Descriptive data formal leadership roles
When participants were answering questions relating to leadership roles, they had to carefully consider their response. Firstly, participants were required to determine the relevance of the current leadership role. Subsequently, they had to assess whether the role was being fulfilled by formal leader/team members or not. Finally, if the role was deemed fulfilled, participants were asked to rate the quality of the leadership on a scale from 0 to 10. This resulted in three possible answering options for participants, with an example here for the peer leaders):
- This role is not relevant in the context of my team.
- This role is relevant, but is not shown by team members.
- One or more team members fulfill this role, and I rate the quality of their leadership.
To facilitate participant responses, we employed a multiple-choice system. An example of how this appeared on the Qualtrics platform is provided in the image below:
Relevance of formal leadership roles
In a similar manner to the peer leadership roles, the subsequent graphs depict the questionnaire responses, offering visual representations of the frequency of participants indicating that a leadership role was not relevant, relevant but not fulfilled by the formal leader, or relevant and fulfilled. The initial bar graph presents the overall results, while the subsequent four bar graphs represent the outcomes for each specific type of team, namely faculty/departmental/campus boards, POC-teams, research teams, and ATP-teams.
The external leader
The social leader
The conflict-resolution leader
The participative leader
The adaptive leader
The directive leader
The self-critical leader
The well-being leader
The team development leader
The task leader
The motivational leader
The empowering leader
The self-developing leader
The psychological safety leader
The team-oriented leader
The exemplary leader
Perceived quality of formal leadership roles
The subsequent graphs illustrate the average perceived quality of formal leadership roles. Error bars are incorporated to represent the standard deviations. These averages ranged from 5.8 to 6.9, measured on a scale from 0 to 10.
The following graphs depict the average perceived quality of formal leadership roles for faculty/departmental/campus boards, POC-teams, research teams, and ATP-teams. Error bars are incorporated to represent the standard deviations.
Relation between formal leadership roles
This table represents the correlations between the different formal leadership roles. These findings show a moderate to high interconnectivity between formal leadership roles (with most correlations falling between .50 and .80).
Latent profile analysis
Next, we performed latent profile analyses using M-plus, in order to identify underlying latent profiles or distinct patterns of leadership behaviour. By conducting latent profile analyses, we aimed to identify potential distinct combinations or configurations of leadership roles that tend to co-occur together.
