Journal of Organizational Behavior最新文献

A key challenge in the shared leadership literature has been a limited understanding of how multiple leadership activities are shared across team members and roles. We address this issue by conceptualizing and operationalizing shared leadership using both its content (i.e., what leadership roles are shared) and distribution (i.e., how leadership is shared across members and roles). In an exploratory study comprised of 129 work teams, we use latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify multiple shared leadership configurations that vary in the extent of sharing. Our second study of 103 MBA teams supports these findings and further (a) considers what shared leadership configurations have the greatest influence on team effectiveness, (b) examines the mediating role of teamwork processes, and (c) investigates the moderating role of temporal dispersion. We advance current research by demonstrating that shared leadership typically manifests in collective (i.e., members share all leadership roles) and distributed configurations (i.e., members hold one leadership role while other members hold other leadership roles), which has implications for team processes and effectiveness. Specifically, we show that collective configurations have higher team effectiveness (compared to distributed configurations) owing to improved teamwork processes and observe that these effects are more pronounced when temporal dispersion is high.

Negative events within and outside of work can disrupt coworkers' relationships, triggering a re-evaluation of relationship quality. The subjective experience of these events – which we term relationship threats – harms relationships, resulting in long-lasting negative interpersonal and organizational consequences. Coworkers' responses to a relationship threat determine whether relationships are repaired or whether the threat leads to a loss of commitment, lowered satisfaction, and increased negative affect. Because of the critical role that relationships play in organizational life, it is vital that we have a comprehensive understanding of the repair process. To date, researchers have focused on one of three repair processes: trust repair. In reconceptualizing relationship repair, we flesh out the remaining two processes: relationship work and sensemaking. Our reconceptualization balances the restorative actions that mitigate in-the-moment harm with those that sustain these benefits over time. We expand our understanding of relationship repair by highlighting the role that narrative foundations play in determining a relationships' vulnerabilities and determining effective repair processes. We highlight the importance of considering relationship threats as events embedded within a relationship's history; identify narrative foundations as a bridging mechanism between disrupted relationships and their repair; and expand our conceptualization of the processes that repair relationships.

Longitudinal research has grown in popularity in the field of management and organizations. However, the literature has neglected to consider the important ways in which researchers' temporal decisions can influence observed change in longitudinal studies. Researchers must make a set of temporal decisions to capture change, such as the temporal precision of the hypothesized form of change, the selection of a sample that is expected to exhibit the change, the choice of variables to be measured repeatedly, the frequency of measurements, and the time interval between measurements. However, these decisions typically are based on “educated guesses,” which makes their effects on the observed change unclear. In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework to explain how temporal decisions influence observed change and validate it by meta-analyzing longitudinal studies (k = 268). Specifically, we found that observed change is affected by hypotheses (i.e., temporal precision), the sample (i.e., presence of a change trigger), variables (i.e., variable type and rating source), and measurement occasions (i.e., frequency and time interval). These findings offer insights into the importance of making informed temporal decisions. The implications of our findings are broad and applicable across research streams and theoretical traditions.

Using findings from an inductive study of two high-hazard organizations and insights from behavioral ethics literature, we build a model illustrating the behavioral foundations of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). We show that employees in high-hazard organizations scrutinize their work, actively deciding how to alter work tasks and boundaries and persevering through obstacles to lay the groundwork for CSR. Central to this process is employee moral awareness—the awareness of one's activities and the consequences those activities may have on others—through which they translate organizational hazards into their work decisions. Our findings further suggest that moral awareness is more dynamic than previously conceptualized, continually assembled, and reassembled through the active exchange and deployment of scientific and moral principles. In contrast to the extant literature that prioritizes the unitary nature of CSR and its top-down effects, our findings uncover individual-level ethical decisions as its foundation and identify moral awareness and work scrutinization as mechanisms through which individuals lay the groundwork for CSR.

Kim, T.-Y., Liden, R. C., Liu, Z., & Wu, C. (2022). The interplay of leader–member exchange and peer mentoring in teams on team performance via team potency, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(5), 931–945. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2590

In the original version of this article, all the coefficients reported in Table 2 are marked with **, incorrectly indicating that they are all significant. Below, we provide the corrected version of Table 2.

We apologize for this error.

Emerging research demonstrates that female managers who mistreat their subordinates suffer more severe negative consequences than male managers. Researchers presume this is because women (but not men) are penalized for acting incongruently with communality prescriptions (i.e., being insufficiently kind). However, integrating this work with the broader literature on gender and leadership, gendered reactions to mistreatment could also—or alternatively—be explained by incongruence with high agency proscriptions (i.e., being too dominant). We model these mechanisms simultaneously in a moderated mediation model across three studies, and find that employees are less trusting of female than male managers because they interpret interpersonal justice violations from women as incongruent with low agency prescriptions. Our results challenge a prevailing assumption in the mistreatment literature by revealing that female managers suffer more severe relational consequences than male managers because their violation of interpersonal justice is construed as excessively agentic, whereas these behaviors are viewed as similarly contravening communality for both male and female managers. By directly testing and correctly specifying the mechanism through which manager gender can shape social exchange processes in the aftermath of manager mistreatment, our studies have scientific and practical implications.