The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dynamic Delegation: Shared, Hierarchical, and Deindividualized Leadership in Extreme Action Teams
Open accessAbstract
This paper examines the leadership of extreme action teams—teams whose highly skilled members cooperate to perform urgent, unpredictable, interdependent, and highly consequential tasks while simultaneously coping with frequent changes in team composition and training their teams' novice members. Our qualitative investigation of the leadership of extreme action medical teams in an emergency trauma center revealed a hierarchical, deindividualized system of shared leadership. At the heart of this system is dynamic delegation: senior leaders' rapid and repeated delegation of the active leadership role to and withdrawal of the active leadership role from more junior leaders of the team. Our findings suggest that dynamic delegation enhances extreme action teams' ability to perform reliably while also building their novice team members' skills. We highlight the contingencies that guide senior leaders' delegation and withdrawal of the active leadership role, as well as the values and structures that motivate and enable the shared, ongoing practice of dynamic delegation. Further, we suggest that extreme action teams and other “improvisational” organizational units may achieve swift coordination and reliable performance by melding hierarchical and bureaucratic role-based structures with flexibility-enhancing processes. The insights emerging from our findings at once extend and challenge prior leadership theory and research, paving the way for further theory development and research on team leadership in dynamic settings.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667087 · Cited by 2,433 · cited 1×
“As is common in grounded theory development (e.g., Ely and Thomas, 2001; Miner, Bassoff, and Moorman, 2001), we first each independently reviewed the Phase 1 and Phase 2 data sets, identifying key themes in the data.”
MethodDisrupted Routines: Team Learning and New Technology Implementation in Hospitals
Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3094828 · Cited by 1,729
The Forgotten Ones? The Validity of Consideration and Initiating Structure in Leadership Research.
Judge, T. A., Piccolo, R. F., & Ilies, R. (2004) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.36 · Cited by 1,265
DEVELOPMENT OF A LEADER-MEMBER EXCHANGE: A LONGITUDINAL TEST.
BAUER, T. N., & GREEN, S. G. (1996) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/257068 · Cited by 944
Fiedler, F. E. (1971) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0031454 · Cited by 343
Cited by
Organizational Response to Adversity: Fusing Crisis Management and Resilience Research Streams
Williams, T. A., Gruber, D. A., Sutcliffe, K. M., Shepherd, D. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2017) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2015.0134 · Cited by 1,945
Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic equilibrium Model of Organizing
Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0223 · Cited by 1,631
Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 · Cited by 1,426
Teamwork and patient safety in dynamic domains of healthcare: A review of the literature
MANSER, T. (2009) · Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1399-6576.2008.01717.x · Cited by 1,322
Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422 · Cited by 1,385
Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes
Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, D. S., & Karam, E. P. (2010) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206309347376 · Cited by 1,141
10 Coordination in Organizations: An Integrative Perspective
Okhuysen, G. A., & Bechky, B. A. (2009) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520903047533 · Cited by 998
Owens, B. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2012) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0441 · Cited by 778
A meta-analysis of shared leadership and team effectiveness
Wang, D., Waldman, D. A., & Zhang, Z. (2014) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0034531 · Cited by 731
Baird, A., & Maruping, L. M. (2021) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2021/15882 · Cited by 512
Mindfulness in organizations: a cross-level review
Sutcliffe, K. M., Vogus, T. J., & Dane, E. (2016) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062531 · Cited by 428
Shared Leadership and Team Creativity: A Social Network Analysis in Engineering Design Teams
Wu, Q., & Cormican, K. (2016) · Journal of technology management & innovation · doi:10.4067/s0718-27242016000200001 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Klein, K. J., Ziegert, J. C., Knight, A. P., & Xiao, Y.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-12
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 590-621
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W1604050394
- Cited by
- 755
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 14.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
