No abstract

Although both researchers and practitioners know that an employee’s performance varies over time within a job, this within-person performance variability is not well understood and in fact is often treated as error. In the current paper, we first identify the importance of a within-person approach to job performance and then review several extant theories of within-person performance variability that, despite vastly different foci, converge on the contention that job performance is dynamic rather than static. We compare and contrast the theories along several common metrics and thereby facilitate a discussion of commonalities, differences, and theory elaboration. In so doing, we identify important future research questions on within-person performance variability and methodological challenges in addressing these research questions. Finally, we highlight how the conventional practical implications articulated on the basis of a static, between-person perspective on job performance may need to be modified to account for the dynamic, within-person nature of performance.

Drawing on approach/inhibition theory of power, we investigated two factors that influence the manner by which victims react to workplace ostracism: the hierarchical status of the ostracizer and the level of an ostracizee's external social support including family, friends, and significant others. Across an experimental vignette study (Study 1) and a field study (Study 2), we found support for a three-way interaction with felt ostracism, ostracizee external social support, and ostracizer status influencing victims' organizational citizenship behavior and deviance directed toward other individuals. In addition, felt ostracism and ostracizee external social support interacted to predict turnover intentions. Overall, victims who were ostracized by a legitimate higher-status authority (e.g., manager) and whose external social support network was limited experienced the most negative outcomes across both studies. Our findings suggest that contextual factors both inside and outside the organization jointly impact the way in which individuals react to perceived workplace ostracism. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

Business and demographic trends are conflating to bring language issues at work to the forefront. Although language has an inherent capacity for creating interpersonal bonds, it can also serve as a means of exclusion. The construct of linguistic ostracism encapsulates this phenomenon. Drawing on ethnolinguistic identity theory, we identify how linguistic ostracism influences two interpersonal work behaviors: interpersonal citizenship and interpersonal deviance. We conduct a set of studies that uses multisource data, data across time, and data from three countries. Our results reveal that linguistic ostracism was associated with the enactment of lower interpersonal citizenship behaviors and higher interpersonal deviance behaviors. We find that disidentification served as a mechanism to explain why linguistic ostracism resulted in interpersonal citizenship behaviors and interpersonal deviance behaviors. Furthermore, linguistically ostracized employees with low (vs. high) social self-efficacy engage in fewer interpersonal citizenship behaviors and greater interpersonal deviance behaviors. We discuss theoretical implications associated with the phenomenon of linguistic ostracism and the implications for managers working in linguistically diverse organizations.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between abusive supervision and employee health and safety outcomes in Study 1 and to examine the effect of inconsistent leadership, operationalized as the interaction between transformational leadership and supervisor incivility, on employee safety participation in Study 2. Design/methodology/approach In Study 1, survey data were gathered from n=145 healthcare workers. In Study 2, survey data were gathered from n=177 nurses. Findings A partially mediated structural model was estimated in Study 1 and the results show that the model provided a good fit to the data χ2 (1)=1.27, p=0.23. Abusive supervision predicted safety climate (β=−0.41, p<0.01) and psychological health (β=−0.27, p<0.01). Safety climate, in turn, predicted psychological health (β= 0.40, p<0.01) and safety participation (β= 0.37, p<0.01). Study 2: moderated regression analysis showed that inconsistent leadership significantly predicted employee safety participation, F(5,144)=4.46, p<0.01. Originality/value Theoretical and practical implications for creating psychologically healthy workplaces through interventions aimed at improving leader effectiveness are discussed.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -This paper seeks to examine how aerospace design and integration teams in a highly partnered supply chain are able to leverage extant capabilities and develop new ones when faced with the necessity to adapt to organizational change. Design/methodology/approach -Building on the concept of contextual ambidexterity (Gibson and Birkinshaw), this research uses a combination of qualitative material and objective performance data to investigate the working context of five aerospace design and integration teams, their solutions to crisis-triggering events, and their subsequent schedule adherence. Findings -Team members enacted ambidextrous roles similar to those identified by Birkinshaw and Gibson. These behaviors allowed teams to create ambidextrous solutions when faced with crisis. Teams working in a supportive context were found to produce a greater diversity of ambidextrous solutions, which was found to relate to both overall ambidexterity and schedule adherence performance.Research limitations/implications -Although the results should be interpreted with care, the research answers Raisch and Birkinshaw's call for a more precise definition of organizational ambidexterity as the paper focuses on specific roles played by team members. The findings also point to a potential link between the diversity of ambidextrous behavioral roles and their ability to craft ambidextrous solutions. Practical implications -Teams that can quickly adapt to challenge through ambidextrous solutions are particularly useful in the context of highly partnered supply chains. Managers should therefore actively promote ambidextrous behaviors to ensure that the search for ambidextrous solutions becomes a conscious and deliberate process. Originality/value -This paper substantiates the ambidexterity concept by providing concrete examples drawn from highly partnered aerospace supply chains.

No abstract

No abstract