Category Archives: *Academy of Management
Why directors choose to quit (Human Resource Management)
Do you think it would be helpful to know if one of your directors serving on a board was about to leave? If so, pay attention. According to a recent study, prestige, the ability to have influence over others, and identification with the director role decrease the chance of a director leaving a large firm, while the extent of the time commitment increases the chances of a director leaving. Since an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, it may be prudent to keep an eye on these variables in order to anticipate and execute succession planning of board members.
Home not sweet anymore? What happens to your employees during and after international assignments?
Topic: Turnover
Publication: Academy of Management Journal (APR 2012)
Article: No place like home? An identity strain perspective on repatriate turnover
Authors: Maria L. Kraimer, Margaret A. Shaffer, David A. Harrison and Hong Ren
Reviewed By: Nupur Deshpande
What happens to employees during and after an international assignment? Mostly, they leave. Why? Well, it has to do with the strain that assignments abroad have on their (now) dual identities—a conflict within the repatriate. You see, while employees enjoy the sunshine, gourmet cooking, new sights and sounds along with other perks of working in a whole new environment, they are also taking on an international employee identity, wherein they see themselves as an aggregate of their international work role, work-related experiences, and interactions with international and non-international employees in that setting, thereby making it a part of their self-concept.
This process is facilitated by the degree of job embeddedness (feelings of attachment toward the organization) the expatriate has toward their international role, on and off the job. However, being involved and owning their international identity means letting go of their old one. When they come back to their home county, they see themselves as having taken on an ex-pat identity and responsibilities, which may lead them to expect their home organization to reward them with better perks such as higher levels of job responsibility, higher pay, opportunities to utilize skills acquired on global assignments, and respect from colleagues. When they aren’t met with the fanfare they feel they deserve, they may experience feelings of job deprivation when the repatriates compare themselves to their home-based colleagues. This induces identity strain—the feeling that your positive self-image is threatened because the organization does not see them as they see themselves. If the level of strain gets too high and reaches a point that is unbearable, the repatriate quits in order to find an environment that is supportive of their new identity.
What can employers do to help their employees readjust to life back home? Two things: 1) acknowledge that the employees self-concept may have changed in their time abroad and 2) change their work to fit their new identity. Communicating the value of their experience and involving them in operations in which they now have expertise may keep them in your organization and happy.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Keeping Your Hottest Performers From Burning Out (Human Resource Management)
Topic: Burnout
Publication: Academy of Management Review (JUL 2012)
Article: Catching Falling Stars: A Human Resource Response to Social Capital’s Detrimental Effect of Information Overload on Star Employees
Authors: James B. Oldroyd and Shad S. Morris
Reviewer: Susan Rosengarten
Every organization has its “star employees”—those people whose performance seems to outshine the rest. People are drawn to star performers because of their great importance within their firms and thus stars tend to have more social capital than the average employee. Through their interconnected webs of contacts and connections, stars gain access to more information than average employees, which can be overwhelming. Furthermore, information overload can negatively impact star employees’ performance and can make them less likely to share valuable information with other employees, ultimately hurting their organization’s bottom line. Even worse, frustrated stars who feel inundated by information requests may feel the need to leave for firms with less demanding environments.
So how do HR professionals prevent star employees from “burning out” and “overloading?” Well, one possible remedy is to increase star performers’ information processing abilities by providing them with varied work experiences and projects. This enables stars to better perceive and pick up on subtle informational cues and acquire more knowledge, which stars will then pass along to others. Furthermore, stars should allocate specific times to checking email, voicemail and texts, and then spend the rest of their time focusing on work, uninterrupted.
HR professionals can also lessen their stars’ loads by using technology to share information. For example, a company’s intranet can house a catalogue of “lessons learned” written by star performers so that employees can easily access and apply them when needed, without having to reach out to their star performers directly. Finally, if organizations really want to keep stars from being bombarded by informational requests, they should consider providing them with support staff, or “gatekeepers,” who can monitor and prioritize their flow of information requests.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
A Closer Look at Human Capital as a Competitive Advantage (Human Resource Management)
Topic: Talent Management, Turnover
Publication: Academy of Management Review (JUL 2012)
Article: Rethinking Sustained Competitive Advantage from Human Capital
Authors: Benjamin A. Campbell, Russell Coff, & David Kryscynski
Reviewed By: Susan Rosengarten
All organizations want the secret to retaining top talent; I challenge you to find me one that doesn’t! Turnover and new-hire training is costly and organizations are always looking to curtail their expenses and get the best bang for their buck. Finding job candidates with the right mix of knowledge, skills, and abilities can be tough, but getting the right people to stay once you’ve found them can be even tougher.
Conventional wisdom suggests that a firm’s human capital can be a source of great competitive advantage, but only if the variables of employees’ jobs restrict them from seeking employment elsewhere. Employees with general human capital, or knowledge and skills that can be applied in other settings, have greater market value than employees with firm-specific human capital, which does not transfer to other settings quite as well. However, Campbell, Coff, and Kryscynski (2012) suggest that there’s more to the story than meets the eye and this approach to human capital mobility may be overly simplistic. They say that factors of supply and demand play a crucial role as well. Under the right conditions, employees with firm-specific human capital may be far more mobile and tradable than you might think. Conversely, supply and demand factors can restrict employees with general human capital as well. Specific supply factors outlined in this article include the hassle of having to search for a new job and whether or not an employee can accurately appraise what his skills are worth and would command on the market. On the other hand, demand factors focus on how valuable an employee’s skills are deemed to be by potential employers.
So for all of you managers out there, use this information to your advantage! Compensation designs, employee selections, and job designs can be strategically created and leveraged to create supply and demand constraints and, ultimately, to produce a competitive advantage for your firm.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Organizational Inducements and Resilience: Oft Ignored, but Effective Resources for Building Commitment and Support for Change
Topic: Change Management
Publication: Academy of Management Journal
Article: Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees’ attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change
Authors: J. Shin, M.S. Taylor, M. Seo
Reviewed by: Kecia Bingham
Although change is common among organizations, successful organizational change is far from typical. Why the low rate of success, you ask? Well there are likely a number of contributing factors, but research increasingly cites the importance of the often ignored, but invaluable resource called employees—specifically employee attitudes and behavioral reactions to change. A study by Shin and colleagues extends previous research on organizational change by highlighting organizational inducements (i.e., valued tangible and intangible outcomes employee receive in exchange for contributing to organizational performance) and psychological resilience (i.e., a trait-like ability to recover from adversity and adapt to shifting demands) as resources that can be developed over time before organizational change begins, and examines the mechanism by which these resources affect employees’ commitment to change and change behaviors (e.g., support for change and turnover).
The authors used survey data collected during three time periods (over a 22 month period) from 234 employees and 45 managers at an IT company in South Korea undergoing large-scale organizational change. Results indicated that employees who perceived themselves as having received high levels of organizational inducements (e.g., career development, open communication with management, good healthcare benefits, competitive salary) tended to have high normative (i.e., support stemming from feeling a sense of obligation to an organization) and affective (i.e., support stemming from belief about benefits associated with the change) commitment to change because those resources helped them develop a state positive affect (i.e., transitory positive emotions) and a high-quality social exchange (i.e., ongoing interaction based on mutual trust and obligation) relationship with the organization. Also, employees with high resilience tended to express high normative and affective commitment to change because of the high positive affect they experienced during the change. While both types of employee commitment to change had direct positive relationships with behavioral (i.e., demonstrated employee support for change above what is required) and creative (i.e., provision of innovative ideas consistent with the spirit of the change) support for change, as assessed by work unit managers, normative commitment had a stronger relationship that existed beyond the effects of affective commitment to change. Moreover, employees with high normative commitment to change were less likely to voluntarily leave the company compared to those with low normative commitment.
Based upon results, four practical implications for managers were noted. First, it is important for managers to be aware of the importance of employee commitment to and engagement in organizational change. Results show how employee commitment relates to demonstrated discretionary behaviors that can affect change implementation. Second, organizations should consider providing high levels of organizational inducements before initiating change to enhance employee commitment to change. In other words, companies would do well to be proactive rather than reactive to employee attitudes and behaviors towards change. Third, employee psychological resilience should be considered as a criterion for selection and/or as content area of training interventions. Reportedly, resilience can be developed through training and social support. Fourth, managers can enhance employee commitment to change and behavioral reactions to it by building employee positive affect and social exchange (e.g., using words that express optimism and enthusiasm when discussing the change).
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Change Agents Beware: Does Your Social Network Help or Hinder Change Initiatives? (Human Resource Management)
Topic: Change Management
Publication: Academy of Management (APR 2012)
Article: Change agents, networks, and institutions: A contingency theory of organizational change
Authors: J. Battilana, T. Casciaro
Reviewed by: Kecia Bingham
Not all change initiatives are created equal. Divergent organizational changes (changes that diverge from the institutional status quo) are especially difficult to implement since they require change agents to persuade organization members to not only adopt new practices, but break with institutional norms. The authors of this study sought to answer what factors increase the likelihood that a change agent: 1) will initiate a divergent change initiative, and 2) will persuade other organization members to adopt that change.
The researchers found that change agents with rich structural holes in their network (i.e., a low degree of connections between contacts in his/her network) were more likely to initiate divergent change than were change agents with network closure (i.e., few structural holes in his/her network). That makes sense, right? The less ingrained someone is in the organization, the more likely they are to shake things up. A network with structural holes is more likely to foster novel ideas compared to a network with a high degree of structural closure, which is characterized by redundant information and pressure to conform to existing norms. Also, the researchers found that those structural holes in a change agent’s network increased the adoption of changes that were different from the status quo, while network closure hindered the adoption of such changes. Reportedly, structural holes allow change agents more leeway in deciding when and how to present change to various stakeholders, which is important in implementing changes that go against the grain. However, structural holes in a change agent’s network hindered the adoption of low degree divergent changes, presumably because it made it more difficult for the change agent to mobilize people and resources around the change.
These findings suggest several practical implications for practitioners. First, contrary to popular thought, network cohesion is not advantageous for all change projects. Instead, change agents with networks rich with structural holes appear better for implementing radical institutional change. Second, when selecting change agents, it is important to consider not only the degree of institutional change, but the change agent’s organizational connections. Lastly, to improve the matching of change agents to change type, organizations may benefit from training potential change champions to recognize structural holes in organizational networks.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Creativity is More Than Thinking Outside the Box (IO Psychology)
Topic: Teams, Creativity
Publication: Academy of Management Journal
Article: Cognitive team diversity and individual team member creativity: A cross-level interaction
Authors: S. J. Shin, T.-Y. Kim, J.-Y. Lee, & L. Bian
Reviewed By: Katie Bachman
A creative team is a joy to own. But how can an organization ensure that their team is acting as a cohesive, effective, creative unit? It turns out that it is oh so simple, but maybe not as rudimentary as you’d think. Join me as we venture outside the box!
When we talk about creativity in teams, we can talk about an individual team member’s creative contribution or we can talk about the creative output for the team as a unit. But none of this is very good if everyone on a team is thinking the same thing (pro tip: that’s not very creative). Instead, we need cognitive team diversity! That’s psychobabble for needing people to think differently, have different knowledge and skills, and come to the table with different values and beliefs. The logical step here (if you follow my creative way of thinking) should be that cognitive team diversity—thinking differently—leads to more creativity among team members. That makes sense, right? If people think differently, they’ll come up with different ideas.
But wait! You don’t think it’s quite that easy, do you? There are two components that we need to add to the model. One is leadership. When a team has a charismatic (“transformational” for those in the know) leader, that relationship between cognitive team diversity and creativity is the real deal. But when the leader is just blahs-ville, that relationship doesn’t hold up. There other thing to look out for is creative self-efficacy among team members. If team members think that cognitive diversity and creativity and all of that are important, it will be. It’s the same relationship as with leadership—if team members have this self-efficacy, it’s all good; but, if team members don’t feel like creativity is warranted or appreciated, it won’t be.
So, good news! Your team can be creative. Just make sure you have the right kind of leader and everyone feels warm and fuzzy about sharing ideas. No sweat!
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Big Decision? Take some time to think about it (IO Psychology)
Topic: Decision Making, Ethics
Publication: Academy of Management Journal (FEB 2012)
Article: Contemplation and conversation: Subtle influences on moral decision making
Authors: Gunia, B. C., Wang, L., Huang, L., Wang, J., & Murninghan, J. K.
Reviewed By: Katie Bachman
In the workplace, important decisions can hinge on the ethical strength of your decision makers. It may be more profitable to make an unethical or self-interested choice, but long term consequences can be dire (I’m lookin’ at you, Wall Street). When it comes to choosing between right and wrong, it is sad to think how easily employees can be swayed. Good news! It works the other way too! You can encourage your employees to make more ethical decisions with just a couple of simple actions. How? Oh, let me tell you!
In an experiment measuring how often individuals would be tell the truth about money (a jackpot to be split between the two of them), participants were more likely to tell the truth about the amount of money to be split if they had some extra time to think about it (contemplation) or if they talked to someone who suggested they make the moral choice (conversation). Take note—they could be swayed to lie if they were encouraged to do so as well, but the relationship was stronger for the positive. Now, isn’t that nice?
So, in this experiment, the choices were pretty clear–tell the truth or tell a lie. If only everything were that easy! For us folks living in the real world, lines tend to be fuzzier, but the bottom line still holds. When faced with a decision, time to think and talking to someone on the high road can help us make more ethically sound decisions.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
The Makings of Morality: The Factors Behind Ethical Behavior (IO Psychology)
Topic: Ethics
Publication: Academy of Management Review
Article: Moral maturation and moral conation: A capacity approach to explaining moral thought and action
Authors: Hannah, S. T., Avolio, B. J., & May, D. R.
Reviewer: Neil Morelli
When it comes to identifying unethical behavior in politics, business, and sport, all it takes is a casual flip through your Sunday paper. With a greater spotlight being placed on understanding and promoting ethical practices in the workplace, Hannah, Avolio, and May’s goal was to help determine what it means to have “moral capacity” in the workplace and how that capacity affects ethical behavior.
Hannah et al. specifically focused on moral challenges, or knowing the correct thing to do but having conflicting values. The reaction to a moral dilemma is usually made of two parts a cognition process and a conation process. In other words, how you think about the dilemma and what you do about the dilemma. The authors’ offered a theoretical model that describes the factors underlying the moral cognition and conation (action) processes.
To summarize the model, the moral cognition process includes having the moral sensitivity to identify the dilemma and the judgment to choose the best option for handling it. The conation, or action, process includes having the motivation to commit to a particular course of action and the persistence to overcome fatigue or obstacles that get in the way. The factors underlying the moral cognition process are grouped into a category called moral maturation capacities, or the ability to attend to and retain morally relevant information. The factors underlying the moral conation process are similarly named moral conation capacities, or the ability to take responsibility for a moral dilemma and take action in the face of adversity.
A closer inspection of the individual components of both moral maturation and moral conation is highly recommended for both researchers and practitioners who are interested in the psychological processes of ethical behavior in the workplace, but what immediate impact can this model have for practice? The authors note that these capacities are both malleable and measureable, meaning that these capacities could be targeted in selection processes and training and development initiatives. The ultimate goal is to decrease the amount of unethical behavior by increasing moral capacity.
human resource management, organizational industrial psychology, organizational management
Human Resource Management: Motivating Your Workers to Create Value
Topic: Human Resource Management, Motivation
Publication: Academy of Management Review
Article: Heterogeneous Motives and the Collective Creation of Value
Authors: Bridoux, F., Coeurderoy, R., and Durand, R.
Reviewer: Neil Morelli
In a world where resources are becoming scarcer, firms should be looking to boost any kind of competitive advantage they can. Bridoux, Coeurderoy, and Durand (2011) suggest that one such competitive advantage is having its individual members work cooperatively to create “collective value” (i.e., effectively using firm resources). In their theoretical summary, the authors pose that a firm can encourage collective value creation and outperform the competition by ensuring its mix of individual employees’ motives and its motivational system are aligned. This alignment must take place at both the between-individual and the within-individual level.
Bridoux et al. first describes how individuals differ between their personal motivational dispositions: they are generally either self-regarding or reciprocator (a “me” attitude versus a “we” attitude). These mixed motivational types across individuals react differently to a firm’s motivational system. Of the three “ideal” motivational systems, individual monetary incentives (assumes all individuals are self-regarding), benevolent cooperation (assumes all individuals benevolently create value), and disciplined cooperation (assumes a mixture of motives exists), disciplined cooperation (involves rewards and punishments imposed by reciprocators when sanctions from an authority are absent) was recommended as the most effective when a firm is made up of both motivational types and involves work that is rarely observed by a direct authority.
While understanding that this motivational system may be the most effective at accommodating motivational between-individual differences, the authors stressed that firms aligning their motivational systems to account for within individual differences is also important. The within-individual motivational difference was described as the tension between the motivation to make sure the firm is successful (i.e., creating collective value) versus the motivation to make sure “I” am successful. The authors suggested that relieving this tension by adopting motivational systems that fill economic and relational needs. For example, the authors mentioned motivating employees by giving stock options. In a sense, this creates a congruency between the mixed motives of wanting to serve the firm while also serving oneself by creating an attitude that says, “When the firm succeeds I succeed.”
Managers who pay attention to these conflicting motivations are poised to make sure their employees are working cooperatively with one another and with their firm to maximize their collective value to the company.
