Group versus individual focused transformationl leadership on social loafing behavior in virtual teams

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY NGUYEN NHU NAM ANH GROUP VERSUS INDIVIDUAL-FOCUSED TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON SOCIAL LOAFING BEHAVIOR IN VIRTUAL TEAMS

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN NHU NAM ANH

GROUP VERSUS INDIVIDUAL-FOCUSED TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON SOCIAL LOAFING BEHAVIOR IN VIRTUAL

TEAMS

MASTER'S THESIS

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

VIETNAM JAPAN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN NHU NAM ANH

GROUP VERSUS INDIVIDUAL-FOCUSED TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP ON SOCIAL LOAFING BEHAVIOR IN VIRTUAL

TEAMS

MAJOR: MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

CODE: 8340101.01

RESEARCH SUPERVISORS:

Associate Prof KODO YOKOZAWA

Dr TRAN THI BICH HANH

Hanoi, 2021

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

A complete study could not be done without any assistance from others Therefore, I would like to give my acknowledgement to their support and motivation during the time of doing this master thesis research as a requirement for completing my Master of Business Administration at Vietnam Japan University

First of all, I wish to express my sincere thanks to my supervisors, Associate Prof

Dr Kodo Yokozawa and Dr Tran Thi Bich Hanh for their insightful feedback and motivation The research would have been difficult to complete without their guidance and inspiration

I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation and gratitude to Ms Huong, MBA program assistant, for her unwavering support of my master’s studies and research, regardless of being on maternity leave during my second year at VJU

I am also grateful to my classmates, Ms Do Hai Yen, Ms Nguyen Thi Anh and

Ms Nguyen Thi Ha for their encouragement and sharing during the past two years at VJU Thanks to them, I received positive peer pressure, which motivated me to conduct the research proactively and complete the master’s thesis I would also like to thank Mr Nguyen Anh Hao, a senior student at VJU who is currently studying for a Ph.D at Yokohama National University, for sharing his experience and knowledge, as well as supporting me in the process of writing a thesis

Finally, I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to my parents for their unending love, care, and support, which has inspired and motivated me throughout my life

Nguyen Nhu Nam Anh

ABSTRACT

Globalization and the developments in digital and communication technology are fueling the growth of virtual teams in the workplaces With the spread of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), the number of virtual group works has increased dramatically since the beginning of 2020 Employees profit from remote working due to its flexible working environment, therefore it could become a new standard in the future Working effectively in a dispersed area without face-to-face communication, however, can be a challenge In a dispersed situation, where social influence and direct supervision are limited, and the contributions are less apparent, some members may exert less effort than anticipated This phenomenon is called social loafing In virtual teams, leaders are responsible for members’ working performance as well as individual attitude towards work, including social loafing behavior Hence, the purpose of this study is to examine the effect of two transformational leadership styles (group-focused and individual-focused) on individual social loafing behavior in virtual teams

To collect samples for quantitative analysis, an online survey questionnaire was employed Participants in this study included Vietnamese employees who work remotely and are currently involved in online projects teams led by managers or team leaders The author obtained 461 responses via an online survey, with a total of 249 valid responses that could be used for data analysis after screening

The results from multiple regression analysis revealed that group-focused transformational leadership has no effect on social loafing, while individual-focused transformational leadership has a negative effect on individual social loafing, with the exception of intellectual stimulation behavior This finding will aid managers in dealing with the challenges of leading virtual team such as productivity loss, particularly social loafing

Keywords: transformational leadership, group-focused, individual-focused,

dual-level, social loafing, virtual teams

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES i

LIST OF FIGURES ii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS iii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Research Motivation 1

1.1.1 Practical Necessity 1

1.1.2 Theoretical Necessity 2

1.2 Research Objective 3

1.3 Research Contribution 3

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Virtual Teams 4

2.1.1 Definition of Virtual Teams 4

2.1.2 The Benefits and Drawbacks of Virtual Teams 5

2.2 Leadership in Virtual Teams 7

2.2.1 Virtual Leadership 7

2.2.2 Transformational Leadership in Virtual Teams 8

2.3 Group- and Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership 9

2.3.1 Group-Focused Transformational Leadership 9

2.3.2 Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership 10

2.4 Social Loafing 11

2.4.1 Definition of Social Loafing 11

2.4.2 Social Loafing in Virtual Teams 12

2.5 Research Gap and Research Question 13

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS AND METHODOLOGY 14

3.1 Research Hypothesis 14

3.1.1 Group-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing 14

3.1.2 Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing 15

3.2 Research Methodology 16

3.2.1 Population 16

3.2.2 Sampling Method and Size 17

3.2.3 Data Collection Process 17

3.2.4 Data Analysis Approach 18

3.2.5 Measurements 19

CHAPTER 4 DATA PRESENTATION 22

4.1 Descriptive Statistics 22

4.1.1 Frequency Analysis 22

4.1.2 Descriptive Analysis 23

4.2 Reliability Analysis 25

4.3 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) 26

4.3.1 Exploratory Factor Analysis for Independent Variables 26

4.3.2 Exploratory Factor Analysis for Dependent Variable 28

4.4 Multiple Regression Analysis 28

4.5 Hypothesis Testing 30

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 32

5.1 Discussion 32

5.1.1 Group-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing 32

5.1.2 Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing 33

5.1.3 Considering the Vietnamese Context in this Study 34

5.2 Implication 35

5.2.1 Theoretical Implication 35

5.2.2 Practical Implication 35

5.3 Conclusion 36

5.4 Limitation and Future Research 37

REFERENCES 40

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Measurement Scale for Group- and Individual-Focused Transformational

Leadership 19

Table 3.2 Measurement Scale for Social Loafing 20

Table 4.1 Table of Frequency Statistics 22

Table 4.2 Frequency Table of Team Size, Team Tenure and Gender 22

Table 4.3 Descriptive Table of Independent Variables 24

Table 4.4 Descriptive Table of Dependent Variable 25

Table 4.5 Cronbach’s Alpha Table 26

Table 4.6 KMO and Bartlett’s Test of Independent Variables 27

Table 4.7 Rotated Component Matrix of Independent Variables 27

Table 4.8 KMO and Barlett’s Test of Dependent Variable 28

Table 4.9 Regression Analysis Summary 29

Table 4.10 Hypothesis Testing Summary 31

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 Research Model 16

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

I-TFL: Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership

G-TFL: Group-Focused Transformational Leadership

SL: Social Loafing

SLTQ: Social Loafing Tendency Questionnaire

TFL: Transformational Leadership

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

Through demonstrating the research motivation, this chapter presents the subject

to be examined in this thesis In addition, the research objectives, research questions and research contributions are discussed in this section below

1.1 Research Motivation

1.1.1 Practical Necessity

The way people work in organizations nowadays is being reshaped by advances

in information and communication technology, as well as globalization and increased competition (Bal & Teo, 2000; Bell & Kozlowski, 2002) In the business world, virtual works have become popular among groupworks (Powell et al., 2004) For their working practices, groups are increasingly dependent on different communication tools such as text messaging, email, and video meetings

According to Dulebohn and Hoch (2017, p 569), virtual teams are “work arrangements where team members are geographically dispersed, have limited face-to-face contact and work interdependently through the use of electronic communication media to achieve common goals” Virtual teams have now been a recent movement towards working across the organization boundaries, which enables more flexibility and adaptability for organizations Remote working in virtual teams has many advantages, including reduced travel time and costs, increased flexibility to assemble a team of professionals and expertise across time and distance, improving equal opportunities and discouraging discrimination (Bergiel et al., 2008)

With the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, organizations worldwide have adopted remote working or working from home As a result, the number of group work in virtual context has increased rapidly since the beginning of 2020 According to the Statistica Research Department, the number of employees in the US worked at home five days or so a week has surged to 44 percent during the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, compared with 17 percent before the outbreak.1 Moreover, there is

1 Mlitz, K (2021, April 09) Remote work frequency before/after COVID-19 2020 Retrieved May 25, 2021, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122987/change-in-remote-work-trends-after-covid-in-usa/

widespread agreement that certain companies will continue to adopt remote working even after COVID-19 Employees are getting benefits from remote working because of its flexible working environment, and therefore, this working style could be a new normal in the future

However, working effectively in a dispersed area without proper face-to-face communication can be a challenge (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002) Working in virtual teams also posit some disadvantages such as technological constrain, communication and collaboration difficulties These limitations led to a low level of group cohesion, which could negatively impact the team performance (Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014) Moreover, the drawbacks of virtual works such as lack of quality in social interaction might lead to the emergence of productivity loss (Monzani et al., 2014) Under the dispersed situation, where social control and direct supervision is reduced, as well as the contributions are less visible, some members may put in less effort than anticipated on team tasks (Chidambaram & Tung, 2005) This is known as social loafing, and it is described as the act of withholding contributions in a team (Karau & Williams, 1993; Latané et al., 1979)

As Bell and Kozlowski (2002) have stated, leadership effectiveness is crucial to the performance of virtual teams Hence, leaders are accountable for each member’s working performance as well as the individual attitude towards work, including social loafing behavior Therefore, there is a necessity for conducting research regarding leadership in virtual context in order to tackle this practical issue

1.1.2 Theoretical Necessity

The trend towards virtual work in organizations has motivated researchers to pay more attention to studies on leadership in virtual context However, Liao (2017) questioned the current literature on virtual leadership for focusing mostly on team success rather than individual outcome In particular, there has been a scarcity of research on the relationship between leadership effectiveness and social loafing behavior, especially in the virtual setting

In terms of leadership style, transformational leadership behavior (TFL) is thought to have a major influence on the effectiveness of virtual teams (Purvanova &

Bono, 2009) Previous research on transformational leadership in virtual context, however, did not consider separating this leadership style into two distinct behaviors, namely group-focused and individual-focused leadership (Wang & Howell, 2010) Wu

et al (2010) found that these two transformational leadership practices had differing effects on followers Furthermore, previous research has not looked at the impact of these two transformational leadership models on social loafing, whether in traditional collocated teams, or in virtual environments Research that focuses in particular on the association between transformational leadership and social loafing in virtual teams is thus needed

1.2 Research Objective

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of two transformational leadership styles (group-focused and individual-focused) on individual social loafing behavior in virtual teams The present seeks to address a relevant research question: What effect does dual-level transformational leadership have on social loafing in virtual teams?

1.3 Research Contribution

The current research intends to make several important contributions To begin,

it adds to the literature on both transformational leadership and social loafing in virtual teams by investigating the effect of dual-level transformational leadership on individual social loafing tendency Second, this study extends the understanding of social loafing

in workplace settings Prior studies on social loafing in virtual teams are often performed

at the undergraduate or graduate level at universities There is a lack of knowledge and information on how to mitigate social loafing in virtual teams in workplace

In terms of practical contribution, the present study will attempt to answer a managerially relevant question: Which transformational leadership behavior is more successful in overcoming social loafing behavior in a virtual team? Are group-focused and individual-focused behaviors equally crucial, or is one better than the other? The answer to this question will help managers in an organization deal better with the challenge of leading virtual teams, such as productivity loss, particularly social loafing

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The research title contains several keywords, such as transformational leadership, virtual teams, and social loafing This section would look at the relevant theories regarding those concepts, as well as pointing out the existing research gaps that are related to the research problems

2.1 Virtual Teams

2.1.1 Definition of Virtual Teams

Globalization and increased competitiveness, as well as developments in digital and networking technology, have allowed a rapid rate of transition than previously possible, resulting in employment that is more complex and diverse (Bal & Teo, 2000; Bell & Kozlowski, 2002) These forces have enabled a tendency for firms to collaborate across corporate boundaries, and, as a result, organizations have grown to be more adaptable and agile With the advancement of technologies, organizations have adopted

a modern way of working, which is telework (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002)

Telework is described by Bailey and Kurland (2002, p 385) as “working outside the conventional workplace and communicating with it by way of telecommunications

or computer-based technology” When different teleworkers are formed into a group to run a project, they will form a virtual group If those members share a common goal and work together to achieve it, then the virtual team is formed

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, the concept and definition of virtual teams have appeared in a number of research papers (Bal & Teo, 2000; Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Kirkman et al., 2002; Townsend, 1998) Given that the characteristics

of virtual teams have evolved over the last 20 years as a consequence of developments

in communication technologies, the following concept by Dulebohn and Hoch (2017, p 569) would be used to describe virtual teams Virtual teams is defined as “work arrangements where team members are geographically dispersed, have limited face-to-face contact and work interdependently through the use of electronic communication media to achieve common goals” Despite having several definitions of virtual teams,

these concepts all have in common, which is geographically dispersed and using technology to communicate and collaborate, in order to achieve common goals

There are two criteria that distinguish virtual teams from traditional teams, which are spatial distance and communication method (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002) As traditional team members operate closely together (in the same space or building), virtual team members are often isolated and distributed in various areas (work from home or telework) Moreover, members in virtual teams always connect and interact through a variety of communication technologies such as e-mail, text messaging and videoconference, since they seldom meet face-to-face as traditional teams Although conventional teams also utilize computer mediated technologies for teamwork, such systems are often used as a complement for face-to-face communication Bell and Kozlowski (2002) have argued that the absence of face-to-face contact is what makes teams virtual

2.1.2 The Benefits and Drawbacks of Virtual Teams

This segment discusses the advantages and disadvantages of virtual teams Without a question, virtual teams hold tremendous potential that it can perform collaborative tasks that traditional teams can not The following are some benefits that enable virtual teams to grow in popularity:

(1) Reduce cost and travel time: with virtual teams, organization can reduce the cost regarding the accommodation fee, travel, relocation, or daily allowances costs Employees who work in virtual teams do not have to worry about any disruption regarding the daily commute to work By saving travel time and cost, employees can spend time on more meaningful activities before starting work in virtual teams By adopting the virtual teams’ structure, IBM had saved $50 million for travel and downtime costs (Bergiel et al., 2008)

(2) Allow organization to recruit the most talented employees: virtual teams open

a chance for organization to find top talents who are geographically dispersed and find it difficult to conduct a business through face-to-face meetings By recruiting top talents without any limitation regarding the physical distance, virtual teams can expand their functional expertise and benefit the organization

in terms of competition In addition, virtual employees can easily work on different teams, hence companies can maximize their workforce by allowing team members with specific skills to serve in multiple teams at the same time (Hertel et al., 2004)

(3) Enhancing equal opportunities in the workplace and discouraging discrimination: employees who are geographically dispersed will have equal access to the virtual workplaces, thereby allowing the organization to accommodate the specific needs of those physically distanced employees Moreover, conducting business online creates an environment that promotes equality and equity among employees, since the performance management of employees in virtual workplaces is mainly based on their productivity and work outcomes rather than any other attributes (Bergiel et al., 2008)

On the other hand, research also suggested that virtual teams face a number of obstacles as opposed to traditional teams Some of the main drawbacks are included below:

(1) Technological difficulties: Although technology has become an essential tool for organizations, not everyone in virtual teams benefits from the use of computers and other electronic devices such as laptops or smartphones Virtual teams may experience the generation gap, which eventually led to an issue that there is a lack of expertise in technological applications within mature senior managers (Bergiel et al., 2008) According to Johnson et al (2001), the introduction of virtual teams would produce problems such as technophobia, a term that describes workers who are unfamiliar with computers and other telecommunication technology

(2) Communication and collaboration difficulties: one of the biggest issues involved in working in virtual teams is communication, which can be described

in three different aspects: (a) lack of project visibility – team members were unsure of what tasks they needed to complete; (b) getting in touch with people –

a member sent a question or message to another team member but never received

a response, or received a delayed reply, leading to further frustration among team

members; and (c) technological constraints – members had difficulties understanding the meaning of text-based messages, since it lacks non-verbal cues (Johnson et al., 2001)

(3) Difficulties in creating trust: trust plays an important role in preventing geographical distance from leading to psychological distance in a virtual team (Jarvenpaa et al., 1998) However, with the communication difficulties mentioned above, virtual teams might experience more challenges than conventional teams in building trust among team members Past research has shown that it is more challenging to develop social relationships through computer mediated communication due to the depersonalization effect (Kanawattanachai & Yoo, 2002) Therefore, virtual teams might experience the lack of affect-based trust, which involves the emotional elements and social skills

of trustees (Kanawattanachai & Yoo, 2002)

2.2 Leadership in Virtual Teams

2.2.1 Virtual Leadership

The concept of virtual leadership is “a social influence process mediated by advanced information technologies to produce changes in attitudes, feelings, thinking, behavior, and/or performance of individuals, groups, and/or organizations” (Hambley et al., 2007)

The unique features of virtual teams require different demands for leadership compared with conventional teams (Huang et al., 2010) Many academics accept that leading virtual teams is more daunting than leading conventional face-to-face teams (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Hoch & Kozlowski, 2014; Liao, 2017) According to Purvanova and Bono (2009), leaders of virtual teams must spend significantly more time and resources to ensure the team performs equivalently to face-to-face teams Given the limited richness of social information through digital networking media resources, virtual leaders may need to take a proactive approach and spend more effort to assist in the coordination of team activities, the development of relationships among team members, and the facilitation of team processes (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Liao, 2017; Purvanova & Bono, 2009) Therefore, leadership effectiveness is critical to the

sustainability of virtual teams (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Hambley et al., 2007; Liao, 2017)

2.2.2 Transformational Leadership in Virtual Teams

While various approaches to leadership studies exist, transformational leadership was selected as a main subject in the present research There are several explanations why this leadership theory was chosen Initially, transformational leadership was proposed by Bass (1985), and it has been endorsed by comprehensive studies since then (Hambley et al., 2007) Several studies have often emphasized the significance of transformational leadership in virtual teams (Bell & Kozlowski, 2002; Purvanova & Bono, 2009) This paradigm may also be used to provide practical recommendation in leadership training (Hambley et al., 2007) Moreover, researchers who focus on virtual leadership will be able to improve their quality of research by adopting research methods and measurements which have been verified in the form of developed theories in traditional leadership research (Zhang & Fjermestad, 2006)

Transformational leader emphasizes motivating and inspiring followers to perform beyond expectation, stimulating thinking that drives innovative solutions to tackle problems and generating follower trust, confidence, and admiration (Balthazard

et al., 2009; Hambley et al., 2007) Idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration are the four dimensions of this leadership style (Bass, 1985)

Purvanova and Bono (2009) argued that transformational leadership is essential

in teams that experience difficulties in communication due to technology constrain According to the findings of this study, transformational leadership has a greater impact

on team outcomes in virtual teams than in conventional face-to-face teams

However, the academic literature on leadership in virtual contexts is only in its early stages, with just a few studies concentrated specifically on the effect of transformational leadership in virtual teams Furthermore, Liao (2017) stated that the latest literature focuses primarily on the impact of leadership on team level outcomes, rather than individual level outcomes

2.3 Group- and Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership

This study takes a step further by exploring the two types of transformational leadership behaviors: group-focused transformational leadership (G-TFL) and individual-focused (I-TFL) transformational leadership The theory regarding G-TFL and I-TFL behavior was proposed first by Kark and Shamir (2002), but prior studies have only viewed transformational leadership as an overarching model and neglected to differentiate between group-focused and individual-focused leadership behaviors (Wang

& Howell, 2010) It was not until Wu et al (2010) published an article that directly addressed the gap on how differentiated transformational leadership impacts group performance The study by Wu et al (2010) was followed by Wang and Howell (2010), who also investigated the impact of these two leadership behaviors on group performance and individual task performance Since then, several papers have been concentrating on analyzing the effect of G-TFL and I-TFL on different outcomes such

as team performance (Chun et al., 2016; Wang & Howell, 2012), individual psychological empowerment (Wang & Howell, 2012) or creative behavior (Dong et al., 2017; Tse & Chiu, 2014) Nonetheless, these studies were conducted mostly in collocated face-to-face context Until now, there has been relatively little study on the impact of this dual-level transformational leadership in the virtual context

While Wu et al (2010) measured the TFL behaviors based on the theory proposed

by Bass (1985), Wang and Howell (2010) have extended their research model on level transformational leadership by developing a new TFL dimension and scale to measure these two factors and tested this preliminary model which has a reliable outcome Therefore, the definitions of G-TFL and I-TFL developed by Wang and Howell (2010) will be used in this study

dual-2.3.1 Group-Focused Transformational Leadership

Wang and Howell (2010) described group-focused transformational leadership

as action that emphasizes the significance of group objectives, strengthens mutually shared values and principles, and inspires a concerted effort to achieve group goals Group-focused transformational leadership has three dimensions: (1) emphasizing group identity, (2) communicating a group vision, and (3) team-building

(1) Emphasizing group identity highlights the mutual characteristics of group

members and stresses the group affiliation of the followers This action was modeled

after the idealized influence dimension in the traditional transformational leadership

proposed by Bass (1985) Showing pride in the group’s accomplishments and achievements, highlighting shared goals and ideals among members, emphasizing the team’s uniqueness, and saying positive things about the team are all examples of

emphasizing group identity

(2) Communicating a group vision entails articulating an idealized and appealing

view of the team’s potential This dimension is derived from Bass (1985) definition of

inspirational motivation, which relates to the action that motivates and inspires

followers to pursue a common vision in order to reach collective goals that seem unreachable Leaders, for example, can speak optimistically regarding the team’s prospects or be positive about what the team will achieve Leaders may also show confidence in what the team will do in the coming years, as well as communicate a consistent vision for the project

(3) Team-building is characterized as encouraging collaboration, resolving

disputes, and fostering mutual confidence among team members Examples of

team-building include developing a team mentality and spirit, resolving disagreements among

team members for the sake of the team’s goals, and promoting mutual trust among members

2.3.2 Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership

Individual-focused transformational leadership is described as an action that empowers individual followers to reach their full potential, strengthen their abilities and skills, and boost their self-efficacy and self-esteem (Wang & Howell, 2010) I-TFL can

be divided into four distinctive dimensions: (1) communicating high expectations, (2) follower development, (3) intellectual stimulation and (4) personal recognition

(1) Communicating high expectations shows the leader’s aspirations of followers for excellence, efficiency, and high result This dimension arose from Bass (1985) TFL

theory of inspirational motivation Leaders who exhibit this behavior inspire supporters

to set high expectations for themselves, demonstrating a total confidence in them and their abilities to accomplish certain goals

(2) Follower development aims to enhance followers’ skills and abilities This dimension derives on the individual consideration dimension developed by Bass (1985),

which is defined as paying careful attention to each individual’s desire for success, serving as coach and tutor, and offering learning opportunities Leaders, for example, may suggest different training methods to help followers improve their ability to carry out the job, providing coaching to help followers enhance job performance, and giving feedback to help them understand

(3) Intellectual stimulation is defined as encouraging followers to be innovative

through questioning assumption, reframing issues, and addressing problems in novel ways This dimension is aligned with the similar TFL dimension proposed by Bass (1985), in which leaders should give followers the ability to think independently, challenge them to look at the issue from various perspectives, and come up with creative ideas and solutions

(4) Personal recognition praise and acknowledge followers for meeting specific objectives or finding innovative ways This dimension is adopted from the contingent

reward dimension in transactional leadership behavior, which is characterized as

rewarding followers for achieving specific performance goals (Bass, 1985) Examples

of personal recognition include commending followers when they achieve their goals, giving them positive feedback for a good performance, or acknowledging the improvement in followers’ quality of work

2.4 Social Loafing

2.4.1 Definition of Social Loafing

Social loafing is defined as the act of withholding contributions in a team (Karau

& Williams, 1993; Latané et al., 1979) In other words, individuals may make less effort when working collaboratively than when working alone (Peñarroja et al., 2017) George (1992) considered social loafing as an explanation for productivity losses in group working The phenomenon of social loafing has become an interesting topic and attracted many researchers since the early twentieth century, starting with Maximilien

Ringelmaan (Alnuaimi et al., 2010) He was the first theorist to describe this phenomenon, which other researchers also called social loafing as the Ringelmaan effect

To understand social loafing, many theories have been suggested, including the social impact theory, the output equity theory, or the matching-to-standard theory (Alnuaimi et al., 2010) Some scholars have recently based their analysis of social loafing on motivation theories and established several antecedents, such as lack of identification of individual contribution to the group, low intrinsic commitment, and low group cohesiveness (Liden et al., 2004) There is a consensus among researchers that the underlying causes of social loafing are motivational in nature (George, 1992; Liden

et al., 2004)

2.4.2 Social Loafing in Virtual Teams

As the number of virtual team works has increased rapidly due to the advance of technology in recent years, productivity loss, particularly social loafing, has become an urgent topic for information systems researchers (Alnuaimi et al., 2010; Dennis et al., 2012) Under the dispersed situation, where social control and direct supervision is reduced, as well as the contributions are less visible, some members may spend less effort than expected and team task (Chidambaram & Tung, 2005) Moreover, the drawbacks of virtual works such as lack of quality in social interaction might lead to the emergence of productivity loss, particularly social loafing behavior (Monzani et al., 2014) Hence, there is a possibility that virtual teams might exhibit social loafing behavior more regularly than traditional collocated teams

Several antecedents of social loafing in virtual context have been discovered in previous studies Group size and dispersion are the two key causes of social loafing behavior in virtual teams (Chidambaram & Tung, 2005) Alnuaimi et al (2010) has extended the research model on team size and dispersion and identified several mediating mechanisms such as diffusion of responsibility, dehumanization, and attribution of blame Perry et al (2016) proposed that work-family circumstances can lead to the tendency of social loafing in virtual teams Moreover, in a technology-supported team, digital communication has been described as a supporting condition for social loafing (Monzani et al., 2014)

Several previous studies have listed the impact of transformational leadership on social loafing (Chen et al., 2020; Kahai et al., 2003; Khan et al., 2020) There is an agreement among these studies that transformational leadership negatively influences social loafing Kahai et al (2003) proposed and tested the research model regarding leadership effectiveness on social loafing in an electronic context However, these findings continued to treat transformational leadership as a broad concept, failing to distinguish between group-focused and individual-focused behaviors According to Wu

et al (2010), G-TFL and I-TFL can affect followers differently Hence, the aim of this study is to fill a void in the existing literature concerning transformational leadership and social loafing behavior

2.5 Research Gap and Research Question

Despite the fact that a variety of studies have been undertaken to investigate the antecedents of social loafing, research regarding the leadership effect on this behavior

is still very limited Furthermore, there has been a relatively small number of research that examine the effects of transformational leadership on social loafing, nor has there been prior research that studies the relationship between dual-focused leadership and loafing behavior in virtual contexts Moreover, Wang and Howell (2012) proposed that future research could investigate the cross-level impact of dual-level transformational leadership on individual-level outcomes such as individual work behavior or attitude Hence, there is a need for research that directly reflects on the linkage between transformational leadership and individual social loafing in virtual teams

Based on the existing gap in the literature review of transformational leadership and social loafing, this study attempts to answer the research question: What effect does dual-level transformational leadership have on social loafing in virtual teams?

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Hypothesis

3.1.1 Group-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing

Group-focused TFL emphasizes the significance of group goals, strengthens mutually held ideals and values, and inspires a united commitment to accomplish group goals (Wang & Howell, 2010) The focus on teamwork emphasizes the group’s mutual effectiveness, implying that by collaborating, team members may achieve better performance This type of leadership aims to increase followers’ intrinsic motivation, which enhances their interest in discussions and collaboration with others (Kahai et al., 2003) With a high degree of inspirational motivation, group-focused TFL behavior may minimize social loafing by assisting team members in perceiving that the ongoing group challenge is critical and requires mutual contributions to the group, as well as their contributions being distinct and important for improved group success In other words,

by communicating group vision and fostering collaboration among team members, leaders can help the team in overcoming social loafing by making members associate greater intrinsic value with "working together" and "learning from each other" (Kahai et al., 2003)

According to Lam (2015), a group that exhibits higher team cohesion – the degree

to which a team is united and dedicated to achieving a particular work goal, is likely to experience less social loafing behavior Moreover, group-focused TFL has a beneficial impact on followers’ helping behavior, which is described as willingly assisting other members of the group with work-related problems (Wang & Howell, 2010) Finally, group-focused TFL stresses the value of group identity, which is favorably linked to individual performance and psychological empowerment, according to Wang and Howell (2012) Therefore:

Hypothesis 1: Group-focused transformational leadership (G-TFL), including

emphasizing group identity (H1a), communicating a group vision (H1b) and building (H1c), are negatively related to individual social loafing behavior

team-3.1.2 Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership and Social Loafing

Individual-focused TFL seeks to inspire individuals to reach their full potential, strengthen their abilities and skills, and improve their self-efficacy and self-esteem (Wang & Howell, 2010) When transformational leaders show individual care and compassion for their followers, they motivate them to engage in more in-role activities needed by their leader (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002) By creating an emotional bond, leaders motivate followers and enhance their personal initiative, which defines as an extent to

go above and beyond their job role and assist others (Judge & Piccolo, 2004; Wang & Howell, 2010) When transformational leaders set high performance expectations, this behavior can enhance followers’ perceived ability to achieve task, which not only motivates them to perform a better in-role performance, but also creates a sense of responsibility to ensure that they fulfill their own duty in the team

There is a follower development behavior inside individual-focused

transformational leadership that helps to improve followers’ skills and abilities by paying particular attention to each individual’s desire for success, serving as a coach and tutor, and offering learning opportunities (Wang & Howell, 2010) This dimension

derives on the individual consideration introduced by Bass (1985), and according to Kahai et al (2003), individual consideration may aid in increasing followers’ sense of

psychological empowerment, hence deflating the level of social loafing

Moreover, by encouraging followers to be independent thinkers, transformational leaders can help them enhance self-determination over their own work (Wang & Howell, 2012) Hence, this study advances the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: Individual-focused transformational leadership (I-TFL), including

communicating high expectation (H2a), follower development (H2b), intellectual stimulation (H2c) and personal recognition (H2d) are negatively related to individual social loafing behavior

Figure 3.1 below present the research model of this study:

Figure 3.1 Research Model 3.2 Research Methodology

In this study, a quantitative analysis approach was used, with samples collected from an online survey-questionnaire By exploring the association between dual-level transformational leadership and social loafing in a virtual team workplace, this quantitative study contributes to a better understanding of the impact of these two leaderships style on followers’ behavior The collected data was analyzed using the software IBM SPSS Statistics Subscription Trial version 27

3.2.1 Population

The population of interest for this quantitative analysis was any Vietnamese individual who is currently engaging in online project teams in organizations, both within and outside Vietnam Those individuals were the members/followers of the teams, each of which is headed by one manager or one team leader Since the research model

on the preliminary effect of transformational leaderships on social loafing behavior in general, this study did not consider separating the team type, team structure, as well as

H1a (-) H1b (-) H1c (-)

the different leader or manager’s position, but rather consider those factors as a general team construct Due to the outbreak of the pandemic COVID-19 since the beginning of

2020, the number of remote workers and virtual project teams has increased rapidly all over the world Therefore, Vietnam was selected for its relevance to the phenomenon of this study

3.2.2 Sampling Method and Size

A non-probability sampling approach was used, which included convenience sampling and snowball sampling A convenience sample is made up of representatives

of the target demographic who follow those requirements, such as ease of access, geographical proximity, availability at a certain period, or the desire to participate (Etikan et al., 2016) In other words, convenience samples can be referred to as individuals who are easily accessible to the researcher While in snowball sampling, the researcher asks individuals to introduce different individuals that are also within the targeted population (Goodman, 1961) In terms of sample size, the minimum number of eligible samples should be five times greater than the total items in the questionnaire (Hair, 2010) Since the survey developed from the present has 8 variables measured by

39 items, the minimum number of valid samples should be at least 195

3.2.3 Data Collection Process

Firstly, the questionnaire was translated from English to Vietnamese with the revision from the supervisors Then, using the snowball sampling method, the survey was distributed through email or instant messages to several targeted remote workers who are currently working in online project teams in organizations The purpose of this step was to collect a certain number of valid samples that could be used for a pilot test There was a total of 83 responses collected from the initial process Data analysis for validity revealed that the measurements were suitable and could be used for further data collection and analysis However, to increase the reliability of target respondents, several screening questions were added, for example: “Are you currently working from home or doing remote working?” This question was used in order to choose the respondents who are actually working in project teams remotely, not those who are experienced Moreover, questions regarding occupation were also included in order to target the respondents in an organizational context exclusively

Following the pilot study to determine the validity of the questionnaire, the survey was revised on Google Form before being distributed on different social networking sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Zalo and YouTube Community Post as a form of convenience sampling method

The data collection process was conducted from March 28th to April 13th The author received 461 responses via online survey After screening, there were a total of

249 valid responses that could be used for data analysis There are three key explanations why the remainding 212 invalid answers were removed First, since the main population

of this study focused only on employees in organizations, a number of responses that did not meet the criteria for the targeted respondents were removed due to the different occupations (student and freelancer) In fact, since the survey questionnaire was distributed with a convenient sampling method via social media platform, many people were willing to answer the survey, which included those who were not the main targeted respondents Second, in order to choose the respondents who are working in virtual team exclusively (online full-time), those who are not currently working from home or not doing remote working are considered as invalid responses Third, the population of target is narrowed to those who are using videoconference as a method of communication

3.2.4 Data Analysis Approach

Descriptive statistics, including frequency analysis, and descriptive analysis were performed first to give an overview of the data distribution This was an important first step that gives the researchers an idea of how the collected data was distributed, as well

as detecting any outliers, or typos that occurred in the data collecting process

In the next step, the reliability of each variable in the dataset was assessed by testing Cronbach’s alpha The process was then followed by Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), a statistical technique used to reduce a set of observed variables into a smaller set with more relevant variables

Finally, observed variables were analyzed with Regression Analysis Since there are seven independent variables of TFL that connect directly to Social Loafing, this study implied multiple regression analysis to measure these relationships

3.2.5 Measurements

Measures for group- and individual-focused transformational leadership were adopted from Wang & Howell (2010) with G-TFL (14 items) and I-TFL (18 items) Five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (frequently, if not always) will be used to measure responses

Table 3.1 Measurement Scale for Group- and

Individual-Focused Transformational Leadership

Social Loafing was measured using the self-reported SLTQ (Social Loafing Tendency Questionnaire) which was developed by Ying et al (2014) This SLTQ consists of seven items that assess individual variations in social loafing Participants respond to each item on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)

Table 3.2 Measurement Scale for Social Loafing

Team size and team tenure were included as control variables to partial out their potential effects on individual social loafing behavior Team size has been one of the antecedents that affect the social loafing outcome of virtual teams (Chidambaram & Tung, 2005; Liden et al., 2004) Team tenure means the length that the team was together (in this study, the author decided to split the team tenure in terms of monthly) Research has also found that team tenure has an impact on team outcomes (Gibson & Gibbs, 2006; Kirkman & Mathieu, 2005) Hence, there might be a possibility that team tenure could also impact the individual outcome, such as social loafing behavior