The current study provides a comprehensive analysis and integration of the literature on the social network correlates of individual innovation. Reviewing the extant literature, we cluster existing network measures into five general properties—size, strength, brokerage, closure, and diversity. Using meta-analysis, we estimate the population effect sizes between these network properties and innovation. Results showed that brokerage had the strongest positive relation to innovation, followed by size, diversity, and strength. Closure, by contrast, had a weak, negative association with innovation. In addition, we offer a path-analytic integration of the literature proposing and testing the direct and indirect effects of the five properties on innovation. We suggest that network size and strength impact innovation through a web of relations with the more proximal features of brokerage, closure, and diversity. Our path-analytic integration considers the two dominant perspectives on the effects of social networks—brokerage versus closure—simultaneously allowing us to establish their relative efficacy in predicting innovation. In addition, our model highlights that network strength can have both negative and positive effects (via different direct and indirect pathways) and thus inherently involves a tradeoff. We discuss the implications of these results for future research and practice.

Despite the growing popularity of shared leadership, there is little research on how beliefs about the benefits of shared leadership—a shared leadership structure schema (LSS)—affect individual outcomes. We address this by integrating adaptive leadership and conservation of resources theories. We apply adaptive leadership theory to hypothesize that a shared LSS leads individuals to support shared leadership by interacting more frequently and taking on interpersonal responsibility, especially when low peer engagement signals a leadership void that shared LSS members try to fill. However, adaptive leadership theory does not discuss how the tendencies motivated by shared LSS impacts members’ outcome. Therefore, we apply conservation of resources theory to hypothesize that taking on interpersonal responsibility makes frequent interactions more stressful, thereby harming individual enjoyment. Further, the demands of interpersonal responsibility reduce members’ ability to process the information acquired in interactions, which negates interaction frequency’s usual performance benefits. Together, these theories suggest that, especially when peer engagement is low, shared LSS has a negative indirect effect on enjoyment and an attenuating effect on performance through interaction frequency due to shared LSS members taking on interpersonal responsibility. We test our model using five waves of multisource data on student consulting teams. Our results extend understanding of shared LSS’s consequences to the individual level and highlight potential costs of supporting shared leadership.

Information elaboration is crucial for successfully responding to change, and teams inevitably frame changes to ground them. Yet, there is sparse knowledge around how framing affects information elaboration. In investigating the relationship that framing has with information elaboration, we show that framing starts a domino effect throughout the phases of information elaboration. Our experiment shows that opportunity framing motivates teams to engage with the change by asking questions about it, which increases the sharing and integrating of unique information, thereby improving decision performance. In contrast, threat framing is followed by avoiding the change through making status quo-directed statements and then discussing shared information, ultimately lowering decision performance. Our findings contribute to the information elaboration literature by helping explain differences in information elaboration’s effectiveness through uncovering interdependent behaviors. Next, we move information elaboration’s antecedents beyond static characteristics to include dynamic tactics.

Motivation and emotion share a common theme: Both occur as a function of or in the presence of a valued object or goal. Investing attention, effort, and time into a particular goal implies value; emotioneliciting stimuli imply that the appraiser is not indifferent to that object. In this chapter, we review implications for motivation and emotion for ethnic groups in the United States. Considering motivation and emotion is a matter of elucidating differences in how members of each ethnic group may perceive different goals, priorities, and judgments in their environments. We provide a summary of the dominant theoretical frameworks in each domain that draws on research conducted in the United States and elsewhere, with the belief that these frameworks shed light on universal processes that have unique manifestations in each ethnic group. Although the intent is to focus on ethnic groups in the United States, because we draw from universal processes, much of the discussion here may apply to other countries, especially those with a Western majority.

No abstract