No abstract

Research on the antecedents of organizational identification (OI), individuals’ sense of oneness with the organization, has developed over time with four major categories: organizational characteristics, managerial policies and practices, interpersonal interactions, and personal attributes. OI research has flourished due to the exploration of antecedents under these four research categories, but it is not well integrated across them. The current lack of integration hinders understanding of the factors that can contribute to OI and how these might jointly shape OI development. To address this important unresolved issue, we seek to provide a comprehensive review of research on the antecedents of OI. In our review, we first summarize the existing research that reflects each of the four major research categories. We then suggest several avenues for future research, including exploration of the longitudinal dynamics between the antecedents and how the antecedents will operate in the context of key emerging work trends: remote work and digital transformation.

To understand gender inequality in STEM, Miner et al. (2018) illustrate how an individual lens and a social-structural lens provide complementary perspectives. They indicate that gender inequality in STEM should not be simply understood from an individual lens concerning individual choices and responsibilities but also a social-structural lens concerning societal structures, processes, and meanings associated with gender. In this commentary, we would like to bring a cultural perspective to the consideration of the STEM field. Specifically, we focus on gender inequity in STEM in Japan and elaborate how Japanese culture, which emphasizes masculinity, collectivism, and a tight culture, imposes a stronger social-structural influence on gender inequality in STEM and at the same time strengthens the use of the individual lens to explain the phenomena, making the issue of gender inequality more prominent.

Although the country-of-origin effect on staffing practices of multinational corporations (MNCs) is well-known, its underlying mechanisms are under-theorized. Drawing on the cross-cultural management and comparative institutionalism literatures, we propose an overarching, theory-based framework with two mechanisms, dispositional and contextual, that might explain country-of-origin effects in MNCs’ use of parent-country nationals (PCNs) in their foreign subsidiaries’ top management teams. The tendency of MNCs from some home countries to staff these positions with PCNs is typically labeled as “ethnocentric”, a word imbued with negative intentions referring mainly to the dispositional rationale behind this staffing choice. However, fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) of staffing practices of MNCs from ten home countries shows that both mechanisms – dispositional and contextual – have considerable explanatory power. Our methodological approach enables us to analyze conceptually distinct, yet empirically intertwined, societal-level explanations as a pattern, and thus offers a viable solution to integrate different perspectives in international and comparative research.

To critically evaluate the relevance of social exchange theory (SET) to the contemporary workplace, Chernyak-Hai and Rabenu point out a number of factors that reshape work relationships and suggest how to apply and extend social exchange theory to understand the new era work relationships. However, in their discussion, they focus mainly on reciprocal exchange (RE) in dyadic relationships. The discussion completely overlooks another important form of social exchange, namely, generalized exchange (GE), which is increasingly relevant to contemporary organizations exactly because of the changes indicated by Chernyak-Hai and Rabenu. In this commentary, we briefly review prior investigations into GE across various social science disciplines and then point out its increasing relevance to organizations. Finally, we will discuss implications for future research in the industrial/organizational psychology (IOP) literature.