Abstract

Research problem: This study provides insights into the role that a leader plays in improving relational capital, thereby motivating team members' citizenship behaviors in distributed teams. We address the following research questions: (1) What is the role of inspirational leadership in cultivating relational capital (i.e., reciprocity and commitment) in distributed teams? (2) Are team members' citizenship behaviors (i.e., knowledge sharing and interpersonal helping) influenced by relational capital in distributed teams? (3) How does technology support for cognitive and affective contextualization facilitate leaders to improve organizational communication? Literature review: The purpose of the review was to provide a theoretical background for the variables in this study. Based on the relevant theories on relational capital, leadership, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and contextualization, this study reviewed how previous studies link these theories to one other, and proposed the positive relationship between leadership, relational capital and OCBs, as well as the moderating relationships of technology support for contextualization. Methodology: The researchers conducted a quantitative survey with 141 respondents in a major university in Asia. The subjects were part-time graduate students pursuing their master's degree. Researchers administrated a paper-based questionnaire along with a cover letter explaining the study's objectives. Responses indicating teams that were situated in only one location and their role as team leaders were removed from the analyses. Participation was completely voluntary. The researchers chose partial least squares to test the hypotheses since it has fewer restrictive assumptions and its ability for analyzing measurement and structural models. Results and discussion: This study highlights the importance of inspirational leaders in cultivating two kinds of relational capital, namely commitment and reciprocity. This study also explores the differential values of contextual information from the cognitive and affective dimensions. A key result is that the effect of inspirational leadership on reciprocity is strengthened when there is technology support for cognitive contextualization. At the same time, technology support for affective contextualization has a direct impact on commitment. These findings provide empirical support for affective and cognitive contextualization in distributed organizational communication, and suggest a way for distinguishing between reciprocity and commitment. This study concludes by illustrating the positive effects of commitment on citizenship behaviors, such as knowledge sharing and interpersonal helping. The implication of this study is that when teams are physically dispersed, there should be more emphasis on leadership with inspirational attributes to get their team members to perform beyond standard requirements. In addition, this study provides leaders and organizations with an opportunity to reflect on the appropriate technology that can be adopted to compensate for insufficient communication. The limitation of this study is that each respondent represents his/her working team. As a result, it may introduce bias to the findings. In addition, self-reported measures may also cause common method bias. Future research could consider the addition of objective measures and longitudinal work to reduce the possibility of common method bias, and investigate how work behaviors change over time.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2012-12-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2012.2188595
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 57 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.08.001
  2. 10.1287/mksc.8.4.310
  3. 10.1177/104649649903000504
  4. 10.1108/01437730910935756
  5. 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1
  6. 10.4135/9781452243610.n7
    Trust in Organizations Frontiers of Theory and Research  
  7. 10.1287/Orsc.1080.0383
  8. 10.1002/job.4030160309
  9. 10.1504/IJNVO.2008.016005
  10. 10.1037/0021-9010.87.5.858
  11. 10.1287/orsc.4.4.577
  12. Why should I share? examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic net…
    MIS Quart  
  13. 10.1111/j.1936-4490.1995.tb00082.x
  14. Sense of virtual community: Determinants and the moderating role of the virtual community…
    Int J Electron Commerce  
  15. 10.2307/20159571
  16. 10.1108/eb022856
  17. 10.1086/228943
  18. 10.2307/249690
  19. 10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00047-7
  20. 10.1007/BF02310555
  21. 10.2307/3151312
  22. 10.1017/CBO9780511815447
  23. 10.1177/0539018409102414
  24. 10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492
  25. 10.2307/4134400
  26. 10.1177/0021886300361002
  27. 10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072
  28. 10.1111/j.1465-7295.2006.00006.x
  29. 10.2307/20159054
  30. 10.2307/258189
  31. 10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538
  32. 10.1037/0022-3514.53.4.743
  33. 10.1016/S0963-8687(00)00045-7
  34. 10.1086/378616
  35. 10.1287/isre.1070.0113
  36. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(199907)20:4<511::AID-JOB900>3.0.CO;2-L
  37. 10.2307/258414
  38. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.007
  39. 10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098
  40. Out of sight, out of sync: Understanding conflict in distributed teams
    Organiz Sci  
  41. 10.1145/1137661.1137666
  42. 10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
  43. 10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x
  44. 10.2307/3250931
  45. 10.1287/isre.1050.0044
  46. 10.2307/259373
  47. 10.2307/420517
  48. 10.4159/9780674029095
    Structural Holes The Social Structure of Competition  
  49. Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis test of their relative validity
    J Appl Psychol  
  50. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
  51. 10.2307/3250961
  52. 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00025-9
  53. 10.2307/2092623
  54. 10.1287/orsc.3.2.179
  55. 10.1287/orsc.1060.0237
  56. 10.1287/orsc.5.3.456
  57. 10.1287/orsc.1050.0122