Despite extensive research on the relationship between social exchange and employee innovation in teams, a comprehensive and quantitative synthesis of research findings is necessary to enhance and expand our understanding. A meta-analysis allows for the comparison of different social exchange relationships and their effects on employee innovation, as well as an investigation into the underlying mechanisms of innovation realization. The results showed that compared to Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), Team-Member Exchange (TMX) demonstrated the stronger relationship with employee innovation. Moreover, cognition and motivation mediated the relationship between TMX and innovation, while affect, cognition and motivation mediated the relationship between LMX and innovation. This paper synthesized a body of critical and thriving literature, thereby endeavoring to furnish evidence that can provide information for theoretical advancements, research methodologies, and updated policy recommendations concerning social exchange relationships for individual innovation.

Managerial networks represent a crucial factor affecting managers’ exploitation and exploration. However, the theoretical mechanism linking managerial networks to managers’ exploitation and exploration remains poorly understood. Thus, we focus on the interplay of managers’ formal and informal networks and develop a moderated mediation model to examine the relationship between managerial networks and managers’ exploitation and exploration. An analysis of 269 managers working in 73 Chinese enterprises reveals that the consistency of managers’ formal and informal network has a positive indirect relationship with managers’ exploitation and exploration via knowledge creation. Environmental dynamism moderates the strength of this mediated relationship such that the mediated effects are weaker under conditions of high environmental dynamism and stronger under conditions of low environmental dynamism. By exploring this theoretical mechanism, this study contributes to the literature concerning exploitation and exploration at the managerial level and systematically analyzes managers’ relationship networks and behaviours based on social information processing theory.

In the era of decentralization, shared leadership has garnered significant acclaim. However, when multiple leaders coexist within a team, the phenomenon akin to “too many cooks spoil the broth” will occur. Given the lack of research regarding the darker aspects of shared leadership, this study investigates the contingency mechanisms of shared leadership damaging team performance. Based on team power conflict theory, we predict that in high leadership distribution disparity or team external environment complexity, shared leadership will induce factionalism within the team member exchange network (TMX) and further impair team performance. In a sample of 90 knowledge-based teams in China, we find that the TMX network EI index partially mediates the relationship between shared leadership and team performance. The leadership distribution disparity and environment complexity moderate the mediating effect of the TMX network EI index. This study contributes to a deeper understanding of why and when shared leadership impairs team performance and offers insights into alleviating the adverse effects of shared leadership.

The purpose of this paper is to elucidate how the advice-giving affects innovative capability by involving knowledge exchange and combination as a mediator and contextual ambidexterity as an important contingency. Based on a survey of 96 Chinese teams, a set of hypotheses was tested using regression analyzes. The findings showed that contextual ambidexterity moderates the indirect effect of advice-giving on innovative capability through knowledge exchange and combination. When contextual ambidexterity is high, workers engage in more knowledge exchange and combination for the team at intermediate levels of advice-giving, the indirect effect of advice-giving at low levels and at high levels exist. When contextual ambidexterity is low, there is no indirect effect of advice-giving at any level. Managers should be aware of the inverted U-shaped relationship between advice-giving and innovative capability and strengthen the construction of contextual ambidexterity. This paper makes up for the theoretical gap between advice-giving and innovative capability. Furthermore, it provides a theoretical reference for practitioners to improve their innovative capability.