1. Introduction
In recent decades, environmental issues have increasingly gained attention because of continuous global warming and higher energy consumption and production [
1,
2]. The balance between resources, the environment, and economic prosperity should be carefully considered in social development. Currently, China aims to promote domestic green economic transformation by achieving the national strategic goal of carbon emissions reaching a peak by 2030 and carbon neutrality before 2060 [
3,
4]. In this context, heavily polluting manufacturing enterprises need to shoulder the responsibility to protect the environment. Therefore, scholars and practitioners suggest addressing the environmental protection requirements of businesses and developing green technology production [
5,
6]. Therefore, an increasing number of companies and organizations across a wide range of industries are beginning to focus on green technology innovation in China. New energy sectors such as clean energy, energy-saving, green buildings, and green transport are growing spectacularly in China [
7,
8]. Besides government support, more funding from social capital needs to be involved in the development of green industries [
9,
10]. Accordingly, green finance products are being developed to meet the requirements of sustainability. Green finance products refer to financial services, such as project investment, financing, project operation, and risk management, that support production activities that protect the environment, support efficient energy conservation, and promote sustainable development [
3,
11].
In certain respects, the development of new green finance products has been deemed essential in the innovation and development of financial enterprises. R&D teams are usually considered the basic carrier of new product research and development [
12]. Here, diversified outstanding talents with different professional skills are integrated to construct an R&D team for green Finance Products. It is beneficial to form a heterogeneous knowledge pool in a team [
13]. Meanwhile, the success of new product development depends greatly on the richness of collective knowledge and innovative technology resources within teams [
14]. How can we accelerate the innovative actions in green finance products’ R&D teams? Is there an effective and cost-saving approach to enhance innovation teams’ problem-solving abilities?
The cumulative evidence has proven a positive role of the innovation climate in an organization’s or team’s effectiveness in certain conditions [
15,
16,
17,
18]. According to Vegt et al. [
19] and Kuenzi and Schminke [
20], the team innovation climate is defined as the shared cognition of the team processes, management behaviors, and other environmental factors that promote the generation and the implementation of new ideas. By shaping and cultivating a work climate of innovation, team members’ internal creative motivation can be stimulated [
21], and all members would bravely strive for the ultimate collective goal [
22]. Researchers have classified the measurement of innovation climates into two types: the cognitive schemata approach [
23] and the shared perception approach. In the financial technology innovation management field, previous research has mostly focused on various product themes’ development, the progress of information technology applications, and legal/regulatory alternation [
24]. The corresponding theoretical underpinnings of green finance products’ R&D teams’ management are limited, which may result in different conclusions being reached. Accordingly, the internal mechanism in which innovation climates positively influence finance products’ R&D teams’ effectiveness requires further investigation.
According to on organizational learning theory, project-based teams benefit by sharing and integrating explicit and tacit knowledge among team members [
25]. Knowledge sharing, defined as the process of understanding, absorbing, and utilizing different types of knowledge [
26], aims to put shared knowledge into project activities [
27]. It has been proved to improve team effectiveness in the contexts of various projects [
28,
29,
30]. However, the lack of expertise may lead to project failure [
31]. The development process of team knowledge is formed by manifesting private knowledge into the team’s knowledge pool. Additionally, integrated knowledge is available to all team members. Therefore, knowledge heterogeneity refers to the degree to which members’ knowledge is different from that of other members [
32], which potentially moderates the positive link between knowledge sharing and team effectiveness.
Accordingly, the objective of this research is to clarify the underlying mechanisms of innovation climates for team effectiveness for the green finance products of R&D teams within a comprehensive theoretical framework. Furthermore, the roles of knowledge sharing and knowledge heterogeneity are studied in this paper. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: First, this study enriches the research results regarding team management (e.g., Zhao et al. [
33], Gao et al. [
34], and Newman et al. [
35]), especially for the green finance industry. It extends our current understanding of how to improve team effectiveness using a cost-saving but effective approach. Second, from the special perspective of knowledge integration, this study incorporates the mediating effect of knowledge sharing and the moderating effects of knowledge heterogeneity into a framework to explore the intrinsic connection between innovation climates and team effectiveness for green finance products’ R&D teams. Finally, this study provides multiple managerial implications for enterprises and governments to drive the development of the green finance innovation industry.
This objective is achieved as follows:
Section 2 introduces a literature review and presents hypotheses with a conceptual model.
Section 3 and
Section 4 present the methodology and empirical results, respectively.
Section 5 offers discussion and implications.
3. Methodology
3.1. Sample and Data Collection
This research collected data from the green finance industry in China. In order to reduce the common method bias, data were collected from two sources including field surveys and online questionnaires [
87,
88]. The survey was carried out from July to December 2021. In the first stage, we conducted a field questionnaire on a team-by-team basis. To avoid homologation problems, the questionnaires were collected from both team leaders and members [
89]. Respondents were asked to answer the questionnaires based on their position only, without leaving their names. This survey considered the green finance product’s R&D team of the five experts in the pilot study as the initial respondents, and the snowball approach is used to distribute the questionnaire. The sample was from five Chinese cities, including Shanghai, Beijing, Hangzhou, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou. The number of people interviewed per team was between 4 and 10. Referring to previous research [
89], team leaders mainly evaluated project information, innovation climate, and team performance, and other team members mainly evaluated the degree of knowledge sharing and knowledge heterogeneity, team members’ work engagement, and satisfaction. In the first stage, the survey results of 52 teams were collected, and the data from three teams were deleted due to incompleteness. In the next stage, the survey link on the Questionnaire Star platform was sent randomly to 500 individuals from a green finance professional association by email. The item
Project Title in the questionnaire was used to associate the different questionnaires from one team. A total of 102 responses were returned, and 22 teams participated in our survey. Finally, six invalid responses were deleted.
Next, a
t-test was used to compare the responses of the two collection methods in terms of innovation climate, knowledge sharing, knowledge heterogeneity, and team effectiveness [
88]. The results showed that differences were insignificant. Further, Harman’s single-factor method was employed to eliminate potential common method bias with single-factor analysis. All indicators were loaded on a single factor. The highest variance for all team member reported variables was 25.913%. The result was under half of the total explained variance, indicating no serious concerns [
87,
90]. Finally, 65 valid team responses, including 65 team leader questionnaires and 375 team member questionnaires, were used in the final analysis, with a response rate of 48.67 percent. The descriptive information of the sample respondents and projects is shown in
Table 1.
The production types of the sampled teams were Credit (32.30 percent), Bonds (27.69 percent), Insurance (24.61 percent), and others (15.4 percent). Regarding product R&D duration, 13.85% of the samples lasted 3 months or less, 32.31% lasted 3~12 months, 35.38% lasted 13–24 months, and 18.46% lasted more than 24 months. Furthermore, the size of 13 teams was less than or equal to 5 persons, the size of 13 teams was more than 5 persons but less than 10 persons, the size of 24 projects was more than 11 persons but less than 20 persons, and the size of 15 teams was more than 20 persons, which corresponds to rates of 20.00%, 20.00%, 36.92%, and 23.08%, respectively. Furthermore, most respondents were male (64.32%), and the majority of these respondents (79.10%) held an undergraduate degree or higher.
3.2. Measures
In this research, measurement scales were used that originated from the literature review so as to ensure the validity of the scales. The translation committee approach was used because respondents were from China [
88]. Two professors majoring in financial technology were invited to translate the English scale into Chinese. Then, the translation committee corrected the differences between the two Chinese versions to achieve a consensus. Next, the Chinese scale version was translated back into English by three Ph.D. candidates in financial technology. Moreover, to ensure the validity and reliability of the scale, a pilot study was implemented involving 18 respondents who were five experts from green finance enterprises in Shanghai, five financial technology researchers, and eight Ph.D. candidates from three renowned Chinese universities. The final version of the questionnaire items is detailed in
Appendix A.
According to Amabile [
36], Liu and Shi [
37], and Popa, Soto-Acosta, and Martinez-Conesa [
91], we propose an operational definition of innovation climate as the extent to which team members’ subjective perceptions of innovation support are generated in the organizational environment. We measured the innovation climate using four items from Popa, Soto-Acosta, and Martinez-Conesa [
91], aiming to create a team climate to integrate different experts, facilitate knowledge sharing, and generate innovative ideas. We define the operational definition of knowledge sharing as the extent of activities that transfer knowledge, exchange knowledge, and create knowledge among team members [
39,
92]. The scale for knowledge sharing was adopted from the study of Chuang, Jackson, and Jiang [
92]. An operational definition of knowledge heterogeneity is proposed based on Ye, Liu, and Tan [
48], Zhang, Wang, and Hao [
79], and Zhao et al. [
93]. It is the degree of diversity of collective knowledge such as knowledge, know-what, know-how, and expertise in an organization perceived by team members. The knowledge heterogeneity items were adopted from the research of Zhao, Huang, Xi, and Wang [
93]. In light of Bandura [
58], Gladstein [
71], and Tjosvold [
72], the operational definition for team effectiveness is an objective assessment including team performance, capabilities, and psychological expectations of team members. Team effectiveness was measured by 11 items from the research of Ding [
94]. Furthermore, seven-point Likert scales were used to measure all variables.
To isolate the effects of the project’s situational factors, product type, product R&D duration, and team size were selected as control variables, and product type was used to differentiate the impact of research objective by different product types. Team size was measured by a number of members, and product R&D duration was reflected by the life cycle of the team.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
In this research, using a questionnaire survey to capture the data from a green finance product’s R&D team in China, we show that an innovation climate has a positive impact on knowledge sharing and that teams’ innovation climate and knowledge sharing can both improve team effectiveness. The theory of TRA, organizational learning theory, and self-efficacy theory can be used to explain the positive impact on team effectiveness improvement [
14,
49]. According to TRA theory, a project-based organization’s or team’s climate, including equity climate, innovation climate, and interpersonal climate, has an impact on members’ knowledge-sharing behavior in companies [
49]. In addition, the positive effects of knowledge sharing on team effectiveness are verified. Based on social network theory, diverse knowledge and information are shared [
64]. In the process of knowledge sharing, team members can not only expand the boundaries of their knowledge acquisition but also put themselves as a hub in the knowledge transfer network, which can improve their self-efficacy and team collective effectiveness [
65].
We also find that knowledge sharing mediates the relationship between an innovation climate and team effectiveness. Knowledge sharing among team members enhances the impact of innovative atmosphere on team effectiveness. Hence, an innovation climate should be created with knowledge sharing to ensure further research and development for green finance products.
In addition, we find that knowledge heterogeneity moderates the relationship between knowledge sharing and team effectiveness. Information decision theory can help us explain the above moderating relationship. Knowledge heterogeneity can stimulate creativity and innovation, lead to the collision of team members’ thinking, and generate new ideas and approaches [
33]. A single knowledge structure can lead to a lack of endogenous power for team innovation; thus it is necessary to continuously improve the level of knowledge diversity within an R&D team to match the knowledge needs of new product development [
33]. Therefore, for green financial R&D teams, knowledge heterogeneity will improve the collective effectiveness with the widely shared knowledge of the team.
5.1. Theoretical Contributions
The theoretical contributions of this study are as follows. First, our research extends previous research by investigating the indirect effect of a team innovation climate on collective effectiveness [
33,
34]. Although the issue of team innovation climate and team effectiveness has received attention for years [
34,
35], we conduct a study on a project-based emerging team, that is, the green financial R&D team. We explore the direct effect of innovation climates on team effectiveness, as well as the indirect effect. This study confirms that innovation climate improves team effectiveness in green financial R&D team as a useful driver that expands the research boundary for team management. Moreover, the findings of this study enrich our understanding of team climate in green financial R&D teams based on organizational behavior and team management theories.
In this study, knowledge sharing is considered a partial mediator in the path of the relationship between innovation climate and team effectiveness [
48,
75]. Thus, it is necessary to enhance the level of knowledge sharing in the team in order to exert a positive influence of the innovation climate and improve team effectiveness. The findings in this study complement the research on self-efficacy realization; further, new knowledge on the issue of motivation and the role of knowledge sharing at the team level are generated. The theoretical and practical analysis framework constructed in this study examines the important impact that the interaction between knowledge heterogeneity and knowledge sharing can have on team effectiveness. It shows that the contribution of knowledge within a team is far from sufficient in green financial R&D teams, and the level of knowledge heterogeneity among team members needs to be continuously improved to enhance team effectiveness. Meanwhile, the joint role of task performance (e.g., duration and cost for the task completion) and team members’ perceptions (e.g., satisfaction for the teamwork and commitment for the team objective) is balanced, which enriches the meaning of the concept of team effectiveness from the perspective of a green financial R&D team.
5.2. Managerial and Practical Implications
The study offers several managerial and practical implications to improve the management of green finance products’ R&D teams. First, in recent decades, industries have faced increasing pressure to be greener and have more sustainable development [
103]. Because of this, green financial products are currently in greater supply than demand. Financial companies should focus on the R&D of green financial products, which is also an important way to promote the development of innovation in the financial industry. Second, since enterprise innovation climates and heterogeneous knowledge sharing are important to enhance the effectiveness of green financial R&D teams, financial enterprises can give priority to reasonable member combinations with greater knowledge heterogeneity when forming R&D teams so that the teams have diverse knowledge and rich information channels in the process of innovation practice. Meanwhile, financial enterprises should build a platform conducive to knowledge sharing and exchange activities and cultivate a good team knowledge sharing climate [
33]. Third, as the P/E ratio of green financial products is currently lower than other types of financial products due to policy guidance, policymakers should design more effective mechanisms beyond green subsidies to incentivize and push green investment strategies in the financial sector [
6]. Thus, the government can listen to practitioners’ opinions from specific theories to better recognize the difficulties faced by financial firms in developing green financial products.
5.3. Limitations and Future Research
This research provides an important theoretical model for green finance products’ R&D teams’ management in the era of sustainable social development. However, there still are a few limitations that can direct future research. First, in this study, the data were collected from two sources in order to reduce common-method bias. According to previous studies, multiple-time data collected can effectually evade the risk of common method bias. Future research could use two point-in-time access questionnaires to eliminate these concerns [
104,
105]. Second, team knowledge sharing is a complex and dynamic process, and this paper provides an inference through the survey method of cross-sectional data; thus, future researchers are suggested to study the phenomenon of team knowledge sharing under dynamic games from the whole life cycle for project development. In addition, the knowledge sharing process consists of two phases, including knowledge contribution and knowledge gathering. It is suggested that researchers explore the roles that two segmentation variables play in this model, and the possible interactions between the two variables can be further discussed. Third, the respondents of the survey were all from China and were not from various countries or other cultural contexts. Future studies could test the proposed framework with data from different countries and regions to enrich the generalization of the results in this study.