2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2010.02.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Managing sales teams in a virtual environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
0
5

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 71 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
1
38
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…First, our findings support Bell and Kozlowski's () proposition that an effective strategy for dispersed team leadership is to distribute leadership functions to the team in a way that fosters collaboration among team members. This study contributes to the limited existing empirical research that has examined distributed forms of leadership in dispersed teams by moving beyond the predominant focus on leadership in conjunction with the use of information and communication tools (e.g., Rapp et al., ; Surinder et al., ; Wakefield et al., ). Here, we show the utility of a leadership approach—empowering leadership—that shares power with subordinates to promote effective virtual collaboration behaviors and performance under dispersed team circumstances.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, our findings support Bell and Kozlowski's () proposition that an effective strategy for dispersed team leadership is to distribute leadership functions to the team in a way that fosters collaboration among team members. This study contributes to the limited existing empirical research that has examined distributed forms of leadership in dispersed teams by moving beyond the predominant focus on leadership in conjunction with the use of information and communication tools (e.g., Rapp et al., ; Surinder et al., ; Wakefield et al., ). Here, we show the utility of a leadership approach—empowering leadership—that shares power with subordinates to promote effective virtual collaboration behaviors and performance under dispersed team circumstances.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to performance-based outcomes, empowering leadership is positively associated with team behaviors, such as shared leadership (Hoch, 2013), knowledge creation (Menguc, Auh, & Uslu, 2013), learning (Yun, Faraj, & Sims, 2005), and effective planning processes (Rapp, Ahearne, Mathieu, & Rapp, 2010). Furthermore, empirical research indicates that empowering leadership has cross-level effects by influencing individual team members' outcomes, including (a) citizenship behaviors, due to customer learning climate and psychological empowerment (Auh, Menguc, & Jung, 2014); (b) innovative and teamwork behaviors and turnover intentions, due to members' affective commitment and psychological empowerment (G. Chen et al, 2011); and (c) safety compliance behaviors (Martínez-Córcoles, Gracia, Tomás, Peiró, & Schöbel, 2013).…”
Section: Team-level and Cross-level Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“….30** Creativity 1 Hon and Chan (2013) .28** Efficacy 2 Hon and Chan (2013) .44** Srivastava, Bartol, and Locke (2006) .47** Knowledge creation or sharing 2 Menguc, Auh, and Uslu (2013) .62** Srivastava et al (2006) .39** Performance 1 Faraj and Sambamurthy (2006) .33** Planning processes 1 Rapp, Ahearne, Mathieu, and Rapp (2010) .20* Proactive behaviors 1 Martin, Liao, and Campbell (2013) .53* Satisfaction 1 Martin et al (2013) .44* Task proficiency 1 Martin et al (2013) .27* Note. When multiple dimensions of empowering leadership were used, the average correlation was reported across these dimensions with the variable(s) of interest.…”
Section: Constructmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To determine whether data aggregation is justifiable and acceptable, this research calculates ICC 1 , ICC 2 , and rwg of its factors based on their mean values of each team (see Appendix B). ICC 1 represents the percentage of individual level variance that is attributable to team membership, while ICC 2 represents the reliability of team mean scores (e.g., Rapp et al, 2010). The statistic rwg represents the reliability within groups averaged across all teams (e.g., Somech, 2008).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%