As social network theory and methodology advance, scholars in multiple fields have increasingly become interested in examining work teams using network perspectives. Social networks not only enabled work team researchers to theorize about interdependencies and the dynamic interplay of team components (i.e., individuals, dyads, and whole teams) but also provided a methodological tool kit with which to operationalize and test hypotheses about such interdependencies. To this end, the purpose of this article is to conduct an integrative review of organizational teams research that has adopted a social network perspective to highlight what is known and what remains to be addressed. We then outline an agenda for future research that introduces three promising areas to guide researchers to move the field forward. We conclude that a more thorough integration of the networks and teams literatures offer great promise for advancing both our science and practice.
Individuals with visible disabilities can acknowledge their disabilities in different ways, which may differ in effectiveness. Across four studies, we investigate whether individuals with visible disabilities engage in different acknowledgment strategies (claiming, downplaying) and how and why these different strategies affect evaluations from others. Specifically, we draw from the Stereotype Content Model and Stereotype-Fit Theory to articulate a process whereby claiming and downplaying differentially affect others’ perceptions of competence and warmth, which subsequently affect overall evaluations of the individual with a disability. We found that individuals with visible disabilities intentionally manage others’ impressions by engaging in claiming and downplaying. Claiming strategies (relative to downplaying or not acknowledging) resulted in higher evaluations because they activated perceptions of competence and warmth and the benefits of claiming were stronger for jobs higher in interpersonal demands. We discuss the implications of these results for individuals with disabilities and for organizations.
Does working in a female dominated industry influence how male leaders are perceived? To investigate this question, we draw on Role Congruity Theory and suggest that industry gender composition moderates the relationship between leader gender and four different aspects of leadership effectiveness. The existing literature suggests that male leaders are likely to be perceived more effective than female leaders because leader roles largely resemble male gender roles. However, the perception of leadership effectiveness does not solely depend on the leader gender but also the context that makes the leader gender more salient. Based on the 360-degree leadership assessment data of 952 U.S. leaders and their raters (n=8684), the current study found that as the gender composition of the industry becomes more congruent with the gender of the leader, both self-and other-leader perceptions become more favorable. In this study, industry gender composition moderated the relationship (a) between leader gender and self-ratings of leadership effectiveness dimensions as well as (b) between leader gender and other-ratings. This was particularly true when looking at perceptions of leaders' abilities to promote adaptability in their organizations. Overall, this paper provides insight into the role of contextual factors on leadership effectiveness ratings and highlights the importance of considering industry gender composition when utilizing feedback for the purposes of leadership development.
Purpose – The authors sought initial validity evidence for a measure of anticipated discrimination in the workplace using three samples of working adults with various chronic illnesses. The purpose of this paper is to propose a single factor structure, correlations with stigma dimensions, discriminant validity from similar scales, and incremental validity in predicting work-related outcomes. Design/methodology/approach – Adults working at least 20 hours per week with various chronic illnesses (Sample 1 n=332, Sample 2 n=193, Sample 3 n=230) voluntarily completed an online survey. Structural equation modeling and hierarchical multiple regression were used to analyze the data. Findings – Results supported the proposed single-factor structure, along with proposed correlations with strain, and job attitudes (job satisfaction, affective commitment, and both procedural justice). Discriminant validity was observed between anticipated discrimination and procedural justice perceptions and perceived impact on performance. The scale demonstrated incremental validity in predicting strain beyond the relevant controls in all three samples, although it only demonstrated incremental validity in predicting job satisfaction in Samples 1 and 3 and affective commitment in Sample 1. Research limitations/implications – Study limitations include the use of single-source, cross-sectional data, omission of a non-stigmatized sample, and a deductive approach to item generation. Future research should attempt to validate the scale on other stigmatized worker populations. Practical implications – Organizations may use this scale to monitor employees’ perceptions of anticipated discrimination and researchers may use it as a measure of a workplace stressor. Originality/value – The vast majority of existing stigma and discrimination scales do not specifically address the workplace context. This study contributes to the literature by providing psychometric information for a workplace anticipated discrimination scale using samples from an under-represented worker population.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.