A framework for understanding the etiology of organizational behavior is presented. The framework is based on theory and research from interactional psychology, vocational psychology, I/O psychology, and organizational theory. The framework proposes that organizations are functions of the kinds of people they contain and, further, that the people there are functions of an attraction‐selection‐attrition (ASA) cycle. The ASA cycle is proposed as an alternative model for understanding organizations and the causes of the structures, processes, and technology of organizations. First, the ASA framework is developed through a series of propositions. Then some implications of the model are outlined, including (1) the difficulty of bringing about change in organizations, (2) the utility of personality and interest measures for understanding organizational behavior, (3) the genesis of organizational climate and culture, (4) the importance of recruitment, and (5) the need for person‐based theories of leadership and job attitudes. It is concluded that contemporary I/O psychology is overly dominated by situationist theories of the behavior of organizations and the people in them.

The meaning of employee engagement is ambiguous among both academic researchers and among practitioners who use it in conversations with clients. We show that the term is used at different times to refer to psychological states, traits, and behaviors as well as their antecedents and outcomes. Drawing on diverse relevant literatures, we offer a series of propositions about (a) psychological state engagement; (b) behavioral engagement; and (c) trait engagement. In addition, we offer propositions regarding the effects of job attributes and leadership as main effects on state and behavioral engagement and as moderators of the relationships among the 3 facets of engagement. We conclude with thoughts about the measurement of the 3 facets of engagement and potential antecedents, especially measurement via employee surveys.

A set of foundation issues that support employee work and service quality is conceptualized as a necessary but not sufficient cause of a climate for service, which in turn is proposed to be reflected in customer experiences. Climate for service rests on the foundation issues, but in addition it requires policies and practices that focus attention directly on service quality. Data were collected at multiple points in time from employees and customers of 134 branches of a bank and analyzed via structural equation modeling. Results indicated that the model in which the foundation issues yielded a climate for service, and climate for service in turn led to customer perceptions of service quality, fit the data well. However, subsequent cross-lagged analyses revealed the presence of a reciprocal effect for climate and customer perceptions. Implications of these results for theory and research are offered.

The construct of Human Resource (HR) Attributions is introduced. We argue that the attributions that employees make about the reasons why management adopts the HR practices that it does have consequences for their attitudes and behaviors, and ultimately, unit performance. Drawing on the strategic HR literature, we propose a typology of five HR-Attribution dimensions. Utilizing data collected from a service firm, we show that employees make varying attributions for the same HR practices, and that these attributions are differentially associated with commitment and satisfaction. In turn, we show that these attitudes become shared within units and that they are related to unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors and customer satisfaction. Findings and implications are discussed. ACKNOLWEDGEMENT.We would like to thank Michele Gelfand, Paul Tesluk, Paul Hanges, and John Hausknecht for their invaluable feedback on earlier drafts of this paper. This research was funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation. HR Attributions, 2 ABSTRACTThe construct of Human Resource (HR) Attributions is introduced. We argue that the attributions that employees make about the reasons why management adopts the HR practices that it does have consequences for their attitudes and behaviors, and ultimately, unit performance.Drawing on the strategic HR literature, we propose a typology of five HR-Attribution dimensions.Utilizing data collected from a service firm, we show that employees make varying attributions for the same HR practices, and that these attributions are differentially associated with commitment and satisfaction. In turn, we show that these attitudes become shared within units and that they are related to unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors and customer satisfaction. Findings and implications are discussed.

Organizational climate and organizational culture theory and research are reviewed. The article is first framed with definitions of the constructs, and preliminary thoughts on their interrelationships are noted. Organizational climate is briefly defined as the meanings people attach to interrelated bundles of experiences they have at work. Organizational culture is briefly defined as the basic assumptions about the world and the values that guide life in organizations. A brief history of climate research is presented, followed by the major accomplishments in research on the topic with regard to levels issues, the foci of climate research, and studies of climate strength. A brief overview of the more recent study of organizational culture is then introduced, followed by samples of important thinking and research on the roles of leadership and national culture in understanding organizational culture and performance and culture as a moderator variable in research in organizational behavior. The final section of the article proposes an integration of climate and culture thinking and research and concludes with practical implications for the management of effective contemporary organizations. Throughout, recommendations are made for additional thinking and research.