Observing Leadership as and in Networks: A Multilevel Investigation of Shared Leadership, Discrete Emotions, and Knowledge Behaviors

References

• Kumar V, Reinartz W. Loyalty programs: design and effectiveness. In: Customer Relationship Management. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer; 2018:179–205.
   Google Scholar
• Marzi G. On the nature, origins and outcomes of over featuring in the new product development process. J Eng Technol Manage. 2022;64:101685. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2022.101685
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee MY, Edmondson AC. Self-managing organizations: exploring the limits of less-hierarchical organizing. Res Organ Behav. 2017;37:35–58. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Cormican K. Shared leadership and team effectiveness: an investigation of whether and when in engineering design teams. Front in Psychol. 2021;11569198. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.569198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu J, Chen Z, Huang Q, Liu H, Huang S. A multilevel analysis of the relationship between shared leadership and creativity in inter-organizational teams. J Creative Behav. 2018;52(2):109–126. doi:10.1002/jocb.135
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Cormican K. Shared leadership and team creativity: a social network analysis in engineering design teams. J Technol Manage Innov. 2016;11(2):2–12. doi:10.4067/S0718-27242016000200001
   Google Scholar
• Han SJ, Lee Y, Beyerlein M, Kolb J. Shared leadership in teams: the role of coordination, goal commitment, and knowledge sharing on perceived team performance. Team Perform Manag. 2018;24(3–4):150–168. doi:10.1108/Tpm-11-2016-0050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klasmeier KN, Rowold J. A multilevel investigation of predictors and outcomes of shared leadership. J Organ Behav. 2020;41(9):915–930. doi:10.1002/job.2477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter DR, DeChurch LA, Braun MT, Contractor NS. Social network approaches to leadership: an integrative conceptual review. J Appl Psychol. 2015;100(3):597. doi:10.1037/a0038922
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayo M, Meindl JR, Pastor J-C. Shared leadership in work teams: a social network approach. In: Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership. Vol. 193–214. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2003:chap 9.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu J, Liao Z, Yam KC, Johnson RE. Shared leadership: a state-of-the-art review and future research agenda. J Organ Behav. 2018;39(7):834–852. doi:10.1002/job.2296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Smith BR, Dixon AL, Robertson B. Distributed leadership in teams: the network of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadersh Q. 2006;17(3):232–245. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doos M, Wilhelmson L. Fifty-five years of managerial shared leadership research: a review of an empirical field. Leadership-London. 2021;17(6):715–746. doi:10.1177/17427150211037809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinha R, Chiu CY, Srinivas SB. Shared leadership and relationship conflict in teams: the moderating role of team power base diversity. J Organ Behav. 2021;42(5):649–667. doi:10.1002/job.2515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmieleski KM, Cole MS, Baron RA. Shared authentic leadership and new venture performance. J Manage. 2012;38(5):1476–1499. doi:10.1177/0149206311415419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conroy SA, Becker WJ, Menges JI. The meaning of my feelings depends on who I am: work-related identifications shape emotion effects in organizations. Acad Manage J. 2017;60(3):1071–1093. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.1040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Den Hooff B, Schouten AP, Simonovski S. What one feels and what one knows: the influence of emotions on attitudes and intentions towards knowledge sharing. J Knowl Manag. 2012;16(1):148–158. doi:10.1108/13673271211198990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang Y-H. Coping with fear and guilt using mobile social networking applications: knowledge hiding, loafing, and sharing. Telemat Inform. 2017;34(5):779–797. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus RS. Emotion and Adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press; 1991a.
   Google Scholar
• Lazarus RS. Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. Am Psychol. 1991b;46(8):819–834. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.46.8.819
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee DS, Lee KC, Seo YW. An analysis of shared leadership, diversity, and team creativity in an e-learning environment. Comput Hum Behav. 2015;42(1):47–56. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweeney A, Clarke N, Higgs M. Shared leadership in commercial organizations: a systematic review of definitions, theoretical frameworks and organizational outcomes. Int J Manag Rev. 2019;21(1):115–136. doi:10.1111/ijmr.12181
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Innocenzo L, Mathieu JE, Kukenberger MR. A meta-analysis of different forms of shared leadership–team performance relations. J Manage. 2016;42(7):1964–1991. doi:10.1177/0149206314525205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeRue DS, Ashford SJ. Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Acad Manage Rev. 2010;35(4):627–647. doi:10.5465/amr.35.4.zok627
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emery C, Calvard TS, Pierce ME. Leadership as an emergent group process: a social network study of personality and leadership. Group Process Interg. 2013;16(1):28–45. doi:10.1177/1368430212461835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chiu CC, Owens BP, Tesluk PE. Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: the role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(12):1705–1720. doi:10.1037/apl0000159
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He H, Hu Y. The dynamic impacts of shared leadership and the transactive memory system on team performance: a longitudinal study. J Bus Res. 2021;130(6):14–26. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fransen K, Van Puyenbroeck S, Loughead TM, et al. Who takes the lead? Social network analysis as a pioneering tool to investigate shared leadership within sports teams. Soc Networks. 2015;43:28–38. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoppe B, Reinelt C. Social network analysis and the evaluation of leadership networks. Leadersh Q. 2010;21(4):600–619. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordback ES, Espinosa JA. Effective coordination of shared leadership in global virtual teams. J Manage Inform Syst. 2019;36(1):321–350. doi:10.1080/07421222.2018.1558943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu Y, Hao J-X, Dong X-Y, Khalifa M. A multilevel model for effects of social capital and knowledge sharing in knowledge-intensive work teams. Int J Inform Manage. 2013;33(5):780–790. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2013.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Tracy JL, Robins RW. The psychological structure of pride: a tale of two facets. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007;92(3):506–525. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson JB, Tesluk PE, Marrone JA. Shared leadership in teams: an investigation of antecedent conditions and performance. Acad Manage J. 2007;50(5):1217–1234. doi:10.2307/20159921
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang B, Knippenberg D, Gu Q. A cross‐level model of shared leadership, meaning, and individual creativity. J Organ Behav. 2021;42(1):68–83. doi:10.1002/job.2494
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams LA, DeSteno D. Pride and perseverance: the motivational role of pride. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008;94(6):1007–1017. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.1007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai Q, Lin W, Wang L. Family incivility and counterproductive work behavior: a moderated mediation model of self-esteem and emotional regulation. J Vocat Behav. 2016;94:11–19. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2016.02.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serenko A, Bontis N. Understanding counterproductive knowledge behavior: antecedents and consequences of intra-organizational knowledge hiding. J Knowl Manag. 2016;20(6):1199–1224. doi:10.1108/Jkm-05-2016-0203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homsma GJ, Van Dyck C, De Gilder D, Koopman PL, Elfring T. Learning from error: the influence of error incident characteristics. J Bus Res. 2009;62(1):115–122. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu MH, Chang CM. Examining interpersonal trust as a facilitator and uncertainty as an inhibitor of intra‐organisational knowledge sharing. Inform Syst J. 2014;24(2):119–142. doi:10.1111/isj.12000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang H-L, Cheng -H-H. Creative self-efficacy and its factors: an empirical study of information system analysts and programmers. Comput Hum Behav. 2009;25(2):429–438. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu X, Min Q, Wu D, Liu Z. How does social network diversity affect users’ lurking intention toward social network services? A role perspective. Inform Manage-Amster. 2020;57(7):103258. doi:10.1016/j.im.2019.103258
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahuja MK, Galletta DF, Carley KM. Individual centrality and performance in virtual R&D groups: an empirical study. Manage Sci. 2003;49(1):21–38. doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.1.21.12756
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barclay LJ, Kiefer T. Approach or avoid? Exploring overall justice and the differential effects of positive and negative emotions. J Manage. 2014;40(7):1857–1898. doi:10.1177/0149206312441833
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teo TS, Yu Y. Online buying behavior: a transaction cost economics perspective. Omega. 2005;33(5):451–465. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2004.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staples DS, Webster J. Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Inform Syst J. 2008;18(6):617–640. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00244.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kish-Gephart JJ, Detert JR, Treviño LK, Edmondson AC. Silenced by fear: the nature, sources, and consequences of fear at work. Res Organ Behav. 2009;29:163–193. doi:10.1016/j.riob.2009.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiewitz C, Restubog SLD, Shoss MK, Garcia PRJM, Tang RL. Suffering in silence: investigating the role of fear in the relationship between abusive supervision and defensive silence. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(5):731. doi:10.1037/apl0000074
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Halbusi H, Tang TL-P, Williams KA, Ramayah T. Do ethical leaders enhance employee ethical behaviors? Asian J Bus Ethics. 2022;11(1):105–135. doi:10.1007/s13520-022-00143-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Halbusi H, Williams KA, Ramayah T, Aldieri L, Vinci CP. Linking ethical leadership and ethical climate to employees’ ethical behavior: the moderating role of person–organization fit. Pers Rev. 2020;50(1):159–185. doi:10.1108/PR-09-2019-0522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiller NJ, Day DV, Vance RJ. Collective enactment of leadership roles and team effectiveness: a field study. Leadersh Q. 2006;17(4):387–397. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura A, Walters RH. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall; 1977.
   Google Scholar
• He W, Hao P, Huang X, et al. Different roles of shared and vertical leadership in promoting team creativity: cultivating and synthesizing team members’ individual creativity. Pers Psychol. 2020;73(1):199–225. doi:10.1111/peps.12321
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeRue DS, Nahrgang JD, Ashford SJ. Interpersonal perceptions and the emergence of leadership structures in groups: a network perspective. Organ Sci. 2015;26(4):1192–1209. doi:10.1287/orsc.2014.0963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergman JZ, Rentsch JR, Small EE, Davenport SW, Bergman SM. The shared leadership process in decision-making teams. J Soc Psychol. 2012;152(1):17–42. doi:10.1080/00224545.2010.538763
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu S, Hu J, Li Y, Wang Z, Lin X. Examining the cross-level relationship between shared leadership and learning in teams: evidence from China. Leadersh Q. 2014;25(2):282–295. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathieu JE, Kukenberger MR, D’innocenzo L, Reilly G. Modeling reciprocal team cohesion–performance relationships, as impacted by shared leadership and members’ competence. J Appl Psychol. 2015;100(3):713–734. doi:10.1037/a0038898
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman J. Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Sparrowe RT, Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Kraimer ML. Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Acad Manage J. 2001;44(2):316–325. doi:10.2307/3069458
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassan MS, Ariffin RNR, Mansor N, Al Halbusi H. The moderating role of willingness to implement policy on street-level bureaucrats’ multidimensional enforcement style and discretion. Int J Public Admin. 2021;1–15. doi:10.1080/01900692.2021.2001008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson JB. Internal Team Leadership: An Examination of Leadership Roles, Role Structure, and Member Outcomes. University of Maryland, College Park; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Huang X, Hsieh J, He W. Expertise dissimilarity and creativity: the contingent roles of tacit and explicit knowledge sharing. J Appl Psychol. 2014;99(5):816. doi:10.1037/a0036911
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huo W, Cai Z, Luo J, Men C, Jia R. Antecedents and intervention mechanisms: a multi-level study of R&D team’s knowledge hiding behavior. J Knowl Manag. 2016;20(5):880–897. doi:10.1108/Jkm-11-2015-0451
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Škerlavaj M, Connelly CE, Cerne M, Dysvik A. Tell me if you can: time pressure, prosocial motivation, perspective taking, and knowledge hiding. J Knowl Manag. 2018;22(7):1489–1509. doi:10.1108/JKM-05-2017-0179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Zyphur MJ, Zhang Z. A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychol Methods. 2010;15(3):209–233. doi:10.1037/a0020141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Selig JP. Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Commun Methods Meas. 2012;6(2):77–98. doi:10.1080/19312458.2012.679848
   Google Scholar
• Enders CK, Tofighi D. Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: a new look at an old issue. Psychol Methods. 2007;12(2):121–138. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.12.2.121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff NP. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012;63(1):539–569. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Halbusi H. Who pays attention to the moral aspects? Role of organizational justice and moral attentiveness in leveraging ethical behavior. Int J Ethics Syst. 2022;38(3):357–379. doi:10.1108/IJOES-09-2021-0180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassan MS, Raja Ariffin RN, Mansor N, Al Halbusi H. An examination of street-level bureaucrats’ discretion and the moderating role of supervisory support: evidence from the field. Administrat Sci. 2021;11(3):65. doi:10.3390/admsci11030065
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matta FK, Scott BA, Colquitt JA, Koopman J, Passantino LG. Is consistently unfair better than sporadically fair? An investigation of justice variability and stress. Acad Manage J. 2017;60(2):743–770. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yam KC, Christian MS, Wei W, Liao Z, Nai J. The mixed blessing of leader sense of humor: examining costs and benefits. Acad Manage J. 2018;61(1):348–369. doi:10.5465/amj.2015.1088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Černe M, Nerstad CG, Dysvik A, Škerlavaj M. What goes around comes around: knowledge hiding, perceived motivational climate, and creativity. Acad Manage J. 2014;57(1):172–192. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.0122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babcock P. Shedding light on knowledge management. Society Human Res Manage. 2004;49(5):46–51.
   Google Scholar
• Kumar Jha J, Varkkey B. Are you a cistern or a channel? Exploring factors triggering knowledge-hiding behavior at the workplace: evidence from the Indian R&D professionals. J Knowl Manag. 2018;22(4):824–849. doi:10.1108/JKM-02-2017-0048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Labafi S. Knowledge hiding as an obstacle of innovation in organizations a qualitative study of software industry. AD-Minist. 2017;30:131–148. doi:10.17230/ad-minister.30.7
   Google Scholar
• Li N, Zheng X, Harris TB, Liu X, Kirkman BL. Recognizing “me” benefits “we”: investigating the positive spillover effects of formal individual recognition in teams. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(7):925. doi:10.1037/apl0000101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar