Abstract
Given the high demand for 21st century knowledge work to be completed in group settings, combined with the low percentage of teams who reach high performing status, the stakes are higher than ever as teams attempt to deliver on their organization’s strategic, financial, and community objectives. Researchers have hypothesized repeatedly that the conditions in which teams engage are vitally important to their success in achieving team outcomes, and they have found that the group leader strongly influences the team’s working environment, relationships, behaviors, affect, productivity, creativity, innovation, resilience, and effectiveness; specifically finding that positivity in leaders yields many benefits for both individuals and teams. Therefore, in demonstration of the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes, this literature review examines and makes connections surrounding essential concepts in positive psychology; key theoretical foundations; positivity in team settings; positive leadership approaches; and the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes. Ultimately, this review concludes that the literature overwhelmingly agrees that leader positivity is related to numerous positive team outcomes including: increased team trust and psychological safety; improved individual and team performance; improved job satisfaction and engagement; improved change management; and increased team effectiveness.
Keywords: positivity, positivity psychological capital, leader positivity, positive leadership, transformational leadership, authentic leadership, teams, team outcomes, team effectiveness
Leader Positivity and Team Outcomes: A Literature Review
Delivering on an organization’s strategic, financial, and community objectives are primary goals for teams (Barua et al., 2019). In the complex environment of the 21st century knowledge economy – more than ever before – this work requires group contribution versus individual contribution (Wheelan, 2016). Wheelan (2016) asserts, however, that simply bringing together multiple people to work on a common project does not guarantee that group will become a high performance team. Researchers have hypothesized repeatedly that the conditions in which teams engage are vitally important to their success in achieving team outcomes (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). To that end, numerous studies in recent years have researched leader influences on team environment, relationships, behaviors, affect, productivity, creativity, innovation, resilience, and effectiveness; and found that positive psychology and psychological capital (PsyCap) show many benefits for both individuals and teams (Anglin et al., 2018; Bartz & Rice, 2017; Barua et al., 2019; Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017; Luthans & Youssef- Madrid et al., 2016; Meng et al., 2016; Morgan, 2017; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Rus & Baban, 2019; Tenney, et al., 2016). Therefore, given the high stakes for teams, the significant relationship between team leader and team members, and the apparent benefits positivity holds for both individuals and teams, this present literature review seeks to investigate the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes by examining and making connections in the extant literature surrounding essential concepts in positive psychology; key theoretical foundations; positivity in team settings; positive leadership approaches; and finally, the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes. Ultimately, the review concludes that the literature overwhelmingly agrees that leader positivity is related to numerous positive team outcomes including: increased team trust and psychological safety; improved individual and team performance; improved job satisfaction and engagement; improved change management; and increased team effectiveness.
Literature Review
In establishing the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes, the literature follows a logical structure by first discussing essential concepts in positive psychology; then making connections to key theoretical foundations; then examining positivity in team settings; then identifying positive leadership approaches; and finally, demonstrating the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes.
Essential Concepts in Positive Psychology
To properly establish the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes, one must first understand four essential concepts the literature establishes in the field of positive psychology: the definition of positive psychology; the benefits of positive emotion; positivity versus negativity; and the construct of psychological capital (PsyCap).
Definition of positive psychology. Researchers largely agree on the definition of positive psychology and its contribution to the study of people and interpersonal interactions (Allen & McCarthy, 2016; Barua et al., 2019; Bartz & Rice, 2017; Dixon et al., 2016; Harty et al., 2016). The concept of positive psychology was first defined by Seligman in his 1999 presidential address to the American Psychological Association where he presented it as a unique psychological practice that aims to understand the factors that lead to desirable outcomes; and also the factors that prevent it (Allen & McCarthy, 2016). Allen and McCarthy (2016) define positive psychology as the science of the positive aspects of human life, which includes factors such as happiness, optimism, and flourishing. Dixon et al. (2016) expand on this definition saying it is the science of the positive subjective experience, positive individual traits, and positive organizations. Researchers of positive psychology are interested in three factors: positive emotion such as love, contentment, and pleasure; positive engagement such as flow – which is being so immersed in a purposeful and satisfying activity a person loses track of time – intrinsic motivation, commitment, and mindfulness; and positive meaning, such as values, connections to others, and life goals (Allen & McCarthy, 2016). Ultimately, Allen and McCarthy conclude that positive psychology is studying more than the absence of pain or suffering; rather, it is understanding the presence of the positive aspect of human existence (Allen & McCarthy, 2016).
Harty et al. (2016) add to the definition of positive psychology by highlighting its focus on human strengths and the aspects and conditions that lead to increased well-being, health, self-fulfillment, and optimal living. They point out that the positive psychology movement is rooted in humanistic psychology, which emphasizes free will, personal growth, and the attempt to find meaning in one’s existence (Harty et al., 2016). Like Allen and McCarthy (2016), Harty et al. (2016) emphasize that the reduction of stress, conflict, and noise in one’s life is not enough to generate positivity; but rather, positivity requires a sense of health, creativity, self-efficacy, meaning, and profitability. Finally, Barua et al. (2019) assert that positive psychology is about understanding the valued subjective experiences such as well-being, contentment, satisfaction, hope, optimism, flow, and happiness; whereas Bartz and Rice (2017) underscore that positive psychology stresses the use of emotions to drive meaningful, positive, authentic relationships with people.
Benefits of positive emotion. There are both physical and emotional benefits of positive emotion. First, positive emotions are related to reduced mortality in both healthy and diseased populations (Allen & McCarthy, 2016). Additionally, positive emotion is shown to strengthen both the immune system and endocrine system; and experiencing positive emotion is related to fewer headaches, fewer cold and flu symptoms, reduced inflammation, and lower incidence of cardiovascular disease (Allen & McCarthy, 2016). Studies also show that happier people take more risks, are more creative, exercise less caution around others, and demonstrate greater resilience in seeking opportunities (Allen & McCarthy, 2016). Finally, high levels of positive emotions are related to health, well-being, stable relationships, and increased profitability (Harty et al., 2016).
Positivity versus negativity. Lehmann-Willenbrock et al. (2017) define positivity as an individual’s observable acts or statements that express or imply optimism, enthusiasm, and effervescence; and that are constructive, supportive, and affirmative. Luthans & Youssef-Morgan (2017) explain that neuroscience traces positivity (and negativity) to the pre-frontal cortex, which processes higher-order rational thinking, rather than simply being a primitive and volatile emotional reaction. The prefrontal cortex also shows greater plasticity toward higher positivity, indicating that humans can become more positive and sustain positivity over time (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017).
Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) point out that positivity and negativity are not two ends of the same spectrum; rather, they are differing emotions with unique characteristics that can be displayed at the same time. In other words, positivity is not simply the absence of negativity (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). For example, at the organizational level, simply fixing problems does not automatically result in a thriving, successful organization (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Similarly, employees may not be burned out, but that does not mean they are engaged (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). According to Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) positivity in an organizational environment is: “elevating processes and outcomes which dramatically exceed common or expected performance … spectacular results, surprising outcomes, and extraordinary achievements … [and] an affirmative bias in change or toward an emphasis on strengths capabilities, and possibilities rather than problems, threats, and weakness” (p. 199). To explain this definition of organizational positivity, Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) provide this analogy: By definition, a positive number is greater than zero; and, when added to another, equals a greater number than the two individual numbers. Thus, “an observable phenomenon can be considered positive if it adds value, leaving the context, process, or outcomes within which it takes place elevated, uplifted, improved, or somehow better” (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013, p. 200).
Negativity, on the other hand, tends to feel more overwhelming than positivity due to three factors: intensity, adaptation, and singularity (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Intensity refers to the fact that negative effects receive more attention and are perceived more intensely because they represent threats (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Adaptation refers to how negative events signal maladaptation and a perceived need for change, while positive events affirm that all is well and limit motivation for change (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Interestingly, Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) point out that most managerial decisions are made in response to crisis or performance gaps (signaling maladaptation); thus, managerial interactions and decisions likely skew toward negativity. Singularity is the concept that a single negative component of a system (such as one individual or one team) can disrupt the functionality of an entire system, but a single positive component does not guarantee optimal functionality of the whole (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Finally, Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) underscore that both positivity and negativity are needed for healthy functioning; in extremes, however, neither are productive. Extreme positivity may be delusional, irresponsible, or promote complacency; and extreme negativity limits the brain’s ability to think openly, resulting in narrow-mindedness and restricted creativity (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Extreme negativity will also deplete physical, social, and psychological resources such that stress, social alienation, and illness increase (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013).
Positive psychological capital. A significant portion of the literature related to positivity, leadership, and teams is related to developing the construct of positive psychological capital (PsyCap). The literature is strongly aligned on what psychological capital is and the significance of its impact on developing positivity in individuals and teams. Anglin et al. (2018) summarize the concept of psychological capital saying: “If human capital is what you know; and social capital is who you know; then psychological capital is who you are” (p. 474).
Psychological capital (PsyCap) is comprised of four individual constructs, which together, spell the acronym HERO: Hope; Efficacy; Resilience; and Optimism (Anglin et al., 2018; Harty et al., 2016; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Li, 2018; Wu & Chen, 2018; Yavuz, 2020; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Hope is persevering toward a goal (willpower) and redirecting paths and hope when needed (waypower); efficacy is self-confidence in one’s ability achieve success; resiliency is the capacity to rebound or bounce back following adversity, uncertainty, risk, or overwhelm; and optimism is one’s perspective that attributes success to personal, permanent, and pervasive factors, and attributes negative events to external, temporary, and situation-specific factors (Anglin et al., 2018; Harty et al., 2016; Li, 2018; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Wu & Chen, 2018; Yavuz, 2020; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). The four resources of PsyCap combine to form a higher-order core construct based on shared commonalities of the individual constructs (Harty et al., 2016; Li, 2018; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Wu & Chen, 2018; Yavuz, 2020; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Hope, efficacy, resilience, and optimism share a sense of control, intentionality, and agency in terms of pursuing goals; as well as positive appraisal of circumstances, motivation, and perseverance (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). For example, optimism and efficacy mean individuals believe their chances of success are high and that they possess the means to achieve it; hope promotes motivation for success and the pursuit of multiple paths toward success; resilience allows for recovery when any of those pathways are blocked (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). In other words, when combined together, HERO is more powerful than the sum of its individual component resources (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Although the construct of HERO requires all four constructs to work together, the individual components do have unique characteristics as well. For example, hope, efficacy, and optimism are proactive in nature, but resilience is reactive in nature; the notion of pathways and waypower are unique to hope; and hope and efficacy have an internal focus, while optimism and resilience have an outward focus (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017).
Research supports PsyCap is a state-like resource, which is demonstrated by longitudinal studies showing PsyCap can be developed and changes over time, and is effective in increasing positivity, decreasing negativity, and improving well-being (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Hope can be developed through effective goal-setting, contingency planning, and mental rehearsals; efficacy can be developed through mastery and success experiences, learning from others’ success, social persuasion, and positive feedback; resilience can be developed through asset-focused, risk-focused, and process-focused strategies that emphasize building and utilizing personal assets to mitigate risks; and optimism can be developed through positive self-talk, thinking patterns that promote leniency for the past, appreciation for the present, and opportunity-seeking for the future (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017).
Finally, PsyCap is directly related to positive emotions and positivity in general (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). PsyCap triggers a positive affective states that broadens thought-action repertoires, which leads to higher creativity and a wider range of pathways (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). In turn, positive emotions build and restore physical, social, and psychological resources, including PsyCap and its constituent resources (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Although PsyCap is individual in nature, it benefits from social mechanisms (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Efficacy, optimism, and hope all benefit from social support and relying on the resources of others when one’s own resources are depleted (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017).
Key Theoretical Foundations
Having first established the understanding of four essential concepts in the field of positive psychology, it is important to consider next two key theoretical foundations that add to the relationship of how leader positivity is related to team outcomes. Those two key theories are broaden-and-build theory and conservation of resources theory.
Broaden-and-build theory. Broaden-and-build theory – established by Frederickson in the late 1990s as a result of her research in positive emotion – states that positive emotions broaden an individual’s thought-action repertoire, which means: when people are more positive, they are more open-minded, more receptive to new ideas, more adaptive, and more flexible (Allen & McCarthy, 2016; Barua et al., 2019; Dixon et al., 2016; Harty et al., 2016; Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). In contrast, negative emotions cause a narrow mind in which one is less capable of comparing alternatives, experimenting with new ways, and considering options (Dixon et al., 2016; Harty et al., 2016; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Positive emotions also build multiple domains of personal resources, upon which a person can later draw for future resilience, skills, knowledge, and support: physical resources (e.g. energy management); intellectual resources (e.g. ability to learn new things); social resources (e.g. positive relationships); and psychological resources (e.g. a sense of personal identity and goal orientation) (Allen & McCarthy, 2016; Dixon et al., 2016; Harty et al., 2016; Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Thus, leaders who cultivate positivity on their team will reap the benefits of broadening thinking patterns and building physical, intellectual, social, and psychological resources for ongoing success.
Conservation of resources theory. Resources are the internal and external factors (e.g. psychological, physical, organizational, or social) that people value to provide them with motivation and support in balancing demands and achieving success (Xu et al., 2017). Job-related resources include leader support, autonomy, feedback, self-efficacy, resilience, and knowledge (Xu et al., 2017). Conservation of resources theory (COR) states that employees tend to acquire, retain, and protect their resources such that people with plentiful resources will work harder and behave positively to attain more resources; and people with limited resources might behave negatively in order to protect what few resources they do have (Xu et al., 2017).
In the context of groups, resources can be increased or decreased through a gain spiral or a loss spiral, respectively (Li, 2018). Gain spiral describes how individuals or teams with sufficient resources more easily gain additional resources; which in turn, brings them greater resource increments (Li, 2018). When individuals or teams get into a gain spiral, the resources they possess lead to the gain of other resources, which help them to achieve goals, promote learning and growth, foster motivation, and engagement (Li, 2018). Conversely, in a loss spiral individuals or teams who lack resources are more subject to the threats of resource loss, which in turn, causes resource investment not to meet the need, thus aggravating additional resource loss (Li, 2018). When individuals or teams fall into a loss spiral, they need to deploy additional effort and energy to recover or maintain positive performance (Li, 2018). This strategy is not sustainable, however, and eventually all resources are depleted, which results in exhaustion and burnout (Li, 2018). It is important to note that a loss spiral develops faster than a gain spiral; thus, individuals lacking resources are more likely to fall into a loss spiral; however, accumulating resources prevents a loss spiral (Li, 2018). Thus, positive leaders who cultivate gain spirals of psychological resources on their teams are more likely to see improved outcomes (Li, 2008).
Positivity in Team Settings
Continuing to build upon the understanding of essential concepts in positive psychology and the key theoretical foundations, the present literature review moves next to an exploration of positivity in team settings, positive leadership styles, and finally, the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes. First, there are three concepts the literature establishes related to positivity in team settings that leaders must leverage in order to impact their teams: Team positivity, collective psychological capital, and affective presence.
Team positivity. The research is clear that psychological resources have a synergistic effect between individuals and among groups such that teams are powerful mechanisms through which the beliefs, attitudes, and moods of individual members influence the affect of other individuals and the group as a whole (Harty et al., 2016; Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017; Livi et al., 2015; Rebelo et al., 2018; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Teams develop affective tones when the majority of the team members have a positive (or negative) tone to the point that the affective tone of the entire group is perceived as positive (or negative) (Rebelo et al., 2018). These mechanisms occur through interaction rituals, participation shifts, and team interaction flow – all of which demonstrate how team member emotions quickly build on each other through dynamic speaker switching, thus facilitating both positive and negative emotions to spread among members (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017).
The impacts of team positivity – and the potential consequences of team negativity – are compelling. For example, positive emotions expressed in a team setting such as enthusiasm, joy, and elation facilitate prosocial and cooperative behaviors among team members (Madrid et al., 2016). Conversely, expression of negative feelings in teams such as anxiety, tension, and worry inhibit sharing of ideas and other forms of information sharing among members (Madrid et al., 2016). Furthermore, there is a demonstrated relationship between group positivity and group performance where group positivity is associated with a greater degree of teamwork because individuals in the group are more motivated to demonstrate positive attitudes and behaviors (Livi et al., 2015). Both Harty et al. (2016) and Youssef-Morgan and Luthans (2013) cite that individuals and teams begin to thrive at a 3:1 ratio of positive comments to negative comments; and, in their studies, this ratio was the most significant factor that separated more successful teams from less successful teams. Positive comments include expressions of optimism, support, encouragement, and appreciation; and negative comments include dissatisfaction, fear, sarcasm, and cynicism (Harty et al., 2016). For top management teams to thrive and achieve effectiveness, the positive-to-negative interaction ratio is 6:1 (Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013).
Collective psychological capital. Collective psychological capital (PsyCap) is a team phenomenon that is a synergy of interaction and coordination between team members who possess the four elements of individual PsyCap and represents the group’s shared belief in its joint capabilities to organize and execute to succeed (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Wu & Chen, 2018). Wu and Chen (2018) describe collective PsyCap as the “group’s shared psychological state of development that is characterized by efficacy, hope, optimism, and resilience” (p. 76). Collective PsyCap manifests in a group setting differently than in individuals, however. For example, group resiliency is not simply the output a group of resilient individuals, but rather, is related to the dynamic structures and processes the group adopts and executes that allows the group to anticipate, prepare for, and withstand challenges (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017).
Researchers have also found that there is a positive relationship between collective PsyCap and group performance, especially among teams where tasks are highly dependent upon one another (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). Collective PsyCap is also positively associated with increased team organizational citizenship behaviors, as well as greater levels of organizational commitment (Li, 2018; Wu & Chen, 2018). Additionally, teams with higher collective PsyCap are able to face adversity or failure with greater positivity and approach adversity with a willingness to learn from it, leading them to experience higher degrees of creativity and innovation (Wu & Chen, 2018).
Affective presence. Affective presence is a psychological construct by which individuals cause others around them to feel similarly positive or negative (Madrid et al., 2016). There exists a range of implicit and explicit processes that link affect: transference, interaction synchrony, controlled interpersonal affect regulation, and impression management (Madrid et al., 2016). Affective presence is related to interpersonal skills, such as emotional expressiveness and understanding others’ emotions; and impacts social interactions, friendship networks, and interpersonal liking (Madrid et al., 2016). Affective presence is an interpersonal trait and, thus, can only be displayed when there is a social interaction (Madrid et al., 2016).
Leader affective presence. Leaders are a significant source of affective presence among a team’s members because leaders play a central role in developing cognitive, affective, and behavioral values, processes, and norms (Madrid et al., 2016). Leader affective presence influences teamwork via the leader’s emotions and moods, which are propagated to members through contagion, inference, and role modeling (Madrid et al., 2016). Where the leader expresses positive affect and team members respond with positive affect, it is said to be a convergence of positive affect (Madrid et al., 2016). In turn, convergence of positive affect influences the shared behaviors and outcomes that are associated with improved team effectiveness (Madrid et al., 2016). Therefore, when the team leader consistently elicits positive affective presence among the team, team members are more likely to share information with one another leading to improved team outcomes such as creativity, innovation, and performance (Madrid et al., 2016). Conversely, it has been shown that where the leader has negative affective presence, teams are less likely to share information because there is no affective reward associated with negative affect (Madrid et al., 2016). Additionally, members are likely to self-protect against the potential for a convergence of negative affect, which is linked with increased conflict and reduced prosocial team behavior (Madrid et al., 2016).
Positive Leadership Approaches
The review of the literature on the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes continues build upon itself as the present review moves next into a brief exploration of leadership styles that are most often examined and discussed by researchers in relation to positivity. First, the literature discusses the broad characteristics of positive leadership (Barua et al., 2019; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013); and then, most often, discusses transformational leadership and authentic leadership as specific positive leadership approaches (Anglin et al., 2018; Hu et al., 2018; Li, 2018; Meng et al., 2016; Rebelo et al., 2018; Wu & Chen, 2018; Yavuz, 2020).
Broad characteristics of positive leadership. Youssef-Morgan & Luthans (2013) characterize positive leadership broadly as the integration of positive traits, processes, behaviors, and outcomes. Additionally, the literature emphasizes positive leadership is distinctive in that it focuses on developing others and leverages positive emotions and positive energy for building competencies based on individual strengths, recognizing and encouraging individual contributions, and keeping a consistently positive perspective (Barua et al., 2019; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). Strengths-based approaches do not ignore weaknesses; but rather, develop their strengths to compensate for their weaknesses; recognition and encouragement is about appreciating individual contributions and accomplishments, which builds trust and empowerment; and a positive perspective is critical to positive leadership – especially in managing change – by de-catastrophizing negative experiences and setbacks, which helps to interpret problems by providing support and solutions, thus building resiliency (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018).
Positive leadership cultivates a workplace culture that promotes positive emotions, greater self-efficacy, greater resiliency, increased intrinsic motivation, and improved social relationships between coworkers and the organization (Harty et al., 2016). Furthermore, positive leaders have teams who are more engaged, more productive, more creative, and achieve better results (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). As a result, positive leaders generally enjoy improved relationships with their followers, which leads to greater work commitment, increased employee productivity, higher quality, better teamwork, and improved problem solving (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). Conversely, leaders who focus on negativity, barriers, and problems cultivated higher levels of frustration (Harty et al., 2016). Instead, during challenging times, positive leaders identify and appreciate the positive aspects of the situation, providing perspective on “what goes right with them, what gives them life, [and] what is experienced as good, inspiring, and extraordinary” (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018, p. 19). In fact, Ramdas and Patrick (2018) boldly assert that, in challenging times, leader optimism is as important for achieving success as competency, as they provide hope and lead the way with a can-do attitude.
Specific positive leadership approaches. Most frequently, the literature cites transformational leadership and authentic leadership as positive leadership approaches that improve employee psychology and behaviors (Anglin et al., 2018; Hu et al., 2018; Li, 2018; Meng et al., 2016; Rebelo et al., 2018; Wu & Chen, 2018; Yavuz, 2020).
Transformational leadership. Transformational leaders generate enthusiasm for a vision and encourage collective commitment toward achieving that vision; have a high degree of individual consideration for each team member; create opportunities for employee growth and development through intellectual stimulation; set high performance expectations; and act as a role model for employees, gaining their respect, trust, and admiration (Li, 2018; Rebelo et al., 2018; Yavuz, 2020). One of the core components of transformational leadership is providing support. Thus, as members perceive a positive, supportive work environment, they are more willing to take greater risks to explore new solutions to persistent problems, with the confidence that the support of their leader will not fail (Rebelo et al., 2018).
Empirically, there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and employee attitudes and behaviors due to a higher level of leader-member exchange, and thus, a greater chance for the leader to influence followers’ emotions, attitudes, and behaviors (Hu et al. 2018; Li, 2018; Yavuz, 2020). Additionally, transformational leadership is positively related to higher levels of employee work engagement; increased follower potential, ability, skills, self-efficacy, satisfaction, engagement, and self-esteem; and contributes significantly to both individual and organizational performance (Li, 2018; Yavuz, 2020). With its emphasis on future vision, high achievement, and shared responsibility toward a common goal, transformational leadership is especially effective for leading followers through change (Yavuz, 2020). Additionally, transformational leadership positively affects followers’ intrinsic motivation, thus encouraging followers to achieve more than they original expected (Li, 2018; Rebelo et al., 2018). In relation to teams, as transformational leadership emphasizes the collective over the individual, it is shown to have a significant positive impact on team performance (Rebelo et al., 2018). Finally, the relationship between transformational leadership and psychological capital is also well established. Anglin et al. (2018) purport that leaders high in PsyCap instill greater follower belief in a cause or vision; thus, transformational leadership is a positive predictor of psychological capital (Hu et al., 2018). Additionally, transformational leadership is proven to have a positive relationship to knowledge workers’ psychological capital, which, in turn, influences knowledge workers’ engagement and increases team learning behaviors, which improves team performance (Li, 2018; Rebelo et al., 2018).
Authentic leadership. Authentic leadership is based on genuineness, values, beliefs, and behaviors that influence follower development (Meng et al., 2016; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). Authentic leadership is similar to transformational leadership, but emphasizes characteristics of honesty, integrity, and loyalty (Hu et al., 2018). The literature defines four factors of authentic leadership: self-consciousness (e.g. leader’s cognition of his or her own values, traits, strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies); relational transparency (e.g. openly shares information and freely expresses his or her true inner thoughts and feelings, while also generously soliciting input from others); internalized morality (e.g. makes decisions based on high moral and ethical standards, even under pressure); and balanced treatment (e.g. seeks fairness and solicits differing views before making a decision) (Hu et al., 2018; Meng et al., 2016; Yavuz, 2020).
Authentic leadership is based on trust and transparency, with a high value on ethics and moral values; and thus, creates an ethical and reliable culture within the team or organization (Yavuz, 2020). Behaviorally, authentic leaders emphasize leading from their beliefs and values, and encourage their followers to do the same (Yavuz, 2020). As such, key antecedents of authentic leadership are self-knowledge and self-consistency (Yavuz, 2020). Therefore, leaders who know their own values, convictions, strengths, and weaknesses – and experience high levels of positive affect – are more likely to exude authentic leadership (Yavuz, 2020).
The relationship between authentic leadership and positive individual and team outcomes is firmly established. First, authentic leadership is shown to positively affect followers’ attitudes and behaviors, thus improving engagement, job satisfaction, and team commitment; as well as employee subjective well-being, psychological capital, knowledge-sharing, and creativity (Hu et al., 2018; Meng et al., 2016; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Yavuz, 2020). Furthermore, authentic leaders have been shown to increase followers’ leader satisfaction, organizational commitment, extra-role effort, and perceived team effectiveness (Hu et al., 2018; Meng et al., 2016; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Yavuz, 2020). Authentic leadership is also related to building trust and increased psychological safety (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). Finally, PsyCap and positive organizational context is an antecedent to authentic leadership development (Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017). The relationship between authentic leadership and proactive employee behavior (which benefits an organization) is mediated by positive PsyCap (Hu et al., 2018). Like transformational leadership, authentic leadership also facilitates PsyCap development in team members (Rebelo et al., 2018).
Relationship between Leader Positivity and Team Outcomes
Thus far, in the preceding four sections, this present review has explored research regarding essential concepts in the field of positive psychology, key theories related to positivity, positivity in team settings, and positive leadership approaches. It is upon this wide foundation of empirical evidence that the present review culminates by examining how the presence of these factors in leaders impact team outcomes. Ultimately, the literature overwhelmingly agrees that leader positivity is related to numerous positive team outcomes including: increased team trust and psychological safety; improved individual and team performance; improved job satisfaction and engagement; improved change management; and increased team effectiveness.
Increased team trust and psychological safety. Leader positivity cultivates an atmosphere of team trust and psychological safety, which positively influences team knowledge sharing and learning behaviors and, in turn, their creativity, innovation, and productivity (Meng et al., 2016; Wu & Chen, 2018). Social exchange theory is an exchange process based on mutual reciprocation of trust (Wu & Chen, 2018). When group members exchange mutual trust, they experience increased share commitment to the organization, which leads to increased competitive advantages (Wu & Chen, 2018). Other positive effects of shared trust are increased team performance and increased job satisfaction (Wu & Chen, 2018). High degrees of knowledge sharing is a vital characteristic of highly performing teams and is also an indicative of team trust (Meng et al., 2016). Studies show that the stronger the perception of team trust, the more the team engages in knowledge sharing, thus improving team creativity (Meng et al., 2016).
Psychological safety exists when members are able to take risks of self-expression (e.g. disagree, offer a new idea, make a mistake) without fear of humiliation or retribution (Meng et al., 2016). As an expression of positive leadership, authentic leaders promote transparency, trust, and high ethical standards, by which they reduce members’ perception of risk and increase perception of psychological safety (Meng et al., 2016). Psychological safety also promotes a team environment of information sharing since members are not concerned about plagiarism of ideas, losing a competitive edge, or exposing their weaknesses; and because there is an ethic of learning associated with mistakes and failures (Meng et al., 2016). Additionally, psychological safety allows team members to apply more of their cognitive resources toward work tasks, leading to increased creativity, innovation, and productivity (Meng et al., 2016). As authentic leaders role model transparency and expressing their true inner thoughts and feelings, team members are more likely to mimic this behavior, thus increasing overall honesty and integrity, which supports psychological safety (Meng et al., 2016).
Improved individual and team performance. Researchers show that leader positivity is significantly related to improved employee work performance and organizational behavior (Allen & McCarthy, 2016; Dorling, 2017; Livi et al., 2015; Tenney et al., 2016). For example, leader positivity develops increased employee PsyCap, which is a strategic internal resource that promotes positive behavior, organizational development, personal confidence, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior (Dorling, 2017; Hu et al., 2018; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Wu & Chen, 2018;). Further, employees with higher PsyCap have lower levels of absenteeism and reduced turnover intentions; higher intent-to-stay; and higher commitment to organizational objectives (Dorling, 2017). Employees with high PsyCap also generally possess a more positive emotional state and are more consistently hopeful and optimistic, which supports improved performance (Li, 2018). Finally, higher PsyCap is positively related to increased individual creativity and improved problem-solving (Dorling, 2017).
Team positivity – which is influenced by leader positivity – is also linked to better team performance outcomes such as coordination and cooperation (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). During a team interaction, most behaviors are in response to another team member’s recent behavior (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). In problem solving, how the leader orients the discussion – directing the team in solution-orientation versus problem-orientation – impacts the likelihood of subsequent positivity (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). Solution-oriented statements suggest hope, optimism, creativity, and advancement, which is more likely to yield follow-on positivity (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). Problem-oriented statements may momentarily diminish a group’s confidence in their ability to solve them (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017). In short doses, being problem-oriented may be productive for a team; however, in more prolonged sequences, being overly-problem focused may lead to a negative loss spiral, which is likely to increase feelings of helplessness and overwhelm (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017).
Improved job satisfaction and work engagement. Leader positivity is shown to influence employee subjective well-being (SWB) at work, including job satisfaction, positive affect at work, and the absence of job stress or negative affect at work (Tenney et al., 2016). Leader PsyCap is related to developing employee PsyCap, which is also related to increased job satisfaction (Harty et al., 2016; Youssef-Morgan & Luthans, 2013). At the organizational level, there is evidence that increased employee SWB – especially job satisfaction – leads to improved firm performance, including financial outcomes (Tenney et al., 2016).
Leader positivity is also related to increased work engagement, which is “an affective-motivational state of positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication and absorption” (Li, 2018, p. 1152; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Xu et al., 2017). Engagement includes high levels of energy, feelings of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, challenge, high levels of concentration, and being happily engrossed in work (Li, 2018). Employees with high engagement are generally more enthusiastic, energetic, and proactive; and have increased personal well-being, greater intrinsic motivation, and increased sense of meaning in their work, all of which help to mitigate burnout (Li, 2018). High work engagement can positively predict individual and organizational performance, job satisfaction, and innovation; and is also positively related to personal resources such as self-efficacy, trust, organizational climate, transformational leadership, and positive orientation (Li, 2018; Xu et al., 2017). Overall, positive leaders have more engaged employees and deliver improved results (Ramdas & Patrick, 2018). Finally, a predictor of employee work engagement is the level of leader PsyCap (Li, 2018; Xu et al., 2017). Thus, one way to increase employee work engagement is to develop PsyCap in leaders (Xu et al., 2017). Since work engagement is the result of an accumulation of resources, leaders who develop their employees’ PsyCap help their employees accumulate psychological resources that fuel work engagement and work performance (Xu et al., 2017).
Improved change management. A leader’s positive emotions are resources that can be used to manage individual and collective expression, development, and agency (Dixon et al., 2016). Therefore, based on broaden-and-build theory, leaders of change should encourage positive emotions (Dixon et al., 2016). Leaders who use deficit-type questions (questions that focus on problems or what went wrong) and questions about things to eliminate or get rid of direct discussions toward negativity and failure (Dixon et al., 2016). In contrast, leaders who ask positive questions frame discussions around future action with greater promise and opportunity (Dixon et al., 2016). To be clear, leaders should not ignore problems, but seek balance between leveraging deficit-type questions and positive questions, especially in change management (Dixon et al., 2016).
Leaders who use positivity in managing change means they choose a new lens through which to view the situation that is not centered on negativity such as depression, anxiety, disappointment, and failure; but rather, they focus on such positive elements as optimism, leveraging individual and team strengths; and building resiliency, well-being, and flourishing (Dixon et al., 2016). A positive leadership strategy for change management, then, is the primacy of the positive, which seeks to build and sustain momentum for change by broadening and building positive emotions to develop creativity, flexibility, openness, and efficiency in thinking (Dixon et al., 2016).
In relationship to PsyCap, resilience is particularly important for leaders to develop in their teams as those teams with high resiliency are associated with an improved ability to adapt to change and increased goal commitment (Anglin et al., 2018). Furthermore, individuals rated higher in PsyCap are more likely to cope well during organizational change due to having positive expectations, more openness to change, better creativity, and improved problem-solving, all of which are competencies relevant to change (Dorling, 2017). Finally, higher levels of PsyCap mitigate the negative emotions of organizational change, but employees low in PsyCap are prone to negativity, cynicism, and deviant behaviors that comprise resistance to change (Dorling, 2017).
Increased team effectiveness. There is a direct relationship between leader positivity and team effectiveness (Dixon et al., 2016; Martin, 2006; Rebelo et al., 2018). The definition of team effectiveness is dependent upon three factors: a team product that exceeds client expectations; growth in team capabilities over time; and satisfying and meaningful group experience for team members (Martin, 2006). Similarly, Rus & Baban (2019) assert the criteria for team effectiveness are team performance, satisfaction, and viability. Team performance means the work group’s productive output should meet or exceed the stakeholders’ standards; satisfaction refers to how satisfied the team members are with the team; and viability refers to how well the team members are able to work together in the future (Rus & Baban, 2019). Other criteria sometimes used to assess team effectiveness are team efficiency and team innovation (Rus & Baban, 2019).
Martin (2006) aptly points out that a leader does not make a great team, but rather, facilitates the conditions that enable team effectiveness. For example, positive working environments are related to positive staff engagement; reduced turnover; and improved productivity, performance, and profitability (Dixon et al., 2016; Rebelo et al., 2018). Additionally, teams with higher PsyCap (mediated through learning behaviors) have increased performance, higher team satisfaction, and a strong sense of team viability (Rus & Baban, 2019; Rebelo et al., 2018). Thus, having met the criteria for team effectiveness, teams with higher PsyCap have greater team effectiveness (Rus & Baban, 2019).
Madrid et al. (2016) demonstrate the relationship between leader positivity and team effectiveness in terms of an input-process-output model. Team inputs are organizational, group, and individual resources (e.g. organizational or team environment, team task structure, members’ personalities or psychological resources); processes are actions performed by the team members to move the team forward (e.g. planning, coordination, monitoring, etc.); and outputs are the results that are attributable to the team’s inputs and processes (e.g. quantity/quality of work, innovation, etc.) (Madrid et al., 2016). Innovation is a particularly significant outcome of team effectiveness because of its impact on organizational well-being and competitive advantage (Madrid et al., 2016). Within this model, Madrid et al. (2016) found that positive leader affective presence (input) is strongly related to increased team information sharing (process), which in turn, supports increased team innovation (output).
Conclusion
Given the high demand for 21st century knowledge work to be completed in group settings, combined with the low percentage of teams who reach high performing status, the stakes are higher than ever as teams attempt to deliver on their organization’s strategic, financial, and community objectives. As researchers have hypothesized repeatedly that the conditions in which teams engage are vitally important to their success in achieving team outcomes, they have found that the group leader strongly influences the team’s working environment, relationships, behaviors, affect, productivity, creativity, innovation, resilience, and effectiveness; and specifically, found that positivity in leaders yields many benefits for both individuals and teams (Anglin et al., 2018; Bartz & Rice, 2017; Barua et al., 2019; Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2017; Luthans & Youssef-Morgan, 2017; Madrid et al, 2016; Meng et al., 2016; Ramdas & Patrick, 2018; Rus & Baban, 2019; Tenney et al., 2016). Therefore, in demonstration of the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes, the present review examined and made connections in the literature surrounding essential concepts in positive psychology; key theoretical foundations; positivity in team settings; positive leadership approaches; and finally, the relationship between leader positivity and team outcomes. Ultimately, this present review concludes that the literature overwhelmingly agrees that leader positivity is related to numerous positive team outcomes including: increased team trust and psychological safety; improved individual and team performance; improved job satisfaction and engagement; improved change management; and increased team effectiveness.
References
Allen, M., & McCarthy, P. (2016). Be happy in your work: The role of positive psychology in working with change and performance. Journal of Change Management, 16(1), 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2015.1128471
Anglin, A., Short, J., Drover, W., Stevenson, R., McKenny, A., & Allison, T. (2018). The power of positivity? The influence of positive psychological capital language on crowdfunding performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 33(4), 470–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.03.003
Bartz., D. E., & Rice, P. (2017). Managers using positive psychology to maximize productivity and job satisfaction. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 8(7), 1-6.
Barua, B., Muchiri, M., Muenjohn, N., & Burgess, J. (2019). A model exploring relationships between positive, leadership, meditation, flow and task performance. The Journal of Developing Areas, 53(2), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2019.0033
Dixon, M., Lee, S., & Ghaye, T. (2016). Strengths-based reflective practices for the management of change: Applications from sport and positive psychology. Journal of Change Management, 16(2), 142–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2015.1125384
Dorling, J. (2017). Impact of psychological capital on the resistance to change during post-merger integration. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(6), 936–956. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-11-2015-0199
Harty, B., Gustafsson, J., Björkdahl, A., & Möller, A. (2016). Group intervention: A way to improve working teams’ positive psychological capital. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation, 53(2), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-152227
Hu, Y., Wu, X., Zong, Z., Xiao, Y., Maguire, P., Qu, F., … Wang, D. (2018). Authentic leadership and proactive behavior: The role of psychological capital and compassion at work. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02470
Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Chiu, M., Lei, Z., & Kauffeld, S. (2017). Understanding positivity within dynamic team interactions. Group & Organization Management, 42(1), 39–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601116628720
Li, Y. (2019). Leadership styles and knowledge workers’ work engagement: Psychological capital as a mediator. Current Psychology: Research & Reviews., 38(5), 1152–1161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9968-6
Livi, S., Alessandri, G., Caprara, G. V., & Pierro, A. (2015). Positivity within teamwork: Cross-level effects of positivity on performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.015
Luthans, F., & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2017). Psychological capital: An evidence-based positive approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 339-366. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113324
Madrid, H., Totterdell, P., Niven, K., & Barros, E. (2016). Leader affective presence and innovation in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(5), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000078
Martin, E. (2006). Team effectiveness in academic medical libraries: A multiple case study. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA., 94(3), 271–278.
Meng, H., Cheng, Z., & Guo, T. (2016). Positive team atmosphere mediates the impact of authentic leadership on subordinate creativity. Social Behavior and Personality, 44(3), 355–368. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2016.44.3.355
Ramdas, S. K. & Patrick, H. A. (2018). Driving performance through positive leadership. Journal of Positive Management, 9(3), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.12775/27920
Rebelo, T., Dimas, I., Lourenço, P., & Palácio, Â. (2018). Generating team PsyCap through transformational leadership. Team Performance Management, 24(7/8), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-09-2017-0056
Rus, C. L., & Baban, A. (2019). Linking positive psychological capital to team effectiveness through team learning behaviors. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 17, 98-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.24837/pru.v17i2.293
Tenney, E., Poole, J., & Diener, E. (2016). Does positivity enhance work performance?: Why, when, and what we don’t know. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2016.11.002
Wheelan, S. A. (2016). Creating Effective Teams: A Guide for Members and Leaders. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Wu, C., & Chen, T. (2018). Collective psychological capital: Linking shared leadership, organizational commitment, and creativity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.02.003
Xu, J., Liu, Y., & Chung, B. (2017). Leader psychological capital and employee work engagement. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(7), 969–985. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-05-2016-0126
Youssef-Morgan, C. M. & Luthans, F. (2013). Positive leadership: Meaning and application across cultures. Organizational Dynamics, 42(3), 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2013.06.005
Yavuz, M. (2020). Transformational leadership and authentic leadership as practical implications of positive organizational psychology. In E. Baykal (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Positive Organizational Behavior for Improved Workplace Performance (pp. 122-139). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-0058-3.ch008