of transformational leadership, we consider the social distance between leaders and followers as a cross-level moderator of the relationships between senior level managers' transformational leadership and individual-level outcomes. Our sample comprised 268 individuals in 50 leader-follower groups. Results revealed that high social distance reduced or neutralized transformational leadership's association with followers' emulation of leader behavior. In contrast, high levels of social distance between leaders and followers enhanced the effects of transformational leadership on individuals' perceptions of their units' positive emotional climate and individuals' sense of collective efficacy. Results not only highlight the importance of social distance as a contextual variable affecting leader-follower relations but also suggest that the same contextual variable may have differential effects, enhancing some relationships and neutralizing others.
The present study examines the association between dysfunctional team behavior and team performance. Data included measures of teams' dysfunctional behavior and negative affective tone as well as supervisors' ratings of teams' (nonverbal) negative emotional expressivity and performance. Utilizing a field sample of 61 work teams, the authors tested the proposed relationships with robust data analytic techniques. Results were consistent with the hypothesized conceptual scheme, in that negative team affective tone mediated the relationship between dysfunctional team behavior and performance when teams' nonverbal negative expressivity was high but not when nonverbal expressivity was low. On the basis of the findings, the authors conclude that the connection between dysfunctional behavior and performance in team situations is more complex than was previously believed--thereby yielding a pattern of moderated mediation. In sum, the findings demonstrated that team members' collective emotions and emotional processing represent key mechanisms in determining how dysfunctional team behavior is associated with team performance.
In this article, the authors present a framework (the Workplace Social Exchange Network) that draws from multiple streams of social exchange research. The authors attempt to provide an integrative, cross-level theory for understanding the diverse social exchanges that occur in the work-place. Within the workplace, there are a number of social exchanges that may take place between an individual and (a) the organization, (b) their supervisor, and (c) their work group. Surprisingly, researchers have overlooked the influence of social exchanges between employees and their work groups. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first article that collectively discusses the influences and interactions between the three predominate social exchange domains. In addition, the authors provide testable propositions that specify relationships between domains of exchange relationships, moderating organizational factors, and employee outcomes.
