Search

Existing work on legacy in management has focused on the upper echelons and on the "legator"—the person leaving the legacy. Drawing on the meaning maintenance model and concepts surrounding psychological ownership and identity, we build a model that focuses on "legatees"—the beneficiaries of the legacy—in the lower echelons. The departure of a manager, informal leader, or star serves as a disruption to legatees' mental representations of their working world. That disruption causes them to attend to issues of ownership (either psychological ownership or disownership of the legacy) and identity (either identification or rivalry with the legator) in order to fulfill salient needs. Fulfilling continuity and belonging needs results in two behaviors that enhance the durability of the legator's contributions: maintaining and evangelizing. Fulfilling distinctiveness and efficacy needs results in two behaviors that reduce the durability of the legator's contributions: neglecting and erasing. We theorize that these relationships are moderated by two aspects of the legacy: its magnitude and its content (in terms of whether the contributions are tangible or intangible). We describe the implications of our model for the legacy literature in management and lay out an agenda for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on identity construction has argued that employees work to create coherent and distinctive identities that encapsulate individual characteristics and professional and organizational memberships. Models of identity construction have suggested that a past career decision--choosing one professional "road" while leaving behind a "road not taken"--should lose its salience over time. We challenged that consensus by introducing the construct of forgone identity dwelling--thinking about and reflecting on a professional path that could have been. Our field and experimental studies showed that employees did dwell on forgone professional identities, even when the decision events that resulted in them were years in the past. Drawing on cognitive-motivationalrelational theory, we showed that forgone identity dwelling resulted in longing--a yearning for something missing. Such longing created a "double-edged sword" for the behavioral consequences of forgone identity dwelling. On the one hand, longing was associatedwith increased withdrawal behavior and decreased helping behavior because employees were distracted from the here and now. On the other hand, longing was associated with job crafting that in turn reduced those reactions--particularly for employees with an internal locus of control. We discuss the implications of our work for models of identity construction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discussions about the status of scholarly journals in management have tended to revolve around impact factor and standing on relevant lists—cues whose validity has been oft-debated. We introduce a new metric for gauging the status of scholarly journals. Syllabus share represents the proportion of doctoral seminar syllabi comprised of articles from a given journal. We introduce this metric by drawing on a content analysis of 179 management doctoral syllabi (90 micro seminars, 89 macro seminars) from 53 business schools in North America, Europe, and Asia. Our results showed that syllabus share was distinct from impact factor and standing on relevant ranking and advisory lists. Moreover, syllabus share was correlated with perceptions of journal status on the part of both junior and senior scholars. Syllabus share provides a more continuous view of journal status (in contrast to lists) while allowing results to be contextualized (in contrast to impact factor). Our discussion focuses on the value of syllabus share for a more pluralistic conceptualization of journal status and its contributions to the scholarship of management education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We provide a review of progress in the field of organizational justice, paying special attention to articles published in Personnel Psychology. We begin by describing the foundation of the literature, where work linked adherence to distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational justice rules to employee cognitions, emotions, behaviors, and well‐being. We then turn to the extensions that marked the next stage of the literature's evolution, including justice climate, third‐party perspectives, and justice enactment–where managerial motives, characteristics, and context are cast as predictors of justice rule adherence. Next, we move to suggestions for future research, including manager‐based outcomes of justice rule adherence, more explicit integrations with the social justice literature, and gaining a better understanding of the fairness of artificial intelligence systems. We close with the practical implications of the justice literature, many of which have been informed by advancements in the pages of Personnel Psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our study drew on past theorizing on anticipatory justice (D. L. Shapiro & B. L. Kirkman, 2001) and fairness heuristic theory (K. Van den Bos, E. A. Lind, & H. A. M. Wilke, 2001) to build and test a model of employee reactions to a smoking ban. The results of a longitudinal study in a hospital showed that employee levels of preban anticipatory justice were predicted by their global sense of their supervisor's fairness. The combination of anticipatory justice and global supervisory fairness then predicted the experienced justice of the ban 3 months after its implementation, with the effects of the 2 predictors dependent on perceptions of uncertainty and outcome favorability regarding the ban. Finally, experienced (interpersonal) justice predicted significant other ratings of employee support for the ban. Keywords: justice, fairness, organizational change

Research on organizational justice has focused primarily on the receivers of just and unjust treatment. Little is known about why managers adhere to or violate rules of justice in the first place. The authors introduce a model for understanding justice rule adherence and violation. They identify both cognitive motives and affective motives that explain why managers adhere to and violate justice rules. They also draw distinctions among the justice rules by specifying which rules offer managers more of less discretion in their execution. They then describe how motives and discretion interact to influence justice-relevant actions. Finally. the authors incorporate managers' emotional reactions to consider how their actions may change over time. Implications of the model for theory, research, and practice are discussed. Keywords: organizational justice, managerial discretion, motives, affect, emotion

Laboratory studies a vital part of theory-centered research published in a number of journals. Certain guidelines have been elaborated to evaluate lab studies in AMJ is presented.

Research in the organizational justice literature has shown that interpersonal and informational justice are significant predictors of subordinate attitudes and behaviors. However, scholars have neglected to explore whether certain subordinate characteristics might be associated with managers' adherence to interpersonal and informational justice rules. The current authors' study tested a model, inspired by approach-avoidance perspectives (e.g., Gray, 1990), in which manager ratings of subordinate charisma influenced subordinate ratings of interpersonal and informational justice through the mechanisms of positive and negative sentiments (i.e., emotions felt by the manager toward the subordinate). A field study of 181 employees of a large national insurance company revealed partial support for this model. Structural equation modeling revealed that subordinate charisma was related to interpersonal justice perceptions, a relationship that was fully mediated by positive and negative sentiments. However, subordinate charisma was not associated with informational justice perceptions. These findings signal the potential utility in examining subordinate-based predictors of justice variables. Keywords: justice, affect, emotions, charisma

The trust literature distinguishes trustworthiness (the ability, benevolence, and integrity of a trustee) and trust propensity (a dispositional willingness to rely on others) from trust (the intention to accept vulnerability to a trustee based on positive expectations of his or her actions). Although this distinction has clarified some confusion in the literature, it remains unclear (a) which trust antecedents have the strongest relationships with trust and (b) whether trust fully mediates the effects of trustworthiness and trust propensity on behavioral outcomes. Our meta-analysis of 132 independent samples summarized the relationships between the trust variables and both risk taking and job performance (task performance, citizenship behavior, counterproductive behavior). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling supported a partial mediation model wherein trustworthiness and trust propensity explained incremental variance in the behavioral outcomes when trust was controlled. Further analyses revealed that the trustworthiness dimensions also predicted affective commitment, which had unique relationships with the outcomes when controlling for trust. These results generalized across different types of trust measures (i.e., positive expectations measures, willingness-to-be-vulnerable measures, and direct measures) and different trust referents (i.e., leaders, coworkers). Keywords: trust; trustworthiness, commitment, integrity, citizenship

The 3 studies presented here introduce a new measure of the individual-difference form of collectivism. Psychological collectivism is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct with the following 5 facets: preference for in-groups, reliance on in-groups, concern for in-groups, acceptance of in-group norms, and prioritization of in-group goals. Study 1 developed and tested the new measure in a sample of consultants. Study 2 cross-validated the measure using an alumni sample of a Southeastern university, assessing its convergent validity with other collectivism measures. Study 3 linked scores on the measure to 4 dimensions of group member performance (task performance, citizenship behavior, counterproductive behavior, and withdrawal behavior) in a computer software firm and assessed discriminant validity using the Big Five. The results of the studies support the construct validity of the measure and illustrate the potential value of collectivism as a predictor of group member performance. Keywords: collectivism, individual differences, teams, groups, personality

Two empirical studies investigated the context sensitivity of various rules for fostering organizational justice using hypothetical vignettes. Study 1 compared the importance of distributive justice rules (equity, equality, need) and procedural justice rules (process control, decision control, consistency, correctability, accuracy, bias suppression, ethicality) across individual and team contexts. The results showed that team contexts enhanced the importance of equality, consistency, and decision control. Study 2 compared the importance of procedural justice rules across different types of teams. The results showed that the accuracy rule was more important in small teams, while the consistency and bias suppression rules were more important in diverse teams. The importance of other rules, including interpersonal and informational justice, did not vary across the experimental conditions.

This article reported the results of 2 studies that examined reactions to procedural justice in teams. Both studies predicted that individual members' reactions would be driven not just by their own procedural justice levels but also by the justice experienced by other team members. Study 1 examined intact student teams, whereas Study 2 occurred in a laboratory setting. The results showed that individual members' own justice interacted with others' justice, such that higher levels of role performance occurred when justice was consistent within the team. These effects were strongest in highly interdependent teams and weakest for members who were benevolent with respect to equity sensitivity.

This study examined the relationship between organizational justice and stress and whether work-family conflict was a mediator of the relationship. Distributive, procedural, interpersonal, and informational injustice were cast as stressors to explore their relationships with the stress levels of 174 faculty members employed at 23 U.S. universities. The results revealed that procedural and interpersonal justice had the strongest relationships with stress, and that these effects were mediated by work-family conflict. The presence of justice seemed to allow participants to better manage the interface of their work and family lives, which was associated with lower stress levels. These results were observed even when controlling for job satisfaction and the presence of organizational work-family policies.