The Influence of Star Performers on Coordination and Performance:Does Type of Star Matter?

This study contributes to human capital research by focusing on star performers and a process through which they influence team performance. Star performers are important determinants of team functioning and performance. Using American collegiate basketball teams as a sample, this study examines two distinct measures of star performers and predicts different relationships between star performers, coordination, and performance based on the measure of a star performer. Coordination is examined as a process through which star performers influence unit performance. Evidence of coordination mediating the relationship between star performers and performance is found. Teams may have star performers who are disproportionately productive and valuable (Groysberg & Lee, 2008). While star performers are important to the performance of teams, it is also important for teams to function effectively in order to perform at a high level (e.g., Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998). Strategic human resource management frameworks indicate the relationship between human capital and performance works through behaviors that are important to the functioning of a team (e.g., Delery & Shaw, 2001; Wright & McMahan, 1992; Wright et al., 1994; Wright & Snell, 1991). Therefore, it is important to examine processes through which star performers influence the performance of teams. This study makes contributions to human capital research by assessing star performers in two different manners to examine their differential effects on team behaviors and performance. Additionally, this study examines coordination as process through which star performers influence the performance of teams. Star performers are strategically important, (Groysberg et al. 2008) therefore it is important to consider the influence that star performers have on team processes and performance. Research indicates that stars may have positive or negative influences on teams (e.g., Groysberg, Nanda, & Nohira, 2004). Stars that work well with fellow team members can enhance the functioning of the team (Groysberg & Lee, 2008). Stars may also demonstrate dominance in a team which would hamper team functioning (e.g., Driskell, Goodwin, Salas, & O’Shea, 2006; Groysberg et al., 2004). In this study, star performers are assessed in two distinct manners and their differential influences on team coordination and performance are examined. This study also extends human capital research by examining coordination as a process through which star performers influence team performance. This relationship is important to examine because people must use their human capital to create behaviors that lead to performance (Wright et al., 1994). Star performers are important to consider as they can influence the overall behaviors and performance of teams. These relationships are tested with a unique sample of NCAA men’s basketball teams. 1 School of Management, Texas Woman’s University, Denton, TX 76204, USA. 2 Review of Contemporary Business Research, Vol. 5(2), December 2016 Star Performers and Competitive Advantage According to the resource-based view of the firm, resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and nonsubstitutable create a competitive advantage for an organization (Barney, 1991). Following the resource-based view of the firm, differences in human capital, including the star performers of units create performance differences across units (e.g., Groysberg & Lee, 2008; Hitt, Bierman, Shimizu, & Kochar, 2001). Therefore, teams with star performers should outperform units without star performers (Groysberg & Lee, 2008). While it is important for teams to have star performers, it also important for these stars performers to exhibit the necessary behaviors for the unit to be successful (Delery & Shaw, 2001; Wright et al., 1994; Wright & Snell, 1991). Therefore, teams must select individuals that have the human capital necessary to exhibit the required behaviors (Wright et al., 1994). According to Wright et al. (1994), the potential of human capital is realized only to the extent that the possessors of the human capital choose to allow the unit to benefit from the human capital through their behaviors. The systems perspective of strategic human resource management proposes that the influence of people on performance acts as an input, throughput, out model (Wright and Snell, 1991). In this type of system it is proposed that characteristics of human resources (i.e., people) are the input and the human resources engage in role behaviors (throughput) that result in performance outcomes (output) (Wright & Snell, 1991). Therefore, it is indicated that people behaviors should mediate the relationship between characteristics of the workforce and performance (McMahan, Virick, & Wright, 1999; Wright & McMahan, 1992). As mentioned previously, this study examines coordination, which is defined as behavior that is intended to integrate and align the actions, knowledge, and objectives of interdependent members to achieve common goals (e.g., Brannick, Price, Prince, & Salas, 1995; Rico, Sanchez-Manzanares, Gil, & Gibson, 2008). Therefore, teams with star performers that enhance the coordination of other members of the team and increase team performance may develop a competitive advantage over other teams. Star Performers, Coordination, and Performance Today, organizations are more and more concerned with attracting and retaining individuals who are disproportionately productive and valuable (e.g., Groysberg & Lee, 2008; Groysberg et al., 2008). These star performers are important to organizations as they can have a large impact on the performance of organizations (Maister, 1993). According to Groysberg and colleagues (2008), two factors distinguish star performers from average performers. First, star performers are disproportionately more productive (Groysberg et al., 2008), making them more valuable to organizations (Groysberg & Lee, 2008). For example, star researchers have been found to be many times more productive than their colleagues (Ernst, Leptein, & Vitt, 2000; Narin & Breitzman, 1995). The ability and experience of star performers are assets that cannot be compensated for by less stellar performers or nonhuman assets (Kelley & Caplan, 1993; Narin, 1993). Second, star performers are more visible than average performers (e.g., Groysberg & Lee, 2008; Groysberg et al., 2008). That is, they receive more attention from competitors, clients, and the media. Similar to any industry, NCAA men’s basketball has star performers. One way to assess a star performer in NCAA men’s basketball is through the selection to an All American team. Each year, sportswriters vote on players to be selected to the Associated Press All American Team. Each year, 15 players are selected as All Americans. As it is rare to be selected as an All American, these players represent the most talented players. A basketball team with a highly talented All American player will most likely have an advantage over other teams. However, as playing basketball is a highly interdependent task, it is important for the All American player to work with teammates and coordinate their activities together in order to produce higher team performance. One item that may distinguish star performers is the people they work with (Groysberg et al., 2004). “Teammates often help stars by counseling them, coaching them, and serving as role models” (Groysberg et al., 2004 p. 6). If star performers are able to integrate and coordinate their activities with team members, the team most likely will perform at a higher level (Groysberg & Lee, 2008). This concept is similar with NCAA men’s basketball teams, a star player must work with his teammates in order for the team and most likely himself to perform at a higher level. Christopher M. Harris 3 As mentioned previously, players with a higher level of human capital in playing basketball will understand the need for players on the team to coordinate their activities in order for the team to perform at a higher level. A team with an All American has a player with a superior level of basketball human capital. Therefore, an All American player may facilitate the coordination of teammates in order for the team to perform at a high level. As a specific example, John Wall and DeMarcus Cousins from the University of Kentucky were each selected as All Americans for the 2009-2010 NCAA Division One Men’s Basketball season. The following quotes from them after being selected as All Americans demonstrate how they worked with their teammates to help the team perform at a high level. John Wall stated, “We had to learn a lot as freshmen and we were able to help our teammates along the way. This means a lot to both of us." Additionally, DeMarcus Cousins said, "This means a lot because all we really did was try to come in and help our teammates" (Associated Press, 2010). These quotes indicate that All American players can work to coordinate the activities of their teammates in order for the team to perform at a high level. Hypothesis 1: The positive relationship between a star player assessed as a team having an All American player and team performance is mediated by coordination. Another way to asses a star basketball player is via the percentage of a team’s points scored by the team’s highest scorer. In this situation, the highest scorer on the team may be viewed as the star player on the team. This is much different from an All American player, who is selected from all of the players in NCAA Division One men’s basketball. The player who scores the largest percentage of a team’s points may only indicate that the player is a star on his team. As basketball is a highly interdependent task, it is important for players to work together and coordinate their activities for the team to perform at a high level. If one player, is scoring a large percentage of a team’s points it may indicate that the team is not working well together