TABLE 9-5: CORRELATION MATRIX SHARED, VERTICAL LEADERSHIP AND TEAM OUTCOMES
Table 9.5 shows the following correlations:
In terms of vertical leadership:
Organizational creativity was significantly correlated with Business development (ȡ=.67,
p<.01) and Client centricity (ȡ=.62, p<.01).
Business development was significantly correlated with Client centricity (ȡ=.48, p<.01).
Client centricity was highly significantly correlated with Operational efficiency (ȡ=.61,
p<.01).
In terms of shared leadership:
Organizational creativity was significantly correlated with Business development (ȡ=.41,
p<.05), Client centricity (ȡ=.37, p<.05), and mostly correlated with Operational efficiency
(ȡ=.51, p<.01).
Business development was significantly correlated with Client centricity (ȡ=.63, p<.01).
Client centricity was significantly correlated with Operational efficiency (ȡ=.64, p<.01).
In terms of team effectiveness:
Team innovation was highly correlated with Team market proactiveness (ȡ=.68, p<.0).
Team efficiency was highly correlated with Team market responsiveness (ȡ=.46, p<.05).
All measurements were FRQVLGHUHGLQWHUQDOO\UHOLDEOH &URQEDFKDOSKD¶V! The correlation matrix
showed that shared and vertical strategic leadership were largely unrelated. It remains interesting to
study their respective value in explaining team outcomes, i.e. the impact of the formal team leader
(vertical leadership) and the impact of shared leadership (excluding the hierarchical team leader) on
the four team effectiveness scores. For each team the standard deviation was calculated on the four
strategic leadership dimensions and were correlated with the team effectiveness scores. None of these
scores turned out to have a significant influence on team effectiveness. Hence, one may conclude that
the shared leadership measures does capture a collective effort. Before studying their relative added