Pub Date : 2022-11-17DOI: 10.1177/00018392221135606
A. Michel
When organizations take radically new forms, employees’ minds and bodies can also take radically new forms, but prior organizational research has lacked the concepts and data to understand such qualitative changes in persons. For 17 years, I studied a profound societal change, the market turn, inside organizations at their center, investment banks on Wall Street. The banks took a new, market-like form that facilitated the emergence of a cultural–historical new form of personhood, the body entrepreneur. Unlike traditional organizations, which predictably reward employee effort, the banks gradually decoupled rewards from effort, paying bankers for winning first internal and then external competitions and increasingly exposing them to market risk. Bankers internalized this entrepreneurial positioning by transforming their minds and bodies into resources for competitive success regardless of health consequences. As rewards became more elusive, bankers invested more resources, first the mind and then the body, and controlled them in progressively more powerful ways, first through cognitive techniques, then through self-experimentation with drugs. Bankers thus intervened more radically in their minds and bodies than organizations legitimately can, resulting in two qualitative person changes. One, bankers constructed personhood in cultural–historical new ways, changing from the traditional psychological self, which locates processes such as emotions and motivation in the mind, toward a somatic self, the body entrepreneur, which locates them in the body as brain states that bankers could self-design. Two, the body functioned in new ways: not inside–out as a biological imperative but outside–in, fluidly adjusting to changing situations. Whereas prior organizational theories have assumed what the body is, I problematize it, empirically studying the self-technologies through which people construct the culturally situated biologies that compel them to unproblematically reproduce new, market-like organizations.
{"title":"Embodying the Market: The Emergence of the Body Entrepreneur","authors":"A. Michel","doi":"10.1177/00018392221135606","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221135606","url":null,"abstract":"When organizations take radically new forms, employees’ minds and bodies can also take radically new forms, but prior organizational research has lacked the concepts and data to understand such qualitative changes in persons. For 17 years, I studied a profound societal change, the market turn, inside organizations at their center, investment banks on Wall Street. The banks took a new, market-like form that facilitated the emergence of a cultural–historical new form of personhood, the body entrepreneur. Unlike traditional organizations, which predictably reward employee effort, the banks gradually decoupled rewards from effort, paying bankers for winning first internal and then external competitions and increasingly exposing them to market risk. Bankers internalized this entrepreneurial positioning by transforming their minds and bodies into resources for competitive success regardless of health consequences. As rewards became more elusive, bankers invested more resources, first the mind and then the body, and controlled them in progressively more powerful ways, first through cognitive techniques, then through self-experimentation with drugs. Bankers thus intervened more radically in their minds and bodies than organizations legitimately can, resulting in two qualitative person changes. One, bankers constructed personhood in cultural–historical new ways, changing from the traditional psychological self, which locates processes such as emotions and motivation in the mind, toward a somatic self, the body entrepreneur, which locates them in the body as brain states that bankers could self-design. Two, the body functioned in new ways: not inside–out as a biological imperative but outside–in, fluidly adjusting to changing situations. Whereas prior organizational theories have assumed what the body is, I problematize it, empirically studying the self-technologies through which people construct the culturally situated biologies that compel them to unproblematically reproduce new, market-like organizations.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"68 1","pages":"44 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43363780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-09DOI: 10.1177/00018392221134134
Abhijith G. Acharya, W. Laurier, C. Cloutier, Susan Cohen, Raffaele Conti, Essec Joep Cornelissen, Felipe A. Csaszar
{"title":"2022 Outside Reviewers","authors":"Abhijith G. Acharya, W. Laurier, C. Cloutier, Susan Cohen, Raffaele Conti, Essec Joep Cornelissen, Felipe A. Csaszar","doi":"10.1177/00018392221134134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221134134","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"1180 - 1184"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43556622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-11DOI: 10.1177/00018392221124916
B. Lewis, W. Carlos
We examine why organizations may at times decrease their performance after receiving a positive rating. We argue that in contrast to the prevailing assumption that organizations will strive for favorable ratings to achieve reputational benefits, incompatibility between a positive rating and a dominant institutional logic may cause recognized firms to question the perceived value of maintaining superior performance, thus leading them to strategically reduce their efforts on the rated dimension. Using a difference-in-differences design, we examine how companies responded to being rated as charitable organizations, an evaluation that we argue was generally perceived as incompatible with the dominant logic of shareholder maximization during the early 1990s. Our results suggest that firms that were rated as generous were more likely to decrease philanthropic contributions relative to firms that were not rated as generous. We also found this reaction to be amplified or attenuated by organizational and institutional factors that increased or decreased the saliency of the perceived incompatibility between the philanthropy rating and the dominant shareholder logic. These findings provide insights for scholarship on organizational reactivity and impression management and raise important questions for scholars and practitioners interested in improving the effectiveness of evaluation metrics as drivers of organizational performance.
{"title":"Avoiding the Appearance of Virtue: Reactivity to Corporate Social Responsibility Ratings in an Era of Shareholder Primacy","authors":"B. Lewis, W. Carlos","doi":"10.1177/00018392221124916","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221124916","url":null,"abstract":"We examine why organizations may at times decrease their performance after receiving a positive rating. We argue that in contrast to the prevailing assumption that organizations will strive for favorable ratings to achieve reputational benefits, incompatibility between a positive rating and a dominant institutional logic may cause recognized firms to question the perceived value of maintaining superior performance, thus leading them to strategically reduce their efforts on the rated dimension. Using a difference-in-differences design, we examine how companies responded to being rated as charitable organizations, an evaluation that we argue was generally perceived as incompatible with the dominant logic of shareholder maximization during the early 1990s. Our results suggest that firms that were rated as generous were more likely to decrease philanthropic contributions relative to firms that were not rated as generous. We also found this reaction to be amplified or attenuated by organizational and institutional factors that increased or decreased the saliency of the perceived incompatibility between the philanthropy rating and the dominant shareholder logic. These findings provide insights for scholarship on organizational reactivity and impression management and raise important questions for scholars and practitioners interested in improving the effectiveness of evaluation metrics as drivers of organizational performance.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"1093 - 1135"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45531334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-08DOI: 10.1177/00018392221124614
Amanda J. Sharkey, Elizabeth G. Pontikes, Greta Hsu
Mandated gender wage gap disclosure laws are an increasingly popular but relatively untested solution to gender-based compensation inequalities. Scholars and policymakers alike have argued that disclosure will lead to greater social accountability—either reputational harm for firms revealing large disparities or benefit for more-egalitarian organizations. Yet little research has directly tested this central assumption. We advance understanding of this issue by examining reactions from a key constituency affected by pay gaps: employees. We analyze the existence, magnitude, and persistence of changes in employees’ public affective evaluations of their employers on the review site Glassdoor in the wake of pay gap disclosures prompted by new regulations in the United Kingdom. We find a short-lived improvement in employees’ evaluations of organizations reporting pay parity, consistent with a reputational boost. At the same time, we find little evidence of a negative post-disclosure reaction from employees of firms reporting sizable gender-based disparities. We take an abductive approach to investigate these surprising findings, probing key assumptions and the viability of different plausible explanations for the results. We consider how our empirical findings can inform the development of novel theory in the areas of gender wage inequality, reputation, and transparency.
{"title":"The Impact of Mandated Pay Gap Transparency on Firms’ Reputations as Employers","authors":"Amanda J. Sharkey, Elizabeth G. Pontikes, Greta Hsu","doi":"10.1177/00018392221124614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221124614","url":null,"abstract":"Mandated gender wage gap disclosure laws are an increasingly popular but relatively untested solution to gender-based compensation inequalities. Scholars and policymakers alike have argued that disclosure will lead to greater social accountability—either reputational harm for firms revealing large disparities or benefit for more-egalitarian organizations. Yet little research has directly tested this central assumption. We advance understanding of this issue by examining reactions from a key constituency affected by pay gaps: employees. We analyze the existence, magnitude, and persistence of changes in employees’ public affective evaluations of their employers on the review site Glassdoor in the wake of pay gap disclosures prompted by new regulations in the United Kingdom. We find a short-lived improvement in employees’ evaluations of organizations reporting pay parity, consistent with a reputational boost. At the same time, we find little evidence of a negative post-disclosure reaction from employees of firms reporting sizable gender-based disparities. We take an abductive approach to investigate these surprising findings, probing key assumptions and the viability of different plausible explanations for the results. We consider how our empirical findings can inform the development of novel theory in the areas of gender wage inequality, reputation, and transparency.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"1136 - 1179"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47918323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-26DOI: 10.1177/00018392221124607
Alexandra C. Feldberg
This multi-method study of managers in a grocery chain identifies a novel mechanism by which threats of gender stereotypes undermine women’s ability to be effective managers. I find that women managers face a task bind, a dilemma that managers experience as they try to disprove a negative group stereotype by doubling down on one set of tasks at the expense of other essential tasks. My analysis of interview, observational, and archival data reveals that, compared to men, women do more tasks in front of subordinates—in this setting, supervisory tasks “on the floor” of the store—in order to showcase their qualifications as managers. In doing so, they forgo attention to other tasks that are less public but no less important to being effective managers—in this setting, planning tasks in the office of the store. Neglecting office tasks ultimately undermines the profitability of women managers’ departments. This study’s identification of the task bind has implications for theory and practice related to stereotype threat and women leaders, showing how the threat of negative gender stereotypes, prompted here by concern about subordinates’ perceptions, can affect managers’ behaviors in ways that detract from the performance of managers themselves and that of their organizations.
{"title":"The Task Bind: Explaining Gender Differences in Managerial Tasks and Performance","authors":"Alexandra C. Feldberg","doi":"10.1177/00018392221124607","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221124607","url":null,"abstract":"This multi-method study of managers in a grocery chain identifies a novel mechanism by which threats of gender stereotypes undermine women’s ability to be effective managers. I find that women managers face a task bind, a dilemma that managers experience as they try to disprove a negative group stereotype by doubling down on one set of tasks at the expense of other essential tasks. My analysis of interview, observational, and archival data reveals that, compared to men, women do more tasks in front of subordinates—in this setting, supervisory tasks “on the floor” of the store—in order to showcase their qualifications as managers. In doing so, they forgo attention to other tasks that are less public but no less important to being effective managers—in this setting, planning tasks in the office of the store. Neglecting office tasks ultimately undermines the profitability of women managers’ departments. This study’s identification of the task bind has implications for theory and practice related to stereotype threat and women leaders, showing how the threat of negative gender stereotypes, prompted here by concern about subordinates’ perceptions, can affect managers’ behaviors in ways that detract from the performance of managers themselves and that of their organizations.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"1049 - 1092"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48517025","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1177/00018392221123268
K. Weick
In 1841, 180 years before the Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics was published, Ralph Waldo Emerson anticipated its message. In his essay ‘‘Circles’’ he wrote, ‘‘The universe is fluid and volatile. Permanence is but a word of degrees.’’ If we examine degrees of permanence as they apply to the organizational routines discussed in this handbook, then the traditional view that routines are static, repetitive entities becomes one in which routines are treated as patterned, transient, and enacted entanglements. Permanence is short-lived. What seemed static are now, according to this volume, ‘‘temporary and unstable achievements constantly threatening to pull apart and dissolve into patterns and parts that are no longer the same routine’’ (p. 93). These dynamics are not the dualism of stability and change but the duality of patterning and performing: ‘‘A routine is only stable-for-now and its stability is an ongoing accomplishment’’ (p. 467). While this way of analyzing routines has been in development for at least 20 years, this handbook pulls together resources that articulate and enlarge routine dynamics as a ‘‘way of seeing, analyzing, and understanding patterns of action’’ (p. xv). In the remainder of this review, I first simplify the focal perspective, after which I comment on the construction, content, and context created by the handbook. Routines are not invariant sequences, nor are they stable entities separated from change. Instead, routines have an ‘‘internal logic’’ that involves ‘‘the emergence, reproduction, replication, and change of recognizable patterns of action’’ (p. 1). The situated enactment of a routine is the site where people observe the entangled production of outcomes and the potential re-patterning of the original guidance. While this form of practice is action-centric rather than actor-centric, the acting is framed as ‘‘enactment’’ to preserve the agency and creative, improvisational ‘‘doing’’ that performs the patterns. The acting is also framed as ‘‘entanglement’’ to underscore the relationality and multiplicity of process and context. For example, an effort to transfer a routine from one site to another ‘‘involves the effortful enactment of the complex socio-material entanglement which underpins a routine’’ (p. 279). The ontology is both ‘‘flat,’’ forgoing micro–macro levels of reality, and ‘‘fluid,’’ where ‘‘things gain their being from the relations predicated of them’’ (p. 11). The key concepts of this approach include effortful, emergent accomplishments; modification of ostensive and performative properties;
{"title":"Martha S. Feldman, Brian T. Pentland, Luciana D’Adderio, Katharina Dittrich, Claus Rerup, and David Seidl, eds. Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics","authors":"K. Weick","doi":"10.1177/00018392221123268","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221123268","url":null,"abstract":"In 1841, 180 years before the Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics was published, Ralph Waldo Emerson anticipated its message. In his essay ‘‘Circles’’ he wrote, ‘‘The universe is fluid and volatile. Permanence is but a word of degrees.’’ If we examine degrees of permanence as they apply to the organizational routines discussed in this handbook, then the traditional view that routines are static, repetitive entities becomes one in which routines are treated as patterned, transient, and enacted entanglements. Permanence is short-lived. What seemed static are now, according to this volume, ‘‘temporary and unstable achievements constantly threatening to pull apart and dissolve into patterns and parts that are no longer the same routine’’ (p. 93). These dynamics are not the dualism of stability and change but the duality of patterning and performing: ‘‘A routine is only stable-for-now and its stability is an ongoing accomplishment’’ (p. 467). While this way of analyzing routines has been in development for at least 20 years, this handbook pulls together resources that articulate and enlarge routine dynamics as a ‘‘way of seeing, analyzing, and understanding patterns of action’’ (p. xv). In the remainder of this review, I first simplify the focal perspective, after which I comment on the construction, content, and context created by the handbook. Routines are not invariant sequences, nor are they stable entities separated from change. Instead, routines have an ‘‘internal logic’’ that involves ‘‘the emergence, reproduction, replication, and change of recognizable patterns of action’’ (p. 1). The situated enactment of a routine is the site where people observe the entangled production of outcomes and the potential re-patterning of the original guidance. While this form of practice is action-centric rather than actor-centric, the acting is framed as ‘‘enactment’’ to preserve the agency and creative, improvisational ‘‘doing’’ that performs the patterns. The acting is also framed as ‘‘entanglement’’ to underscore the relationality and multiplicity of process and context. For example, an effort to transfer a routine from one site to another ‘‘involves the effortful enactment of the complex socio-material entanglement which underpins a routine’’ (p. 279). The ontology is both ‘‘flat,’’ forgoing micro–macro levels of reality, and ‘‘fluid,’’ where ‘‘things gain their being from the relations predicated of them’’ (p. 11). The key concepts of this approach include effortful, emergent accomplishments; modification of ostensive and performative properties;","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"NP76 - NP79"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47729912","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-26DOI: 10.1177/00018392221123044
H. Leroy
{"title":"Mohammed Raei and Harriette Thurber Rasmussen, eds. Adaptive Leadership in a Global Economy: Perspectives for Application and Scholarship","authors":"H. Leroy","doi":"10.1177/00018392221123044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221123044","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"NP73 - NP75"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49462433","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-23DOI: 10.1177/00018392221117996
Xavier Sobrepere i Profitós, T. Keil, Pasi Kuusela
We draw on the behavioral theory of the firm and prospect theory to examine how performance feedback (decision context) and the characteristics of the alternatives (decision content) that decision makers face jointly determine organizational risk-taking choices. While the behavioral theory of the firm has identified performance feedback’s important role in driving organizational risk-taking decisions, it has not considered the intrinsic attributes of alternatives, specifically the magnitude and likelihood of their outcomes, which have been the focus of prospect theory. We argue that these two attributes play a key role in decision makers’ assessment of alternatives, but because achieving organizational goals is the prime objective in organizations, performance feedback drives how decision makers process information regarding these attributes. Analyzing 23,895 fourth-down decisions from the U.S. National Football League, we find that decision makers weigh attainment discrepancy and the magnitude and likelihood of outcomes in their choices, depending on deadline proximity. Furthermore, the size and valence of attainment discrepancy modify the weight of the magnitude and likelihood of outcomes in risky choices. Our arguments and findings suggest extensions to the behavioral theory of the firm and imply modifications to prospect theory when applied to the organizational context.
{"title":"The Two Blades of the Scissors: Performance Feedback and Intrinsic Attributes in Organizational Risk Taking","authors":"Xavier Sobrepere i Profitós, T. Keil, Pasi Kuusela","doi":"10.1177/00018392221117996","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221117996","url":null,"abstract":"We draw on the behavioral theory of the firm and prospect theory to examine how performance feedback (decision context) and the characteristics of the alternatives (decision content) that decision makers face jointly determine organizational risk-taking choices. While the behavioral theory of the firm has identified performance feedback’s important role in driving organizational risk-taking decisions, it has not considered the intrinsic attributes of alternatives, specifically the magnitude and likelihood of their outcomes, which have been the focus of prospect theory. We argue that these two attributes play a key role in decision makers’ assessment of alternatives, but because achieving organizational goals is the prime objective in organizations, performance feedback drives how decision makers process information regarding these attributes. Analyzing 23,895 fourth-down decisions from the U.S. National Football League, we find that decision makers weigh attainment discrepancy and the magnitude and likelihood of outcomes in their choices, depending on deadline proximity. Furthermore, the size and valence of attainment discrepancy modify the weight of the magnitude and likelihood of outcomes in risky choices. Our arguments and findings suggest extensions to the behavioral theory of the firm and imply modifications to prospect theory when applied to the organizational context.","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"1012 - 1048"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41855889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-19DOI: 10.1177/00018392221119294
L. Brenner
{"title":"Daniel Kahneman, Olivier Sibony, and Cass R. Sunstein. Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment","authors":"L. Brenner","doi":"10.1177/00018392221119294","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392221119294","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":7203,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Science Quarterly","volume":"67 1","pages":"NP69 - NP72"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42390043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"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：