Relationship Quality with a Leader During an Organizational Crisis: Team Dynamics and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During an organizational crisis, we investigate the nature of team members’ relationship with their leader, team dynamics, and outcomes for individuals and teams. We studied an organizational crisis unfolding at three public hospitals facing a bed shortage crisis. Leaders (n = 24) and their team members (n = 150) completed surveys that were matched. Leaders rated themselves and each team member individually; and team members independently rated themselves and their leader. The survey data was analyzed to differentiate the effects of between-team versus within-team variance using multilevel models. Overall, our results speak to the positive associations of leader-member exchange (LMX). When individuals felt higher on LMX than their team average, they were rated as performing better, had lower turnover intentions and higher team potency. Further, teams that were higher on LMX reported fewer turnover intentions, and were more creative. Core self-evaluations (CSE) were also linked to positive outcomes. Particularly in contexts of weak leaders (i.e., when their team rated them low in LMX and low in expertise), positive core self-evaluations were associated with better leader-rated performance. Moreover, teams with higher CSE had higher team potency. Implications for this research and future research directions are provided.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".