NCAA Basketball: Trust in Leadership and Team Performance
By, Lauren Snow
Snow 2
Kurt T. Dirks performed a study that examined the relationship between trust,
leadership, and team performance of NCAA basketball athletes and their coaches. It is
clear that trust has been defined in multiple ways in literature and by researchers. Dirks
conceptualized trust as an expectation or belief that the team can rely on the leader’s
actions or words and that the leader has good intentions toward the team. Thus, the
purpose of this study is to address the question: does trust in a leader affect team
performance?
Dirks exploration of how trust affects a teams performance aligns with the trait
theory of leadership, especially the big five-personality trait of conscientiousness;
integrity. In Lussier and Achua’s Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development
2013, they emphasize that integrity is the foundation for trustworthiness. They continue
to explain that behavior that is honest and ethical makes a person trustworthy – no lying,
cheating, manipulating or stealing (p.40). Relating back to the study, trust in leadership
is important in that it allows the team to be willing to accept the leader’s activities,
goals, and decisions so the team can work hard to achieve them.
It is known that a leader’s roll on any team, especially an NCAA basketball
team, typically involves a number of activities related to team performance, such as
determining team member roles, distributing rewards, motivating teammates and setting
the groups goals and strategies. However, when individuals on the team feel that they
cannot rely on the leader or that the leader does not have the team’s interests at heart,
team members are unlikely to carry out the roles specified by the leader. This makes it
difficult for any high-class basketball team to work together effectively and perform at
the NCAA level.
Snow 3
Dirks explained that prior research has examined the role of trust in teams
focusing on the proposition that a higher level of trust between team members results in
higher team performance. Although studies have been done, Dirks believed that existing
research only focused on the relationship between trust and team performance that is
‘unidirectional’ – that is, trust affects team performance (p.1005). He thought there was
a more complex relationship between trust and team performance, whereby trust
mediates the relationship between past and future performance. Thus he hypothesized
that trust in leadership has a positive effect on team performance and that trust in
leadership mediates the relationship between past team performance and future team
performance (Dirks, p.1006).
In order to test his hypotheses Dirks used a sample of men’s college basketball
teams, 11 from Division I and 19 Division III, in order to obtain maximum variation in
teams within the NCAA. Between these 30 teams, 355 athletes completed surveys
(p.1005). He noted that college basketball teams were an attractive setting, both
empirically and theoretically for studying the relationship between trust (Independent
Variable) and team performance (Dependent Variable). He noted that empirically, the
setting provided a reliable and valid measure of team performance that is independent of
team members’ perceptions. In addition, each team operates under the same NCAA
guidelines and has the same performance objectives. Theoretically, basketball teams
provide a setting in which trust in the leader and trust in teammates are likely to be
meaningful (Dirks, p.1006).
The measurement strategy Dirks used was intended to maximize internal validity
through three procedures. First, data was collected from different sources and different
Snow 4
methods to remove the potential for inflated statistical relationships. Second, the
procedures attempted to make the timing of data collection appropriate. In other words,
Dirks collected data on trust in the first few weeks of the conference schedule because
the teams had been playing together for at least six weeks which should have allowed a
relatively stable level of trust to form. Lastly, the study included measurers of alternative
predictors (control variables) of team performance representing elements of the coach
(experience, career record) and players (talent, trust, tenure) (p.1006-1007).
Dirks used Baron and Kenny’s 1986 regression procedure for mediation in order
to examine both hypotheses. The regression procedure for mediation is a fundamental
hypothesized chain in which one variable affects a second variable that, in turn, affects a
third variable. The intervening variable, M, is the mediator. It “mediates” the
relationship between a predictor, X, and an outcome (p.1174). Dirks procedure involved
estimating three separate regression equations: a) The mediator is regressed on the
independent variable, b) the dependent variable is regressed on the independent variable,
and c) the dependent variable is regressed on both the independent variable and the
mediator (p.1008).
After a series of tests, the data proved support for Hypothesis 1. After controlling
for several potential determinates of team performance, trust in the coach had a
significant effect on winning percentage (Dirks, p.1008). Other than trust in leadership,
the tests found a significant correlation with team performance that including team
talent, past team performance, preconference performance, coach record (but not coach
experience), and trust in teammates.
Snow 5
This study provides several noteworthy findings. Dirks findings prove that trust
in the leader has an effect on team performance. They validate the idea that trust and
integrity is a fundamental trait for leaders to possess in order to gain respect from others
and achieve success. The findings also suggest that the effects of trust on team
performance are not only important theoretically but also substantial in practical terms.
For example after all the tests were done, Dirks looked back at the two teams who
reported the highest levels of trust in their coach and teammates early on in the season.
The results, one team was ranked as the Number one team in the nation for the latter part
of the season, and the other team ended up playing in the championship game for the
national title. In contrast, the team with the lowest level of trust in its coach and
teammates won approximately 10% of their conference games, and the coach was fired
at the end of the season (p.1009).
Past research on trust has focused on the effects of trust on team performance,
whereas this study suggests that a more complex relationship may exist than what has
previously been theorized. Specifically, the study provides theory and evidence that trust
mediates the relationship between past performance and future performance. In
conclusion, trust in leadership applies to all types of teams – athletic or in managerial
roles – and is particularly important because the leaders decisions determine the success
of the team. In order for the team to succeed, the group must embrace and trust the
leader’s decisions in order to perform well.
Snow 6
References
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in
social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 51, 1173-1182.
Web. 18 Mar. 2014.
Dirks, T. Kurt (2000). Trust in Leadership and Team Performance: Evidence from
NCAA Basketball. Journal of Applied Psychology 85.6, 1004-1012.Web. 18
Mar. 2014.
Lussier, N. Robert & Achua, F. Christopher (2013). Leadership: Theory, Application, &
Skill Development. South-Western Cengage Learning 5, 35-42. 18 Mar. 2014.