Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Developing virtual team performance: an integrated perspective of social exchange and social cognitive theories

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of Managerial Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The emerging trend toward physically distributed work teams has necessitated a critical inquiry into the nature and roles of psychological contract and leadership in virtual settings. This study proposes a model based on social cognitive theory and social exchange theory to explain virtual team performance in the information technology industry. In the proposed model, virtual team performance is directly influenced by IT training fulfillment, transactional fulfillment, and knowledge-oriented leadership and also indirectly via the partial mediation of collective IT efficacy. This study adds to the burgeoning theoretical and empirical research on virtual teams by assessing the joint effects of psychological contract fulfillment and knowledge-oriented leadership. Empirical testing of this study at the team level, by surveying team members and leaders across two different points of time, confirms the integrated applicability of social exchange and social cognitive theories in understanding the development of virtual team performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amit R, Schoemaker PJ (1993) Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strateg Manag J 14(1):33–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103(3):411–423

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker P (2000) IT training is the rising star. Works Manag 53(8):34–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1982) Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol 37:122–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Freeman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (1999) Social cognitive theory of personality. In: Pervin L, John O (eds) Handbook of personality, 2nd edn. Guilford, New York, pp 154–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruch Y, Lin CP (2012) All for one, one for all: coopetition and virtual team performance. Technol Forecast Soc Change 79(6):1155–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belcourt M, Wright PC, Saks AM (2000) Managing performance through training and development, 2nd edn. Nelson, Scarborough

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson AD, Johnson SD, Kuchinke KP (2002) The use of technology in the digital workplace: a framework for human resource development. Adv Dev Hum Resour 4(4):392–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM, Bonett DG (1980) Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 88(3):588–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birtch TA, Chiang FF, Van Esch E (2016) A social exchange theory framework for understanding the job characteristics–job outcomes relationship: the mediating role of psychological contract fulfillment. Int J Hum Resour Manag 27(11):1217–1236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinberg D, Castell P (1982) A resource exchange theory approach to interpersonal interactions: a test of Foa’s theory. J Personal Soc Psychol 43(2):260–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockner J (1988) Self-esteem at work. Lexington Books, Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown TC (2003) The effect of verbal self-guidance training on collective efficacy and team performance. Pers Psychol 56(4):935–964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budworth MH (2011) Individual learning and group performance: the role of collective efficacy. J Workplace Learn 23(6):391–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhry A, Wayne SJ, Schalk R (2009) A sensemaking model of employee evaluation of psychological contract fulfillment when and how do employees respond to change? J Appl Behav Sci 45(4):498–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen WY, Hsu BF, Wang ML, Lin YY (2011) Fostering knowledge sharing through human resource management in R&D teams. Int J Technol Manag 53(2–4):309–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cong X, Li-Hua R, Stonehouse G (2007) Knowledge management in the Chinese public sector: empirical investigation. J Technol Manag China 2(3):250–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coyle-Shapiro J, Kessler I (2000) Consequences of the psychological contract for the employment relationship: a large scale survey. J Manag Stud 37(7):903–930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano R, Mitchell MS (2005) Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review. J Manag 31(6):874–900

    Google Scholar 

  • Donate MJ, Guadamillas F (2011) Organizational factors to support knowledge management and innovation. J Knowl Manag 15(6):890–914

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donate MJ, Sánchez de Pablo JD (2015) The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation. J Bus Res 68(2):360–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreachslin JL, Hunt PL, Sprainer E, Snook ID Jr (1999) Communication patterns and group composition: implications for patient-centered care team effectiveness/practitioner response. J Healthc Manag 44(4):252–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durham CC, Knight D, Locke EA (1997) Effects of leader role, team-set goal difficulty, efficacy, and tactics on team effectiveness. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 72(2):203–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erkutlu H, Chafra J (2014) Ethical leadership and workplace bullying in higher education. Hacet Univ J Educ 29(3):55–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Faseyitan S, Libii JN, Hirschbuhl J (1996) An in service model for enhancing faculty computer self-efficacy. Br J Edu Technol 27(3):214–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg K, Mooz H, Cotterman H (2000) Visualizing project management, 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Gecas V (1982) The self-concept. Ann Rev Sociol 8:1–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17(Special Issue):109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khong JZ, Liem GAD, Klassen RM (2017) Task performance in small group settings: the role of group members’ self-efficacy and collective efficacy and group’s characteristics. Educ Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2017.1342767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkman BL, Rosen B, Tesluk PE, Gibson CB (2004) The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: the moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Acad Manag J 47(2):175–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski SW, Gully SM, Brown KG, Salas E, Smith EM, Nason ER (2001) Effects of training goals and goal orientation traits on multidimensional training outcomes and performance adaptability. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 85(1):1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson R, Alcock C, Cooper J, Burgess L (2003) Factors affecting adoption of electronic commerce technologies by SMEs: an Australian study. J Small Bus Enterp Dev 10(3):265–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin CP, Baruch Y, Shih WC (2012) Corporate social responsibility and team performance: the mediating role of team efficacy and team self-esteem. J Bus Ethics 108(2):167–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maamari BE, Chaanine JC (2013) Job satisfaction of the modern information-system-using nurse in Lebanon. J Technol Manag China 8(2):120–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAllister DJ, Bigley GA (2002) Work context and the definition of self: how organizational care influences organization-based self-esteem. Acad Manag J 45(5):894–904

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller BK, Bierly PE III, Daly PS (2007) The knowledge strategy orientation scale: individual perceptions of firm-level phenomena. J Manag Issues 19(3):414–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohsenabad AS, Azadehdel M (2016) The impact of knowledge-oriented leadership on innovation performance of manufacturing and commercial companies of Guilan province. Int J Hum Cult Stud 3(1):884–897

    Google Scholar 

  • Mušič G, Hauptman B, Rogelj P, Zebič T (2014) Predictive monitoring of production line efficiency. Int J Serv Comput Oriented Manuf 1(4):323–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piccoli G, Ahmad R, Ives B (2001) Web-based virtual learning environments: a research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Q 25(4):401–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poe AC (2001) Don’t touch that “send” button. HR Mag 46(7):74–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Rains SA (2008) Seeking health information in the information age: the role of internet self-efficacy. West J Commun 72(1):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen B, Furst S, Blackburn R (2006) Training for virtual teams: an investigation of current practices and future needs. Hum Resour Manag 45(2):229–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saks AM (1995) Longitudinal field investigation of the moderating and mediating effects of self-efficacy on the relationship between training and newcomer adjustment. J Appl Psychol 80:211–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salanova M, Llorens S, Cifre E, Martínez IM, Schaufeli WB (2003) Perceived collective efficacy, subjective well-being and task performance among electronic work groups: an experimental study. Small Group Res 34(1):43–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson R, Raudenbush S, Earls F (1997) Neighborhood and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277(5328):918–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAS Institute Inc (2010) SAS/STAT(R) 9.22 user’s guide. https://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/statug/63347/HTML/default/viewer.htm#statug_calis_sect043.htm

  • Schaubroeck J, Lam SSK, Xie JL (2000) Collective efficacy versus self-efficacy in coping responses to stressors and control: a cross-cultural study. J Appl Psychol 85(4):512–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schenkel MT, Garrison G (2009) Exploring the roles of social capital and team-efficacy in virtual entrepreneurial team performance. Manag Res News 32(6):525–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schermerhorn JR (2012) Management, 11th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk DH (1984) Enhancing self-efficacy and achievement through rewards and goals: motivational and informational effects. J Educ Res 78:29–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shao Z, Wang T, Feng Y (2015) Impact of organizational culture and computer self-efficacy on knowledge sharing. Ind Manag Data Syst 115(4):590–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore LM, Barksdale K (1998) Examining degree of balance and level of obligation in the employment relationship: a social exchange approach. J Organ Behav 19(Special Issue):731–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons RJ, Germans J, Ruijters M (2003) Forum for organizational learning: combining learning at work, organizational learning and training in new ways. J Eur Ind Train 27(1):41–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soto-Acosta P, Martinez-Conesa I, Colomo-Palacios R (2010) An empirical analysis of the relationship between IT training sources and IT value. Inf Syst Manag 27(3):274–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sturges J, Conway N, Guest D, Liefooghe A (2005) Managing the career deal: the psychological contract as a framework for understanding career management, organizational commitment and work behavior. J Organ Behav 26(7):821–838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suazo MM, Stone-Romero EF (2011) Implications of psychological contract breach: a perceived organizational support perspective. J Manag Psychol 26(5):366–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun D, Wang X, Chen L, Sun A (2005) Research on the training mode of compound professionals on informationalization-based business in universities of China. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Electronic commerce. ACM, pp 780–783

  • Tan J, Zhang W, Xia J (2008) Managing risk in a transitional environment: an exploratory study of control and incentive mechanisms of venture capital firms in China. J Small Bus Manag 46(2):263–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan JX, Zawawi D, Aziz YA (2016) Benevolent leadership and its organisational outcomes: a social exchange theory perspective. Int J Econ Manag 10(2):343–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui AS, Pearce JL, Porter LW, Tripoli AM (1997) Alternative approaches to the employee-organization relationship: Does investment in employees pay off? Acad Manag J 40(5):1089–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turnley WH, Bolino MC, Lester SW, Bloodgood JM (2003) The impact of psychological contract fulfillment on the performance of in-role and organizational citizenship behaviors. J Manag 29(2):187–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler TR, Kramer RM, John OP (1999) The psychology of the social self. Erlbaum, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V (1999) Creation of favorable user perceptions: exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Q 23(2):239–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walumbwa FO, Wang P, Lawler JJ, Shi K (2004) The role of collective efficacy in the relations between transformational leadership and work outcomes. J Occup Organ Psychol 77(4):515–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wysocki RK, Beck R Jr, Crane DB (2000) Effective project management. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Zack M, McKeen J, Singh S (2009) Knowledge management and organizational performance: an exploratory survey. J Knowl Manag 13(6):392–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou J, Plaisent M, Zheng L, Bernard P (2014) Psychological contract, organizational commitment and work satisfaction: survey of researchers in Chinese state-owned engineering research institutions. Open J Soc Sci 2:217–225

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Business and Management, National Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

    Chieh-Peng Lin

  2. Graduate Institute of Business Administration, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC

    Chou-Kang Chiu

  3. Department of Business Administration, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

    Na-Ting Liu

Authors
  1. Chieh-Peng Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chou-Kang Chiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Na-Ting Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chou-Kang Chiu.

Appendix A: Measurement items

Appendix A: Measurement items

Virtual team performance (Source: Baruch and Lin 2012)

VTP1. My virtual team is productive.

VTP2. The work quality of my virtual team is superior to that of similar virtual teams in other organizations.

VTP3. My virtual team’s resource planning and allocation are superior to those of similar virtual teams in other organizations.

VTP4. The online collaboration of my virtual team improves team efficiency.

VTP5. Overall, my virtual team’s performance is satisfactory.

Collective IT efficacy (Source: Lin et al. 2012)

CIT1. My team is confident in using IT to meet the quality demands of the work.

CIT2. My team is confident in using IT to correct the mistakes in the work.

CIT3. My team is confident in using IT to keep up with the operational pace of the firm.

Transactional fulfillment (Source: Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler 2000)

TF1. Our team has fair pay compared to others doing similar virtual work in other organizations.

TF2. Our team receives fringe benefits that are fair compared to what others doing similar virtual teamwork in other organizations get.

TF3. Our team has fair pay for its responsibilities in virtual teaming.

TF3. Our team’s compensation increases when it performs well for virtual teamwork.

IT training fulfillment (Source: Coyle-Shapiro and Kessler 2000)

ITT1. Our team has the necessary IT training (i.e., the training of IT skills).

ITT2. Our team has up-to-date IT training for improving its coordination.

ITT3. Our team is supported by the firm when it wants to learn new IT skills.

ITT4. Our team keeps learning new things of IT via a variety of training programs.

Knowledge-oriented leadership (Source: Donate & Sánchez de Pablo 2015)

KOL1. Our team leader promotes learning from experience, tolerating mistakes up to a certain point.

KOL2. Our team leader acts as an adviser, and controls are just an assessment of the accomplishment of objectives.

KOL3. Our team leader promotes the acquisition of external knowledge.

KOL4. Our team leader encourages employees to share and apply their knowledge.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lin, CP., Chiu, CK. & Liu, NT. Developing virtual team performance: an integrated perspective of social exchange and social cognitive theories. Rev Manag Sci 13, 671–688 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0261-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0261-0

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation