We proposed and tested a moderated mediation model that jointly examines affect-based and cognition-based trust as the mediators and prosocial motivation as the moderator in relationships between transformational leadership and followers' helping behavior towards coworkers. Data were collected from 348 sales and servicing employees and their supervisors in four private retail companies and five private manufacturing companies located in Southeast China. The results showed that both affect-based trust and cognition-based trust mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' helping behavior towards coworkers. Furthermore, moderated mediation analyses showed that affect-based trust mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' helping behavior towards coworkers only among employees with high prosocial motivation, whereas cognition-based trust mediated this relationship among only those with low prosocial motivation. Implications for the theory and practice of leadership are then discussed.

Summary Previous research suggests that performance‐prove goal orientation is positively related to knowledge hiding. However, we argue that this effect depends on the focus of performance feedback (i.e., individual‐ and group‐focused feedback), which shapes the nature of the competitive expression of performance‐prove goal orientation (i.e., intragroup and intergroup oriented). We conducted three studies to test our theoretical model. The results of Study 1 with time‐lagged data from 128 part‐time MBA students showed that performance‐prove goal orientation was positively related to knowledge hiding when performance feedback focused more (vs. less) on individual performance but was negatively related to knowledge hiding when performance feedback focused more (vs. less) on group performance. Study 2 replicated these moderation findings in an experimental study of 210 undergraduate students. Study 3 again replicated the moderation effects using multisource data from 317 employees and their supervisors. It also included creativity as an outcome of knowledge hiding and illustrated the distal consequence of the moderation effects of individual‐ and group‐focused performance feedback. We then discussed the implications for the theory and practice of performance‐prove goal orientation and knowledge hiding.

During normal and predictable circumstances, employees' occupational calling (i.e., a transcendent passion to use their talent and competencies toward positive societal impact and a sense of meaningfulness derived from working in a chosen occupational domain) is observed to be relatively stable. However, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, circumstances have become anything but normal and predictable, thus putting employees' sense of occupational calling to the test. In this study, we investigate the possibility that occupational calling fluctuates across days during situations of crisis, and we identify antecedents and consequence of such fluctuations. To test our model, we conducted a daily diary study of 66 nurses working in intensive care units over 5 consecutive work days in a specialized Wuhan hospital that only admitted confirmed COVID-19 patients during the peak of the pandemic in China. We found that the daily number of code blue events (i.e., cardiopulmonary resuscitation efforts with the primary goal of patient revival) was positively related to daily occupational calling for nurses. Moreover, individual differences in prosocial motivation predicted the average level and variability of occupational calling over the 5 days, which subsequently related to the nurses' job performance. Our study sheds light on how occupational calling enables people with the needed occupational knowledge and skills to function effectively in crisis situations.

This study examined how social comparison (i.e., comparing one's pay to similar others' pay) and deserved comparison (i.e., comparing one's pay to one's deserved pay) affect pay fairness perceptions, and the individual differences in the comparison processes. Results based on a field study with a sample of 167 employees showed pay fairness was low when employees received lower pay than a similar other (or what they deserved), increased as their pay exceeded that of a similar other (or deserved pay) to some extent, and then decreased when overpayment was considerable. Second, pay fairness increased as one's actual and similar others' pay levels both increased while pay fairness remained the same as one's actual and the deserved pay levels both increased. In addition, the “threshold” that people start to perceive overpayment as less fair occurred more quickly for those with higher preference for consistency in social comparison and for those with higher preference for the merit principle in deserved comparison. We also conducted experiments, and the results generally replicated the findings in the field study. These findings offer theoretical implications regarding organizational justice, as well as practical implications for designing and executing a compensation system.

No abstract