MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126515863 · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1020

Embracing transformational leadership: Team values and the impact of leader behavior on team performance.

2007· article· en· W2126515863 on OpenAlexaff
John Schaubroeck, Simon S. K. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipPsychologyCollectivismTeam effectivenessPsychological safetyTeam compositionHofstede's cultural dimensions theorySocial psychologyShared leadershipTransactional leadershipManagementPolitical scienceIndividualism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors investigated the relationship between transformational leadership behavior and group performance in 218 financial services teams that were branches of a bank in Hong Kong and the United States. Transformational leadership influenced team performance through the mediating effect of team potency. The effect of transformational leadership on team potency was moderated by team power distance and team collectivism, such that higher power distance teams and more collectivistic teams exhibited stronger positive effects of transformational leadership on team potency. The model was supported by data in both Hong Kong and the United States, which suggests a convergence in how teams function in the East and West and highlights the importance of team values.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations608
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PsychologySame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207