We draw on a three-year qualitative study of the processual dynamics of implementing a sustainability strategy alongside an existing mainstream competitive strategy. We show that despite the legitimacy of the sustainability strategy at the organizational level, actors experience tensions with its implementation at the action level vis-à-vis the mainstream strategy, thus creating the potential for decoupling. Our findings show that working through these tensions on specific tasks, enables actors to legitimate the sustainability strategy in action and to co-enact it with the mainstream strategy within those tasks. Cumulatively, multiple instances of such co-enactment at the action level reinforce the organizational-level legitimacy of the sustainability strategy and its integration with the mainstream strategy. We draw these findings together into a dynamic process model that contributes to the literature on integration of dual strategies at the action and organizational levels as a process of legitimacy making.

Companies increasingly make use of geographically dispersed teams to capture knowledge residing at different locations. In this context, shared leadership is considered a key enabler of team performance. Taking a functional perspective on shared leadership, we thus investigate the relationship between shared leadership behaviors and team performance in dispersed teams. Furthermore, we analyze how socio‐demographic factors that are characteristic for dispersed teams (i.e., high female‐to‐male ratio, high mean age, and high levels of national diversity) affect shared leadership behaviors. Based on data from 96 dispersed teams, we show that shared leadership behavior fosters team performance. Further, we find the socio‐demographic characteristics typical for dispersed teams to foster shared leadership. Theoretical and managerial implications for human resource management are discussed. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Many virtual project teams perform better when leadership is shared (rather than centralized with the formal team leader); however, team leaders are often neither prepared to identify shared leadership potential nor to actually share leadership responsibility. Based on a study of 96 globally dispersed software development teams we show that team leaders tend to underestimate the team members’ capacity to lead themselves. As a consequence, these leaders monopolize decision‐making authority and provide insufficient levels of autonomy for team members to tackle their tasks. Preventing the team members from unfolding their true potential, these leaders unconsciously jeopardize virtual team performance. Paradoxically, it is thus team leaders themselves hindering leadership effectiveness in virtual teams.

Interpersonal trust refers to the willingness to make oneself vulnerable to the actions of another party. Trust is generally acknowledged as fostering knowledge exchange and thus contributing to new product development (NPD) team effectiveness. However, the conditions under which NPD teams come to rely more heavily on trust to facilitate effectiveness remain unclear. With burgeoning global collaboration on new product development, we analyze how the characteristics of global NPD teams, i.e., geographic dispersion, computermediated communication (e.g., e-mail, video-conferencing), team membership flexibility, and national diversity moderate the trust-effectiveness relationship. Our results show that trust is more important under the condition of geographic dispersion, computer-mediated communication, and national diversity. By specifying when trust influences NPD team effectiveness in globally dispersed teams, we discuss the theoretical implications and provide recommendations for management. R&D Management 42, 1, 2012.

Drawing on the capability-based view, we provide new theoretical arguments related to innovation capabilities rather than realized innovation output in firms with family involvement. We focus on technology-based product innovation capabilities and use data from a sample of 119 German manufacturing firms to show that family involvement is positively related to dynamic innovation capabilities. Specifically, the degree of family involvement, which describes the owner family's ability to influence firm behavior, is positively related to sensing innovation opportunities and to transforming a firm's innovation processes, while it is insignificantly related to seizing innovation opportunities. The findings suggest that dynamic innovation capabilities are an important characteristic that differs between firms with varying levels of family involvement.