This multistudy research examines the unit-level relationship between promotive voice behavior and management innovation. Study 1 utilizes multisource data from 62 work units and reports that willingness to discuss ideas mediates the unit-level relationship between promotive voice and management innovation. The results of Study 1 also show that the unit's available resources make the relationship stronger between promotive voice and willingness to discuss ideas. Study 2 employs a scenario-based design to constructively replicate and expand the results of Study 1, utilizing a sample of 100 working adults. The results of the second study also show that resource availability positively moderates the relationship between promotive voice and willingness to discuss ideas. Furthermore, Study 2 shows that the indirect effect of promotive voice on management innovation through willingness to discuss ideas is stronger when more resources are made available to the work units. This moderatedmediation effect is shown to be significant using two different operationalizations of management innovation. The implications for theory and practice are discussed.

We propose solutions to two recurring problems in cross-national research: response style differences and language bias. In order to do so, we conduct a methodological comparison of two different response formats-rating and ranking. For rating, we assess the effect of changing the commonly used 5-point Likert scales to 7-point Likert scales. For ranking, we evaluate the validity of presenting respondents with short scenarios for which they need to rank their top 3 solutions. Our results -based on two studies of 1965 undergraduate and 1714 MBA students in 16 different countries -confirm our hypotheses that both solutions reduce response and language bias, but show that ranking generally is a superior solution. These findings allow researchers to have greater confidence in the validity of crossnational differences if these response formats are used, instead of the more traditional 5point Likert scales. In addition, our findings have several practical implications for multinational corporations, relating to issues such as selection interviews, performance appraisals, and cross-cultural training.ß

No abstract

No abstract

This study compares the ratings for three dimensions of organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) provided by managers (self-ratings), their subordinates, and their colleagues (superiors and peers) in the Spanish branch of a multinational food company. Using hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis, we find strong method effects, indicating that ratings from different sources provide different information. A comparison among means shows that, in most cases, subordinate and self-ratings are significantly higher than colleague ratings. We also add to the recent research about the dimensionality of OCB by performing a correlation analysis among OCB dimensions that controls for method effects. Our results show that, when methods are taken into account, correlations among OCB dimensions are not significant.