Team Success: A Mixed Methods Approach to Evaluating Virtual Team Leadership Behaviors
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I found the paper interesting and generally well written. The paper is well structured, theoretical insights are later used to summarize the empirical results. Nevertheless, I have some remarks:
1) Title is not informative and inaccurate. First, you are investigating virtual teams; second, “Team Effectiveness” is not a synonym of “Team Success”, third - what is an aim of manuscript. The title and the aim should be inline.
2) The theoretical part must 1) define the concepts very clearly. the authors use the different concepts as synonyms, but this is not accurate. For instance, Effectiveness and Success (later Team Performance); in H1 is written Short-Term Virtual Teams, in other hypotheses -Team (?).
3) 2.1. Sample and research methodology. I would suggest deleting Research methodology. Only research sample and analysis of quantitative data are presented here.
4) Discussion. I missed the discussion on the research results. To what extent they are inline to the results of other scholars' research? The authors are advised to develop a clear link between literature and empirical study to show how this study fits in within the existing literature. Later, identify the contribution of your study and explain why that contribution is important for advancing the field.
5) Conclusions. What are limitations of the study?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to review the paper "Team Effectiveness: A Mixed Methods Approach to Understanding Team Success" which investigates the dynamics of short-term, project-based virtual teams and their impact on team effectiveness. I find this paper to be well-written, and the mixed-methods approach used is appropriate for investigating the research question. The study's findings are significant as they provide insight into the antecedents of team effectiveness in project-based virtual teams. The results suggest that instrumental support is essential for team effectiveness, which can be useful for organizations and team leaders who want to improve team performance in virtual settings. The study's limitations are adequately discussed, and future research is suggested.
I very rarely recommend the publication of a paper without suggesting some improvements, however, I read the paper several times and I did not find any important flaws. I hope that this paper will be the starting point for the research of this phenomenon in a more natural environment and based on real employees and tasks. Overall, I recommend this paper for publication.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the efforts in improving the paper. However, I would like to draw attention to the comments expressed earlier and new comments raised by authors' corrections.
1. what is an aim of manuscript? Please provide the aim in Abstract and Introduction. The title and the aim should be inline.
2. I would suggest separating the introduction and literature review. I think that the justification of the need and relevance of the scientific research would allow a clearer understanding of the problem and the aim or the manuscript.
3. I would strongly recommend considering again what the research's key words are. Leadership behaviors and leadership styles are not synonyms. Please carefully reconsider the main concepts of the study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
