Research constructs and measurement

Team performance

Team performance is the behavioral perspective views performance in terms of the measurable behaviors that are relevant to the achievement of team goals (Campbell et al., 1993). Team performance was measured using five items directly drawn from Lin (2010).

Measurement items are stated as follows:

22

1. The collaboration of our team reduces redundancy of work content.

2. The collaboration of our team improves team efficiency.

3. The collaboration of our team coordinates the efforts of everyone on the team.

4. The collaboration of our team facilitates innovating new ideas.

5. The collaboration of our team streamlines the internal processes.

Team agility

Team agility is defined as the ability of a team to quickly respond to changes in a market environment (Christopher, 2000; Swafford et al., 2006) and a 8-item scale by Breu et al.

(2001) was used to measure the team agility. Measurement items are stated as follows:

1. Our team can develop new skills quickly.

2. Our team‟s responsiveness to changing needs of the other teams (or customers) is timely.

3. Our team‟s responsiveness to changing organizational conditions is timely.

4. Our team‟s speed of acquiring the skills necessary for business process change is fast.

5. Our team‟s effectiveness of cooperating across functional boundaries is good.

6. Our team‟s speed of acquiring new IT (or software) skills is fast.

7. Our team can switch to different projects (or missions) with ease.

8. Our team‟s speed of applying new management skills is fast.

Coopetition

In cooperation, Individuals believe that others‟ success facilitates their own success. Others‟

goal attainment promotes their success, as when they pursue a common vision and shared rewards (Deutsch, 1973). In competition, people believe that their goals are negatively related, that is, one‟s goal attainment precludes, or at least makes others less likely attain their goals. They pursue their own goals and may even be tempted to obstruct the goal progress of others (Deutsch, 1973). Both scales were used by Wong, Tjosvold, and Liu (2009). The five cooperative goal items measured the emphasis on mutual goals, shared rewards and common tasks. And the five competitive goal items measured the emphasis on incompatible goals and rewards. Measurement items are stated as follows:

23

Cooperation

1. Our team members „swim or sink‟ together.

2. Our team members want each other to succeed.

3. Our team members seek compatible attitude in terms of teamwork.

4. Our teamwork goes smoothly.

5. When our team members work together, we usually seek a solution that is good for the team.

Competition

1. Our team members structure things in ways that favor their own benefit rather than that of other team members.

2. Our team members have a „win–lose‟ relationship.

3. Our team members like to show that they are superior to each other.

4. Our team members‟ work attitude is incompatible with each other.

5. Our team members give high priority to the things they want to accomplish and low priority to the things other team members want to accomplish.

Team empowerment

Empowerment is defined as increased intrinsic task motivation manifested in a set of four cognitions reflecting individuals‟ orientation to their work role, including meaning (i.e., belief that their work is important), competence (i.e., perceived ability to perform their tasks), impact (i.e., degree to which employees fell their work affects the performance of their team) and self-determination (i.e., perceived autonomy at work) (Avolio et al., 2004).

Empowerment was measured with twelve items directly drawn from Spreitzer (1995).

Measurement items are stated as follows:

Meaning

1. The work I do is very important to me.

2. My job activities are personally meaningful to me.

3. The work I do is meaningful to me.

24

Competence

1. I am confident about my ability to do my job.

2. I am self-assured about my capabilities to perform my work activities.

3. I have mastered the skills necessary for my job.

Self-determination

1. I have significant autonomy in determining how I do my job.

2. I can decide on my own how to go about my work.

3. I have considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do my job.

Impact

1. My impact on what happens in my team is large.

2. I have a great deal of control over what happens in my team.

3. I have significant influence over what happens in my team.

Collectivism

Collectivism is the tendency to be concerned about the consequences of one‟s behavior on the other team members, and to be willing to sacrifice personal interests for the attainment of collaborative interests (Hofstede, 1980). Collectivism was measured using seven items directly drawn from Robert & Wasti‟s (2002) organizational culture scale. Measurement items are stated as follows:

1. Management and supervisors are protective of and generous to loyal workers.

2. Decisions about changes in work methods are taken jointly by supervisors and employees.

3. Employees are taken care of like members of a family.

4. Everyone shares responsibility for the team‟ failures as well as success.

5. Regardless of hierarchical level, employees take each other‟s views into consideration.

6. Once someone is hired, the team takes care of that person‟s overall welfare.

7. Everyone is kept informed about major decisions that affect the success of the team.

Team politics

25

Team politics is the phenomenon when individuals deliberately act in a way that will protect or enhance their own self-interests, even if their actions may or may not be in the best interests of other team members (Kacmar & Ferries, 1993). Team politics is measure using five items directly drawn from Vigoda (2002). Measurement items are stated as follows:

1. The member who gets ahead around here is not determined by merit, but by favoritism.

2. There are a few members in our team who always get things their way, because no one dares to challenge them.

3. Members in our team attempt to build themselves up by tearing others down.

4. I have seen changes made in policies here that only serve the purposes of a few individuals, not our team.

5. Managers prefer yes-men around here: good ideas are rejected when it means disagreeing with superiors.

Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership is defined as a style of leadership that transforms followers to rise above their self-interest by altering their morale, ideas, interests, and values, motivating them to perform better than initially expected (Pieterse, van Knippenberg, Schippers, &

Stam, 2010). Transformational leadership was measured using 19 items directly drawn from Avolio, Bass, & Jung (1999). Measurement items are stated as follows:

1. I am proud of being my team leader‟s subordinate.

2. I respect my team leader.

3. My team leader is my role-model.

4. I am confident about my team leader.

5. My team leader deals things with justice.

6. My team leader‟s behaviors fit with moral standard.

7. When making a decision, the team leader considers about ethics.

8. The team leader is really responsible.

9. The team leader considers about the team‟s future.

10. The team leader emphasizes team work and mission.

26

11. The team leader inspires my passion to the team.

12. The team leader makes me really optimistic about the team‟s future.

13. The team leader encourages me to revise if a prior decision is appropriate.

14. The team leader encourages me to try different means to solve problems.

15. The team leader suggests me to use novel ways to deal with things.

16. The team leader inspires me to analyze things with different aspects.

17. The team leader values my abilities and advantages.

18. The team leader instructs me and also trains me.

19. The team leader pays attention to individual differences in the team.

Transactional leadership

Transactional leadership is characterized by leader behaviors aimed at monitoring and controlling employees with rewards or punishments (Burns, 1978). Transactional leadership was measured using 3 items directly drawn the scale items of contingent punishment behavior from Podsakoff et al. (1984). Measurement items are stated as follows:

1. My team leader will indicate his (her) disapproval if I performed at a low level.

2. My team leader lets me know about it when I perform poorly.

3. My team leader points it out to me when my productivity is not up to par.

The constructs in this study are measured using 5-point Likert scales drawn and modified from existing literature. Four steps are employed in choosing measurement items.

First, the items from the existing literature are translated into Chinese from English. Second, the items in Chinese were then substantially refined by a focus group of four people familiar with organizational behavior, including two graduate students and two professors. Our focus group repeatedly examined both our English version questionnaire as well as its Chinese counterpart, maintaining a high degree of correspondence between the two questionnaires.

Third, two pilot studies were conducted prior to the actual survey to assess the quality of our measures and improve item readability and clarity if needed. Some inappropriate items were repeatedly reworded or removed from our survey questionnaire after two pilot tests

27

analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. Respondents for these studies were drawn from the student population at an evening college, who worked professionally during the day in the information technology industry. They were asked to complete the survey questionnaire and point out any confusing items. Sample sizes for the two pilot studies were 105 and 69 respondents respectively. These respondents did not overlap with the respondents in the actual survey. The appendix 1 lists all the scale items with their references.