TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND TEAM CLIMATE: DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS ON FREEDOM AND TRUST AND OPENNESS PERCEPTIONS WITHIN WORK TEAMS

(1)

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND

TEAM CLIMATE: DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS

ON FREEDOM AND TRUST AND OPENNESS

PERCEPTIONS WITHIN WORK TEAMS

A case study

Graduation thesis University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business

MSc Change Management

January 2015

Written by Charlotte Anna Hess

(2)

Abstract

This research examines how the six different dimensions of transformational leadership influence the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate, within work teams in a change context. The outcomes of fifteen interviews are used to gain more insights according to the dimensions of transformational leadership and how they influence the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate. The interviews were explorative to give deeper insights on the examined topics. During the interviews there was room for the respondents to give an explanation to every answer and for the researcher to ask examples of every topic. The interview fragments were coded and combined in a coding scheme. Results show that one of the six dimensions of transformational leadership influences freedom. Namely, ‘High performance expectations’. Three of the six dimensions of transformational leadership have influence on trust and openness. These three dimensions are: ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’, ‘High performance expectations’ and ‘Providing individualized support’. Another factor which emerged during this research, and which affects freedom, is the degree of own responsibility. Personalized leadership and team diversity affects trust and openness within work teams.

Keywords: Team climate, (dimensions of) transformational leadership, freedom, trust and openness, qualitative research.

(3)

1. Introduction

With the growing use of teams in organisations, it has become more and more important to examine factors that enable these teams to perform optimally. One of these factors is team climate. Sun, Xu, & Shang (2014) state that team climate is considered as a strong performance driver of many work environments. It can be used to forecast team performance effectively (Rajnandini, Schreisheim, & Williams, 1999). After economic situation and competitive power, team climate is found to be the third driver of team performance (Guzzo, Yost, Campbell, & Shea, 1993). Furthermore, Sun et al. (2014) state that team climate can encourage members to regard their work as a precious contribution, helps members find their own values, and satisfies members’ social needs. Therefore, team members will be more confident about themselves and their team (Anderson & West, 1998). Accordingly, team climate influences team performance. It helps determine the innovative activities in the group (Scott, 1998) and affects the creativity of team members (Mumford, Scott, Gaddis, & Strange, 2002). Gray (2001) believed that the climate of a project team is significantly correlated with its success. So, it is important to research how such a climate is created.

Despite its importance for team performance, the concept of team climate is not always clearly defined and used. According to Schneider (1990), it is the set of norms, attitudes, and expectations that individuals perceive in a specific social context. Team climate is affected by many organisational factors and individual behaviours and consists of different dimensions. In this research, the focus is on two specific dimensions of team climate; freedom, and trust and openness. Isaksen and Lauer (2002) found that these are two of the nine dimensions which are suitable for creativity and change. Creativity and change are important factors for the organisation which participated in this case study. Creativity because this is one of the aspects which give the organisation a competitive advantage and change because the organisation is changing itself.

Freedom refers to ‘’ ‘team members’ perception of their autonomy to make decisions about goals (what), work methods (how), planning issues (when), and the distribution of work among team members’’ (Rico, Molleman, Sánchez-Manzanares, & Vegt, 2007, p.116). Research has shown that this freedom is important for team performance, because, these teams develop better decisions (Rico et al., 2007).

(6)

by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking, models the effects of team psychological safety and team efficacy together on learning and performance in organisational work teams’.

Building teams and their team climate is an important function of leaders (Sun et al., 2014). It is important that leaders pay enough attention trying to have positive effects on followers by keeping and bringing them together (Sun et al., 2014). By setting performance expectations that correspond with their value systems, leaders shape employees’ attitudes and behaviours (Oreg, & Berson, 2009).

Leaders with a transformational leadership style pay a lot of attention to setting performance expectations, inspiring employees and providing a vision. Furthermore, it is an important leadership style during change (Oreg & Berson, 2011). According to Bass, Avolio & Atwater (1996) transformational leadership is more effective than other leadership styles during change and it can influence employees’ reactions to change through a number of routes. Transformational leadership is considered as one of the new leadership approaches and has dominated the leadership literature since its introduction (Bass & Avolio, 1996; Grant, 2012; Oreg 2011; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009; Tsui, Fu, Liu, & Li 2010). Transformational leadership consists of different dimensions, these are explained in the theoretical framework.

Adding to this, Sun et al. (2014) state: ‘’Given that team climate is of importance to team performance and that transformational leadership is a critical antecedent of organisational climate, team climate may mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and team performance. Yet, little research has investigated these questions: Does team transformational leadership impact team performance?’’ (p.127). So, according to this there is a reason to believe that transformational leadership may have influence on freedom and trust and openness within a team, which affect team performance (Edmondson, 1999; Rico et al., 2007; Kim, Dirks, & Cooper, 2009).

(7)

leadership, but did not distinguish the specific dimensions of transformational leadership. In the present study we will focus on which dimensions of transformational leadership influence freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate. So, the goal of this study is to discover which dimensions of transformational leadership influence the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate. The dimensions for transformational leadership, as well as for team climate, are further explained in the theoretical framework. Freedom and trust and openness are the dimensions which are going to be examined. These dimensions of team climate are chosen because both are important success factors in the teams which are used in this case study.

The literature gap which is going to be addressed is the gap between the different dimensions of transformational leadership and the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate. Important to keep in mind is that freedom and trust and openness are not the same as team climate, they are important predictors for it. Continued in this study, the terms freedom and trust and openness are going to be used (so, these refer to the freedom and trust and openness predictors of team climate). A lot of studies focused on transformational leadership and team climate itself, but the combination with the specific dimensions of team climate is not made very often, even more when transformational leadership is also divided in its different dimensions. According to Sun et al. (2014) ‘’transformational leadership is an important research point, especially the study on team climate’’ (p.142) because transformational leadership has impact on team climate.

In practice, the new findings of this research may contribute to the way teams are going to be lead. The study may give insights in the way how leaders should lead teams to increase their freedom and trust and openness and which specific dimensions of transformational leadership may be important. It is also possible that not all the dimensions are needed. So, which characteristics and factors of team climate and transformational leadership can be determinative?

(8)

(9)

2. Theoretical framework

In this chapter an overview of the literature on work teams, team climate and transformational leadership is given.

2.1 Work teams

According to Kozlowski & Ilgen (2006) a team can be defined as ‘’(a) two or more individuals who (b) socially interact (face-to-face or, increasingly, virtually); (c) possess one or more common goals; (d) are brought together to perform organisationally relevant tasks; (e) exhibit interdependencies with respect to workflow, goals, and outcomes; (f) have different roles and responsibilities; and (g) are together embedded in an encompassing organisational system, with boundaries and linkages to the broader system context and task environment’’ (p.79). Ilgen, Hollenbeck, Johnson, & Jundt (2005) add to this that work teams can be seen as dynamic, emergent, and adaptive entities embedded in a multilevel (individual, team, organisation) system. Furthermore, Kozlowski & Ilgen (2006) state that ‘’teams are complex dynamic systems that exist in a context, develop as members interact over time, and evolve and adapt as situational demands unfold’’ (p.78). Bresman (2013) stated that many work teams operate in dynamic environments where change is constant, resources are scarce and time is short (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997; Posen & Levinthal, 2012).

2.2 Team climate

Team climate is a broad concept. It incorporates and affects attitudes of employees and therefore is a useful construct to study how teams experience and respond to events within and outside the organisation (Pirola-Merlo, Härtel, Mann, & Hirst, 2002). According to Schneider (1990) a ‘’climate refers to the set of norms, attitudes, and expectations that individuals perceive to operate in a specific social context’’ (p.384). Schneider (1990) also states that team climate may incorporates both attitudes and expectations as well as feelings. Anderson and West (1994) defined team climate accordingly; ‘’team climate is the climate of work teams facilitated common goals that predispose people toward collective action, which boosts job performance’’ (p.234).

(10)

its success and Schneider et al. (1996) state that the behaviour of employees, who are working within a team that is supported or rewarded by the leader, has a large influence on the actual behaviour of employees. So, as can be read, there are many broad definitions and effects of team climate. Below there is described which one are applicable in this study and why.

Starting with Isaksen and Lauer (2002) who state that ‘’team climate influences processes such as: problem solving, decision-making, communicating and coordinating, learning and creating, and levels of motivation and commitment’’ (p. 79). It is important to keep in mind that Isaksen and Lauer (2002) refer to a specific team climate; a climate for creativity and change. As well as Isaksen and Lauer (2002) also Mumford et al. (2002) mentions that team climate affects the creativity of team members. This is applicable to this case study because the organisation where the teams operate is changing and they have a more creative way of working than their competitors. So, summarizing the above, in this study, a team climate for creativity and change refers to the set of norms, attitudes, expectations and common goals within a team and how these predispose people towards collective action.

Adding to this, Isaksen and Lauer (2002) found that there are several dimensions that influence a team climate which is suitable for creativity and change. They mention the following nine dimensions: ‘’challenge and involvement (extent to which teams are given opportunities and get involved), freedom (degree that teams can take initiatives), trust and openness (degree of emotional safety in relationships), idea time (time taken to generate ideas), playfulness and humor (amount of spontaneity and frivolity shown), conflict (degree of tensions within a team), idea support (consideration of new ideas), debate (occurrence of encounters and disagreement between viewpoints) and risk-taking (degree of tolerated ambiguity and uncertainty)’’ (p.80). For this research, two dimensions are going to be taken into account; freedom (degree that teams can take initiatives) and trust and openness (degree of emotional safety in relationships). The terms freedom and trust and openness are used in the continuation of this research. Both are important influencers of team performance (Edmondson, 1999; Rico et al., 2007; Kim, Dirks, & Cooper, 2009). These dimensions are more extensively explained in the next paragraph.

(11)

and take initiatives to acquire and share information about their work. In the opposite teams work within strict guidelines and are not allowed to take initiative. Team members carry out their work in prescribed ways with little room to redefine their tasks’’.

Trust and openness refers to the degree of emotional safety in relationships (Isaksen and Lauer, 2002). According to Edmondson (1999) psychological safety is important for team learning and innovativeness. ‘’When there is a high degree of trust, team members trust one another and feel ‘safe’ enough to be open and honest with their colleagues, in the spirit of constructive relationships. Team members are genuinely open and frank with one another. They count on each other for professional and personal support. Team members have a sincere respect for one another and give credit where credit is due’’ (Isaksen and Lauer, 2002, p.80). The importance of trust within teams is also supported in other literature, it influences team learning, team performance and innovativeness (Kim, Dirks, & Cooper, 2009; Edmondson, 1999; Rico et al., 2007). Isaksen and Lauer (2002) state that ‘’when trust is missing, team members are suspicious of each other, and therefore, they closely guard themselves, their plans, and their ideas. In these situations team members find it extremely difficult to openly communicate with each other and function as a team’’ (p.80).

2.3 Transformational leadership

(12)

James MacGregor Burns (1978) first introduced the concept of transformational leadership in his descriptive research on political leaders. This term is now used in organisational research as well (Bass & Riggio, 2006) and is considered as one of the new leadership approaches (Bass & Avolio, 1996; Grant, 2012; Oreg & Berson, 2011; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009; Tsui, et al., 2010) which has dominated the literature since its introduction in the early 1980s (Bass & Avolio, 1996; Grant, 2012; Oreg 2011; Rowold & Rohmann, 2009; Tsui, Fu, Liu, & Li 2010).

Burns (1978) defined transformational leadership as a process in which “leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation” (p.20). De Poel (2011) also gives a definition of transformational leadership (based on Bass,1985; 1998; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Moorman & Fetter, 1990): ‘’the extent to which a leader is able to transform the beliefs and attitudes of individual employees in order for them to perform beyond what they are expected to do’’ (p.9).

In this study these definitions are combined into the following definition of transformational leadership: ‘’the extent to which a leader is able to transform the beliefs and attitudes of individual employees in order for them to perform beyond what they are expected to do and raise one another to higher levels of morality and motivation’’. This definition both covers the performance of the leader as well as the performance of subordinates.

In addition to this, Burns (1978) stresses that the transformational approach creates significant change in the life of people and organisations. Furthermore, he states that it redesigns perceptions and values, and changes expectations and aspirations of employees. In contrast to transactional leadership, transformational leadership is not based on a “give and take ” relationship, but on the leader’s personality, traits, and ability to make a difference through example, articulation of an energizing vision, and challenging goals. According to Kark and Shamir (2002) transformational leadership operates at both team and dyad levels by displaying behaviours directed toward the entire group and its individual members simultaneously. So, transformational leaders inspire the whole team as well as an individual person.

(13)

problem solving and fourth; Individualized Consideration: Gives personal attention, treats each employee individually, coaches, advises’’.

Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Mooman, & Fetter (1990, p.112) defined transformational leadership among the following six dimensions; ‘’Identifying and articulating a vision: Behaviour on the part of the leader aimed at identifying new opportunities for his or her unit/division/company, and developing, articulating, and inspiring others with his or her vision of the future; Providing an appropriate model: Behaviour on the part of the leader that sets an example for employees to follow that is consistent with the values the leader espouses; Fostering the acceptance of group goals: Behaviour on the part of the leader aimed at promoting cooperation among employees and getting them to work together toward a common goal; High performance expectations: Behaviour that demonstrates the leader’s expectations for excellence, quality, and/or high performance on the part of followers; Providing individualized support: Behaviour on the part of the leader that indicates that he/she respects followers and is concerned about their personal feelings and needs; Intellectual stimulation: Behaviour on the part of the leader that challenges followers to re-examine some of their assumptions about their work and rethink how it can be performed’’.

In this research the six dimensions are going to be used because these dimensions are more recent, more extended, have a clearer relation to work teams and include all the important elements of transformational leadership (Podsakoff et al., 1990).

2.4 Transformational leadership and freedom and trust and openness

(14)

organisation is advancing toward an important goal and their work is of great value. Thus, they will be willing to contribute to the group in order to show gratitude to their leader (Vera & Crossan, 2004).

Additionally, by using their unique and inspirational influences (‘Identifying and articulating a vision’ dimension), transformational leaders can create a convergent tendency for followers to understand team climate (Struckman & Yammarino, 2003). Furthermore, followers can enhance their team inner cohesion (‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership) because while they are affected differently by both individual and social team goals, they can accept charismatic values from their leader (Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993).

Besides this, transformational leadership can convey team goals and visions to subordinates through communication, and promote the recognition of both team visions and team climate through good relationships (Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). Both encouragement and motivation have effect on group members (e.g., information sharing, goals achievement, team cognition), which can cause a convergent trend for team mental patterns and form a better team climate (Zaccaro, Rittman, & Mark 2001). This belongs to the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership.

Transformational leaders inspire their subordinates by setting high standards, exerting ideal influences (‘High performance expectation’ dimension of transformational leadership), and assigning meaningful but challenging work. They encourage subordinates to keep a positive and enthusiastic team spirit. To further improve freedom and trust and openness, leaders communicate and share expectations and future visions with subordinates (Ostroff, Kinicki, & Tamkins, 2003). To finalize, Jae et al. (2014) state that team leaders should motivate both the individual and the collective to maximize their team's potential by inspiring the team as a whole and forming unique developmental relationships with its members (‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership).

2.4 Model of the researched dimensions

(15)

(16)

3. Methodology

In this chapter, first the research approach will be explained. After that, the organisation case is described. Lastly, the data collection method (paragraph 3.3) and the data analysis method (paragraph 3.4) are presented.

3.1 Research approach

To investigate the influence of the specific dimensions of transformational leadership on freedom, and trust and openness an explorative embedded single case study (one case study with multiple units of analysis (Cooper & Schindler (2008)) ) was conducted. By doing this it is possible to make an in-depth analysis and investigate why and if there are links and connections between these concepts.

3.2 Case

The study was conducted in an information technology (IT) and technique secondment agency, located in the west of the Netherlands. In 2014 the amount of internal employees (people working at the headquarters) doubled, from 30 to 60 employees. In 2014, there was also a 18% growth in external employees. External employees are employees who work at projects for other companies and are located at those companies. At the moment, the organisation used for this case study, has 420 external employees. The expectation of the executives for 2015 is that the company will grow at least as fast as in 2014.

By knowing this the company faces several problems. One of them is how the company can keep its unique way of working and maintain this in the future. The company is unique in the fact that the organisation is very flat and innovative. But how can they maintain this freedom in the future? Because of their fast growth it seems impossible to keep working with, for example, such a flat organisational structure.

Within the organisation three of the seven teams were selected for this study. These teams were selected because together they give the most broad representation of the organisation. One of the team is the biggest team (twelve employees), the other is the team which has the distinguishing factor of the organisation against competitors (nine employees) and the third team is the newest team within the organisation and consists of eight employees.

(17)

3.3 Data collection method

Interviews were held to collect the data for this study. The interviews were semi-structured and with mostly open-ended question because experiences of the respondents were interesting for this research and the open-ended questions made it possible to gather explorative responses of the respondents, which suits the explorative character of the study (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). Furthermore, semi-structured interviews make it possible for the respondents to come up with new ideas and this can give the researcher new insights. A pilot interview was held to test the questions, if they result in the needed data, and if the interview fits the time available (one hour). After the pilot interview the order of the questions changed, to make the interview more clear for the respondents. Besides that, there were added questions to gather more information. The pilot showed one hour was enough to conduct the interviews. The interview template can be found in Appendix I (team member) and Appendix II (team leader).

The interview started with three general questions. These questions were designed to gather general information in order to obtain a picture of the team and the organisation. They were also designed to put the respondent at ease and to make an easy start with not too difficult and confronting questions at the beginning of the interview. The second set of questions focused on transformational leadership and its six dimensions. The third set focused on the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate.

Within each team, four members and the team leader were interviewed. In total, four women and eleven men were interviewed. So, 27% of the respondents is female. Within the whole organisation 36% of the employees is female. The average age of the respondents was 28 years.

An average team within the organisation consists of eight persons (including the leader). The teams which were used for this study consists of respectively; nine (team A), twelve (team B) and eight (team C) people, including the leader. In total fifteen interviews were conducted, five at every team. So that means that in team A 55% of the members was interviewed, in team B 42%, and in team C 63%. So, in total 52% of the team members of the used teams were interviewed, which is 31% of the total employees working within the organisation. The teams were responsible for; technical employees (account management and detachment), recruitment of IT personnel and the coaching of IT personnel.

(18)

explained in the email. By this, the researcher tried to avoid that employees already formed an opinion about the topics discussed in the interview. During the interviews, the researcher asked open question. With this, the researcher tried to not give a direction to the answers of the team members. Furthermore, the researcher stated several times that there are no wrong or false answers to the questions.

As stated above the interviews took, on average, one hour and took place at the headquarters of the organisation. All interviews were recorded on an electronic device with the permission of the respondents. Confidentiality was guaranteed regarding the interviews and every respondent received their transcript after the interview to ensure that they agreed with the information, which they all did.

3.4 Data analysis method

The data gathered during the fifteen interviews, were transcribed and coded with both deductive and inductive coding. Deductive codes are codes which emerge from theory and they are pre-set (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). The deductive codes were developed before the interviews took place. Freedom, trust and openness and the dimensions of transformational leadership were defined and by doing this it came clear which fragments (mentioned in the interviews) belong to which code. An overview of the deductive codes used in this study can be found in Appendix III. These coded data were interview fragments that indicated the presence (positive) or absence (negative) of the behaviour that indicates freedom, trust and openness and transformational leadership. A description and samples of these deductive codes can be found in the next chapter, Table 1 (columns 1 till 4).

Inductive codes are codes that emerge during the interviews and are used to capture issues which come forward during the interviews (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). The outcome of these inductive codes can be found in the next chapter, Table 2. The inductive codes were developed during the coding process. Important findings were marked and at the end of the coding process these marked sections were compared to see if there were similarities. If there were similarities an inductive code emerged.

(19)

By doing this, it became clear which codes were applicable to which phrase. This final way of coding was used for all the transcripts and by counting the codes they were also checked a last time.

(20)

4. Results

First, in paragraph 4.1, the coding scheme of the deductive codes, used for the interview analysis, and the corresponding findings are presented. In the following paragraphs the results per team are provided. In paragraph 4.5 inductive codes are presented. This chapter is closed with the overall results.

4.1 Coding scheme deductive codes

The coding scheme for the deductive codes, used for the interview analysis, and the corresponding findings are presented in Table 1. An explanation of the codes can be found in Appendix III. Table 1 shows the code name, description of the code, a sample of the code, frequency and specific respondents.

The results in Table 1 show that the teams score overall very high on both freedom, and trust and openness (the lowest score is on the negative trust and openness code). On the dimensions of transformational leadership the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ and ‘High performance expectations’ dimensions have the highest scores. A high score means that the phrase is mentioned very often, it is not about the extent of the code. Codes can be mentioned more than once by one respondent. Specific quotes and the findings per team are mentioned in Table 1 and the following paragraphs.

Table 1 Deductive codes

No. Code Description Sample Frequency Specific

Respondents 1. TFL

Vision positive

Behaviour on the part of the leader aimed at identifying new

opportunities for his or her

unit/division/company, and developing,

articulating, and inspiring others with his or her vision of the future.

‘’I think the leader is one of the most inspiring persons within the company.’’ (TA1) 29 All; TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 2. TFL Vision negative

Behaviour on the part of the leader that has a negative influence at identifying new

opportunities for his/her unit/division/company, and developing,

articulating, and inspiring

‘’We had a meeting once, but that is already half a year ago. I do not have a concrete picture of his vision and

16 TA1, TA2,

(21)

3. TFL Model positive

Behaviour on the part of the leader that sets an example for employees to follow that is

consistent with the values the leader espouses.

‘’The leader provides frameworks for us an also acts upon it himself’’. (TA1) 26 All; TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 4. TFL Model negative

Behaviour on the part of the leader that is not setting an example for employees to follow that is consistent with the values the leader espouses.

‘’The leader does not set an example for me, I would act differently’’. (TB3) 8 TA1, TA3, TA5, TB1, TB3, TB5, TC1 5. TFL Group positive

Behaviour on the part of the leader aimed at promoting cooperation among employees and getting them to work together toward a common goal. ‘’By saying: we are in this together. That kind of stuff. We also have a teambonus instead of an individual bonus’’. (TC2) 51 TA1, TA2, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 6. TFL Group negative

Behaviour on the part of the leader that has a negative influence at promoting cooperation among employees and getting them to work together toward a common goal. ‘’Because everyone gets his own customer groups, people do not act as each other’s sounding boards very often anymore. Because the work became more individualistic’’. (TB4) 20 TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TC1, TC3, TC4, 7. TFL Per positive Behaviour that

demonstrates the leader’s expectations for

excellence, quality, and/or high performance on the part of followers.

(22)

8. TFL Per negative

Behaviour that

demonstrates the leader has no expectations for excellence, quality, and/or high performance on the part of followers.

‘’The leader does not set clear goals for me’’ (TC3) 19 TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4 9. TFL Sup positive

Behaviour on the part of the leader that indicates that he/she respects followers and is concerned about their personal feelings and needs. ‘’I am a loud person, so when I am a bit quieter than normal, that is a sign for the leader to act upon it. So that shows the leader pays attention to everyone’’ (TB2) 41 TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 10. TFL Sup negative

Behaviour on the part of the leader that indicates that he/she does not respects followers and is not concerned about their personal feelings and needs.

‘’When I am not feeling well, there are other colleagues noticing, but the leader never mentions it’’ (TB3) 8 TA4, TA5, TB2, TB3, TB4, TC5 11. TFL Intel positive

Behaviour on the part of the leader that challenges followers to re-examine some of their

assumptions about their work and rethink how it can be performed.

‘’The leader will always ask: why did you do like this? He/she will always ask questions which make you rethink your options.’’ (TA1) 35 All; TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 12. TFL Intel negative

Behaviour on the part of the leader that does not challenges followers to re-examine some of their assumptions about their work and rethink how it can be performed.

(23)

13. TC Freedom positive

Team can take initiatives or are at liberty to act without constantly referring to higher authorities or ‘rule books’ for decisions

‘’They

considere that you know how to deal with customers. There are no real guidelines for that. Due to the amount of different customers’’. (TC1) 62 All; TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 14. TC Freedom negative

Team cannot take initiatives or are at liberty to act without constantly referring to higher authorities or ‘rule books’ for decisions

‘’We do have standard procedures and processes and checklists you have to go through’’. (TB2) 16 TA1, TA2, TA5, TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC3, TC4, TC5 15. TC T&O positive There is emotional safety in relationships. When there is a high degree of trust, team members trust one another and feel ‘safe’ enough to be open and honest with their colleagues, in the spirit of constructive

relationships.

‘’You can talk about it with anyone. Also the leader is open to other opinions and your story. You can be open about it and explain if needed’’. (TB4) 74 All; TA1, TA2, TA3, TA4, TA5. TB1, TB2, TB3, TB4, TB5, TC1, TC2, TC3, TC4, TC5 16. TC T&O negative There is no/low emotional safety in relationships. When there is a low degree of trust, team members do not trust one another and do not feel ‘safe’ enough to be open and honest with their colleagues, in the spirit of constructive relationships.

(24)

4.2 Outcomes of the interviews with team A

The specific outcomes of the deductive codes of team A are presented in Table 1 in Appendix IV. As presented in the table, the vision is not expressed very clear (‘Identifying and articulating a vision’). As stated by respondent TA4: ‘’We had a meeting once, but that is already half a year ago. I do not have a concrete picture of his vision and how we get there’’. Besides this, the leader is experienced as inspiring and acts like a model for his employees, the leader acts in a way that set an example for thr employees. As stated by TA1; ‘’Practice what you preach is the way the leader acts’’. The leader stated that he/she is ‘’searching how to set an example for the employees when the example has to be different for everyone’’. This is because the leader believes in the fact that you have to empower people and people have to work with their strengths. So, according to this, it seems that the ‘Identifying and articulating a vision’ and ‘Providing an appropriate model’ can vary independently.

There are no team goals (‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’). As stated by TA3: ‘’ The most important goal is to keep the employees satisfied, but that is not measurable’’. This is a conscious choice of the leader: ‘’I act upon own responsibility and freedom, and that is not acting upon working in teams’’. The leader adds to this ‘’And by giving employees responsibility and freedom the leader creates high expectations’’. Besides these high expectations, subordinates do not have clear goals (‘High performance expectations’); ‘’The leader does not set clear goals for me’’ as stated by TA2. But, by asking a lot of questions the leader does create an atmosphere of encouraging employees. As stated by TA1: ‘’The leader will always ask: why did you do this like this? He will always ask questions which make you rethink your options’’. With these questions the leader encourage team members the team leader also creates that team members rethink their actions (‘Intellectual stimulation’).

The last dimension of transformational leadership (‘Providing individualized support’) is experienced as high. The team members have the feeling that they are supported by the leader.

(25)

The perception of the leader and the team members are almost the same within this team. The leaders’ score only differentiates on the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership in a way that the leader perceives that he/she acts more upon it, in order to stimulate the group, than that the team members perceive.

Summarizing above results show that it seems that the ‘Identifying and articulating a vision’ and ‘Providing an appropriate model’ can vary independently and ‘High performance expectations’ and ‘Intellectual stimulation’ are both stimulated by the fact that the leader asks questions if the team members ask the leader a question.

4.3 Outcomes of the interviews with team B

The specific outcomes of the deductive codes of team B are presented in Table 2 in Appendix IV. The team members do not perceive ‘Identifying and articulating a vision’ and ‘Providing an appropriate model’ dimensions of transformational leadership as high. As stated by respondent TB3: ‘’I do not really have an idea what the vision is’’. This respondent also stated: ‘’I work here quite a long time so the leader is not a model for me anymore’’.

On the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ the experiences of team members and the team leader differentiates. There are no clear team goals, but the team is experienced as close. As stated by respondent TB2: ‘’Sometimes it is more like we are a group of friends instead of colleagues’’.

As can be seen in Table 2 in Appendix IV, the team members perceive the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership as very high. ‘’By giving me more challenging tasks the leader showed his/her high expectations. He/she gave me the feeling that she has high expectations’’, as stated by respondent TB1. Adding to this, all the respondents mention several times that by setting clear goals and setting high expectations the leader challenges subordinates. As stated by respondent TB4: ‘’The leader tries to set our goals a little bit higher. With this the leader tries to push you to make another step and develop yourself. So I think the leader has high expectations for everyone’’. The leader expresses these expectations in conversations but also by email, as stated by TB2: ‘’The expectations are communicated in meetings, personally or through email’’.

According to the ‘Providing individualized support’ and ‘Intellectual stimulation’ dimensions the results show that the team members perceive it, but not as very high or low.

(26)

standard procedures but that not limits you in taking initiatives. If you have an idea the leader is always open to that’’.

About the trust and openness the respondents are almost unanimous; ‘’You can talk about it with everyone. The leader is also open to other opinions and your story. You can be open about it and explain if needed’’ as stated by TB4 and as stated by TB2 ‘’ I think we have such a strong team, we respect each other and that makes we can trust each other’’.

The perception of the leader and the team members are almost the same within this team. The leaders’ score only differentiates on freedom. The leader experiences that he/she gives a lot of freedom but the team members experiences that their amount of freedom is bounded by some rules.

Summarizing the results shows that the highest scores for this team are on the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership and trust and openness. According to the respondents, the leader creates this high performances by always setting the goals a little bit higher. Furthermore, the results show that strict rules do not affect freedom, although rules do set boundaries. Compared to the other two teams, this team scores almost as high as these teams on this dimensions, although this team has the most strict rules.

4.4 Outcomes of the interviews with team C

The specific outcomes of the deductive codes of team C are presented in Table 3 in Appendix IV. The most characteristics results of this team are the positive ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership and on trust and opennes. A reason of the high score on the group dimension can be that the team has a team bonus. As stated by respondent TC2; ‘’By saying, we are in this together. That kind of stuff, we have a team bonus, not an individual bonus. That encourages us to work together’’. An important link this respondent also makes is that ‘’because we all have the same interest, it makes no sense to undermine others’’. This can be a reason for a link between a positive score on the group dimension and a high score on trust and openness. The leader also plays an important role in the group process. As stated by respondent TC4: ‘’The leader is a real driver of the team, only his presence and the way he is, is enough’’.

The team members do not perceive ‘Identifying and articulating a vision’ and ‘Providing an appropriate model’ dimensions of transformational leadership as high. There is no clear goal the leader does not state a model for them.

(27)

TC1: ‘’There are no clear goals, but they do have high expectations. If you do not perform you are out’’.

The leader is experienced as supportive according to the results on the ‘Providing individualized support’ dimension. As stated by respondent TC2: ‘’The leader is there for you, if you need it’’.

Team members do not have the feeling that they are stimulated to rethink their ideas (‘Intellectual Stimulation’ dimension). Simply because there is no time. As stated by respondent TC4: ‘’If you have a good idea, the leader says OK, go your way. He will not ask questions then’’.

The team scores high on freedom, the most important factor which influences freedom is that there are almost no rules. As stated by TC3: ‘’Rules? We barely have them.’’.

As stated above the team scores high on trust and openness. But, there are also a few negative quotes on trust and openness. One of them is mentioned by respondent TC1; ‘’I am not sure if I can trust my colleagues. Actually, no. Everyone is here for their selves, their own success. We always say here, and it also is an unwritten rule, everyone will award the other but himself just a little more and that is the way we work here’’. Although the team bonus, people go for their own success.

The perception of the leader and the team members are the same within this team. The are no differentiations between the scores.

Summarizing the above, it shows that having a team bonus is a influencer for the bonding in a team. Although everyone is in the team for their selves, they still have a lot team spirit and want to work for each other. Adding to this the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership can be linked to the trust and openness dimension of team climate. The team feels strong and this ensures that employees feel free to say anything, dare to take risks and trust each other.

4.5 Outcomes of the inductive codes

(28)

he leads his subordinates in a way that fits them, so he does not lead all his subordinates in the same way. As stated by the leader: ‘’I think it is important to align my way of leadership and take into account what the ambition of the employee is and how he or she enjoys their work’’.

Thirdly, in team C it is remarkable that all the employees mention that they experience their team as very driven and motivated. As stated by respondent TC1: ‘’We have a hands on mentality. Do a lot of thing and work hard, that is the way it works’’.

The fourth emerged code which affects freedom and trust and openness within the team is the diversity within the teams, the team consists of different characters, ages and/or types. In every team there are respondents who experience their team as diverse. This may have influence on the freedom and trust and openness within the teams.

Table 2 Inductive codes

No. Code Description Sample Frequency Specific

Respondents 1. Diverse team The composition of the

work teams is diverse. Different characters, ages and/or types

‘’There are many different kinds of people on the team’’. (TB1) 6 TA1, TA4, TA5, TB1, TB2, TC1

2. Close team The work teams are experienced as close ‘’It is a close team’’. (TA2) 5 TA1, TA2, TB2, TB4, TC5 3. Own responsibility

The level of own responsibility within work team is

experienced as high

‘’You act from your own responsibility’’ (TA1) 8 TA1, TA2, TA4 TA5, TB1 4. Openness leader

The leader is open to the employees, easy to reach, accessible and always willing to help

‘’The lines are short, the leader is easy to reach’’. (TC1) 10 TA1, TA2, TA3, TB2, TC1, TC2 5. Personalized leadership

The leader provides leadership which fits the person, so different leadership styles per person

‘’It differs per person which frameworks the leader gives’’. (TA1) 5 TA1, TA2, TA4, TA5, TB5

6. Driven team The work teams are experienced as driven and motivated.

(29)

4.6 Overall results

After combining the specific results presented in the previous paragraphs the overall patterns and results can be examined. As shown in Table 1, overall, the respondents experience a high degree of freedom as well as a high degree of trust and openness. They mention it often and can give clear and different examples.

Furthermore, there is a relation between the following three dimensions of transformational leadership, which are also experienced as high; ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’, ‘High performance expectations’ and ‘Providing individualized support’ and freedom and trust and openness.

According to freedom the results show that transformational leadership influence freedom within teams in a way that strict rules does not per se limit the degree of freedom within a team. The team which had the most strict rules (team B) scored almost as high as the other two teams on freedom.

Furthermore, the results show that by giving responsibility and freedom, subordinates experience that as if the leader has high expectations for their performance (‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership). By acting upon own responsibility, giving employees freedom and responsibility the leader tries to create high expectations.

The ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership also influences trust and openness within teams. By always setting the goals a little bit higher the leader creates the feeling that he believes in the team members and that the leader trusts them in reaching the expectations.

The findings also show that transformational leadership influence trust and openness within work teams in a way that the ‘Fostering the acceptance of group goals’ dimension of transformational leadership can be linked to trust and openness. The team feels close and strong and this ensures that employees feel free to say anything, dare to take risks and trust each other.

(30)

you, we can talk about anything and they will support me when I am in trouble. Whether it is personal or business’’.

4.7 Additional findings

Other findings which were remarkable for the organisation, but cannot be linked specifically to freedom and trust and openness are the fact that in every team the members mention that the leaders always ask a question, if the team members came to them with a question. This was an important stimulation of the high score on the ‘Intellectual stimulation’ dimension of transformational leadership.

The second finding is on the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership. The results show that the absence of goals can result in the fact that team members keep setting their own goals higher and higher. Because there is no limit (goals) they are asking more and more of their selves. So maybe employees perform higher if there are no goals? It should be noted here, that it was mentioned by the respondents that within this organisation almost everyone is motivated by their selves, the do not need external rewards.

(31)

5. Discussion & Conclusions

In this chapter, the research question is going to be answered in paragraph 5.4. Before that, in the first paragraph, the main findings on the influence of transformational leadership on freedom are provided. After that, in the second paragraph, the main findings on the influence of transformational leadership on trust and openness are shown. The third paragraph provides an overview of other, emerged, conclusions on both freedom and trust and openness. After this, theoretical (paragraph 5.5) and practical (paragraph 5.6) implications are given. This chapter ends with the limitations of the study and suggestions for future research (paragraph 5.7).

5.1 Main findings on the influence of transformational leadership on freedom within work teams

The ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership influences freedom in a way that by giving responsibility and freedom subordinates experience that as if the leader has high expectations for their performance. By acting upon own responsibility, freedom and giving employees responsibility the leader tries to create high expectations.

Furthermore, the results show that freedom within work teams is not per se limited by strict rules. The team which had the most strict rules (team B) scored almost as high as the other two teams on this dimension. As stated in the literature, freedom is the way team members can take initiatives or are at liberty to act without constantly referring to higher authorities or ‘rule books’ for decisions (Isaksen & Lauer, 2002). This study showed that a ‘rule of books’ for decisions does not per se limited work teams in the experience of freedom. Comparing this with the literature there can be stated that the literature does mention the ‘High performance expectations’ of transformational leadership but it does not specifically relate this dimension to the degree of freedom within work teams. It is more about keeping the team positive and enthusiastic (Ostroff, Kinicki, and Tamkins, 2003).

5.2 Main findings on the influence of transformational leadership on trust and openness within work teams

(32)

its members has a positive influence on trust and openness within teams (Jae et al., 2014). Team members dare to take risks and trust each other.

Secondly, trust and openness is influenced by the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership. By always setting the goals a little bit higher, team members have the feeling that the leader believes in them and that the leader trusts them that they will reach these expectations. This is also supported in the literature because by sharing expectations and setting high goals leaders keep the team positive and enthusiastic and although there are high expectations, that does not limit the trust and openness in a team (Ostroff, Kinicki, and Tamkins, 2003).

Thirdly, the ‘Providing individualized support’ dimension influences trust and openness within work teams because by showing that the leader respects followers and is concerned about their personal feelings and needs, the leader supports the overall feeling of trust and openness within the team. Team members are open to each other and trust each other, they are open about mistakes and dare to talk about it with each other. This is also supported in the literature on psychological safety. As stated by Edmondson (1999), psychological safety influences team psychological safety, team efficacy, team learning and team performance. So, by giving attention to team members and showing respect, the leader stimulates team members to trust each other and be open to each other.

5.3 Other influences on freedom and trust and openness within work teams

During the interviews there were found other remarkable results which can have influence on freedom and trust and openness. The first is that the level of own responsibility is experienced as very high by the respondents. As a result of this people are aware what is expected of them and they have to take initiatives. This makes that there has to be freedom within the teams, otherwise the subordinates have no room to take initiatives. So, own responsibility leads to the experience of a high level of freedom. Employees experience that there is room for new ideas and initiatives, but you have to come up with it yourself. Literature shows that ‘’belief in individual responsibility and autonomy are a strong sense of team collaboration. When employees feel that they are making a difference, they become engaged.’’ (Sawa & Swift, 2013, p.96). Additionally, if team members can make their own decision, their autonomy increases (Sawa & Swift, 2013) and their decisions will be better (Rico et al., 2007).

(33)

performance will rise (Edmondson, 1999). Because people feel more comfortable in a team, they experience a higher level of trust and openness within the team. Abfalter (2013) already stated that the ‘one-fits-all’ leadership times are over and that leadership has become more personalized, especially within creative teams.

The third factor which affects freedom and trust and openness within the team is the diversity within the team, the team consists of different characters, ages and/or types. The literature adds to this that transformational leadership plays an important role in teams with high diversity (De Poel, 2014). Transformational leadership is effective in diverse teams by giving individual employees a sense of direction and stimulating each employee to focus on a common goal (De Poel, 2014).

5.4 Conclusion

So, in the introduction the following research question for this study is mentioned: ‘’How and which dimensions of transformational leadership influence the freedom and trust and openness dimensions of team climate, within work teams in a change context?’’

The results indicate that the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership is the dimensions which has influence on both freedom and trust and openness within work teams.

Freedom is only influenced by the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership, by setting high expectations the team leader gives team members freedom to operate on this expectations.

(34)

Figure 2: The six dimensions of transformational leadership and their effects on freedom and trust and openness

5.5 Theoretical implications

(35)

2001). So, it is possible that leaders act upon that without providing the vision.

Secondly, this research showed that transformational leadership influence the freedom dimension of team climate within work teams in a way that strict rules does not per se limit the experienced degree of freedom by team members. So, although there are rules within a team, employees can experience freedom. In theory, freedom is often defined by the amount of rules for the team (e.g. Sawa & Swift, 2013; Rico et al., 2007; Abfalter, 2013), but that does not have to be an indicator as showed by the results of this study.

Thirdly, the research showed the importance of the ‘High performance expectations’ dimension of transformational leadership on freedom and trust and openness. If team leaders expresses behaviour that demonstrates their expectations for excellence, quality, and/or high performance on the part of followers this can increase the level of freedom and trust and openness within a team. Behaviour that demonstrates their expectations can give employees responsibility and freedom. By doing this, the leader creates high expectations according to the results.

5.6 Practical implications

On the practical implications this study gave insights about how leaders should lead teams in order to higher freedom and trust and openness within teams. This is important because, freedom and trust and openness both influence the team performance (Edmondson, 1999; Rico et al., 2007; Kim, Dirks, & Cooper, 2009).

The first practical implications is that this study found that it is important to take into account the diversity within work teams. Transformational leadership is effective in diverse teams by giving individual employees a sense of direction and stimulating each employee to focus on a common goal (De Poel, 2014). So, if the teams are not diverse, transformational leadership does not have to be the right leadership style.

(36)

important. This study was conducted at a young, growing and developing organisation, so it does not have a strict incorporation trajectory (yet) and, according to the interviews, this was a reason why the respondents were not aware of the vision.

5.7 Limitations of this research and suggestions for future research

This study has a few constraints and limitations. One of them is that this study is a single case study. Only one organisation is examined and within this organisation fifteen interviews were conducted. This small sample size, as well as the fact that these interviews are conducted in one organisation, both influence the generalizability of the study. But by doing this, it was possible to gain extensive and explorative results.

Secondly, only qualitative research has been conducted. In spite of its benefits, like the explorative way of a research and the possibility to dive deep into a subject, this also has its downsides. One of these downsides is that it is hard to get measurable data (Cooper & Schindler, 2008). The transcripts are coded to make the results more measurable. Coding is also done by a fellow researcher to increase the inter rater reliability and validity. Another limitation of the qualitative semi structured interviews is that the researcher had the possibility to ask deeper questions on certain topics, and by this, gain more extensive answers. Because the interviewing process was not fixed completely (it was semi-structured) it can vary per respondent how many deep questions were asked per topic.

Suggestions for future research are, firstly, to do a quantitative study on this topic and/or to repeat this study in other organisations and sectors. By doing this there can be tested whether the outcomes are generalizable to other organisations. This is interesting because then, outcomes are more generalizable and the benefits of transformational leadership on freedom and trust and openness can be implemented and executed within more organisations and sectors. Furthermore, there is not published much about this topic so it is interesting to find out how and if there are more relations between the dimensions of transformational leadership and the dimensions of team climate in more organisations.

(37)

Swift, 2013) but these concepts are not specifically related to freedom and trust and openness. The third suggestion for future research is to examine the dimensions of transformational leadership separately. This research made a start with that, but it can be further explored. In the recent literature, transformational leadership is mostly seen as one big term. As well as on research on the positive effects of transformational leadership (e.g. Kark & Shamir, 2002; Podsakoff et al., 1990; Rowald & Rohmann, 2009) as on the downsides of transformational leadership (e.g. Stoker, Grutterink, & Kolk, 2012; Tourish, 2013).

(38)

References

Abfalter, D. (2013). Authenticity and respect: Leading creative teams in the performing arts. Creativity & Innovation Management. 22 (3), 295-306.

Anderson, N.R., & West M.A. (1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 19 (3), 235-259.

Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantages in firms. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (1), 150-169.

Atwater, D., & Bass, B.M. (1994). Transformational leadership in teams, In B.M. Bass and B. Avolio (Eds.) Improving organisational effectiveness through transformational leadership, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations, New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., & Atwater, L. (1996). The Transformational and Transactional Leadership of Men and Women. Applied psychology: an international review, 45 (l), 5–34.

Bass, B. (1998). Transformational Leadership: Industry, Military, and Educational Impact. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Bresman, H. (2013). Changing routines: A process model of vicarious group learning in pharmaceutical R&D. Acadamy of Management Journal, 56 (1), 35-61.

Brown, S.L., & Eisenhardt, K.M. (1997). The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organisations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42 (1), 1-34.

(39)

Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. (2008). Business Research Methods. New York: McGraw Hill.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly. 44 (2), 350-383.

Grant, A. M. (2012). Leading with meaning: Beneficiary contact, prosocial impact, and the performance effects of transformational leadership. The Academy of Management Journal, 55 (2), 458–476.

Gray, R. J. (2001). Organisational climate and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 19 (1), 103–109.

Guzzo, R. A., Yost, P. R., Campbell, R. J., & Shea, G. P. (1993). Potency in groups: Articulating a construct. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32 (1), 87–106.

Howard, L. W., Foster, S. T., & Shannon, P. (2005). Leadership, perceived team climate and process improvement in municipal government. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 22 (8/9), 769–795.

Ilgen, D.R., Hollenbeck, J.R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organisations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56 (3), 517–543.

Isaksen, S. G., & Lauer, K. J. (2002). The climate for creativity and change in teams. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11 (1), 74–86.

Jae, U.C., Kyoungmin, C., & Sosik, J.J. (2014). Collective and interpersonal transformational leadership, social exchanges, and performance in teams. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 333-338.

(40)

Kark, R., & Shamir, B. (2002). The influence of transformational leadership on followers’ relational versus collective self-concept. Academy of Management Proceedings & Membership Directory, 1-6.

Kim, P.H., Dirks, K.T., & Cooper, C.D. (2009). The repair of trust: A dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 34 (3), 401-422.

Kozlowski, S. W.J., & Ilgen, D.R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science, 7 (3), 77-124.

Maurer, T. J., & Tarulli, B. A. (1994). Investigation of perceived environment, perceived outcome, and person variables in relationship to voluntary developmental activity by employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79 (1), 3–14.

Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and relationships. Leadership Quarterly, 13 (6), 705–750.

Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2009). Leaders’ characteristics and behaviors and employees’ resistance to organisational change. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1-6.

Oreg, S., & Berson, Y. (2011). Leadership and employees’ reactions to change: The role of leaders’ personal attributes and transformational leadership style. Personnel Psychology, 64 (3): 627-659.

Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Tamkins, M. (2003). Organisational culture and climate. Industrial and Organisational Psychology, 12 (4), 565–594.

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND TEAM CLIMATE: DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS ON FREEDOM AND TRUST AND OPENNESS PERCEPTIONS WITHIN WORK TEAMS