Pub Date : 2016-03-22DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2015.17908ABSTRACT
Richard A. Devine, B. Lamont, R. Harris
Academics across disciplines have long explored research regarding how power and status dynamics determine organizational outcomes (Child, 1972; Salancik and Pfeifer, 1974; Pfeifer and Salancik, 1978; Pfeifer, 1981; Richmond et al, 1983; Finkelstein and Hambrick, 1990; Abrahamson and Park, 1994; Thye, 2000). In mergers and acquisitions, scholars have examined how the struggle for power influences top management team (TMT) turnover (Walsh, 1988), acculturation (Nahavandi and Malekzadeh, 1988), pursuit of market power (Chatterjee, 1991), integration decisions (Haspeslagh and Jemison, 1991), and in the context of mergers of equals (MOE), how they can be better managed. MOE involve the merging of two large, related firms of similar size (Ellis et al., 2009). They require significant strategic and operational restructuring in order to blend the two involved legacy firms (Haspeslagh and Jemison, 1991). To do so, the retention and cooperation of TMTs is needed from both firms in order for the merger to be successful. I his is done to foster the cooperation of key employees in blending the firm and recognizing cross-organizational synergies (Graebner, 2004). However, MOE are predicated on a false premise that both firms will emerge equal partners in the new combination. Yet, that is rarely if ever true (Brew, 2014). As a result of the "friendly" merger transaction, the firms will often take on a combined company name, relocate headquarters, and reconfigure management to represent equal stakes in the new company. Through preliminary discussions, the firms' respective chief executive officers (CEOs) and TMTs will broker shared power agreements to distribute control. However, MOE oftentimes becomes a euphemism for the power struggles that subsequently ensue. Following the consummation of MOE, it often becomes clear that any equality was in name only. Executive infighting develops as each party to the exchange pursues their own firm agendas, ideals, and initiatives. Furthermore, it becomes clear that equality was never truly part of either firm's intent as the more dominant management team can emerge quite rapidly. For example, chairman of DaimlerChrysler, Jurgen Schrempp, later contended that he always saw Chrysler as being simply a division of Daimler and that a shared stake in the company was never his vision. This was evidenced by the exodus of Chrysler's managers along with their prompt replacement with German counterparts (Landler, 2005). Similarly, misrepresentation prior to the AOL-Time Warner merger of equals led to a power struggle that helped provoke shareholder value destruction totaling over $200 billion. This led to the sell-off of AOL by Time Warner several years later (Davidolf, 2009; Perez-Pena, 2009). Using power and status theory, this study contends that political skill and power differences between the merging firms' CEOs predict who prevails as the controlling party. Power is defined as a property of a social relationship, where one par
跨学科的学者长期以来一直在探索权力和地位动态如何决定组织结果的研究(Child, 1972;Salancik and Pfeifer, 1974;Pfeifer and Salancik, 1978;Pfeifer, 1981;Richmond et al .， 1983;Finkelstein and Hambrick, 1990;Abrahamson and Park, 1994;Thye, 2000)。在并购中，学者们研究了权力争夺如何影响高层管理团队(TMT)的更替(Walsh, 1988)、文化适应(Nahavandi和Malekzadeh, 1988)、对市场权力的追求(Chatterjee, 1991)、整合决策(haaspeslagh和Jemison, 1991)，以及在对等合并(MOE)的背景下，如何更好地管理它们。MOE涉及两个规模相似的大型相关公司的合并(Ellis et al.， 2009)。他们需要重大的战略和业务重组，以融合两个涉及的遗留公司(哈斯斯拉格和杰米森，1991年)。要做到这一点，就需要两家公司的tmt的保留和合作，以使合并成功。这样做是为了促进关键员工在融合公司和认识跨组织协同效应方面的合作(格雷布纳，2004年)。然而，MOE是基于一个错误的前提，即两家公司将在新的合并中成为平等的合作伙伴。然而，这种情况很少发生(Brew, 2014)。作为“友好”合并交易的结果，这些公司通常会采用合并后的公司名称，搬迁总部，并重新配置管理层，以代表新公司的同等股份。通过初步讨论，两家公司各自的首席执行官(ceo)和tmt将促成权力共享协议，以分配控制权。然而，MOE经常成为随后发生的权力斗争的委婉说法。随着MOE的完成，很明显，任何平等都只是名义上的。当交易所的每一方都追求自己坚定的议程、理想和倡议时，高管内斗就会发展起来。此外，很明显，平等从来都不是两家公司真正意图的一部分，因为更具主导地位的管理团队可以很快出现。例如，戴姆勒-克莱斯勒(DaimlerChrysler)董事长于尔根•施伦普(Jurgen Schrempp)后来辩称，他一直认为克莱斯勒只是戴姆勒(Daimler)的一个部门，入股从来都不是他的愿景。这一点可以从克莱斯勒经理的大批离职以及德国同行的迅速接替中得到证明(Landler, 2005)。同样，在美国在线与时代华纳对等合并之前，虚假陈述导致了一场权力斗争，最终导致股东价值损失超过2000亿美元。这导致了几年后时代华纳出售AOL (Davidolf, 2009;Perez-Pena, 2009)。运用权力与地位理论，本研究认为，并购公司首席执行官之间的政治技巧和权力差异预测了谁将成为控股方。权力被定义为一种社会关系的属性，其中一方对另一方拥有权威(爱默生，1962)。权力允许掌握权力的人(如ceo)分配指令，并为实现预期目标调动资源。相反，政治技巧是一种相对静态的人格特征。它被定义为个人理解他人并利用这些知识以有利于个人和组织目标的方式行事的能力(Ferris, Treadway et al.， 2005)。这种类型的社交能力在群体环境中是理想的，允许个人在促进合作的无缝事项中完成目标(Ferris et al, 2007)。在关注政治技能方面，本研究旨在评估组织层面的政治技能，并回应最近研究对政治技能具体维度的关注(Ferris et al.， 2012;木村,2014)。因此，该研究侧重于现有工作表明的四个维度中的两个，这两个维度对管理有效性、社会机敏性和网络能力特别重要(Ferris, Treadway等. ...)
{"title":"Managerial Control in Mergers of Equals: The Role of Political Skill","authors":"Richard A. Devine, B. Lamont, R. Harris","doi":"10.5465/AMBPP.2015.17908ABSTRACT","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2015.17908ABSTRACT","url":null,"abstract":"Academics across disciplines have long explored research regarding how power and status dynamics determine organizational outcomes (Child, 1972; Salancik and Pfeifer, 1974; Pfeifer and Salancik, 1978; Pfeifer, 1981; Richmond et al, 1983; Finkelstein and Hambrick, 1990; Abrahamson and Park, 1994; Thye, 2000). In mergers and acquisitions, scholars have examined how the struggle for power influences top management team (TMT) turnover (Walsh, 1988), acculturation (Nahavandi and Malekzadeh, 1988), pursuit of market power (Chatterjee, 1991), integration decisions (Haspeslagh and Jemison, 1991), and in the context of mergers of equals (MOE), how they can be better managed. MOE involve the merging of two large, related firms of similar size (Ellis et al., 2009). They require significant strategic and operational restructuring in order to blend the two involved legacy firms (Haspeslagh and Jemison, 1991). To do so, the retention and cooperation of TMTs is needed from both firms in order for the merger to be successful. I his is done to foster the cooperation of key employees in blending the firm and recognizing cross-organizational synergies (Graebner, 2004). However, MOE are predicated on a false premise that both firms will emerge equal partners in the new combination. Yet, that is rarely if ever true (Brew, 2014). As a result of the \"friendly\" merger transaction, the firms will often take on a combined company name, relocate headquarters, and reconfigure management to represent equal stakes in the new company. Through preliminary discussions, the firms' respective chief executive officers (CEOs) and TMTs will broker shared power agreements to distribute control. However, MOE oftentimes becomes a euphemism for the power struggles that subsequently ensue. Following the consummation of MOE, it often becomes clear that any equality was in name only. Executive infighting develops as each party to the exchange pursues their own firm agendas, ideals, and initiatives. Furthermore, it becomes clear that equality was never truly part of either firm's intent as the more dominant management team can emerge quite rapidly. For example, chairman of DaimlerChrysler, Jurgen Schrempp, later contended that he always saw Chrysler as being simply a division of Daimler and that a shared stake in the company was never his vision. This was evidenced by the exodus of Chrysler's managers along with their prompt replacement with German counterparts (Landler, 2005). Similarly, misrepresentation prior to the AOL-Time Warner merger of equals led to a power struggle that helped provoke shareholder value destruction totaling over $200 billion. This led to the sell-off of AOL by Time Warner several years later (Davidolf, 2009; Perez-Pena, 2009). Using power and status theory, this study contends that political skill and power differences between the merging firms' CEOs predict who prevails as the controlling party. Power is defined as a property of a social relationship, where one par","PeriodicalId":228014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Issues","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129669393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Accounting literature deploys audit quality as a central concept of auditing, yet our appreciation of the construct has not yielded the desired audit. While this construct has been captured by the need to service investors’ decision-making and its role in the efficiency of the capital markets, inputs from much of the performers of audit to the audit quality debate has been minimal. Using survey responses from auditors of their perceptions about audit quality in the auditing industry, this paper rolls back the evolution of audit quality literature to report what those actually doing audits perceive. A conceptual model that specifies auditor characteristics with ex ante and process constraints as a moderator identifies the extent to which auditor’s independence, integrity and objectivity impact the quality of financial statement auditing. The research also finds that process constraints negatively impact the positive effect of auditor’s characteristics on audit quality. Findings from our research show that audit practitioners’ perceptions about factors that determine audit quality must be strongly considered in order to achieve desired audit.
{"title":"What Auditors Think about Audit Quality - A New Perspective on an Old Issue","authors":"George K. Baah, T. Fogarty","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2822565","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2822565","url":null,"abstract":"Accounting literature deploys audit quality as a central concept of auditing, yet our appreciation of the construct has not yielded the desired audit. While this construct has been captured by the need to service investors’ decision-making and its role in the efficiency of the capital markets, inputs from much of the performers of audit to the audit quality debate has been minimal. Using survey responses from auditors of their perceptions about audit quality in the auditing industry, this paper rolls back the evolution of audit quality literature to report what those actually doing audits perceive. A conceptual model that specifies auditor characteristics with ex ante and process constraints as a moderator identifies the extent to which auditor’s independence, integrity and objectivity impact the quality of financial statement auditing. The research also finds that process constraints negatively impact the positive effect of auditor’s characteristics on audit quality. Findings from our research show that audit practitioners’ perceptions about factors that determine audit quality must be strongly considered in order to achieve desired audit.","PeriodicalId":228014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Issues","volume":"228 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124188309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-12-22DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2015.11555ABSTRACT
B. Miller, Elizabeth A. Adair, K. Nicols, Dennis L. Smart
Over the past few years, volunteerism in the U.S. has declined from an estimated 50% of U.S. adults collectively logging volunteer hours equivalent to five million fulltime jobs (Meier and Stutzer, 2008) to a recent low of only 25% of Americans engaged in volunteer work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014). The driving force behind many charitable groups is the blood, sweat, and tears of a sizeable volunteer base. For example, the American Red Cross has approximately 400,000 U.S. volunteers comprising 94% of its humanitarian workforce (American Red Cross, 2014) and saw donations of 5.7 million units of blood during the 2013 fiscal year (American Red Cross, 2013). In that same fiscal year, Habitat For Humanity depended upon 309,687 volunteer worker-hours to complete approximately 12,673 home construction projects for economically disadvantaged persons in Africa and the Middle East alone (Habitat for Humanity International, 2013). Twenty-five thousand Make-a-Wish volunteers across America each spent an average of 12 hours granting 14,000 wishes last year (Make-A-Wish[R] Foundation of America, 2014). The personal sacrifices of time, energy, and resources by these volunteers are a critical component in the success of the charitable or service organizations they choose to support. However, limited research has examined the job attitudes of volunteers, many of whom play distinct and important roles within organizations. An understanding of how some particular characteristics of both volunteers and organizations influence job attitudes that are critical to retaining reliable, productive volunteers is important. In two studies using data from independent samples collected from two different volunteer organizations an examination of the interactive effects of volunteers' work engagement and their perceptions of organizational politics on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions is conducted using an adaptation of Chacon et al.'s (2007) Volunteer Duration of Service Model. Volunteer work is much different from voluntary group membership and involves the giving of one's time and effort without the expectation of direct financial compensation (Thoits and Hewitt, 2001). The purpose of volunteer work is to better a community or a specific subset of a community which is in need (Wilson and Musick, 1997). Thus, volunteer work is a planned long-term form of social participation that promotes good citizenship and a sense of community, both of which facilitate social action for the common good (Omoto and Malsch, 2005; Penner, 2002; Snyder and Omoto, 2008). Even though volunteers earn no direct financial compensation for their time and effort, they often enjoy higher levels of life satisfaction (Meier and Stutzer, 2008), better self-esteem and physical health, an increased sense of control, as well as lower levels of depression (Thoits and Hewitt, 2001). Over time, many people report a change in their self-concept as they grow to see their
在过去的几年里，美国的志愿服务已经从大约50%的美国成年人总共相当于500万个全职工作的志愿服务时间(Meier和Stutzer, 2008)下降到最近的最低点，只有25%的美国人从事志愿工作(劳工统计局，2014)。许多慈善组织背后的推动力是大量志愿者的血汗和眼泪。例如，美国红十字会约有40万名美国志愿者，占其人道主义工作人员的94%(美国红十字会，2014年)，2013财政年度献血量为570万单位(美国红十字会，2013年)。在同一财政年度，仁人家园仅在非洲和中东就依靠309,687个志愿者工时完成了大约12,673个为经济弱势群体提供的住房建设项目(Habitat For Humanity International, 2013)。去年，全美2.5万名Make-a-Wish志愿者平均每人花费12个小时实现1.4万个愿望(Make-a-Wish [R] Foundation of America, 2014)。这些志愿者个人牺牲的时间、精力和资源是他们选择支持的慈善或服务机构成功的关键因素。然而，有限的研究调查了志愿者的工作态度，他们中的许多人在组织中扮演着独特而重要的角色。了解志愿者和组织的某些特点是如何影响工作态度的，这对留住可靠、高效的志愿者至关重要。在两项研究中，使用了从两个不同的志愿者组织收集的独立样本的数据，研究了志愿者的工作投入和他们对组织政治的看法对工作满意度、组织承诺和离职意向的互动影响，并采用了Chacon等人(2007)的志愿者服务持续时间模型。志愿工作与志愿团体成员有很大不同，它涉及到在不期望直接经济补偿的情况下付出自己的时间和精力(Thoits和Hewitt, 2001)。志愿者工作的目的是改善社区或社区中需要帮助的特定子集(Wilson and Musick, 1997)。因此，志愿者工作是一种有计划的长期社会参与形式，可以促进良好的公民意识和社区意识，这两者都有助于为共同利益采取社会行动(Omoto和Malsch, 2005;写作人,2002;Snyder and Omoto, 2008)。尽管志愿者的时间和努力没有获得直接的经济补偿，但他们通常享有更高水平的生活满意度(Meier和Stutzer, 2008)，更好的自尊和身体健康，更强的控制感，以及更低水平的抑郁(Thoits和Hewitt, 2001)。随着时间的推移，许多人报告说他们的自我概念发生了变化，因为他们逐渐认识到自己在生活中的角色不仅是雇员、配偶或兄弟姐妹，而且是志愿者，这进一步延续了志愿者角色的寿命(Callero, 1985;Callero et al.， 1987;Grube和Piliavin, 2000)。这种自我概念的变化是一个重要的结果，可以在社会认同理论的视角下进行检验(Tajfel和Turner, 1979)，这表明个体认为自己在心理上与他们所属的群体有联系。在一个让自己感到自豪的组织中，成为一个成熟的、积极的志愿者成员，并从中得到其他成员的尊重，这有助于培养自由选择的行为(Tyler and Blader, 2001)，而志愿服务组织对这种行为是如此依赖。对组织来说，管理志愿者是一项持续的斗争，因为组织经常面临管理有偿员工的问题。尽管志愿者没有报酬，但他们在这些组织中的角色与那些有报酬的员工并没有什么不同，因为他们在组织内执行需要努力、时间和负责任的行为的活动(Vecina et al. ...)
{"title":"Hindering the Help: Politics and Engagement in Volunteer Service Organizations","authors":"B. Miller, Elizabeth A. Adair, K. Nicols, Dennis L. Smart","doi":"10.5465/AMBPP.2015.11555ABSTRACT","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2015.11555ABSTRACT","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past few years, volunteerism in the U.S. has declined from an estimated 50% of U.S. adults collectively logging volunteer hours equivalent to five million fulltime jobs (Meier and Stutzer, 2008) to a recent low of only 25% of Americans engaged in volunteer work (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014). The driving force behind many charitable groups is the blood, sweat, and tears of a sizeable volunteer base. For example, the American Red Cross has approximately 400,000 U.S. volunteers comprising 94% of its humanitarian workforce (American Red Cross, 2014) and saw donations of 5.7 million units of blood during the 2013 fiscal year (American Red Cross, 2013). In that same fiscal year, Habitat For Humanity depended upon 309,687 volunteer worker-hours to complete approximately 12,673 home construction projects for economically disadvantaged persons in Africa and the Middle East alone (Habitat for Humanity International, 2013). Twenty-five thousand Make-a-Wish volunteers across America each spent an average of 12 hours granting 14,000 wishes last year (Make-A-Wish[R] Foundation of America, 2014). The personal sacrifices of time, energy, and resources by these volunteers are a critical component in the success of the charitable or service organizations they choose to support. However, limited research has examined the job attitudes of volunteers, many of whom play distinct and important roles within organizations. An understanding of how some particular characteristics of both volunteers and organizations influence job attitudes that are critical to retaining reliable, productive volunteers is important. In two studies using data from independent samples collected from two different volunteer organizations an examination of the interactive effects of volunteers' work engagement and their perceptions of organizational politics on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions is conducted using an adaptation of Chacon et al.'s (2007) Volunteer Duration of Service Model. Volunteer work is much different from voluntary group membership and involves the giving of one's time and effort without the expectation of direct financial compensation (Thoits and Hewitt, 2001). The purpose of volunteer work is to better a community or a specific subset of a community which is in need (Wilson and Musick, 1997). Thus, volunteer work is a planned long-term form of social participation that promotes good citizenship and a sense of community, both of which facilitate social action for the common good (Omoto and Malsch, 2005; Penner, 2002; Snyder and Omoto, 2008). Even though volunteers earn no direct financial compensation for their time and effort, they often enjoy higher levels of life satisfaction (Meier and Stutzer, 2008), better self-esteem and physical health, an increased sense of control, as well as lower levels of depression (Thoits and Hewitt, 2001). Over time, many people report a change in their self-concept as they grow to see their ","PeriodicalId":228014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Issues","volume":"86 9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116307961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since the early 1990s, human resource management (HRM) scholars have sought to specify the link between high performing HRM practices and both individual and firm performance (Becker and Huselid, 2006; Huselid, 1995). This strategic HRM (SHRM) literature has found that organizations practicing SHRM not only increase performance but also decrease employee turnover (Arthur, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Lepak and Snell, 2002). At the organizational level, the dollars saved and earned through reduced turnover and increased productivity demonstrate the utility of SHRM systems (Ichniowski et al., 1997). When organizations utilize SHRM, integrating HRM systems, and aligning HRM systems with organizational goals (Huselid, 1995), they place a premium on developing cutting edge practices that retain employees with the best skills and highest levels of motivation (Barney, 1991). Arthur outlines differences between SHRM perspectives, finding that SHRM "control" systems, which are designed to enforce "employee compliance with specified rules and procedures" (1994: 671), lead to increased turnover and decreased performance. On the other hand, SHRM "commitment" systems, which "shape desired employee behaviors and attitudes by forging psychological links between organizational and employee goals" (Arthur, 1994: 671), result in decreased employee turnover and increased performance. As further empirical research has bolstered these findings (i.e., Huselid, 1995; Ichniowski et al., 1997; Lepak and Snell, 2002), it becomes increasingly important to understand how SHRM effectiveness enhances the critical psychological links between employees and organizations. Moreover, several SHRM researchers have called for explicit examinations of these psychological links not only at the organization level but at the individual level (Becker and Huselid, 2006; Gerhart, 2005). One individual-level factor that can help to explain the psychological impact of SHRM practices is job embeddedness (JE), which Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, and Erez (2001b) validate and use to explain how employees become psychologically and socially enmeshed within the organization and community in which the organization operates. Hailed as an "anti-withdrawal" theory (Holtom et al., 2006; Mitchell et al., 2001b), JE describes the psychological forces that act "like a net or a web in which an individual can become stuck" (Mitchell et al., 2001b: 1104); moreover, the process of becoming embedded influences turnover intentions that lead to voluntary turnover (Allen, 2006). Importantly, JE explains unique variability of these important outcomes beyond the effects of job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Mitchell et al., 200lb; Lee et al., 2004). However, because JE has emerged as the most recent construct to explain employee turnover decisions, researchers have much to discover about the full potential of JE as an important variable in HRM. That is, HRM scholars have yet to determine how SHRM effectiv
自20世纪90年代初以来，人力资源管理(HRM)学者一直试图明确高绩效人力资源管理实践与个人和企业绩效之间的联系(Becker and Huselid, 2006;Huselid, 1995)。这种战略人力资源管理(SHRM)文献发现，实施人力资源管理的组织不仅可以提高绩效，还可以减少员工流失率(Arthur, 1994;Huselid, 1995;Lepak and Snell, 2002)。在组织层面，通过减少营业额和提高生产率节省和赚取的美元证明了人力资源管理系统的效用(Ichniowski等人，1997)。当组织利用人力资源管理，整合人力资源管理系统，并使人力资源管理系统与组织目标保持一致时(Huselid, 1995)，他们将重点放在开发尖端实践上，以保留拥有最佳技能和最高水平动机的员工(Barney, 1991)。Arthur概述了人力资源管理观点之间的差异，发现人力资源管理“控制”系统旨在强制“员工遵守特定的规则和程序”(1994:671)，导致人员流动率增加和绩效下降。另一方面，人力资源管理“承诺”系统“通过在组织目标和员工目标之间建立心理联系来塑造期望的员工行为和态度”(Arthur, 1994: 671)，导致员工流失率下降和绩效提高。随着进一步的实证研究支持了这些发现(即，Huselid, 1995;Ichniowski et al.， 1997;Lepak and Snell, 2002)，了解人力资源管理的有效性如何增强员工与组织之间的关键心理联系变得越来越重要。此外，一些人力资源管理研究人员呼吁不仅在组织层面，而且在个人层面对这些心理联系进行明确的检查(Becker and Huselid, 2006;台北2005)。一个可以帮助解释人力资源管理实践的心理影响的个人层面因素是工作嵌入性(JE)， Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski和Erez (2001b)验证并使用它来解释员工如何在心理上和社会上融入组织和组织运作的社区。被誉为“反戒断”理论(Holtom et al.， 2006;Mitchell et al.， 2001b)， JE描述了心理力量的行为“就像一张网或一张网，一个人可能会被困在其中”(Mitchell et al.， 2001b: 1104);此外，嵌入的过程会影响导致自愿离职的离职意向(Allen, 2006)。重要的是，在工作满意度和组织承诺的影响之外，JE解释了这些重要结果的独特可变性(Mitchell et al.， 200lb;Lee et al.， 2004)。然而，由于JE已经成为解释员工离职决策的最新结构，研究人员还需要发现JE作为人力资源管理中一个重要变量的全部潜力。也就是说，人力资源管理学者尚未确定人力资源管理有效性如何将员工JE作为发展员工与组织之间关键心理联系的手段。虽然人力资源管理实践与人力资源管理之间的直接关系直观地吸引了许多人力资源管理学者(Allen, 2006)，但社会交换理论的支持者(Blau, 1964)始终表明，个人对个人的互动在人类工作行为中发挥着重要作用(Cropanzano和Mitchell, 2005)。在组织方面，研究人员一致发现，领导-成员交换(LMX)关系比组织(如人力资源管理)的支持更能直接预测员工的离职意向(Gerstner and Day, 1997)，而组织(如人力资源管理)的支持倾向于预测员工的工作满意度和承诺(setaton et al.， 1996)。在理解人力资源管理有效性如何影响员工JE方面，包括直接的LMX关系应该增强或抑制组织的人力资源管理流程的有效性，以利用员工JE的好处。．．．
{"title":"Moderating and mediating the HRM effectiveness-intent to turnover relationship: The roles of supervisors and job embeddedness.","authors":"Anthony R. Wheeler, Kenneth J. Harris, P. Harvey","doi":"10.1037/e518532013-050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/e518532013-050","url":null,"abstract":"Since the early 1990s, human resource management (HRM) scholars have sought to specify the link between high performing HRM practices and both individual and firm performance (Becker and Huselid, 2006; Huselid, 1995). This strategic HRM (SHRM) literature has found that organizations practicing SHRM not only increase performance but also decrease employee turnover (Arthur, 1994; Huselid, 1995; Lepak and Snell, 2002). At the organizational level, the dollars saved and earned through reduced turnover and increased productivity demonstrate the utility of SHRM systems (Ichniowski et al., 1997). When organizations utilize SHRM, integrating HRM systems, and aligning HRM systems with organizational goals (Huselid, 1995), they place a premium on developing cutting edge practices that retain employees with the best skills and highest levels of motivation (Barney, 1991). Arthur outlines differences between SHRM perspectives, finding that SHRM \"control\" systems, which are designed to enforce \"employee compliance with specified rules and procedures\" (1994: 671), lead to increased turnover and decreased performance. On the other hand, SHRM \"commitment\" systems, which \"shape desired employee behaviors and attitudes by forging psychological links between organizational and employee goals\" (Arthur, 1994: 671), result in decreased employee turnover and increased performance. As further empirical research has bolstered these findings (i.e., Huselid, 1995; Ichniowski et al., 1997; Lepak and Snell, 2002), it becomes increasingly important to understand how SHRM effectiveness enhances the critical psychological links between employees and organizations. Moreover, several SHRM researchers have called for explicit examinations of these psychological links not only at the organization level but at the individual level (Becker and Huselid, 2006; Gerhart, 2005). One individual-level factor that can help to explain the psychological impact of SHRM practices is job embeddedness (JE), which Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, and Erez (2001b) validate and use to explain how employees become psychologically and socially enmeshed within the organization and community in which the organization operates. Hailed as an \"anti-withdrawal\" theory (Holtom et al., 2006; Mitchell et al., 2001b), JE describes the psychological forces that act \"like a net or a web in which an individual can become stuck\" (Mitchell et al., 2001b: 1104); moreover, the process of becoming embedded influences turnover intentions that lead to voluntary turnover (Allen, 2006). Importantly, JE explains unique variability of these important outcomes beyond the effects of job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Mitchell et al., 200lb; Lee et al., 2004). However, because JE has emerged as the most recent construct to explain employee turnover decisions, researchers have much to discover about the full potential of JE as an important variable in HRM. That is, HRM scholars have yet to determine how SHRM effectiv","PeriodicalId":228014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Issues","volume":"195 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116147111","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2007-08-01DOI: 10.5465/AMBPP.2007.26530768
Vera L. Street, H. Marble, Marc D. Street
Sustained performance advantages are rare in business (Wiggins and Ruefli, 2002). Nevertheless, firm managers are constantly faced with the challenge of trying to attain this elusive goal. Thus, it is not surprising that an important aim of strategic management researchers is to better understand how firms attain superior firm performance (Hoskisson et al., 1999). Firms adopting a "first-mover" strategy may be able to secure sustainable performance advantages (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). The term "first moves" (or "pioneering moves") can mean organizational efforts to create new markets through the introduction of new products or services; it can also refer to entry into new markets, or the development and implementation of new work processes (Kerin et al., 1992). Firms may benefit from adopting such strategies. For instance, Lieberman and Montgomery (1988) indicate three sources of advantage available to first movers so that they can outperform the competition. First, technological leadership allows for outperformance because a first mover is able to develop expertise from their leading edge research, development, and other similar activities (Cho et al., 1998). Additionally, preemption of assets, obtaining valuable assets or positioning space before others enter the market (Kerin et al., 1992; Lieberman and Montgomery, 1988) allows a competitive edge. Third, first movers are able to influence buyer behavior in that they provide the initial learning experience about a product/service for the consumer (Dos Santos and Peffers, 1995). As such, first-mover advantages have been an important area of study for strategy scholars. This is not to say, however, that there are no risks or costs associated with first moving. Indeed, scholars have argued that there is no conclusive evidence to support the existence of a first-mover advantage (see discussions by Kerin el al., 1992; Xie, 2003). It is likely first moves can be advantageous, but these advantages are not a given. Advantages from first moving are more likely to be gained when certain firm and environmental conditions exist (e.g., Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). Though some research does highlight the importance of specific internal characteristics and first moves (e.g., Szymanski et al., 1995) and others have also included external contingencies (e.g., Covin et al., 2000), the exact nature of the relationships among internal organizational characteristics, first moves, and firm performance remains elusive (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998; VanderWerf and Mahon, 1997). The resource-based view (RBV) can help one to better understand these relationships (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). The RBV is characterized by the assertion that a firm creates value through its network of resources (Black and Boal, 1994; Conner, 1991; Madhok, 1996). Firms outperform their competitors by leveraging these resources. As such, it is important to understand how these resources are acquired or built (e.g., Dierickx
持续的绩效优势在商业中是罕见的(Wiggins和Ruefli, 2002)。然而，企业管理人员不断面临着努力实现这一难以实现的目标的挑战。因此，毫不奇怪，战略管理研究者的一个重要目标是更好地理解企业如何获得卓越的企业绩效(Hoskisson et al.， 1999)。采用“先发”战略的公司可能能够获得可持续的绩效优势(Lieberman和Montgomery, 1998)。术语“第一步”(或“开拓性行动”)可以指通过引入新产品或服务来创造新市场的组织努力;它也可以指进入新市场，或开发和实施新的工作流程(Kerin et al.， 1992)。企业可能会从采用这种策略中受益。例如，利伯曼和蒙哥马利(1988)指出，先行者可以获得三种优势来源，使他们能够超越竞争对手。首先，技术领先允许卓越表现，因为先行者能够从他们的前沿研究、开发和其他类似活动中发展专业知识(Cho et al.， 1998)。此外，抢占资产，在他人进入市场之前获得有价值的资产或定位空间(Kerin et al.， 1992;利伯曼和蒙哥马利，1988)允许竞争优势。第三，先行者能够影响购买者的行为，因为他们为消费者提供了关于产品/服务的初步学习经验(Dos Santos和Peffers, 1995)。因此，先发优势一直是战略学者研究的一个重要领域。然而，这并不是说第一次搬家就没有风险或成本。事实上，学者们认为没有确凿的证据支持先发优势的存在(见Kerin el al.， 1992;谢,2003)。第一步很可能是有利的，但这些优势并不是给定的。当特定的企业和环境条件存在时，第一次行动的优势更有可能获得(例如，Lieberman和Montgomery, 1998)。尽管一些研究确实强调了特定的内部特征和第一步的重要性(例如，Szymanski等人，1995)，其他研究也包括了外部偶发性(例如，Covin等人，2000)，但组织内部特征、第一步和公司绩效之间关系的确切性质仍然难以捉摸(Lieberman和Montgomery, 1998;VanderWerf and Mahon, 1997)。资源基础观点(RBV)可以帮助人们更好地理解这些关系(Lieberman和Montgomery, 1998)。RBV的特点是断言企业通过其资源网络创造价值(Black and Boal, 1994;康纳,1991;Madhok, 1996)。企业通过利用这些资源胜过竞争对手。因此，了解如何获得或构建这些资源是很重要的(例如，Dierickx和Cool, 1989)。Lieberman和Montgomery(1998)认为，前面提到的由第一步产生的优势来源确实是企业的资源。在他们的模型中，Street等人(2010)展示了组织能力的要素如何帮助先行者建立这些资源，从而带来卓越的绩效。在此模型的基础上，本文检验了组织能力要素对首次行动-绩效关系的影响。此外，环境动力对这种调节关系的影响也进行了测试。为此，我们确定了五个行业的第一步。然后，分析公司的股票价格，看看公司的第一次行动是否会导致积极的股票反应。接下来，我们测试了先发者的组织能力水平对股价反应的影响，以及环境动力如何影响这种影响。本文对战略管理文献的贡献在于，研究结果有助于我们更多地了解第一步绩效关系及其附带因素的性质。…
{"title":"An Empirical Investigation of the Influence of Organizational Capacity and Environmental Dynamism on First Moves","authors":"Vera L. Street, H. Marble, Marc D. Street","doi":"10.5465/AMBPP.2007.26530768","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2007.26530768","url":null,"abstract":"Sustained performance advantages are rare in business (Wiggins and Ruefli, 2002). Nevertheless, firm managers are constantly faced with the challenge of trying to attain this elusive goal. Thus, it is not surprising that an important aim of strategic management researchers is to better understand how firms attain superior firm performance (Hoskisson et al., 1999). Firms adopting a \"first-mover\" strategy may be able to secure sustainable performance advantages (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). The term \"first moves\" (or \"pioneering moves\") can mean organizational efforts to create new markets through the introduction of new products or services; it can also refer to entry into new markets, or the development and implementation of new work processes (Kerin et al., 1992). Firms may benefit from adopting such strategies. For instance, Lieberman and Montgomery (1988) indicate three sources of advantage available to first movers so that they can outperform the competition. First, technological leadership allows for outperformance because a first mover is able to develop expertise from their leading edge research, development, and other similar activities (Cho et al., 1998). Additionally, preemption of assets, obtaining valuable assets or positioning space before others enter the market (Kerin et al., 1992; Lieberman and Montgomery, 1988) allows a competitive edge. Third, first movers are able to influence buyer behavior in that they provide the initial learning experience about a product/service for the consumer (Dos Santos and Peffers, 1995). As such, first-mover advantages have been an important area of study for strategy scholars. This is not to say, however, that there are no risks or costs associated with first moving. Indeed, scholars have argued that there is no conclusive evidence to support the existence of a first-mover advantage (see discussions by Kerin el al., 1992; Xie, 2003). It is likely first moves can be advantageous, but these advantages are not a given. Advantages from first moving are more likely to be gained when certain firm and environmental conditions exist (e.g., Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). Though some research does highlight the importance of specific internal characteristics and first moves (e.g., Szymanski et al., 1995) and others have also included external contingencies (e.g., Covin et al., 2000), the exact nature of the relationships among internal organizational characteristics, first moves, and firm performance remains elusive (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998; VanderWerf and Mahon, 1997). The resource-based view (RBV) can help one to better understand these relationships (Lieberman and Montgomery, 1998). The RBV is characterized by the assertion that a firm creates value through its network of resources (Black and Boal, 1994; Conner, 1991; Madhok, 1996). Firms outperform their competitors by leveraging these resources. As such, it is important to understand how these resources are acquired or built (e.g., Dierickx ","PeriodicalId":228014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Managerial Issues","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133612785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：