CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 99Team Dynamics and PerformanceEmployee Performance and LeadershipLeadership and Management in Organizations

Virtual Team Leader Communication: Employee Perception and Organizational Reality

Open access
Newman, Sean A., Ford, Robert C., Marshall, Greg W.·2020·International Journal of Business Communication
DOI 10.1177/2329488419829895
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Based on a study of leader communication effectiveness conducted in a large human resource outsourcing firm, this article reports how virtual team members’ perceptions of their leaders’ effective use of communication tools and techniques affect team performance outcomes. The study also investigates the role that trust plays in moderating the relationship between virtual team members’ perceptions of their leaders’ effective use of communication and team performance. Analysis of 458 responses from 68 teams found a positive relationship between virtual team members’ perceptions of leaders’ effective use of communications and team members’ perception of their team’s performance. The study also found that trust strengthens the relationship between perceived leader communication effectiveness and team performance results. Last, the study also revealed serious organizational alignment issues between what team members perceived to be effective leader communication, their perception of team performance outcomes, and the organizations performance measured by a balanced scorecard.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2329488419829895

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • High trust in a collaboration raises how positively the team views its own performance.

    “That being said, trust has an affect on the perception of performance such that when trust is high in a collaboration, the team's perception of its performance is higher [182].”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [182]

    The Results section says that trust strengthens the relationship between perceived leader communication effectiveness and perceived team performance. The claim broadens this conditional finding about trust in a leader to trust in a collaboration generally; the paper does not establish that broader relationship. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Team members' perceptions of their leaders' use of communication tools and techniques can affect their perceptions of overall team performance.

    “In addition to this, team members' perceptions of their leaders' use of communication tools and techniques can impact their perceptions of overall team performance [182]).”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [182]

  • Positive perceptions of leadership communication lead to positive perceptions of performance.

    “In particular, positive perceptions of leadership communication results in positive perceptions of performance [182].”

    From Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review (2020) · cites this paper as [182]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]8. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals
  2. [27]27. Hayes, N. (2002). Managing teams: A strategy for success (2nd ed.). London, England: Thomson Learning. Google Scholar
  3. [72]72. Powell, A., Piccoli, G., Ives, B. (2004). Virtual teams: A review of current literature and directions for future research. ACM Sigmis Database, 35, 6-36.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Newman, S. A., Ford, R. C., & Marshall, G. W.
Affiliations
Rollins College (US)
Corresponding author
Newman, Sean A.
ORCID
Newman, Sean A.
Venue
International Journal of Business Communication
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2019-02-14
Volume
57
Issue
4
Pages
452-473
ISSN
  • 2329-4884 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-4892
DOI
10.1177/2329488419829895
OpenAlex
W2913913681
Semantic Scholar
04d39891903769fbbd8437e43d2abc6dd0149320
Cited by
99
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 4
FWCI
11.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • International Journal of Business Communication (publishedVersion)
  • Aston Publications Explorer (Aston University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employee Performance and Leadership
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Leadership and Management in Organizations
Keywords
virtual teams, leadership communication, communication effectiveness, employee perceptions, team performance, trust, moderating effect, human resource outsourcing, organizational alignment, balanced scorecard, communication tools

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review