Elien Neimeijer

105 Figure 3. Structural equation model of the relation between work climate, positive team functioning and group climate. Multilevel analyses Because Positive and Negative team functioning were strongly correlated ( r = -.72), we combined these scores into a mean score of Team Functioning for use in further analyses. A series of hierarchical linear models was conducted to examine the relation between group climate (level 1 and 2) and work climate (level 2). First, four different random intercept-only models were examined to establish whether there was signifi- cant variance at Level-2 for the dependent variables Support, Growth, Repression, and Atmosphere. Results indicated that there was significant Level-2 variance for Atmosphere (ICC = .21, Wald z = 2.39, p = .017). No significant Level-2 variance was found for Support (ICC = .09, Wald z = 1.33, p = .185), Growth (ICC = .05, Wald z = 0.78, p = .434), and Repression (ICC = .07, Wald z = 1.06, p = .290). Subsequent analyses were thus only conducted for Atmosphere. However, none of the Level-1 nor Level-2 predictors were significantly related to Atmosphere, and these explanatory models did not significantly improve fit of the intercept-only model (see table 2). Job satisfaction Repression Work load Shared vision Positive team functioning Growth Work environment .49** -.31** .27 (ns) .01 (ns) -.17 (ns) -.03 (ns) -.61**