No abstract

Based on a multilevel data set collected from 599 individuals working in 102 self-managing teams, we examined the relationship between emotional intelligence (EI) and team member performance, focusing on the dimensions of teamwork and leadership performance. Furthermore, we explored the moderating role of team-level characteristics, such as noninformational diversity, size, and collective EI on the EI–performance relationship. As predicted, team members with higher EI were better at facilitating teamwork and playing the role of an informal leader than those with lower EI. The positive contribution of EI on team member performance was stronger for teams with greater diversity, larger sizes, and with lower average levels of team member EI. The study suggests that managers of self-managing teams should emphasize EI in their selection, training, and evaluation systems.

In this study, I have provided the first review of recent multilevel developments in the leader– member exchange (LMX) literature and identified fruitful areas for future research. After thoroughly reviewing conceptualization and operationalization in the literature, I summarized empirical findings at the dyadic, individual within-team, and team levels. I then addressed confusion in conceptualization and operationalization in the literature. I also suggested additional antecedents, moderators, and outcome variables for future researchers to focus on for the expansion of the nomological networks of the various multilevel LMX constructs. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Regarding the effect of identification on creativity in groups, two theoretical views compete. One view emphasizing group‐welfare motives underlying identification proposes a positive identification–creativity relationship in groups because members sharing high group identification are motivated to engage in behaviors that they believe are optimal for their group, including those that depart from the group's status quo, thus resulting in enhanced group creativity. The other view highlighting affiliative motives underlying identification, in contrast, posits a negative identification–creativity relationship in groups because highly identified members are motivated to engage in behaviors that certify their belongingness in the group, that is, behaviors that conform to the existing group norms and status quo, which constrains the group's potential for creativity. This study aims to reconcile these competing perspectives by invoking regulatory focus theory. Drawing on the notion that group identification effects rely on the content of group identity that the identification is based on, the authors suggest that group regulatory focus, as a critical group identity content, moderates the identification–creativity relationship in groups; the relationship is positive when the group's regulatory focus is highly promotion‐oriented, whereas it is negative when the group's regulatory focus is highly prevention‐oriented. Analyzing data from 65 workgroups in a cosmetics company in Korea, the authors show evidence that the identification–creativity relationship is positive in groups with a high promotion focus. The prediction regarding the prevention–focus moderation effect is not supported. The implications of the findings for both theory and practice are discussed.

No abstract