Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

  • Fair pay dispersion: A regulatory focus theory view
    Publication date: September 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 142

    Author(s): Tae-Youn Park, Seongsu Kim, Li-Kuo Sung

    The authors propose that the debate on the fairness of large pay dispersion can be advanced by considering people’s regulatory focus. While some argue that pay dispersion is fair only when it reflects individual contribution differences, others argue that large pay dispersion is fair as employees perceive others’ high pay as a signal of their own future pay. Invoking the view of regulatory focus theory, the authors suggest that pay dispersion increases pay fairness perception when employees have a strong promotion focus, whereas pay dispersion decreases fairness perception when employees have a strong prevention focus. Using two multilevel field studies—Study 1 with 827 employees in 137 teams at 42 organizations in South Korea and Study 2 with 186 employees in 46 teams at 5 high-technology organizations in Taiwan—the authors present supportive evidence of the promotion focus moderation effect. Evidence of the prevention focus moderation effect is not found.





  • What “blindness” to gender differences helps women see and do: Implications for confidence, agency, and action in male-dominated environments
    Publication date: September 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 142

    Author(s): Ashley E. Martin, Katherine W. Phillips

    The ways in which we discuss gender (embracing vs. downplaying difference) has implications for women’s workplace confidence and behavior, especially in male-dominated environments and positions of power. In five total studies (N =1453), across a variety of samples, we found that gender-blindness—the belief that gender differences should be downplayed—is a more adaptive strategy for increasing female workplace confidence than gender-awareness—the belief that gender differences should be celebrated. In addition to increasing confidence, gender-blindness was related to actions necessary for reducing gender disparities (e.g., risk-taking, negotiation). We found that perceived gender differences in agency (i.e., assertiveness, independence) accounts for gender differences in workplace confidence, especially in male-dominated environments (e.g., business school) and positions of power (managerial positions). Finally, we found that gender-blindness either lessened or had no effect on men’s confidence, demonstrating the unique positive effect of gender-blindness on women’s confidence. Together, this research highlights the potential for downplaying differences, instead of emphasizing them, to combat the confidence gap.





  • Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace
    Publication date: September 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 142

    Author(s): M. Sandy Hershcovis, Lukas Neville, Tara C. Reich, Amy M. Christie, Lilia M. Cortina, J. Valerie Shan

    Research often paints a dark portrait of power. Previous work underscores the links between power and self-interested, antisocial behavior. In this paper, we identify a potential bright side to power—namely, that the powerful are more likely to intervene when they witness workplace incivility. In experimental (Studies 1 and 3) and field (Study 2) settings, we find evidence suggesting that power can shape how, why, and when the powerful respond to observed incivility against others. We begin by drawing on research linking power and action orientation. In Study 1, we demonstrate that the powerful respond with agency to witnessed incivility. They are more likely to directly confront perpetrators, and less likely to avoid the perpetrator and offer social support to targets. We explain the motivation that leads the powerful to act by integrating theory on responsibility construals of power and hierarchy maintenance. Study 2 shows that felt responsibility mediates the effect of power on increased confrontation and decreased avoidance. Study 3 demonstrates that incivility leads the powerful to perceive a status challenge, which then triggers feelings of responsibility. In Studies 2 and 3, we also reveal an interesting nuance to the effect of power on supporting the target. While the powerful support targets less as a direct effect, we reveal countervailing indirect effects: To the extent that incivility is seen as a status challenge and triggers felt responsibility, power indirectly increases support toward the target. Together, these results enrich the literature on third-party intervention and incivility, showing how power may free bystanders to intervene in response to observed incivility.





  • Team conflict dynamics: Implications of a dyadic view of conflict for team performance
    Publication date: September 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 142

    Author(s): Stephen E. Humphrey, Federico Aime, Lily Cushenbery, Aaron D. Hill, Joshua Fairchild

    This paper endeavored to resolve some of the inconsistencies in the intrateam conflict literature by proposing both that conflict can be conceptualized asan expression of dyadic interactions and that the study of conflict requires a dynamic perspective. We propose that the presence of relationship conflict in even a single dyad within a team can hinder information exchange, whereas the level of information exchange in teams can unlock task conflict. We argue that task and relationship conflict, due to this unfolding process, shift from an initially significant positive relationship to a null relationship over time. We further propose that task conflict and dyadic task conflict asymmetry combine to produce high performance in the teams. Our study of 219 individuals organized in 458 dyads within 51 teams – studied over 8weeks during the development of an entrepreneurial venture – provided support for our theoretical model. Our theory and findings demonstrate that the connection between task and relationship conflict is more complex that previously proposed, with task and relationship conflict differentiating over time.





  • Trash-talking: Competitive incivility motivates rivalry, performance, and unethical behavior
    Publication date: Available online 24 July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    Author(s): Jeremy A. Yip, Maurice E. Schweitzer, Samir Nurmohamed

    Trash-talking increases the psychological stakes of competition and motivates targets to outperform their opponents. In Studies 1 and 2, participants in a competition who were targets of trash-talking outperformed participants who faced the same economic incentives, but were not targets of trash-talking. Perceptions of rivalry mediate the relationship between trash-talking and effort-based performance. In Study 3, we find that targets of trash-talking were particularly motivated to punish their opponents and see them lose. In Study 4, we identify a boundary condition, and show that trash-talking increases effort in competitive interactions, but incivility decreases effort in cooperative interactions. In Study 5, we find that targets of trash-talking were more likely to cheat in a competition than were participants who received neutral messages. In Study 6, we demonstrate that trash-talking harms performance when the performance task involves creativity. Taken together, our findings reveal that trash-talking is a common workplace behavior that can foster rivalry and motivate both constructive and destructive behavior.





  • Beyond personal control: When and how executives’ beliefs in negotiable fate foster entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance
    Publication date: Available online 12 July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    Author(s): Evelyn W.M. Au, Xin Qin, Zhi-Xue Zhang

    Negotiable fate, the belief that fate imposes boundaries within which personal actions can shape outcomes, is rooted in Chinese collective wisdom. This belief is hypothesized to prompt executives to use of available resources to create opportunities by directing their attention to controllable aspects of unpredictable environments. Thus, executives’ endorsement of negotiable fate beliefs is expected not only to enhance firm-level entrepreneurial orientation, but also to positively predict firm innovation and financial performance. We further expect these mediation effects to be stronger under dynamic environments. Studies of top executives in China support the theorized moderated-mediation model. By providing evidence for its context-specific benefits, the concept of negotiable fate enhances the dialogue on fate beliefs in the Chinese context and suggests new directions for organizational behavior scholarship beyond China.





  • Cover 2 – Editorial Board/Barcode
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141









  • Step by step: Sub-goals as a source of motivation
    Publication date: July 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 141

    Author(s): Szu-chi Huang, Liyin Jin, Ying Zhang

    The present research explores the shifting impact of sub-goals on human motivation as individuals move closer to goal attainment, and attributes this shift to the changing source of motivation at different time points during the goal pursuit. In four lab and field experiments, we employed contexts such as exercising, business reviews, and work-for-pay jobs, and performed both within-subject and between-subject tests. We found that when individuals are initiating a goal and derive motivation primarily from the belief that the final goal state is attainable, the structure of sub-goals enhances the sense of attainability and therefore leads to greater motivation. Conversely, when people are completing a goal and the source of motivation centers primarily on the perception that their actions are of value, a focus on the overall goal (rather than sub-goals) heightens the perceived value of the goal-directed actions and leads to greater motivation.





http://rss.sciencedirect.com/publication/science/07495978

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Email
Facebook
Facebook
YouTube
YouTube
Pin It