Journal of Organizational Behavior最新文献

Employee well-being is one of the most studied outcomes in organizational research, operationalized variously as job satisfaction, affective well-being, work engagement, work meaningfulness, and eudaimonic well-being. What is lacking is a unified theoretical framework integrating various disparate research streams around separate well-being indicators. The present work offers such an organizing framework, building on self-determination theory and Erik Allardt's multidimensional theory of well-being. In particular, I distinguish functional well-being from perceived well-being, with the former consisting of three existential conditions associated with particular needs: Having focuses on feeling safe and getting the resources required for survival from work, loving focuses on getting one's interpersonal needs met at work, and doing focuses on getting one's agentic needs for autonomy and competence met at work. Perceived well-being (being) focuses on directly experiencing well-being at work, and I propose that it consists of evaluative, affective, and conative well-being, which largely result from having the three types of needs satisfied at work. I also propose a distinction between the fulfillment pathway to well-being and the frustration pathway to ill-being as two partially independent wellness processes. This integrative framework helps both scholars and practitioners make more informed choices about what dimensions of employee well-being to measure.

System justification theory posits that individuals tend to justify and maintain the status quo. For workplace mistreatment, we argue this tendency can elicit psychological processes in observers that may further disadvantage targets of mistreatment. We propose that organizational climates that are perceived to tolerate mistreatment increase the likelihood that observers perceive specific instances of mistreatment as inevitable. This can activate system justification tendencies in which observers evaluate the mistreatment incident as more legitimate and the target as less legitimate, prompting harmful observer reactions (e.g., minimizing the incident, negatively gossiping about the target). To investigate system justification in observer reactions, we validate a measure of perceived mistreatment inevitability and conduct a multiwave survey to test our hypotheses. Our findings indicate that organizational climates that tolerate mistreatment increase observers' perceptions that specific instances of mistreatment are inevitable, thereby activating processes that prompt observers to justify and maintain the status quo. Theoretical implications include identifying what activates system justification, why observers justify mistreatment, and how these tendencies elicit harmful reactions further disadvantaging targets. Practically, our findings highlight the importance of addressing organizational climates that tolerate mistreatment, avoiding reliance on observers to intervene constructively, and effectively addressing mistreatment to prevent further harm to targets.

Teams often fail to mobilize their resources effectively, which can undermine team engagement. Prominent work engagement theories, including Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) theory, have not accounted for this conceptually. By taking a closer look at how teams can mobilize resources through their use of agile work practices (AWPs), we develop a multilevel extension of JD-R theory. First, we propose that agile taskwork (i.e., use of sprint planning and iterative development practices) contributes to team engagement, especially in teams working on complex tasks. Second, we argue that agile teamwork (i.e., frequency of stand-up and retrospective meetings) promotes team engagement only when team role conflict low. We test our hypotheses in a field study involving 110 teams (N = 694 employees) with multisource ratings of job demands and two different operationalizations of team engagement. Our findings demonstrate which AWPs contribute more (vs. less) strongly to team engagement. Moreover, results evidence the boosting principle of JD-R theory at the team-level by showing that resource mobilization through agile taskwork is most engaging in challenging contexts (i.e., high work complexity). We discuss the implications of these findings for JD-R theory and research on collective work engagement.

Building on research on star performance, gender, and situational constraints, we introduce a longitudinal process model explaining the gender gap in star emergence. We argue that star emergence is less likely for women than men due to stardom's association with men and masculinity. As a result, situational constraints are more likely to insulate women's performance in terms of knowledge, skills, and abilities development and evaluation (e.g., access to vicarious deliberate practice, biased standards), motivation (e.g., competition intensity, negative interpersonal behavior), and opportunity (e.g., access to high potential tasks, partner supportiveness in the extra-work environment). We theorize that these factors lead to insulation cycles that reduce the likelihood of women emerging as stars over time. We also offer propositions about mitigators (e.g., strategic diversity goals and influential sponsors) that might attenuate these insulating effects. Finally, we discuss theoretical implications of understanding gender gaps in star emergence (e.g., performance insulation as gender inequity, the importance of a longitudinal perspective, insulation cycles, and star longevity) and practical implications for organizations to create equitable environments for star emergence (e.g., focusing on performance equity and facilitating gender inclusivity). We conclude that greater insight into the role of gender in star performance can also contribute to the broader understanding of gender gaps in organizations.

The correct and complete reference is:

Georgiadou, A., Amari, A., Swalhi, A., & Hofaidhllaoui, M. (2024). How Does Perceived Organizational Support Improve Expatriates' Outcomes During Global Crises? The Mediating Role of the Ethical Organizational Climate in Global Organizations. Journal of International Management, 30(3), 101131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2024.101131.

Mustafa Özbilgin's affiliation was incorrect in the published version. The correct affiliation is:

Brunel University of London, London, UK.

We apologize for these errors.