Linh-Chi Vo, Mary C Lavissière, Alexandre Lavissière, Jose M Alcaraz
{"title":"“选择职业自杀还是再次拿起我的朝圣杖?”:对发展中地区女性管理者如何应对冲击事件的文化考察","authors":"Linh-Chi Vo, Mary C Lavissière, Alexandre Lavissière, Jose M Alcaraz","doi":"10.1177/00187267231170170","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do key cultural aspects of individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarianism shape the decision making of female managers from developing regions when handling major work–family conflicts (WFC)? We address this question by drawing on a qualitative study of 50 female managers from developing countries in Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa who work in one particular male-dominated industry. We examine the major WFC incidents experienced by our study participants through the theoretical lens of work–life shock events outlined by Crawford et al. We contribute to the episodic approach to WFC research by shedding light on important aspects of the sociocultural role of extended families and the collectivistic values prevalent in developing regions, as well as on pervasive (low) gender egalitarian norms. The accounts of our female managers reveal how major events are perceived and how women use multifaceted methods to handle them, allowing us to propose a decision-making framework and associated cues with three broad types of decision making: (1) self-directed—choosing work; (2) consultative—choosing work; and (3) consultative—choosing family. Alongside this, we offer revealing insights into how the abovementioned cultural aspects help to shape the logic of consequences (through which people assess the impact of alternative actions) and the logic of appropriateness (through which people act according to their identity), thereby influencing WFC decision making during major episodes of conflict.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"318 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Commit professional suicide or take up my pilgrim’s staff again?”: A cultural examination of how female managers resolve shock events in developing regions\",\"authors\":\"Linh-Chi Vo, Mary C Lavissière, Alexandre Lavissière, Jose M Alcaraz\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187267231170170\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How do key cultural aspects of individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarianism shape the decision making of female managers from developing regions when handling major work–family conflicts (WFC)? We address this question by drawing on a qualitative study of 50 female managers from developing countries in Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa who work in one particular male-dominated industry. We examine the major WFC incidents experienced by our study participants through the theoretical lens of work–life shock events outlined by Crawford et al. We contribute to the episodic approach to WFC research by shedding light on important aspects of the sociocultural role of extended families and the collectivistic values prevalent in developing regions, as well as on pervasive (low) gender egalitarian norms. The accounts of our female managers reveal how major events are perceived and how women use multifaceted methods to handle them, allowing us to propose a decision-making framework and associated cues with three broad types of decision making: (1) self-directed—choosing work; (2) consultative—choosing work; and (3) consultative—choosing family. Alongside this, we offer revealing insights into how the abovementioned cultural aspects help to shape the logic of consequences (through which people assess the impact of alternative actions) and the logic of appropriateness (through which people act according to their identity), thereby influencing WFC decision making during major episodes of conflict.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Relations\",\"volume\":\"318 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231170170\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231170170","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
“Commit professional suicide or take up my pilgrim’s staff again?”: A cultural examination of how female managers resolve shock events in developing regions
How do key cultural aspects of individualism/collectivism and gender egalitarianism shape the decision making of female managers from developing regions when handling major work–family conflicts (WFC)? We address this question by drawing on a qualitative study of 50 female managers from developing countries in Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa who work in one particular male-dominated industry. We examine the major WFC incidents experienced by our study participants through the theoretical lens of work–life shock events outlined by Crawford et al. We contribute to the episodic approach to WFC research by shedding light on important aspects of the sociocultural role of extended families and the collectivistic values prevalent in developing regions, as well as on pervasive (low) gender egalitarian norms. The accounts of our female managers reveal how major events are perceived and how women use multifaceted methods to handle them, allowing us to propose a decision-making framework and associated cues with three broad types of decision making: (1) self-directed—choosing work; (2) consultative—choosing work; and (3) consultative—choosing family. Alongside this, we offer revealing insights into how the abovementioned cultural aspects help to shape the logic of consequences (through which people assess the impact of alternative actions) and the logic of appropriateness (through which people act according to their identity), thereby influencing WFC decision making during major episodes of conflict.
期刊介绍:
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.