The role of leadership in facilitating learning efforts is fundamental within organizations. Leaders play a central role in encouraging learning and offer the required guidance for organizations to integrate and sustain learning processes (Carmeli, & Sheaffer, 2008; Edmondson, 2003; Song, Kolb, Lee, & Kim, 2012). More specific, leadership behaviors aimed to encourage learning (i.e., intellectual stimulation) serve as a resource to promote a learning environment characterized by reflection, challenging ideas, and new ways of thinking and action (Edmondson, 1999, 2002, 2003). Team learning is a process through which team members seek to acquire, share, refine, or combine relevant knowledge interacting with one another, as well as to reflect upon feedback and make changes to adapt and improve (Edmondson, 1999).

Leaders promotes team learning through diverse sets of behaviors such as questioning, providing information and exchanging solutions, stimulating curiosity, encouraging voice, promoting a culture for learning, helping to interpret situations in new ways, modeling new ways of thinking and action, providing coaching, being open to change, and developing mechanisms for learning transfer (Carmeli & Scheaffer, 2008; Edmondson, 1999, 2003; Sarin & McDermott, 2003). From a unified leadership approach, transformational leadership approach is perhaps the closest to team and organizational learning (Song et al., 2012).

Transformational leaders act as a social resource that inspires and motivates followers through the transformation of their attitudes, beliefs, and values, leading to performance and well-being improvements (Bass, 1985; Nielsen & Munir, 2009; Rafferty & Griffin, 2004). Transformational leadership is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct. Bass’ (1985) Transformational Leadership Theory identified the following dimensions: Charisma or Idealized influence; Inspirational motivation; Intellectual stimulation; and Individualized consideration. Raferty and Griffin (2004) re-examine the theoretical model presented by Bass (1985) and suggested five sub dimensions of transformational leadership: (1) Vision, which refers to the expression of an idealized picture of the future based around value; (2); Inspirational communication, which refers to the expression of positive and encouraging messages about the organization and statements that build motivation and confidence; (3); Supportive leadership, which refers to leaders expressions of concern for followers and considering their individual needs; (4) Intellectual stimulation, through which leaders’ enhance employees’ interest in, and awareness of problems, and increasing their ability to think about problems in new ways; and (5) Personal recognition, which refers to the provision of recognition and acknowledgement for goal achievement.

Even though extensive research has been conducted linking this person-focused leadership behaviors to team effectiveness, productivity, and positive affective states (Bono et al., 2007; Burke et al., 2006), few empirical studies have addressed the relationship between transformational leadership and team learning. Even more, most of the research on transformational leadership is conducted using a unique factor of transformational leadership. Nonetheless, as suggested by previous research, the study of particular leadership behaviors instead of focusing on multidimensional aspects of leadership is still needed (Burke et al., 2006; Nielsen & Munir, 2009). The study of one particular dimension of leadership allows for the development of specific organizational interventions to promote leaders’ behaviors that improve specific employee and team well-being states, development of capabilities, and therefore, organizational outcomes (Nielsen & Munir, 2009).

Nielsen and Munir (2009), for example, suggested that “through intellectual stimulation leaders encourage followers to make their own decisions and be creative and innovative in their work, and as such they may feel more challenged and thereby also more aroused” (p. 315). According to Rafferty and Griffin (2004) intellectual stimulation is perhaps the most underdeveloped component of transformational leadership; nonetheless, it encompasses a more focused and internally consistent set of behaviors. Intellectual stimulation provide a social resource through which team members are challenged and encouraged to think creatively, experiment, participate, and solve problems in their daily work (Rafferty & Griffin, 2004; Zhou, Hirst, & Shipton, 2012).

When leaders stimulate employees intellectually, team members are able to increase their awareness to problems, which allows them new ways of looking at old problems (Rafferty & Griffin, 2004). This suggests a meaningful relationship between leadership behaviors and perceptions of a learning-supporting context (Hetland et al., 2011). Through intellectual stimulation leaders can create an environment for questioning assumptions, differing perspectives, encouraging new ways of thinking, and suggesting new ways of seeing problems.

At the team level, Morgeson et al. (2010) suggest that one important function of leaders concerns challenging the team, which involves “challenging teams with regard to their task performance and confronting the team assumptions, methods, and processes in an effort to find the best ways of accomplishing the team’s work” (p. 21-22). This leadership function is reflected in the intellectual stimulation sub-dimension of transformational leadership; however, traditionally this sub-dimension has been focused at the individual level, representing a limitation for the team level of analysis. In our study, we overcome this limitation rewording and adapting intellectual stimulation measure to focus at the team level using a referent shift consensus composition (Chan, 1998).

Leaders have an important influence over the affective well-being of their followers (Bono et al., 2007; Kelly & Barsade, 2001). Traditional influential theories of leadership, such as transformational leadership, include an emotional component. Leaders help to create shared emotional experiences that bond group members together and infuse performance. For example, Hernández-Baeza et al. (2009) found that leadership charisma has a significant influence in fostering positive team climate and preventing negative affective climate.

In our study, we center the attention on intellectual stimulation as a leader behavior that potentially influences learning activities and processes in teams. When leaders encourage learning behaviors through intellectual stimulation, they can foster emotional contexts as well, which help to better functioning and persevering under adverse circumstances (e.g., Fredrickson, 2003). Rafferty & Griffin (2004) found an unexpected relation between intellectual stimulation of leaders and affective commitment. They suggest that even though intellectual stimulation may provide employees with more role ambiguity and conflict, it is also a way through which leaders express value to team member’s contribution. This sense of value may elicit affective states in employees encouraging them to actively engage in group processes and outcomes (Kelly & Barsade, 2001).

Research shows that positive affect precedes desirable individual and team outcomes (Kelly & Barsade, 2001). Team affect, as a shared pattern of affective states of group members (Kelly & Barsade, 2001), has gained considerable attention since it promotes and derives valuable team dynamics and outcomes such as: coordination, cooperation, performance (Salanova, Llorens, & Schaufeli, 2011), and organizational learning (Scherer & Tran, 2001; Vince, 2002).

In the workplace, positive affect may elicit better relationships among team members, as well as broaden attention to environmental context, thoughts, and actions, encouraging novel ideas and deeds (Fredrickson, 2001; Vacharkulksemsuk & Fredrickson, 2013). Thus, emotional climate influences team and organization dynamics such as idea-generation, creativity, adaptability to change, and facilitation or inhibition of learning processes (Scherer & Tran, 2001). This expands the perspective in the study of team learning, which essentially focuses on aspects such as efficacy beliefs, trust, and psychological safety (Edmonson, 1999; Edmondson, Dillon, & Roloff, 2007; Van der Vegt & Bunderson, 2005; Van den Bossche, Gijselaers, Segers, & Kirschner, 2006).

Collective positive affect can transform organizations making its members more flexible, empathetic, and creative, contributing to organizational effectiveness and adaptation (Fredrickson, 2003). Theoretically, the Broaden-and-Build Theory (Frederickson, 2001) explains how positivity relates to well-being and the development of resources which help for adaptability and performance. Additionally, positive emotions broaden awareness as well as thinking and action repertoires. On the other hand, positive emotions contribute to build enduring cognitive, physical, social, and relational resources (Salanova et al., 2011; Vacharkulsemsuk & Fredrickson, 2013). In this sense, positive affective states enlarge capacities to generate new ideas, increase their alternatives for action, improve member connectivity, and contribute to the overall well-being (Sekerka & Fredrickson, 2008; Vacharkulsemsuk & Fredrickson, 2013).

Previous research evidences the relationship of affective states (positive and negative) on several work outcomes. For example, Tsai, Chen, and Cheng (2009) found that leadership indirectly influences performance and helping behaviors through positive moods. These results contribute to the scarce literature regarding the mediating role of positive affective states between leadership and performance outcomes. Positive affect has a great potential to foster strong social resources at work, but still more understanding is needed on what outcomes positive affect yields at the team level (Vacharkulsemsuk & Fredrickson, 2013).

The current study aims to explore the role of intellectual stimulation and positive affect on team learning, giving particular attention to the role of positive affect between intellectual stimulation of the leader and team learning. Leaders can promote team learning through intellectual stimulation and these intellectual challenging behaviors instill a positive affective context within teams. When intellectually stimulated, team members may feel that leaders are concerned with their growth and development, as well as interested in their contributions to the team, infusing positive affect among team members (Rafferty & Griffin, 2004). This collective positive affect may broaden thinking and build cognitive, social, and relational resources, especially stronger ties among team members, fostering sharing of ideas, reflecting and questioning assumptions (Vacharkulksemsuk & Fredrickson, 2013). In this sense, leaders intellectually stimulate or challenge their teams to contribute to their learning process. These leadership behaviors may also relate significantly to team positive affect, which also contributes to explain why teams engage in team learning.

This study will contribute to the current literature examining how leaders and positive affect at the team level promotes learning. Moreover, this exploration will provide evidence of the role of positive affect on the relationship between leadership intellectual stimulation and team learning, going a step further from the study of mediating variables centered only on interpersonal or cognitive states (e.g., efficacy, psychological safety, collaboration) (Edmondson, 1999; Edmondson et al., 2007; Van der Vegt & Bunderson, 2005; Van den Bossche et al., 2006). We propose the following hypotheses:

H₁: Leadership intellectual stimulation will be positively related to team learning and team positive affect.

H₂: Team positive affect will mediate the relationship between leadership intellectual stimulation and team learning.

The aim of this study was to examine how team positive affect mediates leadership intellectual stimulation and team learning. As we discussed, several authors suggest the importance of evaluating the influence of specific leadership behavior on team and organizational processes (e.g., Burke et al., 2006; Nielsen & Munir, 2009). Since team learning becomes increasingly critical as organizational changes and complexity intensifies (Edmondson, 1999), specific leadership behavior that leverage team learning activities seems to be important to investigate. Moreover, adding to the existence evidence, this research examines the role of team positive affect in the relationship between leadership intellectual stimulation and team learning. In addition, it contributes to enhance the understanding of leadership behavior to promote healthy teams (Salanova et al., 2012). The results show that intellectual stimulation has a positive and significant relationship on team learning when tested at the collective level. This coincides with past research, which also suggests that leaders can promote a learning environment encouraging reflection and new ways of thinking and action (Edmondson, 1999, 2002, 2003). Leaders, as a social resource, can motivate and empower teams to improve their collective way to think and act.

Intellectual stimulation, as a leadership behavior, encompasses a series of leadership activities that are closely related to team learning, since these leadership actions are aimed to challenge and encourage team members to reflect, think, and act differently and in creative new ways. Thus, it is reasonable to understand why intellectual stimulation contributes significantly to the promotion of team learning. However, it is worth noting that leaders may have a direct influence in teams’ positive affect, which contributes to team learning as well. Leader behaviors that encourage learning promote both team learning and an affective climate, which in turn, increments team learning. Results of the mediation analysis showed that team positive affect relates significantly with intellectual stimulation and team learning, and that positive affect partially mediates the relationship. This provides evidence for the potential of team positive affect for team learning considering the capacity of positive affective states to broaden thinking and action repertoires. These results provide intriguing avenues for future understanding of how positive affect may have an influence on team learning through the development of other social or personal resources.

Also, intellectual stimulation has a significant effect on team positive affect. These results contribute to the existing literature on the link between leadership and team positive affective states but considering one specific set of leader behaviors. Additionally, it contributes to generate new questions regarding the mediating role of team positive affect between intellectual stimulation of the leader and other variables such as innovative and creative behavior/performance, helping behaviors (Tsai et al., 2009), or cooperation (Sekerka & Fredrickson, 2008). As suggested by Sekerka and Fredrickson (2008) positive affective climate is a key resource to energize and sustain transformation; thus, by creating experiences that foster collective positive emotional climates, practitioners could stimulate cooperation in route to change. However, change does not come alone; it is inherently linked to learning new ways of thought and behavior (Edmondson, 2002). In this line, it might be possible that intellectual stimulation fosters collective positive affective environment, which in turns influences some team characteristics or process such as cohesion, coordination, or even psychological safety, which finally drives higher team learning. Future research should be conducted in this area.

Team positive affect also contributes to create a context in which team members can feel free to exchange ideas, knowledge, insights, reflect and criticize current assumptions, reflect upon feedback, and generate new ways of thinking and action. In accordance, team positive affect influences team and organizational dynamics such as idea-generation, creativity, adaptability to change, and facilitation or inhibition of learning processes (Scherer & Tran, 2001). Positivity broadens the scope of attention and cognition and lead to a widened array of thought and actions. This result provides evidence of the potential of team positive affect to foster team learning, which in turn potentiates more effective groups.

Although the focus of the present study was on a specific leadership dimension, namely intellectual stimulation, it is possible that other transformational leadership behaviors also significantly relate to the current study outcomes of team positive affect and team learning. Bono et al. (2007) provide compelling evidence that leadership behaviors have an influence on employees’ optimism and enthusiasm. Transformational leadership as a whole construct has been related to team affective states, satisfaction, and affective commitment (Chi, Chung, & Tsai, 2011; Chi & Huang, 2014; Stinglhamber, Marique, Caesens, Hanin, & De Zanet, 2015; To, Tse, & Ashkanasy, 2015), and positive affect has been suggested as a relevant boundary condition for the influence of transformational leadership on effectiveness and behaviors (Gilmore, Hu, Wei, Tetrick, & Zaccaro, 2012). Hernandez-Baeza et al. (2009), for example, found that transformational leadership (i.e., charisma) infuse positive affect in their followers. In a meta-analytical study conducted by Dumdum, Lowe, and Avolio (2002), they found that transformational leadership consistently related to job satisfaction and this relationship was stronger than the correlation found with effectiveness outcomes. Moreover, charisma and intellectual stimulation presented the higher correlations with satisfaction. Hobman et al. (2011) reported that intellectual stimulation of the leader had a significant positive relationship with satisfaction and performance mediated by members’ identification with the leader. Additionally, transformational leadership as a whole and its sub-dimension has been related to affective commitment (Rafferty & Griffin, 2004; Stinglhamber et al., 2015). In a study conducted by Rafferty and Griffin (2004), although they initially hypothesized a relationship between vision and affective commitment, results showed that only intellectual stimulation and inspirational communication were statistically related to this outcome. Although this study was conducted at the individual level, it highlights the complex and multifactorial antecedents for the development of team affectivity and its link to leadership behaviors (Collins et al., 2013).

Although research related to the influence of each transformational leadership sub-dimension on team learning is scarcer, it is well documented how leaders help to create a team environment in which members openly engage in learning processes and activities (Edmondson, 1999). Leaders who articulate a vision and inspire followers, attend followers needs and concerns, and behave in admirable ways provide a context with greater cohesion, trust, and coordination (García-Guiu, Moya, Molero, & Moriano, 2016; Zhang, Cao, & Tjosvold, 2011) which undoubtedly leads to team learning. Towler, Arman, Quesnell, and Hoffman (2014), from a training perspective, found that trainers who demonstrated behaviors such as intellectual stimulation, visionary content, and individual attention influenced positive affect, which translates in skill acquisition and transfer of knowledge. In sum, and bearing on team literature, there are number of affective and non-affective factors (i.e., task, coordination, cohesion, group size, interactions between group members) that influence team processes (Collins et al., 2013; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003; Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006); transformational leadership (i.e., intellectual stimulation in particular) and positive affect, are just one of these possible explanations.

This study provides evidence of the strong influence that leadership intellectual stimulation have on team learning and team positive affect, as well as the potential of positive affect to stimulate team learning. Positive affect serves as a partial mediator between leadership intellectual stimulation and team learning, contributing to explain significant additional variance. In an economy and organizational context that requires constant changes, leaders that encourage continuous learning within their team contribute to both the way the team learns and the way the team feels. This suggests the importance of developing leaders’ behaviors that encourage learning and team positive affect contexts which contributes to team learning and hence to performance.