Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T05:09:11.512Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of learning orientation and global mindset on virtual team members’ willingness to cooperate in: The mediating role of self-efficacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2015

Thi Bich Hanh Tran ,
Chang Hoon Oh  and
Suk Bong Choi
Thi Bich Hanh Tran
Affiliation:
School of Business Administration, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, Republic of Korea
Chang Hoon Oh
Affiliation:
Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Suk Bong Choi*
Affiliation:
College of Business and Economics, Korea University, Sejong City, Republic of Korea
*
Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of learning orientation and global mindset on virtual team member’s willingness to cooperate. It also explores the mediating role of self-efficacy in these relationships. To test the hypothesized relationships, the study used a sample of 224 employees from five global companies in South Korea. The results show that while global mindset is directly and positively related to virtual team members’ willingness to cooperate, learning orientation is not. Self-efficacy serves as a mediator in these relationships. The study concludes with a discussion of the theoretical contributions and managerial implications for improving virtual team members’ cooperative behavior.

Keywords

virtual teamswillingness to cooperatelearning orientationglobal mindsetself-efficacy
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , May 2016 , pp. 311 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, N., & Bartholomew, S. (1992). Managing globally competent people. Academy of Management Executive, 6(3), 52–65.Google Scholar
Agarwal, R. (2003). Teamwork in the netcentric organization. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 443–462). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ananthram, S., & Nankervis, A. R. (2014). Outcomes and benefits of a managerial global mind-set: An exploratory study with senior executives in North America and India. Thunderbird International Business Review, 56(2), 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bal, J., & Teo, P. K. (2001). Implementing virtual team working. Logistics Information Management, 13(6), 346–352.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Beechler, S., Levy, O., Boyacigiller, N. A., & Taylor, S. (2008). Global mind-set. In C. Wankel (Ed.) 21st century management: A reference handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Begley, T. M., & Boyd, D. P. (2003). The need for a corporate global mindset. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(2), 25–32.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, W. J. (2002). Goal orientation and ability: Interactive effects on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 497–505.Google Scholar
Black, J. S., Morrison, A. J., & Gregersen, H. B. (1999). Global explorers. The next generation of leaders. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bouquet, C. (2005). Building global mindsets: An attention-based perspective. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, C. A. (1993). Relations between workgroup characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. M., Rosson, M. B., Convertino, G., & Ganoe, C. H. (2006). Awareness and teamwork in computer-supported collaborations. Interacting with Computers, 18(1), 21–46.Google Scholar
Cseh, M., Davis, E. B., & Khilji, S. E. (2013). Developing a global mindset: Learning of global leaders. European Journal of Training and Development, 37(5), 489–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chopra, A., Kang, K., Karasula, M., Liang, H., Ma, H., & Richards, A. (2001). From crisis to recovery in Korea: Strategy, achievements and lessons. IMF Working Paper 01/154, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cohen, S., & Gibson, C. (2003). Putting the team back in virtual teams. The 18th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organizational Science, 12(3), 346–371.Google Scholar
Daft, R. L. (2011). The leadership experience. Mason, OH: Thomson, South-Western.Google Scholar
Dekker, D. M. (2008). Global virtual teams: Enhancing effectiveness. Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology. Proefschrift.Google Scholar
Dekker, W. den (2013). Global mindset and leadership effectiveness. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dietz-Uhler, B., & Bishop-Clark, C. (2001). The use of computer-mediated communication to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(3), 269–283.Google Scholar
Donavan, D. T., Brown, T. J., & Mowen, J. C. (2004). Internal benefits of service-worker customer orientation: Job satisfaction, commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 128–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273.Google Scholar
Earley, P. C. (2002). Redefining interactions across cultures and organizations: Moving forward with cultural intelligence. In B. M. Staw & R. M. Kramer (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, Vol. 24 (pp. 271–299). New York: JAI.Google Scholar
Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. (2003). Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Ebrahim, N. A., Ahmed, S., & Taha, Z. (2009). Virtual teams: A literature review. Australian Journal of Basic Applied Science, 3(3), 2653–2669.Google Scholar
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5–12.Google Scholar
Endres, M. L., Chowdhury, S., & Milner, M. (2009). Ambiguity tolerance and accurate assessment of self-efficacy in a complex decision task. Journal of Management & Organization, 15(1), 31–46.Google Scholar
Furst, S. A., Reeves, M., Rosen, B., & Blackburn, R. S. (2004). Managing the life cycle of virtual teams. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 6–20.Google Scholar
Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 472–485.Google Scholar
Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. B. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 183–211.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50(2), 327–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffith, T. L., & Neale, M. A. (2001). Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and virtual teams: From nascent knowledge to transitive memory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 379–421.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2002). Cultivating a global mindset. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 116–126.Google Scholar
Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, B. C. (2002). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 73(3), 40–50.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. H., Sluss, D. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2011). Curiosity adapted the cat: The role of trait curiosity in newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 211–220.Google Scholar
Harveston, P. D., Kedia, B. L., & Davis, P. S. (2000). Internationalization of born global and grdual globalizing firms: The impact of the manager. Advances in Competitiveness Research, 8(1), 92–99.Google Scholar
Heenan, D., & Permutter, H. (1979). Multinational organizational development: A social architecture perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 69–95.Google Scholar
Hoegl, M., Weinkauf, K., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2004). Interteam coordination, project commitment, and teamwork in multiteam R&D projects: A longitudinal study. Organization Science, 15(1), 38–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.Google Scholar
Hurn, J. B., & Jenkins, M. (2000). International peer group development. Industrial and Commercial Training, 32(4), 128–131.Google Scholar
Jarvenpaa, S. L., Shaw, T., & Staples, D. S. (2004). Toward contextualized theories of trust: The role of trust in global virtual teams. Information System Research, 15(3), 250–267.Google Scholar
Johansson, C., Dittrich, Y., & Juustila, A. (1999). Software engineering across boundaries: Student project in distributed collaboration. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(4), 286–296.Google Scholar
Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 187–213.Google Scholar
Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2007). The impact of knowledge coordination on virtual team performance over time. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 783–808.Google Scholar
Kaplan, A., & Maehr, M. L. (2007). The contributions and prospects of goal orientation theory. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 141–148.Google Scholar
Kedia, B. L., & Mukherji, A. (1999). Global managers: Developing a mindset for global competitiveness. Journal of World Business, 34(3), 230–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kefalas, A. G. (1998). Think globally, act locally. Thunderbird International Business Review, 40(6), 547–562.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management, 31(5), 700–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkman, B. L., Rosen, B., Tesluk, P. E., & Gibson, C. B. (2004). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (2000). Virtual teams: People working across boundaries with technology. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Levy, O., Beechler, S., Taylor, S., & Boyacigiller, N. A. (2007). What we talk about when we talk about global mindset: Managerial cognition in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 38, 231–258.Google Scholar
Luo, Y. (2006). Political behavior, social responsibility, and perceived corruption: A structuration perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 747–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lurey, J. S., & Raisingham, M. S. (2001). An empirical study of best practices in virtual teams. Information & Management, 38, 523–544.Google Scholar
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacLean, S., & Gray, K. (1998). Structural equation modelling in market research. Journal of the Australian Market Research Society, 4(3), 111–119.Google Scholar
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading virtual teams. Academy of Management Perspective, 21(1), 60–70.Google Scholar
Martins, L. L., Gilson, L. L., & Maynard, M. T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? Journal of Management, 30(6), 805–835.Google Scholar
Mathieu, J. E., Martineau, J. W., & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1993). Individual and situational influences on the development of self-efficacy: Implications for training effectiveness. Personnel Psychology, 46(1), 125–147.Google Scholar
Maznevski, M. L., & Lane, H. W. (2004). Shaping the global mindset: Designing educational experiences for effective global thinking and action. In N. Boyacigiller, R. M. Goodman, & M. Phillips (Eds.), Cross cultures: Insight from master teachers (pp 174–184). London: Routlege.Google Scholar
McCall, M. W., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (2002). Developing global executives. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
McDonald, T., & Seigall, M. (1992). The effects of technological self-efficacy and job focus on job performance, attitudes and withdrawal behaviors. Journal of Psychology, 126(5), 465–475.Google Scholar
Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1989). Applied linear regression models. Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice and performance. Psychological Review, 91, 328–346.Google Scholar
Oddou, G., Mendenhall, M. E., & Bonner Ritchie, J. (2000). Leveraging travel as a tool for global leadership development. Human Resource Management, 39(2), 159–172.Google Scholar
Paul, H. (2000). Creating a mindset. Thunderbird International Business Review, 42(2), 187–200.Google Scholar
Pauleen, D. (2004). Virtual teams: Projects, protocols and processes. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.Google Scholar
Perlmutter, H. (1969). The tortuous evolution of the multinational corporation. Columbia Journal of World Business, 4(1), 9–18.Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.Google Scholar
Porath, C. L., & Bateman, T. S. (2006). Self-regulation: From goal orientation to job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 185–192.Google Scholar
Porter, C. O. L. H. (2005). Goal orientation: Effects on backing up behavior, performance, efficacy, and commitment in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 811–818.Google Scholar
Rabinovich, A., Morton, T. A., Postmes, T., & Verplanken, B. (2009). Think global, act local: The effect of goal and mindset specificity on willingness to donate to an environmental organization. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(4), 391–399.Google Scholar
Rhinesmith, S. H. (1992). Global mindsets for global managers. Training and Development, 46(10), 63–69.Google Scholar
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2007). Organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, P., & Nohria, N. (1994). Influences of human resource management practices in multinational firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 20(2), 229–252.Google Scholar
Rugman, A. M., & Oh, C. H. (2008). Korea’s multinationals in a regional world. Journal of World Business, 43, 5–15.Google Scholar
Santos-Vijande, M. L., López-Sánchez, J. A., & González-Mieres, C. (2012). Organizational learning, innovation, and performance in KIBS. Journal of Management and Organization, 18(6), 870–904.Google Scholar
Sarker, S., & Sahay, S. (2004). Implications of space and time for distributed work: An interpretive study of US-Norwegian systems development teams. European Journal of Information Systems, 13, 3–20.Google Scholar
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self-efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston Eds. Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Windsor: NFER-NELSON.Google Scholar
Scott, D., Bishop, J. W., & Chen, X. (2003). An examination of the relationship of employee involvement with job satisfaction, employee cooperation, and intention to quit in U.S. invested enterprise in China. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11(1), 3–19.Google Scholar
Story, J. (2010). Testing the impact of global mindset on positive outcomes: A multi-level analysis. Doctoral dissertation. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.Google Scholar
Suh, T. W., & Kwon, I. W. (2002). Globalization and reluctant buyers. The International Marketing Review, 19(6), 663–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sujan, H., Weitz, B. A., & Kumar, N. (1994). Learning orientation, working smart, and effective selling. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 39–52.Google Scholar
Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2006). Understanding and developing virtual computer-supported cooperative work teams. In C. Bowers, E. Salas, & F. Jentsch (Eds.), Creating hi-tech teams (pp 213–241). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Townsend, A., DeMarie, S., & Hendrickson, A. (1998). Virtual teams: Technology and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 17–29.Google Scholar
Trevelyan, R. (2011). Self-efficacy and effort in new venture development. Journal of Management and Organization, 17(1), 2–16.Google Scholar
Van Bezooijen, B. (2011). Coordination in virtual teams. Doctoral dissertation. Tilburg University, Tilburg, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Van der Kleij, R. (2007). Overcoming distance in virtual teams: Effects of communication media, experience, and time pressure on distributed teamwork. Doctoral dissertation. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Van de Walle, D. (2003). Behavioral incidence analysis of public spending and social programs. In F. Bourguignon, & L. Pereira de Silva (Eds.), The impact of economic policies on poverty and income distribution: Evaluation techniques and tools (pp. 69–83), Washington, DC: A co-publication of the World Bank and Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
VandeWalle, D., & Cummings, L. L. (1997). A test of the influence of goal orientation on the feedback-seeking process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 390–400.Google Scholar