Curvilinear relationship between intra-team trust and team innovation: the moderating role of task complexity
| Date | 08 July 2019 |
| Published date | 08 July 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-12-2016-0180 |
| Pages | 472-487 |
| Author | Hidajat Hendarsjah,Ely Susanto,Bambang Riyanto Lies Sugianto,Tarsisius Hani Handoko |
| Subject Matter | Strategy,International business |
Curvilinear relationship between
intra-team trust and team innovation: the
moderating role of task complexity
Hidajat Hendarsjah, Ely Susanto, Bambang Riyanto Lies Sugianto and
Tarsisius Hani Handoko
Abstract
Purpose –This paper aims to identify the relationship pattern between intra-team trust and team
innovation andthe influence of moderating variable task complexityon the relationship. It also describes
why and how intra-teamtrust is a unique antecedent for team innovation,as too much or too less influence
of the variablecan have detrimental effectson team innovation.
Design/methodology/approach –The paper uses survey research. The data were collected by
distributingquestionnaires to work teams. After the individual-leveldata were aggregated into team-level
data, hierarchicallinier regression was conductedto test the hypotheses.
Findings –The paper provides empirical findings that (1) intra-team trust and team innovation
have a curvilinear relationship pattern, (2) task complexity does not influence curvilinear
relationship (3) and the increase in task complexity improves the possibility of team innovation to
occur.
Research limitations/implications –The paper has two limitations.First, as intra-team trust was also
represented by aggregated perception of team members’ trust for outside parties (not only members’
perception for their teams), the future research is expected to include the representation in the
instrument. Second,recent research studies have shown that contextualfactor of task interdependence,
instead of task complexity, also had an effect on the relationship pattern between intra-team trust and
team performance(i.e. team innovation). Therefore, for futureresearchers, it is suggested that the use of
task interdependence would be an alternative moderating variable on the relationship between intra-
team trustand team innovation.
Practical implications –The paper discusses the strategy to enhance team innovation by revealing
strategiesto manage interplay among intra-team trust,team complexity and the desired team innovation.
Originality/value –The paper identifies the need to conduct empirical research on how an interplay
among intra-teamtrust, task complexity and team innovationcould be enabled.
Keywords Trust, Innovation, Organizational behaviour, Teams and teamwork
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Innovation has a significantrole for teams in organization. Through innovation, teams havea
greater chance to survive better when dealing with changing environment by adapting and
implementing their innovative solutions (Van de Ven, 1986;O’Reilly and Tushman, 1997;
Drach-Zahavy and Somech, 2001). In line with the argument, Haverman (1992) asserts that
there is a positive relationship between team innovation and organizational survival in an
organizational ecologicalsystem. Coping with uncertainty is common situations whenteams
innovate (Rogers, 1983). Further O’Reilly and Tushman (1997) and Drach-Zahavy and
Somech (2001) argue that intra-team trust would play an important role when teams are
dealing with uncertainty (as teams innovate).
Hidajat Hendarsjah is
based at the Faculty of
Economics and Business,
Universitas Sebelas Maret,
Surakarta, Indonesia.
Ely Susanto is based at the
Department of Public Policy
and Management, Faculty
of Social and Political
Sciences, Universitas
Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta,
Indonesia.
Bambang Riyanto Lies
Sugiantoc and
Tarsisius Hani Handokod
are both based at the
Faculty of Economics and
Business, Universitas
Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta,
Indonesia.
Received 28 December 2016
Revised 16 July 2017
7 January 2018
Accepted 16 January 2018
PAGE 472 jJOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES jVOL. 13 NO. 3 2019, pp. 472-487, ©Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1558-7894 DOI 10.1108/JABS-12-2016-0180
A scant literature review shows that intra-team trust is a potential predictor to enhance team
innovation (Zand, 1972;Woodman et al., 1993;Scott and Bruce, 1994;Lewicki et al., 1998;
Bidault and Castello,2008, 2010;Yuan and Woodman, 2010). Intra-team trust supposedly
can improve several intra-team processes, such as communication intensity between team
members (Zand, 1972;Boss, 1978;Dirks, 1999), lowering emotional conflict (Jehn, 1995;
Simons and Peterson, 2000), and increasing information sharing within team (Gong et al.,
2013). These team processes may appear within team as trust can lower negative
perceptions among team members,and consequently causing team members to exchange
information and ideas comfortably (Yamagishi, 1998;Rousseau et al., 1998). In theend, the
enhancement of information exchange within teams can foster both learning behavior
(through adaptation and implementation of innovative solutions; indicating that teams are
enhancing their innovation) and tim capability in accomplishing their tasks (Edmondson,
1999;Gong et al.,2013).
Although intra-team trust is a main component of innovation in teams in organizations
(Lewicki et al., 1998), there are several problems in predicting the influence of intra-team
trust in building team innovation.The first problem is concerned with the relationship type of
intra-team trust and team innovation. Although several studies have shown that intra-team
trust may facilitate an effective intra-team interaction to result in team innovation, other
findings have shown otherwise –that it is difficultfor a team with high level of intra-team trust
to yield high level team innovation. Some studies show that the increase in intra-team trust
does not necessarily translate into an increase in team innovation. This is indicated by two
groups of findings that suggest different relationship patterns between intra-team trust and
team innovation. While in some cases they have been predicted to form a positive linear
pattern (Woodman et al.,1993;Gong et al.,2013;Liu et al.,2015;Amabile et al.,1996;
Clegg et al., 2002), in other cases they reveal a curvilinear or inverted U-shaped pattern
(Nohria and Gulati, 1996;Uzzi, 1997;Gargiulo and Ertug, 2006;Bidault and Castello,2008,
2010).
The second problem is the influence of the contextual factor of the need for innovative
solutions. That there are two possible relationship patterns between intra-team trust and
team innovation –positive and curvilinear –somehow suggest that the formation of a
relationship pattern by certain variables is not fixed for all conditions (Mesmer-Magnus and
De Church, 2009). The diversity in relationship pattern further indicates the influence of
moderating variables (Whismanand McClelland, 2005).
Trustand innovation in Asian context
We argue that the non-linear relationship between intra-team trust and team innovation may
probably found in Asian context. Based on literature review, this is rooted in two things.
First, the excessive trust might easily found in Asian community (Yamagishi, 1998;De
cremer, 2015). Individuals trust in-group members than out-group members will be greater
for organizations from collectivist Asian culture than from individualist culture (Huff and
Kelley, 2003). They expect their in-group to look after them, an in exchange for that they
owe absolute loyalty to it. Second, the excessive trust situation may form non-linear
relationship between intra-team trust and team innovation because it does not promote
critical attitude as a result of the lack of evaluative behavior in teams (Van de ven, 1986;
Wicks et al., 1999;Gargiulo and Ertug,2006).
Further, the great emphasis on socialorder and harmony in society, as one characteristic of
collectivist society, may cause situation that being innovative is not deemed to be a social
value, as materialized in Asian society (Ng, 2001). Consequently, when teams are dealing
with uncertainty, the idea-challenge activity as a result of informationexchange among team
members –as the base for learning behavior in finding innovative solution (Edmondson,
1999)–indicatively will not be the option for the Asian society. This is because the idea
challenge may break harmony in the society. Thus when exchanging information activity is
VOL. 13 NO. 3 2019 jJOURNAL OF ASIA BUSINESS STUDIES jPAGE 473
To continue reading
Request your trial