The promise and perversity of perspective-taking in organizations

IF 3.1 Q2 MANAGEMENT Research in Organizational Behavior Pub Date : 2015-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.riob.2015.07.003
Gillian Ku , Cynthia S. Wang , Adam D. Galinsky
{"title":"The promise and perversity of perspective-taking in organizations","authors":"Gillian Ku ,&nbsp;Cynthia S. Wang ,&nbsp;Adam D. Galinsky","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2015.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Successful managers and leaders need to effectively navigate their organizational worlds, from motivating customers and employees to managing diversity to preventing and resolving conflicts. Perspective-taking is a psychological process that is particularly relevant to each of these activities. The current review critically examines perspective-taking research conducted by both management scholars and social psychologists and specifies perspective-taking's antecedents, consequences, mechanisms, and moderators, as well as identifies theoretical and/or empirical shortfalls. Our summary of the current state of perspective-taking research offers three important contributions. First, we offer a new definition of perspective-taking: the active cognitive process of imagining the world from another's vantage point or imagining oneself in another's shoes to understand their visual viewpoint, thoughts, motivations, intentions, and/or emotions. Second, we highlight that although perspective-taking has many positive benefits for managers and leaders, it also carries with it the potential for perverse effects. Third, we argue that previous theoretical lenses to understand perspective-taking's goal are insufficient in light of all the available evidence. Instead, we offer a new </span>theoretical proposition to capture the full range of perspective-taking's positive and negative effects: perspective-taking helps individuals effectively navigate a world filled with mixed-motive social interactions. Our mixed-motive model of perspective-taking not only captures the current findings but also offers new directions for future research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.riob.2015.07.003","citationCount":"149","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Organizational Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191308515000040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 149

Abstract

Successful managers and leaders need to effectively navigate their organizational worlds, from motivating customers and employees to managing diversity to preventing and resolving conflicts. Perspective-taking is a psychological process that is particularly relevant to each of these activities. The current review critically examines perspective-taking research conducted by both management scholars and social psychologists and specifies perspective-taking's antecedents, consequences, mechanisms, and moderators, as well as identifies theoretical and/or empirical shortfalls. Our summary of the current state of perspective-taking research offers three important contributions. First, we offer a new definition of perspective-taking: the active cognitive process of imagining the world from another's vantage point or imagining oneself in another's shoes to understand their visual viewpoint, thoughts, motivations, intentions, and/or emotions. Second, we highlight that although perspective-taking has many positive benefits for managers and leaders, it also carries with it the potential for perverse effects. Third, we argue that previous theoretical lenses to understand perspective-taking's goal are insufficient in light of all the available evidence. Instead, we offer a new theoretical proposition to capture the full range of perspective-taking's positive and negative effects: perspective-taking helps individuals effectively navigate a world filled with mixed-motive social interactions. Our mixed-motive model of perspective-taking not only captures the current findings but also offers new directions for future research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织中换位思考的承诺和弊端
成功的管理者和领导者需要有效地驾驭他们的组织世界,从激励客户和员工到管理多样性,再到预防和解决冲突。换位思考是一种心理过程,与上述每一种活动都特别相关。本文对管理学者和社会心理学家进行的换位思考研究进行了批判性的考察,并详细说明了换位思考的前提、后果、机制和调节因素,同时指出了理论和/或经验上的不足。我们对换位思考研究现状的总结提供了三个重要贡献。首先,我们对换位思考给出了一个新的定义:一种积极的认知过程,即从他人的角度想象世界,或者想象自己站在他人的角度来理解他们的视觉观点、想法、动机、意图和/或情绪。其次,我们强调,虽然换位思考对管理者和领导者有很多积极的好处,但它也有可能产生负面影响。第三,我们认为,鉴于所有可用的证据,以前理解换位思考目标的理论镜头是不够的。相反,我们提供了一个新的理论命题来捕捉换位思考的积极和消极影响的全部范围:换位思考帮助个人有效地驾驭一个充满混合动机的社会互动的世界。我们的混合动机换位思考模型不仅抓住了当前的研究成果,而且为未来的研究提供了新的方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research in Organizational Behavior
Research in Organizational Behavior Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Research in Organizational Behavior publishes commissioned papers only, spanning several levels of analysis, and ranging from studies of individuals to groups to organizations and their environments. The topics encompassed are likewise diverse, covering issues from individual emotion and cognition to social movements and networks. Cutting across this diversity, however, is a rather consistent quality of presentation. Being both thorough and thoughtful, Research in Organizational Behavior is commissioned pieces provide substantial contributions to research on organizations. Many have received rewards for their level of scholarship and many have become classics in the field of organizational research.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Creativity as privilege Does diversity influence innovation and economic growth? It depends on spatial scale Leading for human sustainability: An extension of Restricted Employee Sustainability Theory Are experts overconfident?: An interdisciplinary review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1