Advertisement

Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 47, Issue 6, pp 655–673 | Cite as

The positive role of global leaders in enhancing multicultural team innovation

  • Alon Lisak
  • Miriam Erez
  • Yang Sui
  • Cynthia Lee
Article

Abstract

This study contributes to the empirical research on leadership of multicultural teams from the Positive Organizational Scholarship perspective (POS). Following the information/decision-making processes perspective on team cultural diversity, we examined the positive effect of leaders’ global identity, on multicultural team innovation. We proposed that R&D, multicultural team leaders with high global identity foster team-shared innovation goals and motivate team members to adopt communication inclusion behavior, making sure that they all understand each other. Furthermore, we propose that the effect of fostering team shared innovation goals on communication inclusion will be stronger for teams with perceived high, rather than low, cultural diversity and that team communication inclusion will positively affect team innovation. Participants were 574 R&D multicultural team members, their leaders, and their leaders’ managers in 82 co-located teams in a Chinese branch of a large, German global organization. Using SEM analysis, our findings supported our research model, demonstrating that multicultural team leaders with high global identity leveraged cultural diversity to promote innovative goals, which further enhanced team communication inclusion and its positive impact on team innovation. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications to the POS perspective on cultural diversity.

Keywords

innovation and R&D leadership theories organizational behavior structural equation modeling 

Résumé

Cette étude contribue à la recherche empirique sur le leadership des équipes multiculturelles dans la perspective de la « Positive Organizational Scholarship » (POS). En nous appuyant sur la perspective des processus de l’information/prise de décision sur la diversité culturelle des équipes, nous avons étudié l’effet positif de l’identité globale des leaders sur l’innovation des équipes multiculturelles. Nous avons proposé que les leaders d’équipes multiculturelles en R&D avec une identité globale forte favorisent les objectifs d’innovation partagée par l’équipe et motivent les membres de l’équipe à adopter un comportement intégrant la communication, s’assurant qu’ils se comprennent tous mutuellement. Par ailleurs, nous postulons que l’effet de faciliter des objectifs d’innovation partagée par l’équipe sur l’intégration de la communication sera plus fort pour les équipes avec une diversité culturelle perçue élevée, plutôt que faible, et que l’intégration de la communication d’équipe va influencer positivement l’innovation d’équipe. Les participants sont 574 membres d’équipes multiculturelles en R&D, leurs leaders et les managers de leurs leaders dans 82 équipes localisées dans la succursale chinoise d’un grand groupe global allemand. Utilisant un modèle d’équations structurelles, nos résultats valident notre modèle de recherche, montrant que les leaders d’équipes multiculturelles avec une identité globale forte valorisent la diversité culturelle pour promouvoir les objectifs d’innovation, qui ont par ailleurs amélioré l’intégration de la communication d’équipe et son impact positif sur l’innovation d’équipe. Nous discutons les contributions théoriques et managériales à la perspective POS sur la diversité culturelle.

Resumen

Este estudio contribuye a la investigación empírica en equipos multiculturales desde la perspectiva del « Positive Organizational Scholarship » (POS). Siguiendo la perspectiva de los procesos de información/toma de decisiones en diversidad cultural en equipos, examinamos los efectos positivos en la identidad global de los líderes, en la innovación en equipos multiculturales. Proponemos que la I+D, lideres de equipos multiculturales con alta identidad global promueven metas de innovación compartidas por el equipo y motivan a los miembros del equipo a adoptar comportamientos de comunicación incluyente, asegurando que se entienden entre ellos. Además, proponemos que el efecto de promover metas de innovación compartidas por el equipo en comunicación incluyente será más fuerte en equipos percibidos como altos, en lugar de bajos, diversidad cultural y que la comunicación incluyente del equipo afectará positivamente la innovación del equipo. Los participantes fueron 574 miembros de equipos multiculturales de I+D, sus líderes, y los gerentes de sus líderes en 82 equipos ubicados en una misma subsidiaria china de una gran, organización global alemana. Usando análisis SEM, nuestros hallazgos apoyan nuestro modelo investigativo, demostrando que los lideres de equipos multiculturales con una identidad global alta apalancan diversidad cultural para promover metas innovadoras, las cuales aumentan la comunicación incluyente del equipo e impacta positivamente la innovación del equipo. Discutimos las implicaciones teóricas y practicas a la perspectiva POS de diversidad cultural.

Resumo

Este estudo contribui para a pesquisa empírica sobre liderança de equipes multiculturais a partir da perspectiva acadêmica organizacional positiva (POS). De acordo com a perspectiva de processos de informação/tomada de decisão sobre a diversidade cultural da equipe, nós examinamos o efeito positivo da identidade global dos líderes, na inovação de equipes multiculturais. Propusemos que P & D, líderes de equipes multiculturais com elevada identidade global promovem objetivos de inovação compartilhados pela equipe e motivam os membros da equipe a adotar um comportamento de inclusão da comunicação, certificando-se que todos se entendem mutuamente. Além disso, nós propomos que o efeito de promover metas de inovação compartilhadas pela equipe sobre a inclusão de comunicação será mais forte para equipes com alta, e não baixa, diversidade cultural percebida, e que a inclusão da comunicação da equipe vai afetar positivamente sua inovação. Os participantes foram 574 membros de equipes multiculturais de P & D, seus líderes e os gerentes de seus líderes em 82 equipes localizadas em uma filial chinesa de uma grande organização global alemã. Usando análise SEM, nossos achados suportaram nosso modelo de pesquisa, demonstrando que líderes de equipes multiculturais com elevada identidade global alavancaram a diversidade cultural para promover objetivos inovadores, que posteriormente aprimoraram a inclusão da comunicação na equipe e o impacto positivo na inovação da equipe. Nós discutimos as implicações teóricas e práticas para a perspectiva POS sobre a diversidade cultural.

概要

这项研究有助于基于积极组织学术(POS)视角的多元文化团队领导力的实证研究。跟随关于团队文化多元性的信息/决策制定过程视角, 我们检验了领导者的全球认同对多元文化团队创新的正向效应。我们提议, R&D、有高度全球认同的多元文化团队领导者培养了团队共享的创新目标, 并且激发了团队成员采取沟通包含行为, 确保他们都理解彼此。此外, 我们提议培养团队共享创新目标对沟通包含的效应对感知高, 而非低的文化多元性的团队会更强, 团队沟通包含会正向影响团队创新。参与者是一家大型德国全球组织在中国分公司的82个共处一地团队的574名多元文化团队成员、他们的领导, 以及他们领导的管理者。使用SEM分析, 我们的研究结果支持了我们的研究模型, 证明高全球认同的多元文化团队领导者利用文化多样性促进创新目标, 这进一步增强了团队沟通包含和它对团队创新的正向影响。我们讨论POS视角看待文化多样性的理论和实践启示。

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the SHRM Foundation (Grant No. 164). The interpretations, conclusions and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the SHRM Foundation. The survey was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants (Grant No. 71232002). We thank Guest Editor Guenter Stahl and the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments. We thank Etti Doveh and Ayala Cohen for their statistical assistance and Ella Glikson for her help in data collection.

References

  1. Adler, N. J. 1983. A typology of management studies involving culture. Journal of International Business Studies, 14(2): 29–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. 1991. Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Aïssaoui, R., & Fabian, F. 2015. The French paradox: Implications for variations in global convergence. Journal of International Management, 21(1): 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. 2014. Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5): 1297–1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnett, J. J. 2002. The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist, 57(10): 774–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baranik, L. E., Wang, M., Gong, Y., & Shi, J. 2015. Customer mistreatment, employee health, and job performance cognitive rumination and social sharing as mediating mechanisms. Journal of Management. doi: 10.1177/0149206314550995.
  7. Barrick, Bradley, B. H., Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Colbert, A. E. 2007. The moderating role of top management team interdependence: Implications for real teams and working groups. Academy of Management Journal, 50(3): 544–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bartko, J. J. 1976. On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5): 762–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., Jung, D. I., & Berson, Y. 2003. Predicting unit performance by assessing transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2): 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Behfar, K., Kern, M., & Brett, J. 2006. Managing challenges in multicultural teams. Research on Managing Groups and Teams, 9: 233–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bentler, P. M. 1990. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2): 238–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Biermeier-Hanson, B., Liu, M., & Dickson, M. W. 2015. Alternate views of global leadership: Applying global leadership perspectives to leading global teams. In J. L. Wildman & R. L. Griffith (Eds) leading global teams: 95–223. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Bird, A. 2013. Mapping the content domain of global leadership competencies. In M. E. Mendenhall, J. S. Osland, A. Bird, G. R. Oddou, M. L. Maznevski, M. J. Stevens, & G. K. Stahl (Eds) Global leadership: Research, practice and development: 80–96. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Bird, A., & Mendenhall, M. E. 2016. From cross-cultural management to global leadership: Evolution and adaptation. Journal of World Business, 51(1): 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. 2009. A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflicting demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3): 305–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bliese, P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. Kozlowski (Eds) Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349–381. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  17. Brannen, M. Y. 2004. When Mickey loses face: Recontextualization, semantic fit, and the semiotics of foreignness. Academy of Management Review, 29(4): 593–616.Google Scholar
  18. Brett, J., Behfar, K., & Kern, M. C. 2006. Managing multicultural teams. Harvard Business Review, 84(11): 84–91.Google Scholar
  19. Brislin, R. W. 1980. Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds) Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Methodology: 339–444. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  20. Brodbeck, F. C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., & Schulz-Hardt, S. 2007. Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Academy of Management Review, 32(2): 459–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Butler, C. L., Zander, L., Mockaitis, A., & Sutton, C. 2012. The global leader as boundary spanner, bridge maker, and blender. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5(2): 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. 1993. Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4): 823–847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheng, C. Y., Chua, R. Y., Morris, M. W., & Lee, L. 2012. Finding the right mix: How the composition of self‐managing multicultural teams’ cultural value orientation influences performance over time. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3): 389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cyr, D. 2008. Modeling web site design across cultures: Relationships to trust, satisfaction, and e-loyalty. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(4): 47–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dahlin, K. B., Weingart, L. R., & Hinds, P. J. 2005. Team diversity and information use. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6): 1107–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davison, G., & Blackman, D. A. 2005. The role of mental models in sustaining innovation in teams. European Journal of Innovation Management, 8(4): 409–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., Bechtoldt, M. N., & Baas, M. 2011. Group creativity and innovation: A motivated information processing perspective. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1): 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. De Dreu, C. K., Nijstad, B. A., & Van Knippenberg, D. 2008. Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12(1): 22–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. De Meyer, A. 1991. Tech talk: How managers are stimulating global R&D communication. MIT Sloan Management Review, 32(3): 49–58.Google Scholar
  31. DiStefano, J. J., & Maznevski, M. L. 2000. Creating value with diverse teams in global management. Organizational Dynamics, 29(1): 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Durand, R., & Jacqueminet, A. 2015. Peer conformity, attention, and heterogeneous implementation of practices in MNEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(8): 917–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Earley, C. P., & Mosakowski, E. 2000. Creating hybrid team cultures: An empirical test of transnational team functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 43(1): 26–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Eisenbeiss, S. A., & Boerner, S. 2010. Transformational leadership and R&D innovation: Taking a curvilinear approach. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(4): 364–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Eisenbeiss, S. A., Van Knippenberg, D., & Boerner, S. 2008. Transformational leadership and team innovation: Integrating team climate principles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6): 1438–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Erez, M. 2010. Commentary culture and job design. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3): 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Erez, M., & Drori, G. S. 2009. Global culture and organizational processes. In R. S. Bhagat & R. M. Steers (Eds) Handbook of culture, organizations, and work: 148–179. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Erez, M., & Earley, P. C. 1993. Culture, self-identity, and work. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Erez, M., & Gati, E. 2004. A dynamic, multi-level model of culture: From the micro level of the individual to the macro level of a global culture. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(4): 583–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Erez, M., Lisak, A., Harush, R., Glikson, E., Nouri, R., & Shokef, E. 2013. Going global: Developing management students’ cultural intelligence and global identity in culturally diverse virtual teams. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(3): 330–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Erez, M., & Shokef, E. 2008. The culture of global organizations. In P. Smith, M. Peterson, & D. Thomas (Eds) Handbook of cross-cultural management: 285–300. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gassmann, O. 2001. Multicultural teams: Increasing creativity and innovation by diversity. Creativity and Innovation Management, 10(2): 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gebert, D., Boerner, S., & Kearney, E. 2006. Cross-functionality and innovation in new product development teams: A dilemmatic structure and its consequences for the management of diversity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(4): 431–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gelfand, M. J., Leslie, L. M., Keller, K., & De Dreu, C. 2012. Conflict cultures in organizations: How leaders shape conflict cultures and their organizational-level consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6): 1131–1147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Gibson, C. B. 2001. From knowledge accumulation to accommodation: Cycles of collective cognition in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2): 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gibson, C. B., Huang, L., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. L. 2014. Where global and virtual meet: The value of examining the intersection of these elements in twenty-first-century teams. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1): 217–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Glikson, E., & Erez, M. 2013. Antecedents and consequences of cross understanding in multicultural teams. In G. P. Huber & K, Lewis (Chairs) The role of cross-understanding in team work: New empirical evidence, Symposium, Academy of Management Annual Meeting. Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
  48. Grant, A. M., & Berry, J. W. 2011. The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(1): 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Haas, M. R., & Cummings, J. N. 2015. Barriers to knowledge seeking within MNC teams: Which differences matter most? Journal of International Business Studies, 46(1): 36–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hajro, A., Gibson, C., & Pudelko, M. 2015. Knowledge exchange processes in multicultural teams: Linking organizational diversity climates to teams’ effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0442.
  51. Hammond, M., Palanski, M., & Clapp-Smith, R. 2016. Beyond (just) the workplace: A theory of leader development across multiple domains. Academy of Management Review. doi: 10.5465/amr.2014.0431.
  52. Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. 2002. Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5): 1029–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hinds, P. J., & Weisband, S. P. 2003. Knowledge sharing and shared understanding in virtual teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. G. Cohen (Eds) Virtual teams that work: Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness: 21–36. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  54. Hinds, P., Liu, L., & Lyon, J. 2011. Putting the global in global work: An intercultural lens on the practice of cross-national collaboration. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1): 135–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D., Chen, C. H., & Sacramento, C. A. 2011. How does bureaucracy impact individual creativity? A cross-level investigation of team contextual influences on goal orientation–creativity relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3): 624–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Homan, A. C., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S. E., Van Knippenberg, D., Ilgen, & Van Kleef, G. A. 2008. Facing differences with an open mind: Openness to experience, salience of intragroup differences, and performance of diverse work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 51(6): 1204–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hornsey, M. J., & Hogg, M. A. 1999. Subgroup differentiation as a response to an overly‐inclusive group: A test of optimal distinctiveness theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(4): 543–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. 2005. The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process: Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review, 30(1): 96–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1): 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hülsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F. 2009. Team-level predictors of innovation at work: A comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5): 1128–1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1): 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Jöreskog, K. G., & Yang, F. 1996. Nonlinear structural equation models: The Kenny-Judd model with interaction effects. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds) Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques: 57–87. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  63. Joshi, A., Lazarova, M. B., & Liao, H. 2009. Getting everyone on board: The role of inspirational leadership in geographically dispersed teams. Organization Science, 20(1): 240–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Kearney, E., & Gebert, D. 2009. Managing diversity and enhancing team outcomes: The promise of transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1): 77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. 2000. Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method. Psychometrika, 65(4), 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. 2004. Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2): 124–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. 1998. Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23(2): 325–340.Google Scholar
  68. Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. 2005. Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4): 645–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Lee, C., Farh, J. L., & Chen, Z. J. 2011. Promoting group potency in project teams: The importance of group identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(8): 1147–1162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Lester, S. W., Meglino, B. M., & Korsgaard, M. A. 2002. The antecedents and consequences of group potency: A longitudinal investigation of newly formed work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2): 352–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Leung, A. Y., Qiu, L., & Chiu, C. Y. 2014. The psychological science of globalization. In V. Benet-Martinez & Y. Y. Hong (Eds) Handbook of multicultural identity: Basic and applied perspectives: 181–201. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Lewis, K., Huber, G., Erez, M., Rariden, S., & Bayer, M. 2012. Cross-understanding measure. Working paper, University of Texas-Austin.Google Scholar
  73. Li, J., & Kozhikode, R. K. 2009. Developing new innovation models: Shifts in the innovation landscapes in emerging economies and implications for global R&D management. Journal of International Management, 15(3): 328–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lirio, P., Lee, M. D., Williams, M. L., Haugen, L. K., & Kossek, E. E. 2008. The inclusion challenge with reduced‐load professionals: The role of the manager. Human Resource Management, 47(3): 443–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Lisak, A., & Erez, M. 2015. Leadership emergence in multicultural teams: The power of global characteristics. Journal of World Business, 50(1): 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., & Freiberg, S. J. 1999. Understanding the dynamics of leadership: The role of follower self-concepts in the leader/follower relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78(3): 167–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. J. 2005. Identity, deep structure and the development of leadership skill. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(4): 591–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Maznevski, M. L., & Chui, C. 2013. Leading global teams. In M. E. Mendenhall, J. S. Osland, A. Bird, G. R. Oddou, M. L. Maznevski, M. J. Stevens, & G. K. Stahl (Eds) Global leadership: Research, practice and development: 140–172. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  79. McDonough, E. F., Kahnb, K. B., & Barczaka, G. 2001. An investigation of the use of global, virtual, and colocated new product development teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(2): 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Mendenhall, M. E., Reiche, B. S., Bird, A., & Osland, J. S. 2012. Defining the “global” in global leadership. Journal of World Business, 47(4): 493–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Miron-Spektor, E., Erez, M., & Naveh, E. 2011. The effect of conformist and attentive-to-detail members on team innovation: Reconciling the innovation paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4): 740–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Mohammed, S., Ferzandi, L., & Hamilton, K. 2010. Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36(4): 876–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Muthén, B. 1984. A general structural equation model with dichotomous, ordered categorical, and continuous latent variable indicators. Psychometrika, 49(1): 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. 1998–2015. Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User's guide. Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  85. Nouri, R., Erez, M., Rockstuhl, T., Ang, S., Lee, L., & Rafaeli, A. 2013. Taking the bite out of culture: The impact of task structure and task type on overcoming impediments to cross-cultural team performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(6): 739–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Nurmi, N., & Hinds, P. J. 2016. Job complexity and learning opportunities: A silver lining in the design of global virtual work. Journal of International Business Studies, advance online publication 10 March. doi: 10.1057/jibs.2016.11.
  87. Osland, J. 2008. An overview of the global leadership literature. In M. J. S. Mendenhall, A. Osland, A. Bird, G. Oddou, & M. Maznevski (Eds) Global leadership: Research, practice and development: 34–63. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  88. Osland, J., & Bird, A. 2006. Global leaders as experts. In W. Mobley & E. Weldon (Eds) Advances in global leadership, Vol. 4: 123–142. Stanford, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  89. Osland, J., Taylor, S., & Mendenhall, M. 2009. Global leadership: Progress and challenges. In R. Baghat & R. Steers (Eds) Handbook of culture, organization and work: 245–271. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Pearsall, M. J., Ellis, A. P., & Evans, J. M. 2008. Unlocking the effects of gender faultlines on team creativity: Is activation the key? Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1): 225–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Pelled, L. H., Ledford, G. E., & Mohrman, S. A. 1999. Demographic dissimilarity and workplace inclusion. Journal of Management Studies, 36(7): 1013–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Dierendonck, D. 2013. Cultural diversity and team performance: The role of team member goal orientation. Academy of Management Journal, 56(3): 782–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Pieterse, A. N., Van Knippenberg, D., & Van Ginkel, W. P. 2011. Diversity in goal orientation, team reflexivity, and team performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114(2): 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5): 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. 1990. Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2): 107–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. 2007. Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1): 185–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Randel, A., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B., & Shore, L. 2016. Leader inclusiveness, psychological diversity climate, and helping behaviors. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(1): 216–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Rockstuhl, T., & Ng, K. Y. 2008. The effects of cultural intelligence on interpersonal trust in multicultural teams. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds) Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement, and applications: 206–220. New York: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  99. Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. 2011. Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership–innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5): 956–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. 2010. Ensuring positiveness of the scaled difference Chi square test statistic. Psychometrika, 75(2): 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Klein, A., & Moosbrugger, H. 1998. Estimating nonlinear effects using a latent moderated structural equations approach. In R. E. Schumacker & G. A. Marcoulides (Eds) Interaction and nonlinear effects in structural equation modeling: 203–238. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  102. Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. 2008. Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. http://quantpsy.org.
  103. Shalley, C. E., Gilson, L. L., & Blum, T. C. 2009. Interactive effects of growth need strength, work context, and job complexity on self-reported creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3): 489–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. 2005. “What’s your story?” A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3): 395–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. 1993. The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organizational Science, 4(4): 577–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Shemla, M., Meyer, B., Greer, L., & Jehn, K. A. 2016. A review of perceived diversity in teams: Does how members perceive their team’s composition affect team processes and outcomes? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(S1): S89–S106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Shin, S. J., & Zhou, J. 2007. When is educational specialization heterogeneity related to creativity in research and development teams? Transformational leadership as a moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6): 1709–1721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Shokef, E., & Erez, M. 2006. Global work culture and global identity, as a platform for a shared understanding in multicultural teams. In E. Salas (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams, Vol. 9: 325–352. Amsterdam: Emerald.Google Scholar
  109. Shokef, E., & Erez, M. 2008. Cultural intelligence and global identity in multicultural teams. In S. Ang & L. Van Dyne (Eds) Handbook of cultural intelligence: Theory, measurement, and applications: 177–191. New York: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  110. Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., & Singh, G. 2011. Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4): 1262–1289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Smith-Jentsch, K. A., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Salas, E. 2008. Guided team self-correction impacts on team mental models, processes, and effectiveness. Small Group Research, 39(3): 303–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Sosik, J. J., & Dworakivski, A. C. 1998. Self-concept based aspects of the charismatic leader: More than meets the eye. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(4): 503–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. 2006. Empowering leadership in management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(6): 1239–1251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Stahl, G. K., Mäkelä, K., Zander, L., & Maznevski, M. L. 2010a. A look at the bright side of multicultural team diversity. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(4): 439–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Stahl, G. K., Maznevski, M. L., Voigt, A., & Jonsen, K. 2010b. Unraveling the effects of cultural diversity in teams: A meta-analysis of research on multicultural work groups. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(4): 690–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Stahl, G. K., & Tung, R. L. 2014. Towards a more balanced treatment of culture in international business studies: The need for positive cross-cultural scholarship. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(9): 1–24.Google Scholar
  117. Stanko, T. L., & Gibson, C. B. 2009. The role of cultural elements in virtual teams. In R. S. Bhaght & R. M. Steers (Eds) Cambridge handbook of culture organizations and work: 273–304. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Stasser, G. 1999. The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. In J. M. Levine, L. L. Thompson, & D. M. Messick (Eds) Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge: 49–69. New York: Psychological Press.Google Scholar
  119. Tajfel, H. 1976. Exit, voice and intergroup relations. In L. Strickland, E. Aboud, & K. Gergen (Eds) Social psychology in transition. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  120. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.) Psychology of intergroup relations: 7–24. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  121. Thatcher, S. M., & Patel, P. C. 2012. Group faultlines a review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management, 38(4): 969–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. 1973. A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Van der Kamp, M., Tjemkes, B. V., & Jehn, K. A. 2015. Faultline deactivation: Dealing with activated faultlines and conflicts in global teams. In J. L. Wildman & R. L. Griffith (Eds) Leading global teams: 269–293. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  124. Van Dick, R., Van Knippenberg, D., Hägele, S., Guillaume, Y. R., & Brodbeck, F. C. 2008. Group diversity and group identification: The moderating role of diversity beliefs. Human Relations, 61(10): 1463–1492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Van Knippenberg, D., & Hogg, M. A. 2003. A social identity model of leadership effectiveness in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25: 243–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. 2004. Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6): 1008–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. 2007. Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58: 515–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Vashdi, D. R., Bamberger, P. A., & Erez, M. 2013. Can surgical teams ever learn? The role of coordination, complexity, and transitivity in action team learning. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4): 945–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. 2008. Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1): 89–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Webster, J., & Wong, W. K. P. 2008. Comparing traditional and virtual group forms: Identity, communication and trust in naturally occurring project teams. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(1): 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. West, M. A. 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3): 355–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly, C. A. 1998. Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20: 77–140.Google Scholar
  133. Wilson, J. M., Goodman, P. S., & Cronin, M. A. 2007. Group learning. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1041–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Youssef, C. M., & Luthans, F. 2012. Positive global leadership. Journal of World Business, 47(4): 539–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Zander, L., Mockaitis, A. I., & Butler, C. L. 2012. Leading global teams. Journal of World Business, 47(4): 592–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. 2010. The influence of creative process engagement on employee creative performance and overall job performance: A curvilinear assessment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5): 862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alon Lisak
    • 1
  • Miriam Erez
    • 2
  • Yang Sui
    • 3
  • Cynthia Lee
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Ben-Gurion University of the NegevBeer-ShevaIsrael
  2. 2.Technion – Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael
  3. 3.Department of Business and Administration, Donlinks School of Economics and ManagementUniversity of Science and Technology BeijingBeijingChina
  4. 4.Northeastern UniversityBostonUSA
  5. 5.Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityKowloonHong Kong

Personalised recommendations