Tag Archives: industrial-organizational psychology

There to Serve: Servant Leadership and Team Success

Reply

Topic: Leadership, Teams
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (JUL 2011)
Article: Antecedents of Team Potency and Team Effectiveness: An Examination of Goal and Process Clarity and Servant Leadership
Authors: Hu, J. & Liden, R. C.
Reviewed By: Thaddeus Rada

Teams are used in a wide variety of organizations for a wide variety of purposes. While teams can be useful to organizations in many ways, there are risks as well. By forming individuals into collective teams, organizations must risk conflict and competition amongst group members. Generally, it is also necessary to have one or more individuals lead a team. In essence, teams can yield very positive results, but they must be designed and managed thoughtfully. A new article by Jia Hu and Robert Liden addresses how a particular type of leadership – servant leadership – might be especially useful in guiding teams to success.

The authors note that teams tend to perform better when team goals and processes are clear to all team members. This clarity can lead to high team potency beliefs, wherein team members believe in the team’s ability to effectively achieve its goals. The authors go on to point out that leaders of the “servant leader” type are particularly well-positioned to elicit this clarity and trust in their teams. Servant leaders do this through behaviors that put team members first, empowering them, and helping them to grow and succeed both as individuals and team members. Among their hypotheses, the authors hypothesized that, by fostering team potency in these ways, servant leaders might lead teams to perform better and engage in higher levels of organizational citizenship behavior.

Continue reading →

Predicting Burnout: Playing Well With Others Can Go a Long Way!

Reply

Topic: Burnout, Engagement
Publication: Journal of Vocational Behavior (SUMMER 2011)
Article: Social strategies during university studies predict early career work burnout and engagement: 18-year longitudinal study
Authors: Salmela-Aro, K., Tolvanen, A., Nurmi, J. E.
Reviewed by: Larry Martinez

Sure, there are days when we just don’t want to go to work.  In these times, the very thought of going in to the office can make one cringe…we feel like we need a long, isolated vacation.  In short, we’re burned out.  This is a big problem for companies, who rely on employees to be actively engaged and energetic at work.  However, it may be that some people are more or less intrinsically susceptible to burnout and disengagement at work.  That is, some people just have burnout-prone personality characteristics and thus may be unwise investments for employers.  Wouldn’t it be nice if we could figure out who these people are likely to be?  Salmela-Aro and her colleagues (2011) address this issue directly.

These authors followed 292 university students through their academic and subsequent careers (sometimes for as long as 18 years) to find personality characteristics that might predict burnout and disengagement.  Specifically, they found that social strategies used during college were indicators of later reported levels of burnout and engagement.  Social strategies include the extent to which someone is positively (optimism) or negatively (pessimism) inclined to value and approach social relationships.  So, if you have an optimistic social orientation, you are likely to 1) build relationships with coworkers who can act as resources, 2) ask for help when problems arise, and 3) have support from others when the going gets tough.  The opposite would be true for someone with a pessimistic (avoidant) social orientation. 

Continue reading →

Is Bureaucracy Bad for Creativity? That Depends on You

Reply

Topic: Creativity, Strategic HR, Teams
Publication: Academy of Management Journal
Article: How does bureaucracy impact individual creativity? A cross-level investigation of team contextual influences on goal orientation-creativity relationships
Authors: Giles Hirst, Daan Van Knippenberg, Chin-Hui Chen, & Claudia A. Sacramento
Reviewed By: Katie Bachman

Bureaucracy and creativity. They might seem like mortal enemies—we often think of red tape and paper work as the killer of creative thinking—but it doesn’t have to be! Really, it depends on your employees. When we talk about goal orientation (why people do what they do), we usually take about three types of people. First, you have your learning-oriented workers. These are the ones who do what they do for sheer enjoyment of the work. They are intrinsically motivated. Second, you have your performance-prove-oriented employees. These workers want to show you how good they are. Third and finally, you have your performance-avoid workers. These are your risk-adverse employees—the rule followers. They all respond to bureaucracy differently, particularly when it comes to creativity.

We can divide bureaucracy into two dimensions—centralization and formalization. Centralization deals with the amount of decision making ability team members have. The more centralized decision making is, the less team members have opportunity to add their input. Formalization deals with the paperwork. It’s the policies and procedures employees have to adhere to in their job. Like centralization, the more formal the procedure, the less wiggle-room there is for workers.

Continue reading →

Increase generic human capital to increase unit-specific human capital

Reply

Topic: Organizational Performance, Talent Management, Strategic HR
Publication: Academy of Management Journal (APR 2011)
Article: Acquiring and developing human capital in service contexts: The interconnectedness of human capital resources
Authors: Ployhart, R. E., Van Iddekinge, C. H., & MacKenzie, W. I.
Reviewed by: Alexandra Rechlin

It is widely acknowledged that human capital is important, but does it matter whether the capital is generic (transferable to other organizations) or unit-specific (valuable to that particular work unit and not to others)? In this article, Ployhart, Van Iddekinge, and MacKenzie (2011) assessed both generic and unit-specific human capital in a large fast-food organization. They created and tested a model for how the two kinds of human capital relate to each other and to performance and effectiveness outcomes.

The level of generic human capital was based on the cognitive ability and personality of hired applicants, while unit-specific human capital was based on employees’ additional training.  The authors found that changes in generic and unit-specific human capital were positively related over time; that is, as generic human capital increased, so did unit-specific human capital. In addition, changes in unit-specific human capital were positively related to changes in unit service performance behavior (efficiency, service, quality), and changes in unit service performance behavior were positively related to changes in unit service effectiveness (unit financial success).

In other words, hire employees who are smart and whose personalities fit with their jobs.  This will establish strong bench strength and will set the organization up for success as employees are trained to build the skills necessary to excel in specific roles. 

Continue reading →

Career success? The differences are Black and White

Reply

Topic: Diversity
Publication: Journal of Vocational Behavior (online pre-publication)
Article: Evaluating career success of African American males: It’s what you know and who you are that matters.
Authors: Johnson, C. D. & Eby, L. T.
Reviewed by: Larry Martinez

Little research has specifically examined what makes African American males successful.  This research has been done with respect to Caucasian workers, but are the things that are related to success for Caucasians also related to success for African Americans?  Are there other things that might be related to success for African Americans in particular that has not been examined with respect to Caucasians?  These questions formed the basis of research by Johnson and Eby (in press).

Specifically, these authors examined four broad dimensions of characteristics that might be related to success for African Americans: human capital (e.g., education, work history, training), social capital (e.g., informal networks, professional associations, club memberships), individual differences (e.g., motivation, conscientiousness, ambition), and demographic attributes (e.g., marital status, age, skin tone).  In a sample of 247 African American males, these authors found that some characteristics that were related to success in Caucasians were also related for African Americans.  Specifically, human capital and demographic attributes were the most related, while social capital and individual differences were much less related. 

Continue reading →

Life Isn’t Always Fair: Using Inducements & Contributions to Predict Employee Satisfaction

Reply

Topic: Employee Satisfaction, Evidence-Based Management, Rewards
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (JUL 2011)
Article: Promised and Delivered Inducements and Contributions: An Integrated View of Psychological Contract Appraisal
Authors: Lambert, L. S.
Reviewed By: Thaddeus Rada

One of the most common complaints an employee may have with their employing organization is that they are not be fairly or adequately compensated for the contributions that they are putting into the company. A complaint of this type gets down to the concept of a psychological contract, which consists of inducements and contributions. Both of these come in two “varieties,” promised and delivered. Promised inducements or contributions are commitments that an organization or an employee, respectively, commit to providing to the other. Delivered inducements or contributions are what the organization or employee actually provide to the other, which may deviate from the promised inducement or contribution.

Together, the balance, or lack thereof, between these four components determines the overall quality of the psychological contract between an employee and the organization they work for. The current study, by Lisa Schurer Lambert, addresses a gap in the psychological contract literature: the comparison, by employees, of inducements to contributions, particularly with respect to the weight that employees give to each component.

Continue reading →

The Curious Case of Recruiters

1

Topic: Interviewing, Selection
Publication: International Journal of Selection and Assessment (JUN 2011)
Article: How Accurate are Recruiters’ First Impressions of Applicants in Employment Interviews?
Authors: Mast, M. S., Bangerter, A., Bulliard, C., & Aerni, G.
Reviewed By: Thaddeus Rada

Recruiters are still used by a variety of organizations to evaluate applicants and identify candidates that exhibit the potential to become successful employees in the organization. Recruiters typically have a relatively long time in which to form a first impression of a candidate; the authors of the current study, Marianne Mast and colleagues, were interested in knowing if recruiters are able to more accurately (compared to a layperson) assess the personality of job applicants if they have a shorter amount of time in which to make their assessment. Does this shorter time frame inhibit their ability to make accurate assessments about others?

Participants in this study came from one of two groups: recruiters, and students. The students acted as a sort of control group, with their performance thought to be representative of how laypeople might perform on the assessment task. Participants viewed videotapes of mock job applicants; compared to a typical job interview, the videos were much shorter, exposing participants to each applicant for an average of only two minutes. Participants then assessed each applicant’s personality (the assessment utilized the Big 5 personality components). The accuracy of the participants’ assessments were measure against self-assessments completed by the applicants, as well as peer assessments completed by two friends of each applicant. The researchers found that students were able to accurately assess more personality traits (openness, extraversion, and conscientiousness) than the recruiters were (openness only), while recruiters were better able to assess the complete personality profile of each applicant.

Ultimately, the authors argue that recruiters’ skill at assessing personality profiles gives support to the notion that recruiters should continue to be utilized in the personnel selection process. However, it may also be worth considering whether there are instances in which a specific personality dimension is more important than the entire personality profile. The authors note that previous research has found that conscientiousness is the personality dimension most predictive of job performance, in a variety of occupations. In the current study, the authors found that students were able to accurately assess conscientiousness, while recruiters were not. It is my belief that the necessity of “total” personality assessment, as it applies to personnel selection, should continue to be evaluated.

Mast, M. S., Bangerter, A., Bulliard, C., & Aerni, G. (2011). How accurate are recruiters’ first impressions of applicants in employment interviews? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 198-208.

Supervisor support can tip work/family balance into equilibrium

Reply

Topic: Work-Life Balance
Publication: Journal of Vocational Behavior (online pre-publication)
Article: A comparison of types of social support for lower-skill workers: Evidence for the importance of family supportive supervisors.
Authors: Muse, L. A., Pichler, S.
Reviewed by: Larry Martinez

Most of what we know from organizational research is based off of samples of either convenience samples (mostly college students) or white-collar employees (e.g., nurses, accountants, managers).  Most research does not specifically target blue-collar or lower level employees, despite the fact that the majority of jobs are at lower levels.  This is especially true in work/family balance literature.  In addition, few studies examine simultaneously how work interferes with family AND how family interferes with work.  However, Muse and Pichler (in press) focused on these issues directly. 

Lower skilled workers may be especially prone to not being able to utilize public and/or organizational policies that could help relieve stress between work and family obligations because they often face lower job stability and less bargaining power than highly skilled workers.  However, the results of this study suggest that these types of support are also critical for lower skilled workers. 

Continue reading →

What are the performance implications of your organization’s culture?

Reply

Topic: Culture, Human Resources, Organizational Performance
Publication: Journal of Applied Psychology (JULY 2011)
Article: Organizational Culture and Organizational Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Competing Values Framework’s Theoretical Suppositions
Authors: Hartnell, C.A., Ou, A.Y., & Kinicki, A.
Reviewer: Neil Morelli

Try to define your organization’s culture in one word… The word you came up with may be a predictor of how your organization is performing. Although organizational culture is assumed to be a key component of organizational effectiveness, the theoretical connection between these two important concepts remains fuzzy. Hartnell, Ou, and Kinicki conducted a meta-analysis to explore how a prolific taxonomy of organizational cultures, called the competing values framework (CVF), may help connect our understanding of organizational culture to organizational effectiveness.

Briefly, the CVF arranges organizational cultures into four categories: clan (internal focus on human capital and membership), adhocracy (external focus on adapting through creativity, innovation, and gathering of resources), market (external focus on competitiveness and aggressiveness to meet customer demands), and hierarchy (internal focus on maintain predictability and performance through precise control and clearly defined roles).

After examining 84 studies across three dimensions of organizational effectiveness (employee attitudes, operational effectiveness, and financial effectiveness), the authors found that clan cultures were more positively associated with job satisfaction than were adhocracy cultures, subjective innovation was more strongly related to market cultures than adhocracy cultures, and market cultures had stronger positive relationships with financial effectiveness criteria than were clan or adhocracy cultures.

All that to say, each of the CVF culture types were related to organizational effectiveness criteria in varying ways; this highlights the importance of organizational culture’s role in predicting firm performance. However, the authors concluded that more work is needed regarding the CVF’s nomological validity—as researchers and practitioners look to “tried and true” methods of defining organizational culture, they must also be careful to not ignore both the role of culture in organizational functioning or the theoretical foundations of their taxonomies.

Hartnell, C.A., Ou, A.Y., & Kinicki, A. (2011). Organizational culture and organizational
effectiveness: A meta-analytic investigation of the competing values framework’s
theoretical suppositions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 677-694.

human resource management,organizational industrial psychology, organizational management

Human Resources Management: For Some, The Grass is Always Greener

Reply

Topic: Turnover, Human Resources
Publication: Journal of Vocational Behavior (online pre-publication)
Article: Is the past prologue for some more than others? The hobo syndrome and job complexity.
Authors: Becton, J. B., Carr, J. C., Judge, T. A.
Reviewed by: Larry Martinez


The fact is that employees are more mobile today than in decades past.  The former ideal of finding one company and staying there for one’s entire career has been replace by the reality of increased job movement for today’s workers.  But are some workers more likely to get the itch to leave than others?  And more importantly, is there anything that organizations can do to make these wayward workers want to stay?  The results of a study by Becton and colleagues (in press) directly inform these questions.

Based on a sample of 393 employees, these authors found that in general, those employees who had a history of changing jobs frequently (as assessed using biodata) were more likely to turnover in subsequent jobs.  However, this relationship was affected (moderated) by the complexity of the job (as measured by O*Net ratings).  This means that, theoretically, some people are more likely to want to leave their organizations (as evidenced by previous job mobility) and this pattern was even stronger for those in increasingly complex jobs. 

This could be because complex jobs take a longer amount of time to get used to and are fraught with more early onset frustrations as one learns the ropes, making it more likely for these more fickle employees to look for something else. 

These results discount the idea that job hopping is more likely for younger generations, but is instead a dispositional characteristic.  They do, however, lend credit to the idea that using past employment information might be informative with regards to future hiring decisions.  That is, you may be wary of hiring someone who has a history of job hopping.  And according to these results, this may be especially the case in complex jobs.  In addition, organizations may need to adopt specific strategies for retaining employees who have a history of changing jobs that differs from those who do not have this job mobility pattern. 

Becton, J. B., Carr, J. C., & Judge, T. A. (in press). Is the past prologue for some more than others? The hobo syndrome and job complexity. Journal of Vocational Behavior.

human resource management,organizational industrial psychology, organizational management