Impact of e-leadership and team dynamics on virtual team performance in a public organization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study examines the effect of various attributes of leadership and teams, modeled as perceived e-leadership and perceived team dynamics on virtual team (VT) performance in a public organization. Design/methodology/approach Using a survey instrument, data were collected from 184 participants involved in a virtual workplace from one of the largest Canadian public organizations. This study uses PLS-SEM software and quantitative methods. Findings This research identified that perceived team dynamics, which includes team member behavior, collaboration and support, has a significant medium effect on VT member performance. However, perceived e-leadership, which includes leaders' trust, leader communication/co-ordination and leader behavior, has a significant small effect on VT performance. Originality/value This study contribute to literature on VTs and VT's performance specially in public organizations. As the existing literature on employee performance has mainly focused on private organizations, and more so on VTs. However, little is known about VTs in public organizations and specifically about their performance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it