Pub Date : 2020-05-07DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00007
Yannick Griep, S. D. Hansen
For over a decade, organizational behavior scholars have highlighted the importance of studying phenomena through a “temporal lens” by focusing on the role of time and its various implications for research (e.g., Ancona, Goodman, Lawrence, & Tushman, 2001; Bluedorn, 2002; George & Jones, 2000; Mitchell & James, 2001; Ployhart, Holtz, & Bliese, 2002; Roe, 2008). These scholars, among others, argue that time is essential to the study of organizational behavior because it allows us to better explain “when” a phenomenon occurs, “what” aspects of the phenomena are being influenced, “how” these aspects are being influenced, and “why” this influence occurs. As such, time is of the utmost importance when trying to understand the full essence of organizational behavior. Despite the obvious role of time, it bears little acknowledgement in the organizational behavior literature. In fact, in most published articles, the findings and conclusions make no reference to time (for a critical review see Roe, 2008). The consequence is that we know and understand little about the factors related to the emergence or decline of the phenomena under study, their stability or dynamism, the sequence of their occurrence, and their rate of change. This presents a major barrier to advancing the literature, as the role of time is essential to comprehend fully the processes underlying the development and impact of emotions, attitudes, and behaviors in the workplace. As a result, we agree that “advancing theories that address the dynamics of how important phenomena emerge, evolve, and change over time is the next frontier” (Kozlowski, 2009; p. 3) and that that frontier is now upon us. Despite calls to incorporate time and temporal dynamics in the study of organizational phenomena, most researchers continue to develop theory or study emotions, attitudes, and behaviors without attending to time. To address this issue, scholars must change how they conceptualize emotions, attitudes, and behaviors and must adopt their research designs and methodologies such that they reflect the time dependency among phenomena. For example, although longitudinal designs are often believed to reflect the nature of time, most longitudinal studies merely demonstrate a particular sequence of events by predicting future employee emotions, attitudes, or behaviors based on previous emotions, attitudes, or behaviors without accounting for issues such as timing (e.g., early and delayed recovery or decline), time lags (e.g., minutes, hours, days, or weeks), and duration of the effects (immediate, postponed, or lingering influences) (Roe, 2008). As argued by Solinger, van Olffen, Roe, and Hofmans (2013), choosing a limited number of measurement points with large time intervals cannot adequately advance our understanding of how phenomena and relationships evolve and change over time, how employees react to these changes, or how the trajectories evolve over time. Moreover, studying how emotions, attitudes, and b
{"title":"Introduction to the Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","authors":"Yannick Griep, S. D. Hansen","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00007","url":null,"abstract":"For over a decade, organizational behavior scholars have highlighted the importance of studying phenomena through a “temporal lens” by focusing on the role of time and its various implications for research (e.g., Ancona, Goodman, Lawrence, & Tushman, 2001; Bluedorn, 2002; George & Jones, 2000; Mitchell & James, 2001; Ployhart, Holtz, & Bliese, 2002; Roe, 2008). These scholars, among others, argue that time is essential to the study of organizational behavior because it allows us to better explain “when” a phenomenon occurs, “what” aspects of the phenomena are being influenced, “how” these aspects are being influenced, and “why” this influence occurs. As such, time is of the utmost importance when trying to understand the full essence of organizational behavior. Despite the obvious role of time, it bears little acknowledgement in the organizational behavior literature. In fact, in most published articles, the findings and conclusions make no reference to time (for a critical review see Roe, 2008). The consequence is that we know and understand little about the factors related to the emergence or decline of the phenomena under study, their stability or dynamism, the sequence of their occurrence, and their rate of change. This presents a major barrier to advancing the literature, as the role of time is essential to comprehend fully the processes underlying the development and impact of emotions, attitudes, and behaviors in the workplace. As a result, we agree that “advancing theories that address the dynamics of how important phenomena emerge, evolve, and change over time is the next frontier” (Kozlowski, 2009; p. 3) and that that frontier is now upon us. Despite calls to incorporate time and temporal dynamics in the study of organizational phenomena, most researchers continue to develop theory or study emotions, attitudes, and behaviors without attending to time. To address this issue, scholars must change how they conceptualize emotions, attitudes, and behaviors and must adopt their research designs and methodologies such that they reflect the time dependency among phenomena. For example, although longitudinal designs are often believed to reflect the nature of time, most longitudinal studies merely demonstrate a particular sequence of events by predicting future employee emotions, attitudes, or behaviors based on previous emotions, attitudes, or behaviors without accounting for issues such as timing (e.g., early and delayed recovery or decline), time lags (e.g., minutes, hours, days, or weeks), and duration of the effects (immediate, postponed, or lingering influences) (Roe, 2008). As argued by Solinger, van Olffen, Roe, and Hofmans (2013), choosing a limited number of measurement points with large time intervals cannot adequately advance our understanding of how phenomena and relationships evolve and change over time, how employees react to these changes, or how the trajectories evolve over time. Moreover, studying how emotions, attitudes, and b","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115601508","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 : 2020-05-07DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00030
P. Bliese, Jason Kautz, Jonas W. B. Lang
{"title":"Discontinuous growth models: illustrations, recommendations, and an R function for generating the design matrix","authors":"P. Bliese, Jason Kautz, Jonas W. B. Lang","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00030","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130445119","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 : 2020-05-07DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00009
H. Zacher, C. Rudolph
Traditionally, most research conducted in the fields of organizational psychology and organizational behavior (OB) has adopted a differential perspective by focusing on between-person differences in psychological constructs, often measured at a single point in time. For instance, scholars have examined which individual difference characteristics (e.g., general mental ability, personality traits) best predict job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), job attitudes (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002), or leadership success (Bono & Judge, 2004). The emergence of multilevel modeling in the 1990s (Klein & Kozlowski, 2000) has led to a rapid growth in experience sampling and daily diary studies, which mostly investigated within-person variability in psychological constructs across time, as well as within-person associations among variables (Beal & Weiss, 2003). For instance, an early diary study found within-person relationships between employees’ daily recovery during leisure time and next-day work engagement and proactive behavior (Sonnentag, 2003). Up until recently, the vast majority of studies (including most experience sampling and diary studies) did not adopt a dynamic or process perspective by examining the role of change and stability in psychological constructs over time (Roe, 2008). Fortunately, the past decade has seen an increase in theory development and empirical studies that adopt a dynamic way of thinking and, by doing so, sometimes challenge existing knowledge in the field of OB. This trend may be due to an increased interest in the role of time and temporal development in organizational research (Ancona, Goodman, Lawrence, & Tushman, 2001; Mitchell & James, 2001; Shipp & Cole, 2015; Sonnentag, 2012; Zacher, 2015). The goal of this chapter is to selectively highlight such dynamic research, including studies on change and stability over time in: (a) personality and emotions, (b) attitudes and wellbeing, (c) motivation and behavior, (d) career development, (e) job design, (f) leadership and entrepreneurship, (g) teams and diversity, and (h) human resource management. We conclude this chapter with a discussion of implications for future theory development and empirical research. To set the stage, in the following section, we first describe what we mean by “a dynamic way of thinking.”
{"title":"How a dynamic way of thinking can challenge existing knowledge in organizational behavior","authors":"H. Zacher, C. Rudolph","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00009","url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, most research conducted in the fields of organizational psychology and organizational behavior (OB) has adopted a differential perspective by focusing on between-person differences in psychological constructs, often measured at a single point in time. For instance, scholars have examined which individual difference characteristics (e.g., general mental ability, personality traits) best predict job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), job attitudes (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002), or leadership success (Bono & Judge, 2004). The emergence of multilevel modeling in the 1990s (Klein & Kozlowski, 2000) has led to a rapid growth in experience sampling and daily diary studies, which mostly investigated within-person variability in psychological constructs across time, as well as within-person associations among variables (Beal & Weiss, 2003). For instance, an early diary study found within-person relationships between employees’ daily recovery during leisure time and next-day work engagement and proactive behavior (Sonnentag, 2003). Up until recently, the vast majority of studies (including most experience sampling and diary studies) did not adopt a dynamic or process perspective by examining the role of change and stability in psychological constructs over time (Roe, 2008). Fortunately, the past decade has seen an increase in theory development and empirical studies that adopt a dynamic way of thinking and, by doing so, sometimes challenge existing knowledge in the field of OB. This trend may be due to an increased interest in the role of time and temporal development in organizational research (Ancona, Goodman, Lawrence, & Tushman, 2001; Mitchell & James, 2001; Shipp & Cole, 2015; Sonnentag, 2012; Zacher, 2015). The goal of this chapter is to selectively highlight such dynamic research, including studies on change and stability over time in: (a) personality and emotions, (b) attitudes and wellbeing, (c) motivation and behavior, (d) career development, (e) job design, (f) leadership and entrepreneurship, (g) teams and diversity, and (h) human resource management. We conclude this chapter with a discussion of implications for future theory development and empirical research. To set the stage, in the following section, we first describe what we mean by “a dynamic way of thinking.”","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"127 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127482561","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 : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00008
{"title":"The Need to Look at Organizational Behavior from a Dynamic Perspective","authors":"","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126379043","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 : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00029
{"title":"A Method Toolbox","authors":"","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00029","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116710810","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 : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.4337/9781788974387.00011
{"title":"A Dynamic Look at Organizational Behavior Topics","authors":"","doi":"10.4337/9781788974387.00011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974387.00011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":297381,"journal":{"name":"Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126375229","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：