Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

Predicating team performance in technology industry:

Theoretical aspects of social identity and self-regulation
Chieh-Peng Lin ⁎
Institute of Business and Management, National Chiao Tung University, 118, Sec. 1, Jhongsiao W. Rd., Taipei City 10044, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The technology industry environment has been so complex that oftentimes only effective and
Received 28 May 2014 well-coordinated work teams can efficiently detect, assess, and deal with the drastic changes of
Received in revised form 11 May 2015 such environment. This study develops a research model based on the theories of social identity
Accepted 19 May 2015 and self-regulation to forecast team performance in order to understand the interrelations
Available online xxxx
between social, emotional, and motivational factors of teams in technology industry. In the model,
team performance is influenced indirectly by goal commitment, emotional intelligence, and
Keywords: teamwork interdependence via the full mediation of team planning and team identity. At the
Team planning same time, the effects of team planning and team identity on team performance are hypothetically
Social identity
moderated by goal commitment. Empirical testing of this model, by investigating team personnel
Team performance
in high-tech firms from technology industry, confirms the applicability of team planning and team
Emotional intelligence
Goal commitment identity as dual mediators among these work teams. The managerial implications and research
Technology industry limitations based on the empirical findings herein are provided.
© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction To successfully achieve good performance, team members

are trained and encouraged to reinforce their capability and
Previous literature regarding technology innovation indi- motivation so as to work collectively in an effective manner.
cates that the average success rate of technology firms created Previous research has provided support for the validity of
by teams is higher than that of the firms created by individual different employees' capabilities and motivations and has
entrepreneurs (Liu et al., 2015; Tsai et al., 2014; Wu et al., confirmed their relevance to work-related performance. For
2010). Indeed. The technology industry environment has been instance, previous literature regarding performance in tech-
so complex that oftentimes only effective and well-coordinated nology industry has argued the importance of individuals'
work teams can efficiently detect, assess, and deal with the emotional intelligence, their own independent goal commit-
drastic changes of such environment (Wu et al., 2010; Joe et al., ment (e.g., Aubé and Rosseau, 2005), their tasks (e.g., Campbell
2014; Tsai et al., 2012). Besides, from the aspect of technology and Gingrich, 1986), and so forth. While these capabilities and
development opportunities, work teams have greater capacity motivations have been well discussed in prior studies to
for opportunity identification, innovation, and utilization than understand working processes underlying the behavior of
individuals (Wu et al., 2010). Therefore, team performance is individual workers, there is a strong need for further research
critical for technology firms to effectively cope with turbulent to examine these issues from the collective aspect of teams.
and serious competitive threats in a global market. Workplace management has fostered a wide range of
conditions in which the function of individuals' own work,
⁎ Corresponding author at: 118, Sec. 1, Jhongsiao W. Rd., Taipei 10044,
emotional intelligence, or personal goal commitment becomes
Taiwan, R.O.C. blurry in a team. Individual members in a team have to function
E-mail address: [email protected]. collaboratively and cannot be just viewed as representing

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.05.017
0040-1625/© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
14 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

independent parties, because they are not motivated merely by key mediators and justifying goal commitment as a moderator in
their individuals' capabilities or motivations. In fact, individ- a single model setting of collective performance among high-
uals' capabilities and motivations are likely projected on, tech teams, this study complements previous research by
shown by, and adapted to, for instance, the collective emotional obtaining a thorough in-depth understanding about the devel-
intelligence, goal commitment, or work interdependence of the opment of team performance in technology industry. Second,
team. For that reason, this research develops a comprehensive while a majority of empirical studies regarding team perfor-
model built upon previous contemporary works, which helps mance rely only on a one-time survey from a single data source,
high-tech management understand how team performance this study differs by using primary survey data obtained from
and its mediators are influenced by: (1) team workers' two different sources (i.e., team members and their respective
attachment to shared goals (i.e., goal commitment); (2) team leader) in two different points of time with one month apart.
workers' interdependent engagement in dong their work Such a survey method reduces the threat of common method
(i.e., teamwork interdependency); and (3) team workers' variances and thus strengthens the inferences of this study.
collective ability to accurately perceive, understand, and Given the above-mentioned critical advantages, this study is able
manage emotions (i.e., emotional intelligence). to successfully describe a clear picture of team performance
This research ponders how current insights into work development.
motivation and capability in the literature can be utilized to
incorporate complex teaming situations. By doing this, this study 2. Research model and hypotheses
applies the self-regulation theory and social identity principle
(Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) to establish a theoretical Since the work mode of teams (e.g., for R&D, services, etc.) is
model that clearly explains the different behavioral motives in an essential part in technology industry, developing and
collective terms. Specifically, this study uses team planning strengthening team performance in the technology industry
derived from the self-regulation theory and team identity can be considered necessary for successful innovation (Flipse
derived from the social identity theory as dual mediators that et al., 2014). Nevertheless, the predictors of team performance
facilitate team performance. Team planning is defined as a in technology industry have been somewhat overlooked and
teaming activity that requires the team to lay out a course of often remain implicit (Flipse et al., 2014). For that reason, this
action by which it can attain an already chosen objective (Mehta study establishes a research model (see Fig. 1) based on the
et al., 2009), while team identity is defined as the degree to theories of self-regulation and social identity to predict the
which workers define themselves as members of a particular development of team performance in technology industry. In
team (e.g., Eckel and Grossman, 2005). the model, team planning is positively related to goal commit-
Theories of self-regulation and social identity have been ment, emotional intelligence, and teamwork interdependence
used to elaborate the circumstances under which high-tech via the full mediation of team planning and team identity. At the
personnel are likely to consider themselves as part of a same time, the effects of team planning and team identity on
collective (Lin, 2014). That is, self-regulation and social identity team performance are respectively moderated by goal commit-
processes can function together to produce contextually ment. Note that this study examines these three exogenous
meaningful and relevant judgment and behaviors in workplaces variables (i.e., goal commitment, emotional intelligence, and
(e.g., Abrams, 1999; Abrams and Brown, 1989; Oyserman, teamwork interdependence), because they represent three
2007). Team planning (i.e., self-regulation) directly affects team major concerns of team workers: work mood (i.e., emotional
performance (Mehta et al., 2009; DeShon and Gillespie, 2005), intelligence), work design (i.e., teamwork interdependence),
and thus teams with different strengths of determinants and their determination regarding work (i.e., goal commit-
(e.g., goal commitment) may respond differently with various ment). The development of the hypotheses is justified in the
self-regulation tactics to guide teaming activities over time following.
(e.g., Hong and O'Neil, 2001). To sum up, this study explores Team planning represents an indispensable regulatory
how team performance in technology industry is positively approach and team-based process for improving team perfor-
related to the proposed exogenous predictors (e.g., goal mance (e.g., Janicik and Bartel, 2003). Based on self-regulation,
commitment) through the full mediation of team planning team planning relates to metacognition that represents people's
and team identity. knowledge of and control over their cognition in workplaces
In the goal-setting literature, goal commitment is critical (Kozlowski et al., 2009). In technology industry, teams
not as an end in itself, but as a means to an end: performance. frequently apply planning as a tactic to coordinate various
Hollenbeck and Klein (1987) noted that when the entire complicated activities, consequently improving team perfor-
range of goals appears, goal commitment will moderate mance (Weldon et al., 1991). Hence, team planning turns out to
the relationship between performance and its predictors be a crucial meta-cognitive skill that drives team performance
(e.g., Hollenbeck et al., 1989). Consequently, this study extends (Brown et al., 1983; Ford et al., 1998).
such previous finding to further evaluate goal commitment In addition to team planning, team identity is also positively
that moderates the effects of team planning and team identity associated with team performance. The social identity theory
on team performance, which has not been tested yet in suggests that members of a team with dramatic different
previous studies. perceived social categories (i.e., low team identity) may find it
This study is different from previous research in two difficult to integrate their values and norms and work together
important ways. First, this study complements previous research (Jehn et al., 1999). Team workers feel more comfortable working
that has explicitly verified team planning as a major mediator in with the group they identify with (Eckel and Grossman, 2005;
the development of team performance (e.g., Mehta et al., 2009). Northcraft et al., 1996), consequently boosting their team
By integrating team planning with team identity together as two performance. Strong team identity encourages team workers
 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23 15

Goal
commitment

Emotional Team
intelligence planning
Team
performance

Teamwork Team
interdependence identity

Figure 1. Research model.

to behave according to team norms and conventions personal and team identity (Hernandez et al., 2007). Indeed,
(Branscombe et al., 1999; Hobman and Bordia, 2006). The team members often rely on their collective understanding and
presence of team identity (which emphasizes team-based commitment to team goals (i.e., goal commitment) to guide
values) enhances the performance of functionally diverse their behavior and identification towards the team (Furst et al.,
teams (Jehn and Bezrukova, 2004). Collectively, the positive 1999). Team identity develops over time as teams clarify goals,
effects of team planning and team identity on team performance set priorities, become determined to achieve the objectives,
can be stated as below. and invest energy towards accomplishing team goals (Furst
et al., 1999; Sivunen, 2006). As a result, team identity is
H1. Team planning and team identity are both positively developed through the establishment of and commitment to
related to team performance. team goals and objectives (Furst et al., 1999), suggesting a
Goal commitment is referred as team members' persis- positive relationship between goal commitment and team
tence in reaching the team goal (Ke and Zhang, 2009). identity. Hence, the hypothesis is stated as below.
Nomologically speaking, clear goals only facilitate team
activities (e.g., innovation) in reaching the goals if team H3. Goal commitment is positively related to team identity.
members are committed to the goals given that strong goal The intelligent use of people's moods and emotions to
commitment can substantially maintain people's persis- observe, estimate, control, adapt, and analyze is considered
tence for implementing team actions (West, 2002). Goal “emotional intelligence” (e.g., Goleman, 1995). This research
commitment is a mind-set that takes different forms and puts emphasis on the emotional regulation of teams because
binds team members to a course of action that is of relevance the regulation of emotion is critically a core set of control
to a particular target of the team (Meyer and Herscovitch, processes aimed at manipulating when, where, how and which
2001), suggesting its positive effect on team planning. emotion people experience and express (James, 1989; Quirk
The previous literature finds that a subsequent proof of goal and Beer, 2006). In an example of a learning group, instructors
commitment is the taking of action (Locke and Latham, 1994). readily use switched-on emotional intelligence in individual
Given stronger goal commitment, team members are more and team planning to stimulate thinking and encourage
likely to arrange a course of action that can attain an already dialogue about the emotional needs of group members in the
chosen objective (i.e., team planning). This is understandable, learning process (Longaretti, 2008). Team workers with high
because goal commitment is viewed as people's attachment emotional intelligence are more adept at regulating their own
toward specific goals and thus they are likely to do their best to emotions and managing others' emotions to facilitate more
work on actions that favor the goals (Fishbach and Dhar, 2005). effective activities to achieve the team goal (Baruch and Lin,
On the other hand, goal commitment implies that team 2012). Jordan et al. (Tsai et al., 2012) found a link between
members persist in the face of difficulties (Aubé and Rosseau, team-based emotional intelligence and team process effective-
2005; Locke et al., 1981), and thus team members who are ness (i.e., planning team activities to achieve its goal). Similarly,
highly committed to their team goal will take action to cope Menges and Bruch (2009) suggested that emotional intelli-
with the difficulties and obtain the goal (i.e., team planning). gence accelerates a course of collaborative actions by which a
Based on the preceding rationale, the hypothesis can be stated team can obtain its goal and ultimately enhance performance,
as below. indicating a positive relationship between emotional intelli-
gence and team planning. Hence, the hypothesis is developed
H2. Goal commitment is positively related to team planning. as below.
Research about technology and innovation has shown that
strong commitment towards team goals is critical for forming H4. Emotional intelligence is positively related to team
team identity (e.g., Hu and Liden, 2011). Goal commitment is planning.
regarded as team members' attachment or determination to Emotional intelligence is highly relevant to important
attain team goals (Liu, 1999). As previous research argues that work-related factors such as team climate and team members'
people's psychological attachment to certain objectives is development and sense of belongingness (e.g., Pirola-Merlo
influential to identity, attachment is a process that provides et al., 2002), because its principles provide a new way to
16 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

evaluate and understand the human behavior, management H7. Teamwork interdependence is positively related to
styles, attitudes, interpersonal skills, organizational identifica- team identity.
tion, and potential of people (e.g., Landen, 2002; Serrat, 2010). The action–performance relationship in a team is stronger
Previous research suggests that the development of the social when people are committed to their goals (e.g., Klein et al.,
and emotional competencies of a team help facilitate cohesion, 1999). Goal commitment is more obviously important and
collaboration, and team identity (Chapman, 2005). In fact, relevant when team members have more difficulty preparing a
emotional intelligence reflects an ability, capacity, or skill to course of action by which the team can attain an already chosen
evaluate, identify, and manage the emotions of one's self, of objective (Ercz and Zidon, 1984; Locke and Latham, 2002). Goal
others, and of a team (Serrat, 2010), leading to stronger unity. commitment plays a moderating role in the association
Similarly, previous studies indicate that high levels of team between team planning and team performance, because
emotional intelligence encourage other important team pro- enhanced goal commitment prompts team members to more
cesses such as trust and team identity (Druskat and Wolff, enthusiastically schedule their activities to reach the goal
2001; Yang and Mossholder, 2004). Accordingly, this study (e.g., Hollenbeck et al., 1989; Seijts and Latham, 2000),
proposes the below hypothesis. amplifying the effect of team planning on team performance.
On the contrary, despite good team identity, team members
H5. Emotional intelligence is positively related to team with low goal commitment are unlikely to perform well due to
identity. their indetermination and lack of passion to move forward
Although the research about technological innovation towards the goal. Consequently, the hypothesis regarding the
has suggested the advantage of team planning for enhancing interaction between goal commitment and team planning is
team performance, sparse research has focused on identify- described as below.
ing such a teaming characteristic as teamwork interdepen-
dence that may propel a team to engage in a particular style H8. Goal commitment positively moderates the relation-
of team planning (Somech et al., 2009). Teamwork interde- ship between team planning and team performance.
pendence is defined as the extent to which individuals need Whereas previous literature has found a moderating
information, resources, and support from the other team effect of goal commitment on the goal–difficulty–performance
members so as to complete their work with collective relation (Ercz and Zidon, 1984), this study complements the
activities (Brass, 1981; van der Vegt et al., 2003). The literature by evaluating the moderating effect of goal commit-
previous literature has discussed the antecedent role of ment on the identity–performance relation. As goal commit-
teamwork interdependence (e.g., task interdependence) in ment represents the determination or the persistence in
team planning processes (e.g., Cohen and Bailey, 1997). pursuing a specific goal over time (Theodorakis, 1996), it can
Given high teamwork interdependence, team members can generate both main and moderating effects on the develop-
communicate more frequently, support each other more ment of team performance (e.g., Hollenbeck and Klein, 1987;
regularly, and are sympathetically closer to one another. As a Locke, 1968). In this study, goal commitment is a potential
result, teamwork interdependence generates a positive moderator, because team workers who have decided not to
effect on the degree of interaction and communication pursue their team goal with effort-withholding behavior are
among team members and on the level of collective planning people who have less engagement in teamwork (e.g., Zsambok
that is necessary for teams to coordinate and integrate team et al., 1992) and low team identity (Ferguson, 2004). Goal
actions (Gundlach et al., 2006). Consequently, the hypoth- commitment implies the extension of effort, over time, toward
esis is derived as below. the accomplishment of a specific goal and emphasizes an
unwillingness to abandon or to lower the goal (Campion and
H6. Teamwork interdependence is positively related to Lord, 1982). For that reason, if team members present weak
team planning. goal commitment, then their team performance is unlikely to
As a particular type of social identity, team identity increase despite certain levels of team identity. Hence, this
represents team members' cognitive, affective, and behav- study proposes the following hypothesis.
ioral bonds between members and their team (Henry et al.,
H9. Goal commitment positively moderates the relation-
1999). Team identity is purely a group-level construct
ship between team identity and team performance.
representing the collective level of team identification
occurring across all members of a team (Lembke and
Wilson, 1998). Similar to team identity that reveals the 3. Method
extent to which individuals perceive a sense of “oneness”
within a team (Gundlach et al., 2006; Hogg and Terry, 2000; 3.1. Subjects
van Knippenberg and van Schie, 2000), teamwork interde-
pendence requires team members to work together (as The hypotheses derived by this study were empirically
oneness) in order to complete a team task (Somech et al., tested using two separate surveys of working professionals on
2009). Specifically, high teamwork interdependence en- teams from high-tech organizations in Taiwan. This study
courages team members to collaborate and adopt a con- recruited working professionals from teams across high-tech
structive and cooperative management style (Somech et al., firms, because the work mode of teams is prevalent in high-
2009), consequently fostering a shared social identity of the tech firms around the world. Initially, this study invited EMBA
team (e.g., Kramer, 2006). Thus, this study hypothesizes a (Executive Master of Business Administration) students work-
positive relationship between teamwork interdependence ing professionally in high-tech firms to help with the surveys,
and team identity as below. targeting a total of 20 large high-tech firms in a well-known
 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23 17

science park in Taiwan. The sample firms investigated by this the actual survey. Appendix A lists all the scale items used in
study were appropriate representatives because they were this study and their sources.
publicly held companies with a great number of work teams
and large production capacity in technology industry in
4. Data analysis
Taiwan.
Although there was no absolute range for the efficiency of a
This research adopts two major statistical methods to test
team, depending on costs (Oliver and Marwell, 1988), Jackson
our hypotheses. First, the survey data were analyzed using
et al. (1991) recommended that the minimum size of a team for
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to verify the quality of the
researchers to study should include at least three members.
data collected. Second, this study tested its proposed exoge-
Since this study planned to investigate both team members and
nous main, mediating, and moderating effects with hierarchical
their respective leader, this study excluded teams smaller than
regression models by simultaneously including interaction
five members.
terms. Test results from each analysis method are presented
With the support and assistance of the human resource
in the following.
departments of its sample firms, this study's investigators
directly distributed questionnaires to the teams expressing
their interest in volunteering and subsequently traced the status 4.1. Confirmatory factor analysis
of returned questionnaires. The surveys of this study were
conducted in two stages with one month apart. In the first stage, CFA analysis was conducted based on all items correspond-
of the 600 questionnaires distributed to the team members of ing to the three exogenous variables and two mediators of this
150 teams for measuring three exogenous factors and two study (N = 358). Note that team performance was not
mediators in this study's research model (i.e., goal commitment, included in this CFA analysis, because it was measured only
emotional intelligence, teamwork interdependence, team plan- by a leader on each team and thus the total sample size was
ning, and team identity), a total of 411 usable questionnaires relatively small (i.e., a total of 93 team leaders). The goodness-
from 106 teams were returned (i.e., approximately an average of-fit of the hypothesized CFA model was assessed according to
of 3.9 members per team) after some unusable questionnaires various fit metrics as shown in Table 1. The indices of the
with relatively high portions of missing data were removed. To comparative fit index (CFI), the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the
collect the team-level data, this study arranged a large envelope, normed fit index (NFI), and the non-normed fit index (NNFI)
which contained four small envelopes that included survey were equal to or larger than 0.9. Moreover, the root mean
questionnaires for four members of the same team. Every small square residual (RMR) was smaller than 0.05, and the root
envelope could be individually sealed with double-sided tape mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was smaller
after its survey questionnaire was filled out by a team member. than 0.08. These numbers together show that the CFA model of
After the four small envelopes were all put back into the large this study properly fits the empirical data (Bentler and Bonett,
envelope they belonged to, the large envelope was sealed and 1980).
then sent back to the investigator of this study.
In the second-stage survey, 106 questionnaires were
distributed to each team leader of the above-mentioned 106 Table 1
Standardized loadings and reliabilities.
teams (i.e., each leader just measured team performance),
because these 106 teams had provided usable data in the first- Construct Indicators Standardized AVE Cronbach's α
stage survey. Investigating the team leaders across these 106 loading
teams, this study eventually obtained 93 usable questionnaires Team planning PL1 0.80 (t = 17.74) 0.64 0.89
from 93 team leaders (i.e., another 13 team leaders did not fill PL2 0.80 (t = 17.55)
out our questionnaire). Hence, this study would use the data PL3 0.77 (t = 16.81)
PL4 0.80 (t = 17.51)
from these 93 teams for its data analysis. After both sets of PL5 0.82 (t = 18.46)
questionnaires collected across the two different points of time Team identity ID1 0.86 (t = 19.79) 0.72 0.91
were matched up, this study obtained usable data from a total ID2 0.86 (t = 19.73)
of 93 matched teams that include 93 usable questionnaires ID3 0.87 (t = 20.08)
ID4 0.81 (t = 18.23)
from team leaders and 359 usable questionnaires from team
Emotional EI1 0.74 (t = 15.66) 0.69 0.86
members (i.e., there were another 13 unusable questionnaires intelligence EI2 0.86 (t = 19.23)
from team members due to relatively high portions of missing EI3 0.89 (t = 20.64)
data in the questionnaires). Teamwork TI1 0.76 (t = 16.44) 0.65 0.90
interdependence TI2 0.87 (t = 20.19)
TI3 0.83 (t = 18.72)
TI4 0.83 (t = 18.77)
3.2. Measures TI5 0.75 (t = 16.23)
Goal commitment GC1 0.79 (t = 17.28) 0.75 0.90
The constructs in this study were drawn and modified from GC2 0.91 (t = 21.85)
GC3 0.89 (t = 21.14)
existing literature. The scale items of this study were refined by
a focus group of six researchers familiar with organizational Goodness-of-fit indices (N = 358): χ2160 = 418.99 (p-value b 0.001);
behavior, including four graduate students and two professors. NNFI = 0.94; NFI = 0.92; CFI = 0.95; GFI = 0.90; RMR = 0.02;
RMSEA = 0.06.
Inappropriate items were reworded or removed from our Legend: AVE = average variance extracted; NFI = normed fit index;
survey questionnaire after a pilot test using exploratory factor CFI = comparative fit index; GFI = goodness-of-fit index; RMR = root mean
analysis. Respondents for the pilot study were excluded from square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation.
18 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

Convergent validity was examined based on three condi- show that the measurement items and their empirical data at
tions (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). First, the figures of Cronbach's the team-level of analysis capture substantial variances in the
alpha for each factor were larger than 0.70 (see Table 1), underlying constructs of this study.
indicating good reliability of the research instruments. Second,
all factor loadings in Table 1 were significant at p b 0.001 and 4.2. Hierarchical regression analysis
thus confirm the convergent validity of the factors (Gerbing
and Anderson, 1988). Third, the average variance extracted Following the above analyses, this study performed hierar-
(AVE) for each factor exceeded 0.50, showing that the scale chical regression analysis to test the hypothesized relationships
items measuring their corresponding factor obtain sufficient of this study. To confirm the full mediation effects of team
variance in the underlying factor than that attributable to planning on team performance, this study conducted an
measurement error (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). To sum up, the analysis under three steps proposed by Kenny et al. (1998),
data obtained through the investigation of this study met all which have been frequently recommended in the literature
three conditions necessary to assure convergent validity. (e.g., Frazier et al., 2004). Note that this study tested models
This study further confirmed discriminate validity of its data with team-level data by simultaneously including four team-
with chi-square difference tests based on the Bonferroni level control variables (see Table 3). The three steps indicated
method. The chi-square difference statistics for all pairs of above are explained in detail below.
constructs in Table 2 exceeded the critical value of 10.83 based In Model 1, this study included team planning and its three
on the Bonferroni method (i.e., the experiment-wise error rate exogenous determinants. The test results in Model 1 showed
at the overall significance level of 0.01 was controlled), that goal commitment and teamwork interdependence were
confirming discriminant validity of this study's empirical data. positively related to team planning, while emotional intelli-
Accordingly, all the chi-square difference tests of this study gence was unrelated to team planning. Model 2 included team
reveal that the instruments used for measuring the research identity and its three exogenous determinants. The test results
factors of interest herein are statistically acceptable. in Model 2 presented that goal commitment and emotional
Following CFA, this study further analyzes the data aggre- intelligence were positively related to team identity, while
gation of team members' responses to team-level measures teamwork interdependence was unrelated to team identity. In
(see Appendix B) so as to confirm the appropriateness of using Model 3, this study included team performance and its two
team-level data. The figures in Appendix B indicate that the mediators. The test results in Model 3 showed that team
overall aggregation of team-level data is well acceptable. For planning and team identity were both related to team
that reason, the team-level correlation matrix based on the performance. Model 4 included team performance, its two
aggregated data was calculated and it is provided in Appendix C. mediators, and three exogenous determinants to examine
Based on the team-level dataset of Appendix C (i.e., team whether team performance was fully mediated by team
sample size is 93), team-level data including all six factors of planning and team identity. The test results in Model 4 showed
this study were examined using exploratory factor analysis (see that the significant effects of team planning and team identity
Appendix D) for the purpose of a double check and for in Model 3 remained significant in Model 4, while all three
confirmation before the hierarchical regression analysis on the exogenous determinants were insignificantly related to team
proposed hypotheses were conducted. Specifically, Appendix D performance, suggesting a full mediation of team planning and
presents team-level factor matrices. These analytical results team identity. Finally, Model 5 included two interaction terms
to test the moderating effects of goal commitment. The test
results in Model 5 illustrated that the effect of team planning on
Table 2
Chi-square difference tests for examining discriminate validity. team performance was moderated by goal commitment while
the effect of team identity on team performance was not.
Construct pair χ2160 = 418.99 Based on the above statistical outcomes, Table 4 summa-
(unconstrained model)
rizes the results for each hypothesis. Specifically, of the nine
χ2161 χ2 difference hypotheses, this study obtains six supported hypotheses
(constrained
(i.e., H1, H2, H3, H5, H6, and H8) and three unsupported
model)
hypotheses (i.e., H4, H7, and H9).
(team planning, team identity) 745.33*** 326.34
The unsupported H4 may imply that the effects of emotional
(team planning, emotional 753.43*** 334.44
intelligence) intelligence on team planning vary from team to team,
(team planning, teamwork 1034.90*** 615.91 depending on the work context or task-induced stress
interdependence) (e.g., Matthews et al., 2006). For example, it is possible that
(team planning, goal commitment) 634.44*** 215.45 emotional intelligence is less influential on team planning
(team identity, emotional intelligence) 729.18*** 310.19
among the teams with low job stress as compared to the
(team identity, teamwork 959.27*** 540.28
interdependence) teams with high job stress (e.g., Seok et al., 2012). Meanwhile,
(team identity, goal commitment) 680.95*** 261.96 the unsupported H7 may suggest that the effect of teamwork
(emotional intelligence, teamwork 788.22*** 369.23 interdependence on team identity is not deterministic, depend-
interdependence)
ing on cognition-based and affect-based factors. For instance, the
(emotional intelligence, goal 812.62*** 393.63
commitment) effect of teamwork interdependence on team planning can
(task interdependence, goal 898.16*** 479.17 become less obvious when team members have higher levels of
commitment) cognition-based and affect-based trust (e.g., Schaubroeck et al.,
***Significant at the 0.001 overall significance level by using the Bonferroni 2011). Finally, the unsupported H9 demonstrates a stable effect
method. of team identity on team performance regardless of different
 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23 19

Table 3
Team-level hierarchical regression analysis.

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5

Team planning Team identity Team performance Team performance Team performance

Control variables:
Ratio of members' difference in gender −0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
Ratio of members' difference in age −0.02 0.03 −0.01 0.01 −0.02
Ratio of members of higher education 0.01 0.02 −0.02 −0.02 −0.03
Ratio of expatriate members 0.04 −0.02 0.04 0.03 0.04

Antecedents:
Goal commitment 0.50** 0.44** −0.09 −0.68
Emotional intelligence 0.08 0.38** 0.05
Teamwork interdependence 0.15* 0.11 0.14

Mediator:
Team planning 0.39** 0.35** −1.57
Team identity 0.38** 0.32** 1.71*

Interaction:
Goal commitment * team planning 0.51*
Goal commitment * identity −0.35
Adj R2 0.63 0.64 0.51 0.52 0.52

* p b 0.05
**p b 0.01

levels of goal commitment whatsoever. Nevertheless, the test about innovation has demonstrated team planning as the solely
result for the unsupported hypotheses warrants further study mediator between team performance and its exogenous
in greater depth so that true explanations behind the unsup- predictors in technology industry, an important gap exists
ported relationship between research constructs will not be concerning a potential co-equal mediator of such team
misinterpreted. planning (i.e., team identity) and its potential moderator
(i.e., goal commitment) in the development of team perfor-
5. Discussion mance. In terms of technology development, this study
contributes important findings that complement prior research
In today's competitive environment with ever-changing by evaluating three fresh exogenous predictors for team
innovation, teams in technology industry play a key role in planning and team identity, how these predictors indirectly
ensuring the development and prosperity of their organization. relate to team performance, and a critical moderator that
How to continuously enhance team performance in high-tech intervenes in the relationship between team planning and
firms has become a very important issue that cannot be ignored team performance.
in the technology industry. Even though previous literature Self-regulation and social identity theories are mature
psychological concepts that have been widely applied in
management practices and can be also useful for a thorough
discussion to explain our findings based on Fig. 1. For example,
Table 4
one of various aspects in self-regulation is the activation of goal
Test results of hypotheses.
directed behaviors to guide a team's responses to the collective
Hypotheses Results performance (Abrams and Brown, 1989), supporting the
H1: Team planning and team identity are both Supported important role of goal commitment in the development of
positively related to team performance. team performance. Meanwhile, a team's self-control or self-
H2: Goal commitment is positively Supported
regulation is a collective mechanism of self-management for
related to team planning.
H3: Goal commitment is positively Supported
learning to facilitate the team's autonomous behavior of team
related to team identity. planning (Abrams and Brown, 1989; Oyserman, 2007). Anoth-
H4: Emotional intelligence is positively Not supported er example is social identity theory that suggests individual
related to team planning. members' perceived sense of belonging to a particular team
H5: Emotional intelligence is positively Supported
(Oyserman, 2007), supporting the significant role of team
related to team identity.
H6: Teamwork interdependence is Supported identity in the development of team performance.
positively related to team planning. The significant mediation of team identity and team
H7: Teamwork interdependence is Not supported planning in this research shows that they can be view as dual
positively related to team identity.
bellwethers that facilitate the relationship between the collec-
H8: Goal commitment positively Supported
moderates the relationship between
tive determination (e.g., commitment towards a goal) and the
team planning and team performance. collective outcome (e.g., team performance). Team leaders
H9: Goal commitment positively Not supported should calibrate their team planning and team identity
moderates the relationship between periodically via the exchange of knowledge and information
team identity and team performance.
and the sharing of vision and emotion so as to streamline team
20 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

activities and intensify team members' perceived oneness with include organizational characteristics beyond the theoretical
the team. Problems that occur in team planning or team identity scope of self-regulation and social identity, and can even
suggest that either team members are not well convinced of further compare their explanatory ability to the variables
common goals (i.e., due to a lack of goal commitment) or there examined in this study.
is room for management to strengthen the self-concept in terms
of the team in which members belong to (i.e., due to a lack of
team identity). Periodical surveys about the status of team Acknowledgment
planning and team identity can substantially help fine-tune
team performance. This research is supported by Ministry of Science and
The positive influence of goal commitment on both team Technology, Taiwan.
planning and team identity demonstrates that management
should maintain smooth communication channels, officially or
unofficially, with team members while hurrying to convey Appendix A. Measurement items
team goals to team members. While previous literature
recommends that employees learn about their manager's Team performance (Source: Man and Lam, 2003)
expectations regarding team goals (e.g., Wayne et al., 1997), PE1: Team competency
this study complements such findings by suggesting that PE2: Teamwork effectiveness
today's managers should take the initiative to illustrate team PE3: Teamwork quality
goals to their employees and try to obtain a consensus over PE4: Overall team output
their actively dedicating efforts to reach the goals. Team planning (Source: Abrams and Brown, 1989)
The positive influence of teamwork interdependence on In our team,…
team planning reveals that management should try to design PL1: We first determine how to solve a problem before we
tasks that facilitate the team's consolidation so as to improve begin.
team planning. Teamwork interdependence means team PL2: We try to understand the goal of a problem before we
members within a team should feel responsible for each other's attempt to answer.
work. Team members have to learn to realize that team PL3: We ask ourselves about what we can do to solve a
planning can be more effective and efficient as long as they are problem before we do it.
able to support and count on each other during the process of PL4: We figure out our goals and what we need to do to
heading towards their team goals. accomplish them.
The positive influence of emotional intelligence on team PL5: We develop a plan for the solution of a problem.
identity implies that emotional intelligence contributes to Team identity (Source: Jehn et al., 1999)
effective team collaboration by fostering and maintaining a In our team,…
meaningful identity with the team that the people work on ID1: We talk up our team to our friends as a great group to
(e.g., George, 2000). This viewpoint complements previous work in.
literature describing that an emotionally intelligent team ID2: We are identified ourselves with our team.
provides a great deal of supporting information to demonstrate ID3: We are proud to tell others that we are part of this
the effect of emotional intelligence on team performance team.
through role identity and work team cohesion (e.g., Prati ID4: We feel a sense of ownership for our team rather than
et al., 2003). being just employees.
The moderating effect of goal commitment on the relation- Emotional intelligence (Source: Law et al., 2004)
ship between team planning and team performance suggests In our team,…
that team performance may be ineffective with good team EI1: We are able to control our temper so that we can
planning under a lack of motivation to attain the team goal handle difficulties rationally.
(George, 2000; Prati et al., 2003; Burt et al., in press). In other EI2: We can always calm down quickly when we are very
words, team planning is likely to have a more positive effect angry.
on team performance given a stronger goal commitment. EI3: We have good control of our own emotions.
Management should encourage a continuous interactive Goal commitment (Source: Klein et al., 2001)
process promoting future team achievement for already In our team,…
chosen team goals, consequently inspiring and augmenting GC1: We are committed to pursuing the team's goal.
goal commitment. GC2: We think it is important to reach the team's goal.
Lastly, there are two noticeable limitations in this research. GC3: We care about achieving the team's goal
The first limitation relates to the survey of this research in a Teamwork interdependence (Source: Kiggundu, 1983)
single industry setting—Taiwan's high-tech industry. For that In our team,…
reason, the generalizability of the empirical findings may be TI1: Most of every member's work activities are highly
limited to the country investigated herein. Further research related to the activities of other people on the team.
across different industries may be helpful to generalize the TI2: Every member's work cannot be done without other
findings in greater depth. Second, while this study focuses on members' support.
two key mediators from the perspective of team members, it TI3: Team members work together to get group tasks done.
does not include some other mediators related to organization- TI4: Team members frequently join forces with each other.
level dynamics, structures, policies, or governance. Future TI5: Every member works closely with other members to do
scholars are advised to explore other potential mediators or his/her work properly.
 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23 21

Appendix B. Inter-rater reliability References

Abrams, D., 1999. Social identity, social cognition, and the self: the flexibility
Construct rwg ICC1 ICC2 and stability of self-categorization. In: Abrams, D., Hogg, M.A. (Eds.), Social
Identity and Social Cognition. Blackwell, Oxford, England, pp. 197–229.
Team performance 0.900 0.323 0.650 Abrams, D., Brown, R.J., 1989. Self-consciousness and social identity: self-
Team planning 0.934 0.323 0.649 regulation as a group member. Soc. Psychol. Q. 52, 311–318.
Team identity 0.904 0.321 0.648 Aubé, C., Rosseau, V., 2005. Team goal commitment and team effectiveness: the
Goal commitment 0.850 0.321 0.648 role of task interdependence and supportive behaviors, Group Dynamics.
Emotional intelligence 0.917 0.320 0.647 Theory Res. Pract. 9, 189–204.
Teamwork interdependence 0.938 0.320 0.747 Baruch, Y., Lin, C.P., 2012. All for one, one for all: coopetition and virtual team
performance. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79, 1155–1168.
Note 1: ICC stands for interclass correlation coefficient. Bentler, P.M., Bonett, D.G., 1980. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the
Note 2: The ICC1 values are all larger than the recommended level of 0.12 analysis of covariance structures. Psychol. Bull. 88, 588.
(James, 1982). Branscombe, N.R., Ellemers, N., Spears, R., Doosje, B., 1999. The context and
Note 3: The ICC2 values are all larger than the recommended level of 0.60 content of social identity threat. In: Ellemers, N., Spears, R., Doosje, B. (Eds.),
(Baruch and Lin, 2012). Social Identity: Context, Commitment, Content. Blackwell Science, Oxford,
Note 4: The rwg values above are all larger than the recommended level of 0.70 UK, pp. 35–58.
(James et al., 1984). Brass, D.J., 1981. Structural relationships, job characteristics, and worker
satisfaction and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 26,
331–348.
Brown, A.L., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A., Campione, J.C., 1983. Learning,
Appendix C. Team-level correlation matrix remembering, and understanding. In: Flavell, J.H., Markman, E.M. (Eds.),
Handbook of Child Psychology. vol. 3. Wiley, New York, pp. 77–166.
Burt, G., Mackay, D.J., Perchard, A., 2015. Managerial hyperopia: a potential
unintended consequence of foresight in a top management team? Technol.
Name Mean Standard 1 2 3 4 5 6 Forecast. Soc. Chang. (in press).
deviation Campbell, D.J., Gingrich, K.F., 1986. The interactive effects of task complexity
and participation on task performance: a field experiment. Organ. Behav.
1. Team 3.83 0.38 1.00
Hum. Decis. Process. 38, 162–180.
performance
Campion, M.A., Lord, R.G., 1982. A control systems conceptualization of the goal
2. Team 3.73 0.36 0.68 1.00 setting and changing process. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 30, 265–287.
planning Chapman, M., 2005. Emotional intelligence and coaching: an exploratory study.
3. Team identity 3.69 0.42 0.67 0.70 1.00 In: Cavanagh, M., Grant, A., Kemp, T. (Eds.), Evidence-Based Coaching.
4. Goal 3.78 0.41 0.59 0.78 0.75 1.00 Australian Academic Press, Bowen Hills, Australia.
commitment Cohen, S.G., Bailey, D.E., 1997. What makes teams work: group effectiveness
5. Emotional 3.55 0.41 0.54 0.59 0.69 0.61 1.00 research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J. Manag. 23, 239–290.
intelligence DeShon, R.P., Gillespie, J.Z., 2005. A motivated action theory account of goal
6. Teamwork 3.71 0.51 0.61 0.66 0.66 0.68 0.61 1.00 orientation. J. Appl. Psychol. 90, 1096–1127.
interdependence Druskat, V., Wolff, S., 2001. Group emotional intelligence and its influence on
group effectiveness. In: Cherniss, C., Goleman, D. (Eds.), The Emotionally
Intelligent Workplace: How to Select for, Measure, and Improve Emotional
Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and Organizations. Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, pp. 132–155.
Appendix D. Team-level factor matrix of the data

Items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6

Team performance_1 0.29 0.16 −0.02 0.08 0.76 0.30

Team performance_2 0.07 0.26 0.24 0.20 0.81 0.03
Team performance_3 0.23 0.35 0.35 0.13 0.64 0.11
Team performance_4 0.29 0.18 0.45 0.27 0.66 0.04
Teamwork interdependence_1 0.69 0.26 0.27 0.33 0.25 0.13
Teamwork interdependence_2 0.80 0.18 0.26 0.25 0.32 0.06
Teamwork interdependence_3 0.80 0.28 0.22 0.27 0.10 0.20
Teamwork interdependence_4 0.85 0.14 0.21 0.17 0.24 0.18
Teamwork interdependence_5 0.82 0.25 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.28
Emotional intelligence_1 0.17 0.21 0.24 0.79 0.15 0.08
Emotional intelligence_2 0.27 0.14 0.23 0.76 0.20 0.18
Emotional intelligence_3 0.27 0.21 0.24 0.81 0.14 0.19
Team identity_1 0.29 0.24 0.75 0.32 0.18 0.18
Team identity_2 0.22 0.24 0.76 0.27 0.30 0.14
Team identity_3 0.26 0.18 0.72 0.32 0.24 0.34
Team identity_4 0.27 0.30 0.66 0.25 0.17 0.44
Goal commitment_1 0.34 0.34 0.27 0.18 0.23 0.68
Goal commitment_2 0.27 0.37 0.35 0.19 0.15 0.71
Goal commitment_3 0.28 0.45 0.29 0.30 0.15 0.63
Team planning_1 0.16 0.72 0.21 0.21 0.35 0.16
Team planning_2 0.34 0.69 0.36 0.01 0.32 0.07
Team planning_3 0.17 0.67 0.29 0.26 0.25 0.21
Team planning_4 0.29 0.67 0.23 0.33 0.17 0.29
Team planning_5 0.28 0.77 0.01 0.17 0.12 0.38

Legend: Factor 1 = Teamwork interdependence; Factor 2 = Team planning; Factor 3 = Team identity; Factor 4 = Emotional intelligence; Factor 5 = Team
performance; Factor 6 = Goal commitment.
22 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23

Eckel, C.C., Grossman, P.J., 2005. Managing diversity by creating team identity. Kiggundu, M.N., 1983. Task interdependence and job design: test of a theory.
J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 58, 371–392. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 31, 145–172.
Ercz, M., Zidon, I., 1984. Effect of goal acceptance on the relation of goal Klein, H.J., Wesson, M.J., Hollenbeck, J.R., Alge, B.J., 1999. Goal commitment and
difficulty to performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 69, 69–78. the goal-setting process: conceptual clarification and empirical synthesis.
Ferguson, M., 2004. The role of group membership perception and J. Appl. Psychol. 84, 885.
team identity in a virtual team's use of influence tactics. Social Science Klein, H.J., Wesson, M.J., Hollenbeck, J.R., Wright, P.M., DeShon, R.P., 2001. The
Research Network, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id= assessment of goal commitment: a measurement model meta-analysis.
602047 accessed in October 2012. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 85, 32–55.
Fishbach, A., Dhar, R., 2005. Goals as excuses or guides: the liberating effect of Kozlowski, S.W.J., Watola, D.J., Jensen, J.M., Kim, B.H., Botero, I.C., 2009.
perceived goal progress on choice. J. Consum. Res. 32, 370–377. Developing adaptive teams: a theory of dynamic team leadership. In:
Flipse, S.M., van der Sanden, M.C., Osseweijer, P., 2014. Improving industrial Salas, E., Goodwin, G.F., Burke, C.S. (Eds.), Team Effectiveness in Complex
R&D practices with social and ethical aspects: aligning key performance Organisations: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives and Approaches (SIOP
indicators with social and ethical aspects in food technology R&D. Technol. Frontier Series). Taylor and Francis, New York, pp. 113–156.
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 85, 185–197. Kramer, R.M., 2006. Social capital and cooperative behavior in the workplace: a
Ford, J.K., Smith, E.M., Weissbein, D.A., Gully, S.M., Salas, E., 1998. Relationships social identity perspective. Adv. Group Process. 23, 1–30.
of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with Landen, M., 2002. Emotion management: dabbling in mystery – white
learning outcomes and transfer. J. Appl. Psychol. 83, 218–233. witchcraft or black art? Hum. Resour. Dev. Int. 5, 507–521.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable Law, K.S., Wong, C.-S., Song, L.J., 2004. The construct and criterion validity of
variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. J. Mark. Res. emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies.
382–388. J. Appl. Psychol. 89, 483–496.
Frazier, P.A., Tix, A.P., Barron, K.E., 2004. Testing moderator and mediator effects Lembke, S., Wilson, M.G., 1998. Putting the ‘team’ into teamwork: alternative
in counseling psychology research. J. Couns. Psychol. 51, 115. theoretical contributions for contemporary management practice. Hum.
Furst, S., Blackburn, R., Rosen, B., 1999. Virtual team effectiveness: a proposed Relat. 51, 927–944.
research agenda. Inf. Syst. J. 9, 249–269. Lin, J.Y., 2014. Effects on diversity of R&D sources and human capital on
George, J.M., 2000. Emotions and leadership: the role of emotional intelligence. industrial performance. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 85, 168–184.
Hum. Relat. 53, 1027–1055. Liu, A.M.M., 1999. A research model of project complexity and goal
Gerbing, D.W., Anderson, J.C., 1988. An updated paradigm for scale develop- commitment effects on project outcome. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 6,
ment incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J. Mark. Res. 25, 105–111.
186–192. Liu, M.-L., Liu, N.T., Ding, C.G., Lin, C.P., 2015. Exploring team performance in
Goleman, D., 1995. Emotional Intelligence. Bantam, New York. high-tech industries: future trends of building up teamwork. Technol.
Gundlach, M., Zivnuska, S., Stoner, J., 2006. Understanding the relationship Forecast. Soc. Chang. 91, 295–310.
between individualism-collectivism and team performance through an Locke, E.A., 1968. Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organ.
integration of social identity theory and the social relations model. Hum. Behav. Hum. Perform. 3, 157–189.
Relat. 59, 1603–1632. Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P., 1994. Goal Setting Theory. In: O'Neil Jr., H.F., Drillings,
Henry, B.H., Arrow, H., Carini, B., 1999. A tripartite model of group M. (Eds.), Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 13–29.
identification: theory and measurement. Small Group Res. 30, 558–581. Locke, E.A., Latham, G.P., 2002. Building a practically useful theory of goal
Hernandez, B., Hidalgo, M.C., Salazar-Laplace, M.E., Hess, S., 2007. Place setting and task motivation: a 35 year odyssey. Am. Psychol. 57,
attachment and place identity in natives and non-natives. J. Environ. 705–717.
Psychol. 27, 310–319. Locke, E.A., Shaw, K.M., Saari, L.M., Latham, G.P., 1981. Goal setting and task
Hobman, E.V., Bordia, P., 2006. The team identification in the dissimilarity– performance: 1969-1980. Psychol. Bull. 90, 125–152.
conflict relationship. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 9, 483–507. Longaretti, L., 2008. Switched-on Ideas: Wellbeing. Curriculum Corporation,
Hogg, M.A., Terry, D.J., 2000. Social identity and self categorization processes in Carlton, Vic.
organizational contexts. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25, 121–140. Man, D.C., Lam, S.S.K., 2003. The effects of job complexity and autonomy on
Hollenbeck, J.R., Klein, H.J., 1987. Goal commitment and the goal-setting cohesiveness in collectivistic and individualistic work groups: a cross-
process: problems, prospects, and proposals for future research. J. Appl. cultural analysis. J. Organ. Behav. 24, 979–1001.
Psychol. 72, 212–220. Matthews, G., Emo, A.K., Funke, G., Zeidner, M., Roberts Jr., R.D., Costa, P.T.,
Hollenbeck, J.R., Klein, H.J., O'Leary, A.M., Wright, P.M., 1989. Investigation of the Schulze, R., 2006. Emotional intelligence, personality, and task-induced
construct validity of a self-report measure of goal commitment. J. Appl. stress. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 12, 96–107.
Psychol. 74, 951–956. Mehta, A., Field, H., Armenakis, A., Mehta, N., 2009. Team goal orientation and
Hong, E., O'Neil Jr., H.F., 2001. Construct validation of a trait self-regulation team performance: the mediating role of team planning. J. Manag. 35,
model. Int. J. Psychol. 36, 186–194. 1026–1046.
Hu, J., Liden, R.C., 2011. Antecedents of team potency and team effectiveness: an Menges, J.I., Bruch, H., 2009. Organizational emotional intelligence: an empirical
examination of goal and process clarity and servant leadership. J. Appl. study. In: Hartel, C.E.J., Ashkanasy, N.M., Zerbe, W.J. (Eds.), Research on
Psychol. 96, 851–862. Emotion in Organizations, Emotions in Groups, Organizations and Cultures.
Jackson, S.E., Brett, J.F., Sessa, V.I., Cooper, D.M., Julin, J.A., Peyronnin, K., 1991. Vol. 5. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK, pp. 181–209.
Some differences make a difference: individual dissimilarity and group Meyer, J.P., Herscovitch, L., 2001. Commitment in the workplace: toward a
heterogeneity as correlates of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. general model. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 11, 299–326.
J. Appl. Psychol. 76, 675–689. Northcraft, G.B., Polzer, J.T., Neale, M.A., Kramer, R.M., 1996. Diversity, social
James, L.R., 1982. Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. J. Appl. identity, and performance: emergent social dynamics in cross-functional
Psychol. 67, 219–229. teams. In: Jackson, S.E., Roderman, M.N. (Eds.), Diversity in Work Teams:
James, N., 1989. Emotional labour: skill and work in the social regulation of Research Paradigms for a Changing Workplace. APA, Washington, D.C,
feelings. Sociol. Rev. 37, 15–42. pp. 69–96.
James, L.R., Demaree, R.G., Wolf, G., 1984. Estimating within-group interrater Oliver, P.E., Marwell, G., 1988. The paradox of group size in collective action: a
reliability with and without response bias. J. Appl. Psychol. 69, 85–98. theory of the critical mass. II. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1–8.
Janicik, G.A., Bartel, C.A., 2003. Talking about time: effects of temporal planning Oyserman, D., 2007. Social identity and self-regulation. In: Kruglanski, A.,
and time awareness norms on group coordination and performance, Group Higgins, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed. Guilford Press,
Dynamics. Theory Res. Pract. 7, 122–134. NY, pp. 432–453.
Jehn, K.A., Bezrukova, K., 2004. A field study of group diversity, workgroup Pirola-Merlo, A., Hartel, C., Mann, L., Hirst, G., 2002. How leaders influence the
context, and performance. J. Organ. Behav. 25, 703–729. impact of affective events on team climate and performance in R&D teams.
Jehn, K.A., Northcraft, G., Neale, M., 1999. Why differences make a difference: a Leadersh. Q. 13, 561–581.
field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in work groups. Adm. Sci. Prati, L., Ferris, D.C., Ammeter, A.P., Buckley, M.R., 2003. Emotional
Q. 44, 741–763. intelligence, leadership effectiveness, and team outcomes. Int.
Joe, S.W., Tsai, Y.H., Lin, C.P., Liu, W.T., 2014. Modeling team performance and its J. Organ. Anal. 11, 21–40.
determinants in high-tech industries: future trends of virtual teaming. Quirk, G.J., Beer, J.S., 2006. Prefrontal involvement in the regulation of emotion:
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 88, 16–25. convergence of rat and human studies. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 16, 723–727.
Ke, W.L., Zhang, P., 2009. Motivations in open source software communities: the Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S.S., Peng, A.C., 2011. Cognition-based and affect-based
mediating role of effort intensity and goal commitment. Int. J. Electron. trust as mediators of leader behavior influences on team performance.
Commer. 13, 39–66. J. Appl. Psychol. 96, 863–871.
Kenny, D.A., Kashy, D.A., Bolger, N., 1998. Data analysis in social psychology. The Seijts, G.H., Latham, G.P., 2000. The construct of goal commitment: measure-
Handbook of Social Psychology 1 pp. 233–265. ment and relationships with task performance. In: Goffin, R., Helmes, E.
 C.-P. Lin / Technological Forecasting & Social Change 98 (2015) 13–23 23

(Eds.), Problems and Solutions in Human Assessment. Kluwer Academic, van Knippenberg, D., van Schie, E.C.M., 2000. Foci and correlates of
Dordrecht, the Netherlands, pp. 315–332. organizational identification. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 73, 137–147.
Seok, C.B., Hashmi, S.I., Chiew, T.C., 2012. The effect of emotional intelligence Wayne, S.J., Shore, L.M., Liden, R.C., 1997. Perceived organizational support and
and job stress on mental health problems: a study among nurses. SE Asia leader-member exchange: a social exchange perspective. Acad. Manag. J.
Psychol. J. 1, 56–67. 40, 82–111.
Serrat, O., 2010. Understanding and Developing Emotional Intelligence. Asian Weldon, E., Jehn, K.A., Pradhan, P., 1991. Processes that mediate the relationship
Development Bank, Washington, DC. between a group goal and improved group performance. J. Pers. Soc.
Sivunen, A., 2006. Strengthening identification with the team in virtual teams: Psychol. 61, 555–569.
the leaders' perspective. Group Decis. Negot. 15, 345–366. West, M.A., 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: an integrative model
Somech, A., Desivilya, H.S., Lidogoster, H., 2009. Team conflict management and of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Appl. Psychol.
team effectiveness: the effects of task interdependence and team 51, 355–424.
identification. J. Organ. Behav. 30, 359–378. Wu, D.D., Kefan, X., Hua, L., Shi, Z., Olson, D.L., 2010. Modeling technological
Tajfel, H., 1978. Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social innovation risks of an entrepreneurial team using system dynamics: an
Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Academic Press, London. agent-based perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 77, 857–869.
Tajfel, H., Turner, J.C., 1979. An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In: Yang, J., Mossholder, K.W., 2004. Decoupling task and relationship conflict: the
Austin, W.G., Worchel, S. (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup role of intragroup emotional processing. J. Organ. Behav. 25, 589–605.
Relations. Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, pp. 7–24. Zsambok, C., Klein, G., Kyne, M., Klinger, D., 1992. Advanced Team Decision
Theodorakis, Y., 1996. The influence of goals, commitment, self-efficacy Making: A Developmental Model (Contract MDA903-90-C-0117, U.S. Army
and self-satisfaction on motor performance. J. Appl. Sport Psychol. 8, Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences). Klein Associates,
171–182. Inc., Fairborn, OH.
Tsai, Y.H., Joe, S.W., Lin, C.P., Wang, R.T., Chang, Y.H., 2012. Modeling the
relationship between IT-mediated social capital and social support: key
Chieh-Peng Lin is a professor in the Institute of Business & Management,
mediating mechanisms of sense of group. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79,
National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan. His research interests focus on the
1592–1604.
social science related to organizational behavior and information technology.
Tsai, Y.H., Ma, H.C., Lin, C.P., Chiu, C.K., Chen, S.C., 2014. Group social
His work has been published in a variety of journals including Computers in
capital in virtual teaming contexts: a moderating role of positive
Human Behavior, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Group & Organization Manage-
affective tone in knowledge sharing. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.
ment, Human Relations, Information Systems Journal, International Journal of
86, 13–20.
Electronic Commerce, Journal of Business Ethics, Technological Forecasting and
van der Vegt, G.S., van de Vliert, E., Oosterhof, A., 2003. Informational
Social Change, and so on.
dissimilarity and organizational citizenship behavior: the role of intrateam
interdependence and identification. Acad. Manag. 46, 715–728.