TABLE 6.

Study 1: Path analytic results–direct, indirect, and total effects of EOR Approaches on team performance (via team collective efficacy) at low and high levels of team cohesion (95% confidence interval)–Hypothesis 4.

					Direct effects		Indirect effects		Total effects
	PMX		PYM		(PYX)		(PYM × PMX)		(PYX + PYMPMX)
a–Underinvestment
Simple paths for low team cohesion	–0.05	0.43	−0.04	0.32	–0.09	0.34	−0.01	0.12	−0.06	0.39
Simple paths for high team cohesion	–0.05	0.43	0.32	0.77	–0.09	0.34	−0.02	0.25	−0.01	0.49
b–Overinvestment
Simple paths for low team cohesion	0.04	0.46	−0.04	0.32	–0.28	0.13	−0.00	0.13	−0.24	0.18
Simple paths for high team cohesion	0.04	0.46	0.32	0.77	–0.28	0.13	0.03	0.29	−0.17	0.31
c–Mutual investment
Simple paths for low team cohesion	0.39	0.71	−0.04	0.32	–0.08	0.28	−0.02	0.19	0.01	0.37
Simple paths for high team cohesion	0.39	0.71	0.32	0.77	–0.08	0.28	0.16	0.47	0.20	0.60

N = 231; Confidence intervals in bold are significantly different across team cohesion levels. The base category is the quasi-spot contract approach. P_MX, path from X (underinvestment in a, overinvestment in b, mutual investment in c) to M (team collective efficacy); P_YM, path from M to Y (team performance); P_YX, path from X to Y.