The generalized estimating equation (GEE)

This article examines the relationship of employee perceptions of information privacy in their work organizations and important psychological and behavioral outcomes. A model is presented in which information privacy predicts psychological empowerment, which in turn predicts discretionary behaviors on the job, including creative performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). Results from 2 studies (Study 1: single organization, N=310; Study 2: multiple organizations, N=303) confirm that information privacy entails judgments of information gathering control, information handling control, and legitimacy. Moreover, a model linking information privacy to empowerment and empowerment to creative performance and OCBs was supported. Findings are discussed in light of organizational attempts to control employees through the gathering and handling of their personal information.

Our study investigates an unexplored succession process—interim CEO successions. We define an interim CEO succession as a case where the title of chief executive officer is vacated by the incumbent and the board of directors has not announced a permanent successor, but instead designates a particular individual as ‘interim CEO,’ or ‘acting CEO,’ or ‘CEO until a permanent successor is named.’ Theory predicts that interim CEO successions will lead to the type of disruption that can harm firm performance, even after a permanent successor is appointed. Our data show that interim CEO succession processes are widely employed by publicly‐traded U.S. firms, and that they are associated with lower performance during the period in which the interim serves. However, whether the interim CEO also simultaneously serves as chairman moderates the impact of this type of succession on firm performance, as well as on long‐term firm survival. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

We integrate concepts from research on emotion and memory to show how critical exchanges-or anchoring events-can suddenly and durably change the rules for organizational relationships, leading them to reach nonreciprocal forms like altruism or competition. We define these events and discuss the likelihood of their occurring as a function of the current state of the relationship, the time in that state of the relationship, and the social context in which the event takes place. We thank Gilad Chen, Karen Jansen, Adelaide King, David Sluss, the participants in the George Mason University RIOTS research group, and the University of Virginia's CORE group for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts. We also thank the three anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier versions of this article. A portion of this research was supported by the McIntire School of Commerce Foundation's Dean's Fund for Excellence.