This paper conceptualises “human resource (HR) differentiation” as a set of deliberate and differentiating HR practices across individuals within the organisation to address employees' unique work needs and preferences as well as reward them for their input. Despite the importance of HR differentiation, research has mainly focused on the recipients of such practices, overlooking the consequences of HR differentiation from co‐workers' perspective. This is a significant omission because a growing concern suggests that HR differentiation might be a double‐edged sword, as the presumed positive effects might only be confined to employees benefiting from it. Taking a first step, this paper offers a conceptual model that explains how co‐workers of a focal employee, who is entitled to an advantageous outcome through HR differentiation, are likely to react, either positively by showing contentment or negatively by showing anger, with behavioural consequences towards the focal employee and organisation. In so doing, we rely on deontic justice theory and explore contextual conditions at the individual and team level under which co‐workers react. As a result, our model can inspire future research by adopting a broader and more inclusive approach to HR differentiation, underlining the need for caution when implementing HR differentiation in a team setting.
In an era of New Public Management reforms, public sector policies often create a mismatch between social and economic values that can lead to public policy alienation – professionals’ feelings of disconnection from public policies. Policy alienation can create unrest among public professionals and carry several negative repercussions for their wellbeing and work-related attitudes. The negative repercussions of policy alienation are likely to inhibit public service delivery. However, existing research on policy alienation and its consequences for street-level bureaucrats’ wellbeing is scarce. Thus, it is unknown how policymakers can curb policy disconnect and counter its negative implications. To contribute to both general policy alienation theory and practice, our study hypothesized that the two dimensions of general policy meaninglessness – client meaninglessness and societal meaninglessness –are negatively related to street-level bureaucrats’ psychological wellbeing. We hypothesize this negative relationship is due to alienative commitment. A time-lagged survey data collected from 401 public professionals and analyzed using structural equation modelling supported our hypothesized relationships. The present study extends the nomological networks of the antecedents and consequences of alienative commitment and offers important implications that can help policymakers to counter the issues related to public professionals’ alienative commitment and psychological wellbeing.
The aim of this paper is to critically analyze Kolb"s theoretical model on experiential learning from a constructivist perspective by relating it to more contemporary practices in the field of experiential education. It has been observed that the experiential learning phenomenon has been overwhelmed by individualistic views and overly deterministic intents of reconceptualization. In particular, this paper investigates the deficiencies in Kolb"s experiential learning cycle by comparing it with alternate conceptions to learning proposed by Fenwick (2001). The discussion further develops a theoretical critique based on assumptions compiled after a theoretical discourse of the literature enlisting factors which question the effectiveness of the learning cycle. Lastly, the authors propose modifications in the concept of experiential learning by identifying the environmental and structural constraints which may affect the effectiveness of the experiential learning process.
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.