虚拟团队共享式领导的双刃剑效应研究：基于调适性结构理论的视角

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01770

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

虚拟团队因新兴技术驱动而成为组织管理的潮流, 尤其全球疫情的爆发使得远程办公备受关注。共享式领导是与虚拟团队高度匹配的领导模式, 但现今学界对虚拟团队共享式领导作用机制的研究比较匮乏, 且集中在正面效应和团队层次, 忽略了共享式领导可能存在的负面效应及对个体层次的影响。研究基于调适性结构理论, 提出虚拟团队共享式领导有助于团队及个体内部动机和效能感的提升, 同时也会加剧团队内社会惰化现象和关系冲突水平, 引发员工的工作负荷和工作焦虑感, 进而对团队绩效和个体绩效产生双刃剑效应, 同时, 团队虚拟性、任务复杂性和任务重要性在其中起到调节作用。研究模型系统打开了虚拟团队共享式领导的影响机制黑箱, 为组织如何在虚拟情境下领导团队、提升绩效提供借鉴。

关键词: 虚拟团队, 共享式领导, 团队绩效, 个体绩效, 调适性结构理论

Abstract:

With remote working becoming a norm following the global pandemic, workers increasingly need to work in virtual teams supported by collaborative technologies. While the literature has highlighted the relevance of shared leadership for virtual teams, empirical research appears to focus on the positive effects of shared leadership on virtual teamwork at the team level while neglecting the negative effects of shared leadership on virtual team work at the individual level.

This paper argues that shared leadership is a double-edged sword in relation to virtual team leadership in terms of both team and individual performance. Using adaptive structuration theory, we propose a study to show that shared leadership in virtual teams is positively related to team performance through the mechanisms of team intrinsic motivation and team self-efficacy. Team virtuality plays an inverted U-shaped moderating role in the relationship between shared leadership and team self-efficacy, as well as the relationship between shared leadership and team intrinsic motivation. Before reaching a certain critical point, team virtuality plays a positive moderating role, and after reaching a critical point, team virtuality plays a negative moderating role. Task complexity positively moderates the effects of shared leadership on team self-efficacy and team intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, we propose that shared leadership in virtual teams is negatively related to team performance through the mechanisms of social loafing and relationship conflict. Team virtuality plays a positive moderating role in the relationship between shared leadership and social loafing, as well as the relationship between shared leadership and relationship conflict. While task complexity negatively moderates the effects of shared leadership on team self-efficacy and team intrinsic motivation.

Meanwhile, this study also shows that shared leadership is a double-edged sword in relation to virtual team leadership in terms of individual performance. On the one hand, we propose that shared leadership in virtual teams is positively related to individual performance through the mechanisms of individual intrinsic motivation and individual self-efficacy. Team virtuality plays an inverted U-shaped moderating role in the relationship between shared leadership and individual self-efficacy, as well as the relationship between shared leadership and individual intrinsic motivation. Before reaching a certain critical point, team virtuality plays a positive moderating role, and after reaching a critical point, team virtuality plays a negative moderating role. Task significance positively moderates the effects of shared leadership on individual self-efficacy and individual intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, shared leadership in virtual teams is negatively related to individual performance through the mechanisms of workload and job anxiety. Team virtuality plays a U-shaped moderating role in the relationship between shared leadership and workload, as well as the relationship between shared leadership and job anxiety. Before reaching a certain critical point, team virtuality plays a negative moderating role, and after reaching a critical point, team virtuality plays a positive moderating role. Task significance negatively moderates the effects of shared leadership on workload and job anxiety.

Our proposed research not only extends our understanding of the influence mechanisms and boundary conditions of shared leadership in virtual teams, but also provides suggestions to organizations for improving leadership and performance in virtual team contexts.

Key words: virtual teams, shared leadership, team performance, individual performance, adaptive structuration theory

中图分类号:

B849: C93

刘松博, 程进凯, 王曦. (2022). 虚拟团队共享式领导的双刃剑效应研究：基于调适性结构理论的视角. 心理科学进展 , 30(8), 1770-1784.

LIU Songbo, CHENG Jinkai, WANG Xi. (2022). The double-edged sword of shared leadership in virtual teams: A perspective from adaptive structuration theory. Advances in Psychological Science, 30(8), 1770-1784.

图/表 3

参考文献 117

[1]	陈晓红, 赵可. (2010). 团队冲突、冲突管理与绩效关系的实证研究. 南开管理评论, 13(5), 31-35.
[2]	顾琴轩, 张冰钦. (2017). 虚拟团队变革型和交易型领导对团队创造力的影响机理: 共享领导视角. 中国人力资源开发, (11), 6-16+107.
[3]	蒿坡, 龙立荣. (2017). 共享型领导的概念、测量与作用机制. 管理评论, 29(5), 87-101.
[4]	蒿坡, 龙立荣. (2020). 化被动为主动: 共享型领导对员工主动变革行为的影响及作用机制研究. 管理工程学报, 34(2), 11-20.
[5]	蒿坡, 龙立荣, 贺伟. (2015). 共享型领导如何影响团队产出? 信息交换、激情氛围与环境不确定性的作用. 心理学报, 47(10), 1288-1299.
[6]	李迁, 姜霞, 盛昭瀚. (2019). 团队信任、共享领导力与新产品开发创新绩效关系. 科研管理, 40(12), 292-300.
[7]	宋琪, 陈扬. (2021). 需求和接受的授权型领导匹配对下属工作结果的影响:情绪耗竭的中介作用. 心理学报, 53(8), 890-903.
[8]	宋源. (2007). 虚拟团队中的共享领导模式. 中国人力资源开发, (8), 13-16.
[9]	王重鸣, 唐宁玉. (2006). 虚拟团队研究: 回顾、分析和展望. 科学学研究, (1), 117-124.
[10]	王灏晨, 温珂. (2020). 新冠肺炎疫情的危中之机——加速我国数字化转型. 科学学研究, 38(3), 393-395.
[11]	王丽平, 李忠华. (2017). 半虚拟创新团队中虚拟性概念界定与量表开发. 科技进步与对策, 34(3), 110-116.
[12]	王亮, 牛雄鹰, 石冠峰. (2017). 互联网背景下共享型领导对团队创造力的促进作用研究: 边界行为视角. 科技进步与对策, 34(1), 141-146.
[13]	王敏, 李淑敏. (2017). 工作负荷对个体感知到的团队内冲突的影响——控制点及情感信任的调节作用. 管理评论, 29(4), 122-133.
[14]	王永丽, 邓静怡, 任荣伟. (2009). 授权型领导、团队沟通对团队绩效的影响. 管理世界, (4), 119-127.
[15]	魏薇, 房俨然, 李剑南, 施俊琦, 莫申江. (2020). 冲突对绩效的影响: 个体、团队宜人性的调节作用. 心理学报, 52(3), 345-356.
[16]	吴江华, 顾琴轩, 梁冰倩. (2017). 共享领导与员工创造力: 一个被调节的中介模型. 中国人力资源开发, (11), 43-52.
[17]	吴丽薇, 顾琴轩. (2016). 虚拟团队共享领导及其影响因素与作用结果研究评述. 科技管理研究, 36(12), 101-106.
[18]	吴铁钧, 徐柏荣, 段锦云. (2017). 团队冲突: 概念构思、影响因素和结果. 心理研究, 10(2), 67-73.
[19]	袁朋伟, 董晓庆, 翟怀远, 冯群. (2018). 共享领导对知识员工创新行为的影响研究——知识分享与团队凝聚力的作用. 软科学, 32(1), 87-91.
[20]	张鹏程, 蒋美琴, 李菊, 陈菲. (2018). 领导权力分享对个体创意倡导的双刃剑效应研究. 管理科学, 31(3), 40-50.
[21]	赵宏超, 于砚文, 王玉珏, 吴春波. (2018). 共享型领导如何影响新生代员工建言?——积极互惠与责任知觉的作用. 中国人力资源开发, 35(3), 29-40.
[22]	赵鹏娟, 赵国祥. (2013). 知识型员工共享领导对团队绩效的影响: 团队学习能力的中介效应. 心理与行为研究, 11(3), 374-379.
[23]	赵曙明, 赵筠. (2004). 虚拟团队的十大价值研究. 中国劳动, (2), 32-34.
[24]	Amabile T. M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3(3), 185-201. doi: 10.1016/1053-4822(93)90012-S URL
[25]	Balthazard P. A., Waldman D. A., Howell J. M., & Atwater L. (2004, February). Shared leadership and group interaction styles in problem-solving virtual teams. Paper presented at the meeting of 37^th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, USA.
[26]	Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Personnel Psychology, 50, 801.
[27]	Baruch Y., & Lambert R. (2007). Organizational anxiety: Applying psychological concepts into organizational theory. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(1), 84-99. doi: 10.1108/02683940710721956 URL
[28]	Bell B. S., & Kozlowski S. W. J. (2002). A typology of virtual teams: Implications for effective leadership. Group & Organization Management, 27(1), 14-49.
[29]	Bergman J. Z., Rentsch J. R., Small E. E., Davenport S. W., & Bergman S. M. (2012). The shared leadership process in decision-making teams. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(1), 17-42. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2010.538763 URL
[30]	Berkowitz L. (1953). Sharing leadership in small, decision- making groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48(2), 231-238. doi: 10.1037/h0058076 URL
[31]	Bligh M. C., Pearce C. L., & Kohles J. C. (2006). The importance of self-and shared leadership in team based knowledge work: A meso-level model of leadership dynamics. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(4), 296-318. doi: 10.1108/02683940610663105 URL
[32]	Bunderson J. S., van der Vegt G. S., Cantimur Y., & Rink F. (2016). Different views of hierarchy and why they matter: Hierarchy as inequality or as cascading influence. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1265-1289. doi: 10.5465/amj.2014.0601 URL
[33]	Campbell D. J. (1988). Task complexity: A review and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40-52. doi: 10.2307/258353 URL
[34]	Campbell D. J., & Gingrich K. F. (1986). The interactive effects of task complexity and participation on task performance: A field experiment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38(2), 162-180. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(86)90014-2 URL
[35]	Castellano S., Chandavimol K., Khelladi I, & Orhan M. A. (2021). Impact of self-leadership and shared leadership on the performance of virtual R & D teams. Journal of Business Research, 128, 578-586. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.030 URL
[36]	Chan D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234-246. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.234 URL
[37]	Charlier S. D., Stewart G. L., Greco L. M., & Reeves C. J. (2016). Emergent leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel investigation of individual communication and team dispersion antecedents. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(5), 745-764. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.05.002 URL
[38]	Chen G., & Kanfer R. (2006). Toward a systems theory of motivated behavior in work teams. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 223-267. doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085(06)27006-0 URL
[39]	Chidambaram L., & Tung L. L. (2005). Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology- supported groups. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 107-234. doi: 10.1287/isre.1050.0060 URL
[40]	Cooper R. B., & Jayatilaka B. (2006). Group creativity: The effects of extrinsic, intrinsic, and obligation motivations. Creativity Research Journal, 18(2), 153-172. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1802_3 URL
[41]	Coun M. J. H., Peters P., & Blomme R. (2019). “Letʼs share!” The mediating role of employeesʼ self-determination in the relationship between transformational and shared leadership and perceived knowledge sharing among peers. European Management Journal, 37(4), 481-491. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2018.12.001 URL
[42]	Cramton C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098 URL
[43]	Day D. V., Gronn P., & Salas E. (2004). Leadership capacity in teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(6), 857-880. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.001 URL
[44]	Deci E. L., & Ryan R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 URL
[45]	Desanctis G., & Poole M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-287. doi: 10.1287/orsc.5.2.121 URL
[46]	DeVaro J., Li R., & Brookshire D. (2007). Analysing the job characteristics model: New support from a cross-section of establishments. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(6), 986-1003.
[47]	D’Innocenzo, L., Mathieu, J. E., & Kukenberger, M. R. (2016). A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership-team performance relations. Journal of Management, 42(7), 1964-1991. doi: 10.1177/0149206314525205 URL
[48]	Drescher G., & Garbers Y. (2016). Shared leadership and commonality: A policy-capturing study. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(2), 200-217. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.02.002 URL
[49]	Drescher M. A., Korsgaard M. A., Welpe I. M., Picot A., & Wigand R. T. (2014). The dynamics of shared leadership: Building trust and enhancing performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(5), 771-783. doi: 10.1037/a0036474 pmid: 24731178
[50]	Eisenberg J., Gibbs J., & Erhardt N. (2016). The role of vertical and shared leadership in virtual team collaboration. In C. E. Graham (Ed.), Strategic management and leadership for systems development in virtual spaces (pp. 22-42). Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference.
[51]	Faraj S., & Sambamurthy V. (2006). Leadership of information systems development projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53(2), 238-249. doi: 10.1109/TEM.2006.872245 URL
[52]	Fausing M. S., Joensson T. S., Lewandowski J., & Bligh M. (2015). Antecedents of shared leadership: Empowering leadership and interdependence. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 36(3), 271-291. doi: 10.1108/LODJ-06-2013-0075 URL
[53]	Fran E. C., & Priya V. (2019). Shared leadership in a medical division of an academic hospital. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 34(1), 71-76. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-05-2019-0137 URL
[54]	George J. M. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 35(1), 191-202.
[55]	Gilson L., Maynard M. T., Young N. C. J., Vartiainen M., & Hakonen M. (2014). Virtual teams research: 10 Years, 10 Themes, and 10 Opportunities. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1313-1337. doi: 10.1177/0149206314559946 URL
[56]	Gong Y., Huang J.-C., & Farh J.-L. (2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self- efficacy. The Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765-778.
[57]	Grant A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48-58. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48 pmid: 18211134
[58]	Grant A. M., & Ashford S. J. (2008). The dynamics of proactivity at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 3-34. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.002 URL
[59]	Greer L. L., van Bunderen L., & Yu S. Y. (2017). The dysfunctions of power in teams: A review and emergent conflict perspective. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37(6), 103-124 doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.005 URL
[60]	Greer L. L., & van Kleef G. A. (2010). Equality versus differentiation: The effects of power dispersion on group interaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(6), 1032-1044. doi: 10.1037/a0020373 URL
[61]	Hackman J. R., & Oldham G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159-170. doi: 10.1037/h0076546 URL
[62]	Hobfoll S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513-524. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.44.3.513 pmid: 2648906
[63]	Hobfoll S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6(4), 307-324. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.6.4.307 URL
[64]	Hobfoll S. E., Halbesleben J., Neveu J. P., & Westman M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 103-128. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640 URL
[65]	Hobson J., & Beach J. R. (2000). An investigation of the relationship between psychological health and workload among managers. Occupational Medicine, 50(7), 518-522. doi: 10.1093/occmed/50.7.518 URL
[66]	Hoch J. E., & Dulebohn J. H. (2017). Team personality composition, emergent leadership and shared leadership in virtual teams: A theoretical framework. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 678-693. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.012 URL
[67]	Hoch J. E., & Kozlowski S. W. J. (2014). Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(3), 390-403. doi: 10.1037/a0030264 URL
[68]	Hoch J. E., Pearce C. L., & Welzel L. (2010). Is the most effective team leadership shared: The impact of shared leadership, age diversity, and coordination on team performance. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(3), 105-116. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000020 URL
[69]	Hoon H., & Tan T. M. L. (2008). Organizational citizenship behavior and social loafing: The role of personality, motives, and contextual factors. The Journal of Psychology, 142(1), 89-108. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.142.1.89-112 URL
[70]	Ilgen D. R., Hollenbeck J. R., Johnson M., & Jundt D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-543. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250 URL
[71]	Jarvenpaa S., Shaw T. R., & Staples D. S. (2004). Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information Systems Research, 15(3), 250-267. doi: 10.1287/isre.1040.0028 URL
[72]	Jehn K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256-282. doi: 10.2307/2393638 URL
[73]	Jiang K., Lepak D. P., Hu J., & Baer J. C. (2012). How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264-1294. doi: 10.5465/amj.2011.0088 URL
[74]	Karau S. J., & Williams K. D. (1997). The effects of group cohesiveness on social loafing and social compensation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1(2), 156-168.
[75]	Kim J., & Lee I. (2015). Non-orthogonal multiple access in coordinated direct and relay transmission. IEEE Communications Letters, 19(11), 2037-2040. doi: 10.1109/LCOMM.2015.2474856 URL
[76]	Kirkman B. L, & Mathieu J. E. (2005). The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31(5), 700-718. doi: 10.1177/0149206305279113 URL
[77]	Klein K. J., Ziegert J. C., Knight A. P., & Xiao Y. (2006). Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchical, and deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(4), 590-621. doi: 10.2189/asqu.51.4.590 URL
[78]	Kleingeld A., van Mierlo H., & Arends L. (2011). The effect of goal setting on group performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1289-1304. doi: 10.1037/a0024315 pmid: 21744940
[79]	Kocolowski M. D. (2010). Shared leadership: Is it time for a change? Emerging Leadership Journeys, 3(1), 22-32.
[80]	Kozlowski S. W. J., & Ilgen D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124. doi: 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x pmid: 26158912
[81]	Lee A., Willis S., & Tian A. W. (2017). Empowering leadership: A meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, mediation, and moderation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(3), 306-325. doi: 10.1002/job.2220 URL
[82]	Lee K. C., Lee D. S., & Seo Y. W. (2011, February). Effects of shared leadership on team creativity through knowledge- sharing in an E-learning environment. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication, Seoul, Korea.
[83]	Lemoine G. J., Koseoglu G., & Blum T. C. (2015,August). An integrative network approach to shared leadership: An illustrative case with creative tasks. Paper presented at the 75th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
[84]	Liao C. (2016). Leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 648-659. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.010 URL
[85]	Liu S., Hu J., Li Y., Wang Z., & Lin X. (2014). Examining the cross-level relationship between shared leadership and learning in teams: Evidence from China. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 282-295. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.08.006 URL
[86]	Locke E. A. (2003). Leadership:Starting at the top. In C. L. Pearce, & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 271-284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[87]	Malone T., & Crowston K. (1994). The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys, 26(1), 87-119. doi: 10.1145/174666.174668 URL
[88]	Mathieu J. E., Kukenberger M. R., D’Innocenzo L., & Reilly G. (2015). Modeling reciprocal team cohesion- performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members’ competence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 713-734. doi: 10.1037/a0038898 pmid: 25751749
[89]	McCarthy J. M., Trougakos J. P., & Cheng B. H. (2016). Are anxious workers less productive workers? It depends on the quality of social exchange. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(2), 279-291. doi: 10.1037/apl0000044 pmid: 26375962
[90]	Mcintyre H. H., & Foti R. J. (2013). The impact of shared leadership on teamwork mental models and performance in self-directed teams. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(1), 46-57.
[91]	Mertens N., Boen F., Steffens N., Cotterill S. T., Haslam S. A., & Fransen K. (2020). Leading together towards a stronger ‘us’: An experimental test of the effectiveness of the 5R Shared Leadership Program (5R^S) in basketball teams. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 23(8), 770-775. doi: S1440-2440(19)30777-7 pmid: 32107173
[92]	Morgeson F. P., & Hofmann D. A. (1999). The structure and function of collective constructs: Implications for multilevel research and theory development. The Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 249-265. doi: 10.5465/amr.1999.1893935 URL
[93]	Muethel M., Gehrlein S., & Hoegl M. (2012). Socio- demographic factors and shared leadership behaviors in dispersed teams: Implications for human resource management. Human Resource Management, 51(4), 525-548. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21488 URL
[94]	Murphy S. M., Wayne S. J., Liden R. C., & Erdogan B. (2003). Understanding social loafing: The role of justice perceptions and exchange relationships. Human Relations, 56(1), 61-84. doi: 10.1177/0018726703056001450 URL
[95]	Naik N., & Kim D. J. (2010, January). An extended adaptive structuration theory framework for determinants of virtual team success. Paper presented at the 31^st international conference on information systems, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA.
[96]	Nicolaides V. C., LaPort K. A., Chen T. R., Tomassetti A. J., Weis E. J., Zaccaro S. J., & Cortina J. M. (2014). The shared leadership of teams: A meta-analysis of proximal, distal, and moderating relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 923-942. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.06.006 URL
[97]	Nordbäck E. S., & Espinosa J. A. (2019). Effective coordination of shared leadership in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems. 36(1), 321-350. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2018.1558943 URL
[98]	Parker S., Williams H., & Turner N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636-652. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.636 URL
[99]	Pearce C. L., Manz C. C., & Sims H. P. (2008). The roles of vertical and shared leadership in the enactment of executive corruption: Implications for research and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(3), 353-359. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.03.007 URL
[100]	Peñarroja V., Orengo V., & Abad A. Z. (2017). Reducing perceived social loafing in virtual teams: The effect of team feedback with guided reflexivity. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(8), 424-435. doi: 10.1111/jasp.12449 URL
[101]	Perry S. J., Lorinkova N. M., Hunter E. M., Hubbard A., & McMahon J. T. (2016). When does virtuality really “work”? Examining the role of work-family and virtuality in social loafing. Journal of Management, 42(2), 449-479. doi: 10.1177/0149206313475814 URL
[102]	Pinkley R. L. (2013). Dimensions of conflict frame: Relation to disputant perceptions and expectations. International Journal of Conflict Management, 3(2), 95-113. doi: 10.1108/eb022707 URL
[103]	Robert L. P. (2013, February). A multi-level analysis of the impact of shared leadership in diverse virtual teams. Paper presented at the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 363-374), San Antonio, TX, USA.
[104]	Salancik G. R., & Pfeffer J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(2), 224-253. pmid: 10307892
[105]	Seshadri V., & Dr. Elangovan N. (2019). Role of manager in geographically distributed team: A review. Journal of Management, 6(1), 122-129.
[106]	Shiue Y. C., Chiu C. M., & Chang C. C. (2010). Exploring and mitigating social loafing in online communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 768-777. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.014 URL
[107]	Steiner I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York, NY: Academic Press.
[108]	Townsend A. M., DeMarie S. M., & Hendrickson A. R. (1998). Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 17-29.
[109]	Varshney D. (2019). Relationship between social loafing and the self-concept: Mediating role of perceived organisational politics. Journal of Indian Business Research, 11(1), 60-74. doi: 10.1108/JIBR-11-2017-0230 URL
[110]	Vroom V. R. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
[111]	Wang D., Waldman D. A., & Zhang Z. (2014). A meta- analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 181-198. doi: 10.1037/a0034531 URL
[112]	Wang X. H., Kim T. Y. & Lee D. R. (2016). Cognitive diversity and team creativity: Effects of team intrinsic motivation and transformational leadership. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3231-3239. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.026 URL
[113]	Weiss H. M., & Cropanzano R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 18, 1-74.
[114]	Wright T. A., & Hobfoll S. E. (2004). Commitment, psychological well-being and job performance: An examination of conservation of resources (COR) theory and job burnout. Journal of Business and Management, 9(4), 389-406.
[115]	Zaccaro S. J., & Bader P. (2003). E-leadership and the challenges of leading e-teams: Minimizing the bad and maximizing the good. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 377-387. doi: 10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00129-8 URL
[116]	Zhu J., Liao Z., Wang N., & Li W. D. (2017, August). A social identity perspective on shared leadership and team OCB. Paper presented at the 77^th annual meeting of the academy of management, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
[117]	Zhu J., Liao Z., Yam K. C., & Johnson R. E. (2018). Shared leadership: A state-of-the-art review and future research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(7), 834-852. doi: 10.1002/job.2296 URL