Research in Organizational Behavior最新文献

Applying the culture cycle to understand anti-DEI resistance and intentionally craft a more egalitarian society 运用文化周期来理解对dei的抵抗，并有意打造一个更加平等的社会

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100224

Abigail M. Folberg , Hwayeon Myeong , Linh N.H. Pham , Linda T. Nguyen , Mikki R. Hebl , Eden B. King

Resistance against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), which is often referred to as “backlash,” undermines the effectiveness of DEI and may result in the harassment of marginalized group members, highlighting the need to effectively address it. Typically, scholars study anti-DEI resistance as an individual-level phenomenon. Yet, the current wave of anti-DEI resistance in the U.S. also includes organizational and government actions, including public accusations that DEI is “unAmerican” (The White House, 2025). Thus, anti-DEI resistance might be better understood as a multi-level phenomenon that involves profound disagreements about cultural values. To better understand anti-DEI resistance, we integrate the backlash literature with the culture cycle framework (Markus & Kitayama, 2010), which suggests that culture comprises individuals, interactions, institutions, as well as broader ideals and values. We argue that integrating these two literatures may provide a better understanding of: (1) the ideas and structures that guide DEI and anti-DEI resistance, (2) the multi-level nature of anti-DEI resistance, including how resistance at one level (e.g., individual actions) may affect resistance at another (e.g., organizational actions), (3) how ambivalent resistance (i.e., simultaneously supporting and resisting DEI) may emerge both within and across levels, producing changes in support for DEI over time, and (4) how to address anti-DEI resistance. We then draw on the seven principles of intentional cultural change (Hamedani et al., 2024)—an outgrowth of the culture cycle framework—to advance actionable and empirically supported interventions designed to remediate anti-DEI resistance and cultivate inclusive change. We conclude by offering directions for future research.

对多样性、公平和包容（DEI）的抵制，通常被称为“反弹”，破坏了DEI的有效性，并可能导致对边缘化群体成员的骚扰，突出了有效解决这一问题的必要性。通常，学者们将反dei抵抗作为个体层面的现象进行研究。然而，美国当前的反DEI抵抗浪潮也包括组织和政府行动，包括公开指责DEI是“非美国的”（the White House, 2025）。因此，反dei抵抗可以更好地理解为一种多层次的现象，涉及对文化价值观的深刻分歧。为了更好地理解对dei的抵制，我们将反冲文献与文化周期框架（Markus & Kitayama, 2010）结合起来，认为文化包括个人、互动、制度以及更广泛的理想和价值观。我们认为，整合这两种文献可以更好地理解：(1)指导DEI和反DEI抵抗的思想和结构；(2)反DEI抵抗的多层次性质，包括一个层面的抵抗（例如，个人行动）如何影响另一个层面的抵抗（例如，组织行动）；(3)矛盾抵抗（即，同时支持和抵制DEI）如何在内部和跨层面出现，并随着时间的推移产生对DEI的支持变化；(4)如何解决反DEI抵抗。然后，我们利用有意文化变革的七项原则（Hamedani et al., 2024）——文化周期框架的产物——来推进可操作的和经验支持的干预措施，旨在纠正反dei抵抗并培养包容性变革。最后提出了今后的研究方向。

{"title":"Applying the culture cycle to understand anti-DEI resistance and intentionally craft a more egalitarian society","authors":"Abigail M. Folberg , Hwayeon Myeong , Linh N.H. Pham , Linda T. Nguyen , Mikki R. Hebl , Eden B. King","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100224","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100224","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Resistance against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), which is often referred to as “backlash,” undermines the effectiveness of DEI and may result in the harassment of marginalized group members, highlighting the need to effectively address it. Typically, scholars study anti-DEI resistance as an individual-level phenomenon. Yet, the current wave of anti-DEI resistance in the U.S. also includes organizational and government actions, including public accusations that DEI is “unAmerican” (<span><span>The White House, 2025</span></span>). Thus, anti-DEI resistance might be better understood as a multi-level phenomenon that involves profound disagreements about cultural values. To better understand anti-DEI resistance, we integrate the backlash literature with the culture cycle framework (Markus & Kitayama, 2010), which suggests that culture comprises individuals, interactions, institutions, as well as broader ideals and values. We argue that integrating these two literatures may provide a better understanding of: (1) the ideas and structures that guide DEI and anti-DEI resistance, (2) the multi-level nature of anti-DEI resistance, including how resistance at one level (e.g., individual actions) may affect resistance at another (e.g., organizational actions), (3) how ambivalent resistance (i.e., simultaneously supporting and resisting DEI) may emerge both within and across levels, producing changes in support for DEI over time, and (4) how to address anti-DEI resistance. We then draw on the seven principles of intentional cultural change (<span><span>Hamedani et al., 2024</span></span>)—an outgrowth of the culture cycle framework—to advance actionable and empirically supported interventions designed to remediate anti-DEI resistance and cultivate inclusive change. We conclude by offering directions for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100224"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145531766","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}

引用次数: 0

Workplace inclusion: A social network perspective 职场包容：社会网络视角

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100221

Taurean Butler , Emily Falk , Adam M. Kleinbaum

Workplace inclusion is fundamental to fostering diversity and equity in organizations, yet it remains inconsistently defined and operationalized in the literature. This paper integrates research on the psychology of belonging with social network analysis to propose a framework that bridges organizational practices of inclusion, meso-level network dynamics, and individual experiences of belonging. We define inclusion as the organizational structures, policies, and practices that foster a sense of individual belonging; we conceptualize belonging as stemming from an individual's experience of value, reciprocity, and fit. And we argue that organizational practices of inclusion shape individuals’ experiences of belonging in part by re-shaping the social networks that comprise their daily interactions. Drawing from social network research, we posit key structural indicators of individual-level belonging, including network centrality, bidirectional ties, and structural equivalence, which shape employees’ experiences within organizations. Applying this framework, we then highlight how employees from marginalized groups are disproportionately excluded from informal networks, restricting their access to information, mentorship, and advancement opportunities, and changing the affordances of network positions. We argue that social network analysis provides a potential tool to diagnose and address these disparities, enabling organizations to measure and intervene in structural barriers to inclusion. By linking organizational-level practices of inclusion to the richly theorized individual-level experience of belonging, with networks serving as the bridge, we provide a roadmap for future research and practical interventions that promote retention, well-being, and engagement among diverse groups of employees and advance a more coherent and actionable approach to fostering inclusion in the workplace.

工作场所包容性是促进组织多样性和公平性的基础，但在文献中对其的定义和操作仍然不一致。本文将归属感心理学研究与社会网络分析相结合，提出了一个连接组织包容实践、中观网络动力学和个体归属感体验的框架。我们将包容性定义为培养个人归属感的组织结构、政策和实践；我们将归属感的概念定义为源于个人对价值、互惠和契合的体验。我们认为，包容性的组织实践在一定程度上通过重新塑造构成他们日常互动的社会网络来塑造个人的归属感体验。根据社会网络研究，我们提出了个人层面归属的关键结构指标，包括网络中心性、双向联系和结构等效，这些指标塑造了员工在组织内的体验。应用这一框架，我们接着强调了边缘化群体的员工如何不成比例地被排除在非正式网络之外，限制了他们获得信息、指导和晋升机会，并改变了网络职位的可负担性。我们认为，社会网络分析提供了一种潜在的工具来诊断和解决这些差异，使组织能够衡量和干预包容性的结构性障碍。通过将组织层面的包容实践与理论化程度较高的个人层面的归属感体验联系起来，以网络为桥梁，我们为未来的研究和实际干预提供了路线图，以促进不同员工群体之间的保留、幸福感和参与度，并提出了一种更连贯、更可行的方法来促进工作场所的包容。

{"title":"Workplace inclusion: A social network perspective","authors":"Taurean Butler , Emily Falk , Adam M. Kleinbaum","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100221","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100221","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Workplace inclusion is fundamental to fostering diversity and equity in organizations, yet it remains inconsistently defined and operationalized in the literature. This paper integrates research on the psychology of belonging with social network analysis to propose a framework that bridges organizational practices of inclusion, meso-level network dynamics, and individual experiences of belonging. We define inclusion as the organizational structures, policies, and practices that foster a sense of individual belonging; we conceptualize belonging as stemming from an individual's experience of value, reciprocity, and fit. And we argue that organizational practices of inclusion shape individuals’ experiences of belonging in part by re-shaping the social networks that comprise their daily interactions. Drawing from social network research, we posit key structural indicators of individual-level belonging, including network centrality, bidirectional ties, and structural equivalence, which shape employees’ experiences within organizations. Applying this framework, we then highlight how employees from marginalized groups are disproportionately excluded from informal networks, restricting their access to information, mentorship, and advancement opportunities, and changing the affordances of network positions. We argue that social network analysis provides a potential tool to diagnose and address these disparities, enabling organizations to measure and intervene in structural barriers to inclusion. By linking organizational-level practices of inclusion to the richly theorized individual-level experience of belonging, with networks serving as the bridge, we provide a roadmap for future research and practical interventions that promote retention, well-being, and engagement among diverse groups of employees and advance a more coherent and actionable approach to fostering inclusion in the workplace.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100221"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145575640","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}

引用次数: 0

Buckets under a leaky roof: A dual pathway framework of obfuscated anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations 漏屋顶下的桶：组织中模糊的反平等主义等级制度的双重路径框架

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100227

Alexandra Figueroa , Merrick R. Osborne , Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson

Arbitrary social hierarchies permeate our working lives in ways not always visible, introducing anti-egalitarian norms which stymie productivity. Reviewing bodies of work that identify and describe systems of oppression, we develop a framework that illuminates the cascading influence of such socio-historical factors on organizational processes. We contend that the literatures converge on a single, sobering logic: because organizations are embedded in—and seek legitimacy from—broader socio-historical contexts, the same arbitrary hierarchies that stratify societies are naturally imported into organizational life. At the same time, individuals are motivated to obscure the influence of these hierarchies to reduce psychological distress. We leverage institutional theory and systems psychodynamics to map how organizations are at the crux of external pressures (from society) and upward pressure (from employees) which both perpetuate and obfuscate the replication of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations. In doing so, we clarify the most appropriate applications of common terminology used to describe the experiences of disadvantaged groups (e.g., discrimination, marginalization, minoritization). Specifically, we redirect scholars’ usage of the term “microaggressions” away from the commonplace or subtle nature of the microaggression to highlight their origin in – and maintenance of – anti-egalitarian organizational power structures. We then utilize this framework to generate recommendations to help organizational leaders “stop the leak” or ameliorate the influence of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in their workplace.

武断的社会等级制度以一种并不总是可见的方式渗透到我们的工作生活中，引入了阻碍生产力的反平等主义规范。回顾识别和描述压迫系统的工作机构，我们开发了一个框架，阐明了这些社会历史因素对组织过程的级联影响。我们认为，这些文献集中在一个单一的、发人深意的逻辑上：因为组织嵌入在更广泛的社会历史背景中，并从更广泛的社会历史背景中寻求合法性，因此，将社会分层的同样武断的等级制度自然被引入到组织生活中。与此同时，个体有动机模糊这些等级制度的影响，以减少心理困扰。我们利用制度理论和系统心理动力学来描绘组织如何处于外部压力（来自社会）和向上压力（来自员工）的核心，这些压力既延续又模糊了组织中反平等主义等级制度的复制。在此过程中，我们澄清了用于描述弱势群体经历的常用术语的最适当应用（例如，歧视、边缘化、少数化）。具体来说，我们将学者对“微侵略”一词的使用从微侵略的普通或微妙的本质转向强调它们起源于反平等主义的组织权力结构，并维持这种结构。然后，我们利用这个框架来生成建议，以帮助组织领导者“阻止泄漏”或改善反平等主义等级制度在其工作场所的影响。

{"title":"Buckets under a leaky roof: A dual pathway framework of obfuscated anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations","authors":"Alexandra Figueroa , Merrick R. Osborne , Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100227","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100227","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Arbitrary social hierarchies permeate our working lives in ways not always visible, introducing anti-egalitarian norms which stymie productivity. Reviewing bodies of work that identify and describe systems of oppression, we develop a framework that illuminates the cascading influence of such socio-historical factors on organizational processes. We contend that the literatures converge on a single, sobering logic: because organizations are embedded in—and seek legitimacy from—broader socio-historical contexts, the same arbitrary hierarchies that stratify societies are naturally imported into organizational life. At the same time, individuals are motivated to obscure the influence of these hierarchies to reduce psychological distress. We leverage institutional theory and systems psychodynamics to map how organizations are at the crux of external pressures (from society) and upward pressure (from employees) which both perpetuate and obfuscate the replication of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in organizations. In doing so, we clarify the most appropriate applications of common terminology used to describe the experiences of disadvantaged groups (e.g., discrimination, marginalization, minoritization). Specifically, we redirect scholars’ usage of the term “microaggressions” away from the commonplace or subtle nature of the microaggression to highlight their origin in – and maintenance of – anti-egalitarian organizational power structures. We then utilize this framework to generate recommendations to help organizational leaders “stop the leak” or ameliorate the influence of anti-egalitarian hierarchies in their workplace.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100227"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553330","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}

引用次数: 0

The paradox of privilege: The downsides of masculinity for men and organizations 特权的悖论：男子气概对男性和组织的负面影响

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100226

Ashley E. Martin, Seung Joo Yoo

Gender research in organizational behavior has primarily focused on understanding and addressing the disadvantages women face in masculine work environments. While this body of work has been essential to understanding gender inequality in the workplace, it has left a critical gap: examining how masculinity both shapes and constrains men’s experiences and outcomes. This paper reverses the traditional focus of gender research in organizational behavior by arguing that masculinity is not only a source of advantage; it is also a system of traits, expectations, and values that imposes psychological and social costs on men. Drawing from interdisciplinary research across organizational behavior, psychology, and sociology, we argue that aspects of masculinity—such as stoicism, risk-taking, aggression, self-reliance, ambition, and dominance—are simultaneously organizationally rewarded as well as personally harmful. These expectations contribute to men’s poorer mental health, weaker social support networks, higher rates of self-harm, and greater exposure to physical danger. Moreover, while these aspects of masculinity are thought to drive organizational and societal growth, success, and power, they can also produce exclusionary cultures that undermine employee well-being. This paper argues that gender equity efforts must account for how masculinity shapes men—not only in the ways it enables their power but also in the ways it restricts their well-being. Addressing the double-edged nature of masculinity is not a diversion from gender progress but rather is an essential step toward creating healthier individuals, organizations, and societies.

组织行为学中的性别研究主要集中在理解和解决女性在男性化的工作环境中面临的劣势。虽然这些研究对理解工作场所的性别不平等至关重要，但它留下了一个关键的空白：研究男性气质如何塑造和限制男性的经历和结果。本文颠覆了组织行为学中性别研究的传统焦点，认为男性气质不仅是优势的来源；它也是一个特征、期望和价值观的体系，给男性带来了心理和社会成本。从组织行为学、心理学和社会学的跨学科研究中，我们认为男性气质的一些方面——比如坚忍、冒险、好斗、自立、野心和支配力——在组织上得到回报的同时也对个人有害。这些期望导致男性的心理健康状况较差，社会支持网络较弱，自残率较高，并且更容易面临身体危险。此外，虽然男性气质的这些方面被认为可以推动组织和社会的发展、成功和权力，但它们也会产生排他性的文化，损害员工的福祉。这篇论文认为，性别平等的努力必须考虑到男性气质是如何塑造男性的——不仅在赋予他们权力的方式上，而且在限制他们幸福的方式上。解决阳刚之气的双刃剑本质并不是对性别进步的转移，而是创造更健康的个人、组织和社会的必要步骤。

{"title":"The paradox of privilege: The downsides of masculinity for men and organizations","authors":"Ashley E. Martin, Seung Joo Yoo","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100226","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100226","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Gender research in organizational behavior has primarily focused on understanding and addressing the disadvantages women face in masculine work environments. While this body of work has been essential to understanding gender inequality in the workplace, it has left a critical gap: examining how masculinity both shapes <em>and</em> constrains men’s experiences and outcomes. This paper reverses the traditional focus of gender research in organizational behavior by arguing that masculinity is not only a source of advantage; it is also a system of traits, expectations, and values that imposes psychological and social costs on men. Drawing from interdisciplinary research across organizational behavior, psychology, and sociology, we argue that aspects of masculinity—such as stoicism, risk-taking, aggression, self-reliance, ambition, and dominance—are simultaneously organizationally rewarded as well as personally harmful. These expectations contribute to men’s poorer mental health, weaker social support networks, higher rates of self-harm, and greater exposure to physical danger. Moreover, while these aspects of masculinity are thought to drive organizational and societal growth, success, and power, they can also produce exclusionary cultures that undermine employee well-being. This paper argues that gender equity efforts must account for how masculinity shapes men—not only in the ways it enables their power but also in the ways it restricts their well-being. Addressing the double-edged nature of masculinity is not a diversion from gender progress but rather is an essential step toward creating healthier individuals, organizations, and societies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145553331","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}

引用次数: 0

A theory of stereotype negotiation 刻板印象谈判理论

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100228

Cydney H. Dupree

Inequality is pervasive, challenging people and organizations. Yet we lack a clear picture of how people navigate inequality in everyday social and organizational life. I propose a theory of stereotype negotiation—whereby people use voice (linguistic expression), body (nonverbal expression), and culture (expressed preferences) to counter stereotypes applied to their own social identity group and comply with stereotypes applied to their audience’s social identity group. I first synthesize research on the function, content, and costs of stereotypes. I then construct a behavioral, multi-level model of stereotype negotiation, including individual, interpersonal, and institutional antecedents and consequences. I close with a future research agenda to nuance our understanding of how people, as informed and agentic actors, navigate an increasingly diverse and unequal world: one interaction at a time.

不平等现象普遍存在，给个人和组织带来挑战。然而，我们对人们如何在日常社会和组织生活中应对不平等缺乏清晰的认识。我提出了一种刻板印象协商理论，即人们使用声音（语言表达）、身体（非语言表达）和文化（表达偏好）来对抗适用于自己社会身份群体的刻板印象，并遵守适用于听众社会身份群体的刻板印象。我首先综合研究了刻板印象的功能、内容和成本。然后，我构建了一个行为的、多层次的刻板印象谈判模型，包括个人的、人际的和制度的前因和后果。最后，我提出了一个未来的研究议程，以细化我们对人们作为知情的行动者如何在一个日益多样化和不平等的世界中航行的理解：一次一种互动。

引用次数: 0

ROB preface volume 45, 2025 ROB前言，第45卷，2025年

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100231

Jack Goncalo, Greta Hsu

引用次数: 0

Selling the self: Neo-normative control and the platform paradox 销售自我：新规范控制和平台悖论

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100230

Lindsey D. Cameron , Vanessa M. Conzon , Laura Lam

The platform economy is an increasingly large segment of the contemporary economy that continues to attract workers, drawing on narratives of self-empowerment and entrepreneurship that are idolized within American culture. Yet, the realized lived experiences of workers are often anything but that of a flourishing entrepreneur, with many describing economic precarity, invasive and unpredictable algorithmic control, and demanding hours. What keeps people invested in returning to platform work? We label this observed contradiction the platform paradox, and we theorize how this paradox is continuously regenerated through neo-normative control, a modern form of workplace control that encourages workers to express their ‘authentic’ selves, individuality, and emotions in ways that align with organizational goals. Drawing on extant scholarship, we identify three neo-normative control mechanisms—framing self-as-product, whole self-integration, and hyper-gamification—that support platform workers in experiencing themselves as independent entrepreneurs while also increasing their control by the platform and its algorithmic management system. We illustrate how these controls collectively contribute to adverse consequences on two core work experiences: worker skill and worker time. We propose future research directions to further unpack this paradox and for the field of platform scholarship at-large, discussing implications for inequality.

平台经济是当代经济中越来越大的一部分，它继续吸引着工人，利用美国文化中被偶像化的自我赋权和创业精神。然而，工人们所实现的生活经历往往与蓬勃发展的企业家截然不同，许多人描述了经济不稳定、侵入性和不可预测的算法控制，以及苛刻的工作时间。是什么让人们愿意重返平台工作？我们将这种观察到的矛盾标记为平台悖论，并将这种悖论如何通过新规范控制（一种现代形式的工作场所控制，鼓励员工以与组织目标一致的方式表达他们的“真实”自我、个性和情感）不断再生的方式理论化。根据现有的学术研究，我们确定了三种新规范的控制机制——将自我作为产品、整体自我整合和超游戏化——它们支持平台工人体验自己作为独立企业家的经历，同时也增加了他们对平台及其算法管理系统的控制。我们说明了这些控制是如何共同对两个核心工作经验产生不利影响的：工人技能和工人时间。我们提出了未来的研究方向，以进一步解开这一悖论，并为整个平台学术领域，讨论对不平等的影响。

{"title":"Selling the self: Neo-normative control and the platform paradox","authors":"Lindsey D. Cameron , Vanessa M. Conzon , Laura Lam","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100230","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100230","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The platform economy is an increasingly large segment of the contemporary economy that continues to attract workers, drawing on narratives of self-empowerment and entrepreneurship that are idolized within American culture. Yet, the realized lived experiences of workers are often anything but that of a flourishing entrepreneur, with many describing economic precarity, invasive and unpredictable algorithmic control, and demanding hours. What keeps people invested in returning to platform work? We label this observed contradiction the <em>platform paradox</em>, and we theorize how this paradox is continuously regenerated through neo-normative control, a modern form of workplace control that encourages workers to express their ‘authentic’ selves, individuality, and emotions in ways that align with organizational goals. Drawing on extant scholarship, we identify three neo-normative control mechanisms—framing self-as-product, whole self-integration, and hyper-gamification—that support platform workers in experiencing themselves as independent entrepreneurs while also increasing their control by the platform and its algorithmic management system. We illustrate how these controls collectively contribute to adverse consequences on two core work experiences: worker skill and worker time. We propose future research directions to further unpack this paradox and for the field of platform scholarship at-large, discussing implications for inequality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100230"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145575639","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}

引用次数: 0

Intuitions-at-Work Theory: Understanding the causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations 工作直觉理论：理解组织中直觉与多样性之间的因果循环

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100225

David P. Daniels

Most strategies designed by managers to increase organizational diversity have failed or backfired. Why? For instance, why have executives in nearly all Fortune 500 firms decided to use diversity training, even though this diversity strategy generally does not work and has actually been linked to less (not more) diversity? To address this puzzle, I introduce Intuitions-at-Work Theory (IWT), which proposes that organizational behavior is fundamentally driven by two types of intuitions: reactive intuitions and proactive intuitions. Reactive intuitions are people’s intuition-driven behavioral responses to triggers in their organizational environments – including traditional economic incentives (i.e., external rewards/penalties), psychological nudges (e.g., framing), and behavioral organization (e.g., how behaviors are structurally arranged across people or sequenced within individuals). Proactive intuitions are people’s intuition-driven behavioral strategies for creating, designing, and reshaping the organizational environment and its triggers – especially in ways that leverage other people’s reactive intuitions – to achieve their goals. IWT argues that managers often choose diversity strategies that fail for the same reason they often choose motivational strategies that fail: their proactive intuitions are systematically biased toward strategies that feel “salient” (rather than “subtle”), strategies that feel “positive” (rather than “negative”), and strategies that feel “certain” (rather than “uncertain”) – even when those strategies are suboptimal. IWT challenges and integrates prior theoretical frameworks by proposing that people are both intuitive decision makers who (mis)react to their organizational environments and also intuitive choice architects who (mis)design those environments. This gives rise to a causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations, where diversity triggers intuitions and intuitions shape diversity. But because proactive intuitions are biased toward strategies that feel “salient,” “positive,” and “certain,” managers’ proactive intuitions and targets’ reactive intuitions will be systematically misaligned, leading to three paradoxes: powerful diversity strategies (e.g., diversity reminders just before hiring decisions) can feel too subtle to use, good diversity strategies (e.g., joint evaluation where candidates are assessed side-by-side) can feel too bad to use, and reliable diversity strategies (e.g., anonymizing résumés) can feel too unreliable to use. Strikingly, executives – those with the most power to shape organizations – appear to exhibit the worst proactive intuitions of any sample population studied to date. IWT highlights that diversity researchers and management scholars must expand beyond investigating what works to also investigating intuitions about what works and how to align intuitions with what works.

管理者为增加组织多样性而设计的大多数策略都失败了，或者适得其反。为什么?例如，为什么几乎所有财富500强公司的高管都决定使用多元化培训，尽管这种多元化战略通常不起作用，而且实际上与更少（而不是更多）的多样性有关？为了解决这个难题，我引入了工作直觉理论（IWT），该理论提出，组织行为从根本上是由两种直觉驱动的：反应性直觉和主动性直觉。反应性直觉是人们对组织环境中触发因素的直觉驱动的行为反应，包括传统的经济激励（如外部奖励/惩罚）、心理推动（如框架）和行为组织（如行为在人与人之间的结构安排或个体内部的顺序）。主动直觉是人们创造、设计和重塑组织环境及其触发因素的直觉驱动的行为策略，特别是以利用其他人的反应性直觉的方式来实现他们的目标。IWT认为，管理者选择多样性策略失败的原因与选择激励策略失败的原因是一样的：他们的主动直觉系统地偏向于感觉“突出”（而不是“微妙”）的策略，感觉“积极”（而不是“消极”）的策略，以及感觉“确定”（而不是“不确定”）的策略——即使这些策略不是最优的。IWT挑战并整合了先前的理论框架，提出人们既是对组织环境做出反应的直觉决策者，也是设计这些环境的直觉选择架构师。这就形成了组织中直觉和多样性之间的因果循环，多样性触发直觉，直觉塑造多样性。但由于主动直觉倾向于感觉“突出”、“积极”和“确定”的战略，管理者的主动直觉和目标的被动直觉将会系统性地错位，导致三个悖论：强大的多样性策略（例如，在招聘决定之前提醒多样性）可能会让人感觉太微妙而无法使用，良好的多样性策略（例如，对候选人进行并行评估的联合评估）可能会让人感觉太糟糕而无法使用，而可靠的多样性策略（例如，匿名化rsamsumsams）可能会让人感觉太不可靠而无法使用。引人注目的是，高管——那些最有权力塑造组织的人——似乎表现出迄今为止研究过的所有样本人群中最糟糕的主动直觉。IWT强调，多样性研究人员和管理学者必须从研究什么有效扩展到研究什么有效的直觉，以及如何将直觉与有效结合起来。

{"title":"Intuitions-at-Work Theory: Understanding the causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations","authors":"David P. Daniels","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100225","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100225","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Most strategies designed by managers to increase organizational diversity have failed or backfired. Why? For instance, why have executives in nearly all Fortune 500 firms decided to use diversity training, even though this diversity strategy generally does not work and has actually been linked to less (not more) diversity? To address this puzzle, I introduce Intuitions-at-Work Theory (IWT), which proposes that organizational behavior is fundamentally driven by two types of intuitions: reactive intuitions and proactive intuitions. <em>Reactive intuitions</em> are people’s intuition-driven behavioral responses to triggers in their organizational environments – including traditional economic incentives (i.e., external rewards/penalties), psychological nudges (e.g., framing), and behavioral organization (e.g., how behaviors are structurally arranged across people or sequenced within individuals). <em>Proactive intuitions</em> are people’s intuition-driven behavioral strategies for creating, designing, and reshaping the organizational environment and its triggers – especially in ways that leverage other people’s reactive intuitions – to achieve their goals. IWT argues that managers often choose diversity strategies that fail for the same reason they often choose motivational strategies that fail: their proactive intuitions are systematically biased toward strategies that feel “salient” (rather than “subtle”), strategies that feel “positive” (rather than “negative”), and strategies that feel “certain” (rather than “uncertain”) – even when those strategies are suboptimal. IWT challenges and integrates prior theoretical frameworks by proposing that people are both intuitive decision makers who (mis)react to their organizational environments and also intuitive choice architects who (mis)design those environments. This gives rise to a causal loop between intuitions and diversity in organizations, where diversity triggers intuitions and intuitions shape diversity. But because proactive intuitions are biased toward strategies that feel “salient,” “positive,” and “certain,” managers’ proactive intuitions and targets’ reactive intuitions will be systematically misaligned, leading to three paradoxes: powerful diversity strategies (e.g., diversity reminders just before hiring decisions) can feel too subtle to use, good diversity strategies (e.g., joint evaluation where candidates are assessed side-by-side) can feel too bad to use, and reliable diversity strategies (e.g., anonymizing résumés) can feel too unreliable to use. Strikingly, executives – those with the most power to shape organizations – appear to exhibit the worst proactive intuitions of any sample population studied to date. IWT highlights that diversity researchers and management scholars must expand beyond investigating <em>what works</em> to also investigating <em>intuitions about what works</em> and <em>how to align intuitions with what works</em>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100225"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145608742","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}

引用次数: 0

Organizational nationalism 民族主义组织

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100219

Lori Qingyuan Yue , Yusaku Takeda

The global rise of nationalism has distorted the neoliberal vision of a borderless world where the nationality of businesses would be rendered obsolete. While nationalism can promote social solidarity and progress, it also has the potential to deepen divisions and fuel conflict—realities that organizations cannot ignore. In this paper, we propose a theory of organizational nationalism, which positions organizations not merely as passive responders to nationalist institutional pressures or geopolitical risks but as active agents in shaping nationalistic beliefs, values, and policies. Through theorizing how organizational nationalism manifests and functions, we offer insights into how organizations harness nationalism to motivate employees, cultivate consumer loyalty, and secure sociopolitical legitimacy, and how such engagement may eventually become an organizational commitment that shapes its nationalist character. This perspective fills a critical void in nationalism research by emphasizing the intermediary role played by organizations between the state and individual levels of nationalism. It also offers a unifying framework for the fragmented literature on nationalism in business, which spans topics from state influence on organizational forms to managing “foreignness” in multinational corporations. We conclude by outlining a research roadmap and promising research methodologies in this area.

民族主义在全球的崛起扭曲了新自由主义关于无国界世界的愿景，在这个世界上，企业的国籍将被淘汰。虽然民族主义可以促进社会团结和进步，但它也有可能加深分裂和加剧冲突——这是组织不能忽视的现实。在本文中，我们提出了一种组织民族主义理论，该理论认为组织不仅是民族主义制度压力或地缘政治风险的被动反应者，而且是塑造民族主义信仰、价值观和政策的积极行动者。通过将组织民族主义的表现和功能理论化，我们深入了解了组织如何利用民族主义来激励员工、培养消费者忠诚度和确保社会政治合法性，以及这种参与最终如何成为塑造其民族主义特征的组织承诺。这一视角通过强调组织在国家和个人层面的民族主义之间所起的中介作用，填补了民族主义研究中的一个关键空白。它还为关于商业民族主义的支离破碎的文献提供了一个统一的框架，这些文献涵盖了从国家对组织形式的影响到管理跨国公司的“外来性”等主题。最后，我们概述了该领域的研究路线图和有前途的研究方法。

{"title":"Organizational nationalism","authors":"Lori Qingyuan Yue , Yusaku Takeda","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100219","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100219","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The global rise of nationalism has distorted the neoliberal vision of a borderless world where the nationality of businesses would be rendered obsolete. While nationalism can promote social solidarity and progress, it also has the potential to deepen divisions and fuel conflict—realities that organizations cannot ignore. In this paper, we propose a theory of <em>organizational nationalism,</em> which positions organizations not merely as passive responders to nationalist institutional pressures or geopolitical risks but as active agents in shaping nationalistic beliefs, values, and policies. Through theorizing how organizational nationalism manifests and functions, we offer insights into how organizations harness nationalism to motivate employees, cultivate consumer loyalty, and secure sociopolitical legitimacy, and how such engagement may eventually become an organizational commitment that shapes its nationalist character. This perspective fills a critical void in nationalism research by emphasizing the intermediary role played by organizations between the state and individual levels of nationalism. It also offers a unifying framework for the fragmented literature on nationalism in business, which spans topics from state influence on organizational forms to managing “foreignness” in multinational corporations. We conclude by outlining a research roadmap and promising research methodologies in this area.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100219"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898309","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}

引用次数: 0

The aging firm 老化的公司

IF 3.6 Q2 MANAGEMENT

Research in Organizational Behavior

Pub Date : 2025-12-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.riob.2025.100220

Ines Black, Sharique Hasan, Yoko Shibuya, Maria K. Zhu

Prior research suggests that a firm’s workforce age composition is a key factor influencing its performance through effects on technological adoption, organizational learning, employee job satisfaction, and turnover. However, the existing literature often assumes that the phenomenon of the “aging firm” – that is, an older workforce age composition within firms – primarily reflects broader demographic trends such as population aging or immigration patterns. This paper offers a new framework for understanding how firms may actively make strategic decisions about their workforce age composition. We argue that firms may, directly or indirectly, select a balance of younger and older workers based on a range of internal and external factors, including their production function (e.g., task requirements), human capital capabilities (e.g., hiring and training), and shifts in technology and policy (e.g., automation and retirement policy). By integrating these factors into a cohesive framework, we argue that a firm’s workforce composition should result from a system of interrelated decisions that firms make that depend on their internal capabilities and evolve in response to external shocks.

已有研究表明，企业员工年龄构成通过对技术采用、组织学习、员工工作满意度和离职率的影响，是影响企业绩效的关键因素。然而，现有文献通常假设“公司老龄化”现象——即公司内部年龄较大的劳动力构成——主要反映了更广泛的人口趋势，如人口老龄化或移民模式。本文提供了一个新的框架来理解企业如何积极地对其劳动力年龄构成做出战略决策。我们认为，企业可以直接或间接地根据一系列内部和外部因素选择年轻和年长员工的平衡，包括他们的生产功能（例如，任务要求），人力资本能力（例如，招聘和培训），以及技术和政策的变化（例如，自动化和退休政策）。通过将这些因素整合到一个有凝聚力的框架中，我们认为企业的劳动力构成应该源于企业根据其内部能力做出的相互关联的决策系统，并随着外部冲击的变化而演变。

{"title":"The aging firm","authors":"Ines Black, Sharique Hasan, Yoko Shibuya, Maria K. Zhu","doi":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100220","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.riob.2025.100220","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Prior research suggests that a firm’s workforce age composition is a key factor influencing its performance through effects on technological adoption, organizational learning, employee job satisfaction, and turnover. However, the existing literature often assumes that the phenomenon of the “aging firm” – that is, an older workforce age composition within firms – primarily reflects broader demographic trends such as population aging or immigration patterns. This paper offers a new framework for understanding how firms may actively make strategic decisions about their workforce age composition. We argue that firms may, directly or indirectly, select a balance of younger and older workers based on a range of internal and external factors, including their production function (e.g., task requirements), human capital capabilities (e.g., hiring and training), and shifts in technology and policy (e.g., automation and retirement policy). By integrating these factors into a cohesive framework, we argue that a firm’s workforce composition should result from a system of interrelated decisions that firms make that depend on their internal capabilities and evolve in response to external shocks.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56178,"journal":{"name":"Research in Organizational Behavior","volume":"45 ","pages":"Article 100220"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145753963","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}

引用次数: 0