Pub Date : 2023-05-21DOI: 10.1177/10596011231176591
Charles O’Reilly, Xubo Cao, Donald Sull
Organizational culture is widely seen as an important element in a firm’s success or failure. While there is almost universal agreement that leaders define and shape organizational culture, there is little research exploring how and why they do this. We propose that a leader’s personality and values are the cornerstone of organizational culture. Using a validated natural language processing instrument, we used earnings call data to collect data on the personalities of 460 CEOs in 309 firms and matched this to organizational culture ratings based on Glassdoor employee ratings for the period 2015–2019. Results show strong, interpretable associations between a CEO’s personality and the culture of the firm—and this association is strengthened the longer the CEO is in the role. Further, by examining 128 succession events during this period, we also show that, consistent with attraction-similarity-retention logic, there is some weak evidence that the existing culture of a firm can be related to the selection of a new CEO. We discuss the implications of these findings for future research on organizational culture.
{"title":"CEO Personality: The Cornerstone of Organizational Culture?","authors":"Charles O’Reilly, Xubo Cao, Donald Sull","doi":"10.1177/10596011231176591","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231176591","url":null,"abstract":"Organizational culture is widely seen as an important element in a firm’s success or failure. While there is almost universal agreement that leaders define and shape organizational culture, there is little research exploring how and why they do this. We propose that a leader’s personality and values are the cornerstone of organizational culture. Using a validated natural language processing instrument, we used earnings call data to collect data on the personalities of 460 CEOs in 309 firms and matched this to organizational culture ratings based on Glassdoor employee ratings for the period 2015–2019. Results show strong, interpretable associations between a CEO’s personality and the culture of the firm—and this association is strengthened the longer the CEO is in the role. Further, by examining 128 succession events during this period, we also show that, consistent with attraction-similarity-retention logic, there is some weak evidence that the existing culture of a firm can be related to the selection of a new CEO. We discuss the implications of these findings for future research on organizational culture.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135472834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1177/10596011221150756
Jan B Schmutz, Nadine Bienefeld, M Travis Maynard, Ramón Rico
Work teams increasingly face unprecedented challenges in volatile, uncertain, complex, and often ambiguous environments. In response, team researchers have begun to focus more on teams whose work revolves around mitigating risks in these dynamic environments. Some highly insightful contributions to team research and organizational studies have originated from investigating teams that face unconventional or extreme events. Despite this increased attention to extreme teams, however, a comprehensive theoretical framework is missing. We introduce such a framework that envisions team extremeness as a continuous, multidimensional variable consisting of environmental extremeness (i.e., external team context) and task extremeness (i.e., internal team context). The proposed framework allows every team to be placed on the team extremeness continuum, bridging the gap between literature on extreme and more traditional teams. Furthermore, we present six propositions addressing how team extremeness may interact with team processes, emergent states, and outcomes using core variables for team effectiveness and the well-established input-mediator-output-input model to structure our theorizing. Finally, we outline some potential directions for future research by elaborating on temporal considerations (i.e., patterns and trajectories), measurement approaches, and consideration of multilevel relationships involving team extremeness. We hope that our theoretical framework and theorizing can create a path forward, stimulating future research within the organizational team literature to further examine the impact of team extremeness on team dynamics and effectiveness.
{"title":"Exceeding the Ordinary: A Framework for Examining Teams Across the Extremeness Continuum and Its Impact on Future Research.","authors":"Jan B Schmutz, Nadine Bienefeld, M Travis Maynard, Ramón Rico","doi":"10.1177/10596011221150756","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221150756","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Work teams increasingly face unprecedented challenges in volatile, uncertain, complex, and often ambiguous environments. In response, team researchers have begun to focus more on teams whose work revolves around mitigating risks in these dynamic environments. Some highly insightful contributions to team research and organizational studies have originated from investigating teams that face unconventional or extreme events. Despite this increased attention to extreme teams, however, a comprehensive theoretical framework is missing. We introduce such a framework that envisions <i>team extremeness</i> as a continuous, multidimensional variable consisting of <i>environmental extremeness</i> (i.e., external team context) and <i>task extremeness</i> (i.e., internal team context). The proposed framework allows every team to be placed on the team extremeness continuum, bridging the gap between literature on extreme and more traditional teams. Furthermore, we present six propositions addressing how team extremeness may interact with team processes, emergent states, and outcomes using core variables for team effectiveness and the well-established input-mediator-output-input model to structure our theorizing. Finally, we outline some potential directions for future research by elaborating on temporal considerations (i.e., patterns and trajectories), measurement approaches, and consideration of multilevel relationships involving team extremeness. We hope that our theoretical framework and theorizing can create a path forward, stimulating future research within the organizational team literature to further examine the impact of team extremeness on team dynamics and effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ba/5f/10.1177_10596011221150756.PMC10108401.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9379218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-30DOI: 10.1177/10596011231162491
V. Tonoyan, Julie B. Olson-Buchanan
Despite the rapidly increasing research on the nexus between gender diversity in upper echelons and firm innovation, the scholarly understanding of this topic is far from complete. Although the burgeoning literature has generated valuable insights summarized in our paper—most fundamentally uncovering gender diversity’s positive effect on firm innovation—our review of extant research indicates that it suffers from several limitations. One such key limitation is that scholarship has predominantly theorized and measured the surface-level gender diversity in leadership relying on either gender stereotypes or a notion of innate gender differences when explaining why the inclusion of women on executive boards might make a difference for firm innovation, neglecting the intersection between surface-level gender diversity and deep diversity in top management teams. We develop a multilevel theory that calls attention to investigating intersections between these two constructs, the multidimensionality of firm innovation and gender diversity, and discussing the rationales for why and when diversity is likely to get at the heart of firm innovation. We also map out some methodological suggestions for how scholars could test our propositions. We hope our efforts to describe these paths will encourage their pursuit.
{"title":"Toward a Multidimensional and Multilevel Approach to Studying Gender Diversity in Upper Echelons and Firm Innovation","authors":"V. Tonoyan, Julie B. Olson-Buchanan","doi":"10.1177/10596011231162491","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231162491","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the rapidly increasing research on the nexus between gender diversity in upper echelons and firm innovation, the scholarly understanding of this topic is far from complete. Although the burgeoning literature has generated valuable insights summarized in our paper—most fundamentally uncovering gender diversity’s positive effect on firm innovation—our review of extant research indicates that it suffers from several limitations. One such key limitation is that scholarship has predominantly theorized and measured the surface-level gender diversity in leadership relying on either gender stereotypes or a notion of innate gender differences when explaining why the inclusion of women on executive boards might make a difference for firm innovation, neglecting the intersection between surface-level gender diversity and deep diversity in top management teams. We develop a multilevel theory that calls attention to investigating intersections between these two constructs, the multidimensionality of firm innovation and gender diversity, and discussing the rationales for why and when diversity is likely to get at the heart of firm innovation. We also map out some methodological suggestions for how scholars could test our propositions. We hope our efforts to describe these paths will encourage their pursuit.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46467901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-10DOI: 10.1177/10596011231162765
Tammy L. Rapp, W. Davis, L. Gilson, Melissa Carsten, Thomas J. Zagenczyk
{"title":"The 2023 Conceptual Issue: So…Where Do We Go from Here?","authors":"Tammy L. Rapp, W. Davis, L. Gilson, Melissa Carsten, Thomas J. Zagenczyk","doi":"10.1177/10596011231162765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231162765","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42753903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-05DOI: 10.1177/10596011231162725
P. Coyle, Ashita Goswami, Roseanne J. Foti
Although numerous typologies, taxonomies, characteristics, and behaviors of followers have been proposed, there has been little systematic work to integrate these efforts. Guided by literature on follower role theory and expectations for those in follower roles, we propose a theoretical descriptive typology of follower characteristics and behaviors from the perspective of how leaders view followers within their role(s). Specifically, we constructed our typological model based on the three core tenets of follower role theory: (1) active versus passive characteristics and behaviors, (2) self-directed versus relationship-directed characteristics and behaviors, and (3) stability-focused versus change-focused characteristics and behaviors demonstrated in response to organizational constraints. We then conducted a systematic review of existing follower typologies, taxonomies, characteristics, and behaviors and synthesized 173 follower concepts from 36 Journal articles and book chapters to build out our typological model of 8 specific types of followers, labeled as follows: Politically strategic followers, independent followers, proactive followers, conforming followers, deviant followers, alienated followers, devoted followers, and submissive followers. This typology has important implications for scholars and practitioners. For scholars, this is the first effort to integrate prior attempts to classify follower in-role characteristics and behaviors, thus providing a useful framework to examine various ways in which followers interact with leaders in organizational frameworks. For practitioners, this typology can be used as a diagnostic tool to determine how to effectively engage subordinates.
{"title":"Using a Role-Based Approach to Develop a Comprehensive Typology of Follower Characteristics and Behaviors","authors":"P. Coyle, Ashita Goswami, Roseanne J. Foti","doi":"10.1177/10596011231162725","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231162725","url":null,"abstract":"Although numerous typologies, taxonomies, characteristics, and behaviors of followers have been proposed, there has been little systematic work to integrate these efforts. Guided by literature on follower role theory and expectations for those in follower roles, we propose a theoretical descriptive typology of follower characteristics and behaviors from the perspective of how leaders view followers within their role(s). Specifically, we constructed our typological model based on the three core tenets of follower role theory: (1) active versus passive characteristics and behaviors, (2) self-directed versus relationship-directed characteristics and behaviors, and (3) stability-focused versus change-focused characteristics and behaviors demonstrated in response to organizational constraints. We then conducted a systematic review of existing follower typologies, taxonomies, characteristics, and behaviors and synthesized 173 follower concepts from 36 Journal articles and book chapters to build out our typological model of 8 specific types of followers, labeled as follows: Politically strategic followers, independent followers, proactive followers, conforming followers, deviant followers, alienated followers, devoted followers, and submissive followers. This typology has important implications for scholars and practitioners. For scholars, this is the first effort to integrate prior attempts to classify follower in-role characteristics and behaviors, thus providing a useful framework to examine various ways in which followers interact with leaders in organizational frameworks. For practitioners, this typology can be used as a diagnostic tool to determine how to effectively engage subordinates.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45463921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-05DOI: 10.1177/10596011231161973
Enrica N. Ruggs, Isabel Bilotta, Ashley Membere, E. King, Ashleigh Shelby Rosette
Leadership self-efficacy (LSE), one’s beliefs in their own ability, knowledge, and skills in leading others effectively, can play a large role in how individuals develop and perform as leaders. Understanding the dynamics of LSE growth may be particularly important when considering the development of female leaders. The institutional barriers and gender inequities experienced by women can change the trajectory of their course to leadership; however, the ways in which the course changes likely differ as a function of intersecting identities. Rather than presume all women share common leadership development opportunities and experiences, we contend that women’s LSE is informed by experiences unique to their racial and ethnic backgrounds. According to intersectionality theory, individuals are part of multiple social categories that can shape their experiences. In the current paper, we focus on how the intersection of gender and race influence the development of LSE across the life span for White, Black, Asian American women, and Latinas. Integrating social cognitive theory with intersectionality theory, we explore how gendered and racialized experiences prior to and during adulthood shape women’s leadership self-efficacy. We also discuss ways that organizations can help reduce and counteract negative consequences of barriers to LSE for different women.
{"title":"At the Intersection: The Influence of Race on Women’s Leadership Self-Efficacy Development","authors":"Enrica N. Ruggs, Isabel Bilotta, Ashley Membere, E. King, Ashleigh Shelby Rosette","doi":"10.1177/10596011231161973","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231161973","url":null,"abstract":"Leadership self-efficacy (LSE), one’s beliefs in their own ability, knowledge, and skills in leading others effectively, can play a large role in how individuals develop and perform as leaders. Understanding the dynamics of LSE growth may be particularly important when considering the development of female leaders. The institutional barriers and gender inequities experienced by women can change the trajectory of their course to leadership; however, the ways in which the course changes likely differ as a function of intersecting identities. Rather than presume all women share common leadership development opportunities and experiences, we contend that women’s LSE is informed by experiences unique to their racial and ethnic backgrounds. According to intersectionality theory, individuals are part of multiple social categories that can shape their experiences. In the current paper, we focus on how the intersection of gender and race influence the development of LSE across the life span for White, Black, Asian American women, and Latinas. Integrating social cognitive theory with intersectionality theory, we explore how gendered and racialized experiences prior to and during adulthood shape women’s leadership self-efficacy. We also discuss ways that organizations can help reduce and counteract negative consequences of barriers to LSE for different women.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42204281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-03DOI: 10.1177/10596011231160574
K. Bezrukova, Terri L. Griffith, Chester S. Spell, Vincent Rice, Huiru Evangeline Yang
We theorize about human-team collaboration with AI by drawing upon research in groups and teams, social psychology, information systems, engineering, and beyond. Based on our review, we focus on two main issues in the teams and AI arena. The first is whether the team generally views AI positively or negatively. The second is whether the decision to use AI is left up to the team members (voluntary use of AI) or mandated by top management or other policy-setters in the organization. These two aspects guide our creation of a team-level conceptual framework modeling how AI introduced as a mandated addition to the team can have asymmetric effects on collaboration level depending on the team’s attitudes about AI. When AI is viewed positively by the team, the effect of mandatory use suppresses collaboration in the team. But when a team has negative attitudes toward AI, mandatory use elevates team collaboration. Our model emphasizes the need for managing team attitudes and discretion strategies and promoting new research directions regarding AI’s implications for teamwork.
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence and Groups: Effects of Attitudes and Discretion on Collaboration","authors":"K. Bezrukova, Terri L. Griffith, Chester S. Spell, Vincent Rice, Huiru Evangeline Yang","doi":"10.1177/10596011231160574","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231160574","url":null,"abstract":"We theorize about human-team collaboration with AI by drawing upon research in groups and teams, social psychology, information systems, engineering, and beyond. Based on our review, we focus on two main issues in the teams and AI arena. The first is whether the team generally views AI positively or negatively. The second is whether the decision to use AI is left up to the team members (voluntary use of AI) or mandated by top management or other policy-setters in the organization. These two aspects guide our creation of a team-level conceptual framework modeling how AI introduced as a mandated addition to the team can have asymmetric effects on collaboration level depending on the team’s attitudes about AI. When AI is viewed positively by the team, the effect of mandatory use suppresses collaboration in the team. But when a team has negative attitudes toward AI, mandatory use elevates team collaboration. Our model emphasizes the need for managing team attitudes and discretion strategies and promoting new research directions regarding AI’s implications for teamwork.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41292255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-03DOI: 10.1177/10596011231161974
Rajiv K. Amarnani, P. Bordia, P. Garcia, Imogen Sykes-Bridge
Are late careers worth studying in their own right? The way we think and reason about older workers and late careers—in scholarship and in practice—has been disproportionately informed by a research paradigm that focuses on age differences among employees, which captures how older workers on average differ from younger workers on average. While this contrastive paradigm has been generative, it can also inaccurately portray older workers as a static, homogenous group. In contrast, older workers show considerable heterogeneity (older workers vary), meaningful dynamics (older workers change), and dynamic heterogeneity (older workers vary in how they change). In this paper, we propose that the contrastive paradigm be complemented with a centered paradigm that centers on how older workers vary and change. We develop a theoretical model of how older worker dynamics and older worker heterogeneity shape the quality of their employment relationship—in terms of psychological contracts—which in turn shape their career trajectories and work role enactment. By centering this line of research on older workers, we gain a higher-resolution view of these late careers as unfolding over time and varying among older workers.
{"title":"You Can Leave the Younger Workers Out of It! Toward a Centered Paradigm for Studying Older Workers’ Employment Relationships and Late-Career Dynamics","authors":"Rajiv K. Amarnani, P. Bordia, P. Garcia, Imogen Sykes-Bridge","doi":"10.1177/10596011231161974","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231161974","url":null,"abstract":"Are late careers worth studying in their own right? The way we think and reason about older workers and late careers—in scholarship and in practice—has been disproportionately informed by a research paradigm that focuses on age differences among employees, which captures how older workers on average differ from younger workers on average. While this contrastive paradigm has been generative, it can also inaccurately portray older workers as a static, homogenous group. In contrast, older workers show considerable heterogeneity (older workers vary), meaningful dynamics (older workers change), and dynamic heterogeneity (older workers vary in how they change). In this paper, we propose that the contrastive paradigm be complemented with a centered paradigm that centers on how older workers vary and change. We develop a theoretical model of how older worker dynamics and older worker heterogeneity shape the quality of their employment relationship—in terms of psychological contracts—which in turn shape their career trajectories and work role enactment. By centering this line of research on older workers, we gain a higher-resolution view of these late careers as unfolding over time and varying among older workers.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42621214","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-02DOI: 10.1177/10596011231161404
Dustin K. Jundt, Mindy K. Shoss
Given its acceptance and value as an important facet of workplace behavior, research has primarily attempted to understand adaptive performance by way of examining its antecedents. Although useful, these findings provide little insight into the in-situ, intra-individual processes that occur during adaptive performance (i.e., How do people adapt to change? What determines the speed at which people adapt? How do failures to adapt occur?). The current paper develops and presents a process model of adaptation in order to provide a framework for organizing, understanding, and investigating the in-situ process involved when individuals adapt to changes in job demands. In particular, we suggest that in order to successfully adapt to a changing task environment, individuals must go through a series of processes in order to detect the nature of a change, diagnose its cause, develop or refine strategies, learn additional knowledge or skills, and enact appropriate performance behaviors. At the same time, dynamic emotional, cognitive, motivational, and situational factors serve as proximal inputs and outputs of these processes. In doing so, they shape the success and speed with which people adapt and suggest a broadened set of outcomes of adaptive performance. We describe how this model can be leveraged to stimulate dynamic adaptive performance research and to promote adaptive performance in applied settings.
{"title":"A Process Perspective on Adaptive Performance: Research Insights and New Directions","authors":"Dustin K. Jundt, Mindy K. Shoss","doi":"10.1177/10596011231161404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231161404","url":null,"abstract":"Given its acceptance and value as an important facet of workplace behavior, research has primarily attempted to understand adaptive performance by way of examining its antecedents. Although useful, these findings provide little insight into the in-situ, intra-individual processes that occur during adaptive performance (i.e., How do people adapt to change? What determines the speed at which people adapt? How do failures to adapt occur?). The current paper develops and presents a process model of adaptation in order to provide a framework for organizing, understanding, and investigating the in-situ process involved when individuals adapt to changes in job demands. In particular, we suggest that in order to successfully adapt to a changing task environment, individuals must go through a series of processes in order to detect the nature of a change, diagnose its cause, develop or refine strategies, learn additional knowledge or skills, and enact appropriate performance behaviors. At the same time, dynamic emotional, cognitive, motivational, and situational factors serve as proximal inputs and outputs of these processes. In doing so, they shape the success and speed with which people adapt and suggest a broadened set of outcomes of adaptive performance. We describe how this model can be leveraged to stimulate dynamic adaptive performance research and to promote adaptive performance in applied settings.","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42698224","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/10596011231162498
Ivana Vranjes, Yannick Griep, M. Fortin, G. Notelaers
When employees share and compete for resources through their daily interactions, friction is likely to occur. Such friction can become a breeding ground for interpersonal workplace mistreatment, which is characterized by interpersonal actions that cause severe harm to persons who are motivated to avoid such harm (Pearson, Andersson, & Wegner 2001). Most employees encounter some manifestations of workplace mistreatment throughout their career (Barling, Dupré, & Kelloway 2009), and this mistreatment carries tremendous costs for individuals as well as the organization, including increased stress and reduced performance (for a review, see Dhanani & LaPalme, 2019). It is therefore not surprising that scholars have increasingly become interested in interpersonal mistreatment topics spanning across multiple disciplines and covering an array of constructs, including incivility (e.g., Cortina, Hershcovis, & Clancy 2022), injustice and unfairness (e.g., Fortin, Cropanzano, Cugueró-Escofet, Nadisic, & Van Wagoner 2020), bullying (e.g., Notelaers et al., 2019b), cyberbullying (Vranjes, Baillien, Erreygers, Vandebosch, & De Witte 2021), harassment (e.g., Hershcovis, Vranjes, Berdahl, & Cortina 2021), and organizational and interpersonal deviance (Griep & Vantilborgh, 2018). The proliferation of interpersonal workplace mistreatment research has helped us to better understand individual and contextual antecedents as well as consequences of workplace mistreatment. For instance, previous research found that a stressful work environment leads to mistreatment (for a metaanalysis, see Bowling & Beehr, 2006), especially for people who lack selfregulatory capabilities (McAllister & Perrewe, 2018). This in turn can lead to a plethora of negative outcomes, including reduced employee and organizational wellbeing and performance (for a review, see Dhanani & LaPalme, 2019).
{"title":"Dynamic and Multi-Party Approaches to Interpersonal Workplace Mistreatment Research","authors":"Ivana Vranjes, Yannick Griep, M. Fortin, G. Notelaers","doi":"10.1177/10596011231162498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011231162498","url":null,"abstract":"When employees share and compete for resources through their daily interactions, friction is likely to occur. Such friction can become a breeding ground for interpersonal workplace mistreatment, which is characterized by interpersonal actions that cause severe harm to persons who are motivated to avoid such harm (Pearson, Andersson, & Wegner 2001). Most employees encounter some manifestations of workplace mistreatment throughout their career (Barling, Dupré, & Kelloway 2009), and this mistreatment carries tremendous costs for individuals as well as the organization, including increased stress and reduced performance (for a review, see Dhanani & LaPalme, 2019). It is therefore not surprising that scholars have increasingly become interested in interpersonal mistreatment topics spanning across multiple disciplines and covering an array of constructs, including incivility (e.g., Cortina, Hershcovis, & Clancy 2022), injustice and unfairness (e.g., Fortin, Cropanzano, Cugueró-Escofet, Nadisic, & Van Wagoner 2020), bullying (e.g., Notelaers et al., 2019b), cyberbullying (Vranjes, Baillien, Erreygers, Vandebosch, & De Witte 2021), harassment (e.g., Hershcovis, Vranjes, Berdahl, & Cortina 2021), and organizational and interpersonal deviance (Griep & Vantilborgh, 2018). The proliferation of interpersonal workplace mistreatment research has helped us to better understand individual and contextual antecedents as well as consequences of workplace mistreatment. For instance, previous research found that a stressful work environment leads to mistreatment (for a metaanalysis, see Bowling & Beehr, 2006), especially for people who lack selfregulatory capabilities (McAllister & Perrewe, 2018). This in turn can lead to a plethora of negative outcomes, including reduced employee and organizational wellbeing and performance (for a review, see Dhanani & LaPalme, 2019).","PeriodicalId":48143,"journal":{"name":"Group & Organization Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49633467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","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：