Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

  • Disloyalty aversion: Greater reluctance to bet against close others than the self
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140

    Author(s): Simone Tang, Carey M. Morewedge, Richard P. Larrick, Jill G. Klein

    We examine the mechanisms by which loyalty can induce risk seeking. In seven studies, participants exhibited disloyalty aversion—they were more reluctant to bet on the failure of a close other than on their own failure. In contrast, participants were just as willing to bet on the failure of strangers as on their own failure. This effect persisted when bets were made in private, payouts were larger for betting on failure than success (Studies 1–4, 6), and failure was most likely (Studies 2–6). We propose that disloyalty aversion occurs because the negative identity signal to the self that hedging creates can outweigh the rewards conferred by hedging. Indeed, disloyalty aversion was moderated by factors affecting the strength of this self-signal and the payout of the hedge, including the closeness of the other person, bettors’ trait loyalty, and payout magnitude (Studies 3–5). Disloyalty aversion strongly influences social preferences involving risk.





  • Is adhering to justice rules enough? The role of charismatic qualities in perceptions of supervisors’ overall fairness
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140

    Author(s): Jessica B. Rodell, Jason A. Colquitt, Michael D. Baer

    Our study challenges the consensus that perceptions of overall fairness are driven solely by adherence to justice rules—that “what seems fair” depends solely on “what seems just.” Building on emerging theorizing on incidental affect and fairness appraisals, we argue that charismatic qualities of supervisors can predict employee perceptions of overall fairness, even when controlling for supervisors’ justice rule adherence. We develop theory for how and when charismatic qualities could exert such effects by drawing on existing models of affect and by introducing a new construct—event frequency—that captures how frequently supervisors make resource allocation decisions. The results of a field study suggest that supervisor charismatic qualities predict overall fairness by arousing positive affect that colors fairness perceptions. The effects of charismatic qualities become stronger as decision events become more frequent, presumably because the information processing associated with those events provides additional opportunities for fairness to be infused with affect.





  • Regulatory focus trickle-down: How leader regulatory focus and behavior shape follower regulatory focus
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140

    Author(s): Russell E. Johnson, Danielle D. King, Szu-Han (Joanna) Lin, Brent A. Scott, Erin M. Jackson Walker, Mo Wang

    Regulatory focus is critical at work and is shaped by cues in the environment. We examine how supervisor regulatory foci can activate analogous foci in subordinates. We test this idea across five studies. In Study 1 we find that supervisor regulatory focus predicted change in new hires’ regulatory focus in the first three months after organizational entry. In Studies 2 and 3 we find that leaders’ regulatory foci had unique effects on leadership behaviors, and that these behaviors primed subordinates’ regulatory foci. Specifically, transformational behavior is linked to promotion focus, management by exception behavior to prevention focus, and contingent reward behavior to both foci. In Study 4 we find that leader regulatory focus relates to follower regulatory focus via the mediating effects of the aforementioned leader behaviors. Finally, in Study 5 we additionally find that contingent punishment mediates the relationship between leader and follower prevention focus and that weak regulatory foci increase the likelihood of laissez-faire leadership. Taken together, these results reveal how leader regulatory focus and behavior can be leveraged to shape the motivation of followers.





  • Compensatory control and ambiguity intolerance
    Publication date: May 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 140

    Author(s): Anyi Ma, Aaron C. Kay

    When do people find ambiguity intolerable, and how might this manifest in the workplace where roles, guidelines and expectations can be made to be more or less ambiguous? Compensatory Control Theory (CCT; Kay, Gaucher, Napier, Callan, & Laurin, 2008) suggests a potential driver: perceived control. Recent CCT theory (Landau, Kay, & Whitson, 2015) has posited that people with chronically lower levels of perceived control may be especially likely to seek coherent and structured environments. Given that ambiguous workplace situations – such as flexible roles and titles, or loose guidelines and expectations – necessarily represent a lack of structure, these types of situations may therefore be especially aversive to those lower in perceived control. Four studies support this prediction. Specifically, we observe that low perceived control (both measured or manipulated) predicts greater ambiguity intolerance as well as greater negative attitudes towards ambiguous situations (Studies 1, 2 and 3), but not other types of problematic workplace situations (Study 1), and that this process can exert important downstream consequences, ranging from behavioral intentions to perceived self-efficacy (Study 4).





  • Team adaptation in context: An integrated conceptual model and meta-analytic review
    Publication date: Available online 24 March 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

    Author(s): Jessica Siegel Christian, Michael S. Christian, Matthew J. Pearsall, Erin C. Long

    In modern work teams, successful performance requires adaptation to changing environments, tasks, situations, and role structures. Although empirical studies of team adaptive performance have generated key inferences about team adaptation in specific contexts, there are important conceptual differences across the adaptive stimuli examined in the literature (e.g., novel environments vs. downsizing). We extend theories of team adaptation by suggesting that the effectiveness of team processes and emergent states in driving team adaptive performance will vary based on the nature of the adaptive stimulus. We integrate and extend the team adaptation literature using an IMOI framework to empirically examine a process model of team adaptive performance and examine two distinct contextual moderators: (a) internal versus external changes (i.e., origin), and (b) temporary versus sustained changes (i.e., duration). We meta-analytically examine the processes, emergent states, and inputs that lead to effective team adaptation in general, and in specific contexts. The results of our meta-analysis generally support our proposed model. We discuss implications and directions for future theory and research.





  • Cover 2 – Editorial Board/Barcode
    Publication date: March 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 139









  • Effects of inter-group status on the pursuit of intra-group status
    Publication date: March 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 139

    Author(s): Jin Wook Chang, Rosalind M. Chow, Anita W. Woolley

    This research examines how the status of one’s group influences intra-group behavior and collective outcomes. Two experiments provide evidence that, compared to members of low-status groups, members of high-status groups are more concerned about their intra-group standing, which in turn can increase both the likelihood of competitive and cooperative intra-group behavior. However, whether the desire for intra-group standing manifests via competitive versus cooperative behavior depends on the relevance of the task to the group’s inter-group standing. When the task is not clearly relevant to the group’s status, members of high-status groups are more likely to engage in competitive behavior out of a desire to manage their intra-group status, which, in turn, leads to less desirable collective outcomes. However, when the group’s status is at stake, members of high-status groups seek intra-group status via cooperative behavior, leading to better collective outcomes.





  • A helping hand is hard at work: Help-seekers’ underestimation of helpers’ effort
    Publication date: March 2017
    Source:Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 139

    Author(s): Daniel A. Newark, Vanessa K. Bohns, Francis J. Flynn

    Whether people seek help depends on their estimations of both the likelihood and the value of getting it. Although past research has carefully examined how accurately help-seekers predict whether their help requests will be granted, it has failed to examine how accurately help-seekers predict the value of that help, should they receive it. In this paper, we focus on how accurately help-seekers predict a key determinant of help value, namely, helper effort. In four studies, we find that (a) helpers put more effort into helping than help-seekers expect (Studies 1–4); (b) people do not underestimate the effort others will expend in general, but rather only the effort others will expend helping them (Study 2); and (c) this underestimation of help effort stems from help-seekers’ failure to appreciate the discomfort—in particular, the guilt—that helpers would experience if they did not do enough to help (Studies 3 & 4).





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