Search

Scholars and practitioners have long emphasised the importance of employees speaking up about workplace issues. Yet, voice research remains divided on fundamental questions such as underlying purpose. Drawing on the Job Demands-Resources Model, this study offers an integrative perspective, building on the idea that the interests of employees and managers are distinct concerning the purpose of voice. This article draws on responses from a cross-sectional national online survey distributed by YouGov, with a survey design that ensured that only those employed within an organisational setting with a reporting structure would be included in the data. The sample size used for the analysis (N = 1858) was representative of the UK workforce regarding gender, full- or part-time work status, organisation size and industry. The exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis provides empirical evidence of two alternative and distinct voice forms: organisational and employee-focused. Results show that while organisational voice is associated with significantly higher innovative behaviour and higher levels of burnout, employee-focused voice is significantly and negatively associated with employee burnout. Lastly, our analysis reveals that while the total effect of organisational voice on burnout is positive, employee-focused voice, partially mediating the organisational voice-burnout relationship, exerts a countervailing effect, lowering burnout. Accordingly, organisations are advised to promote both voice forms, given their unique, positive effects, first on the employee (ameliorating burnout) and second on strategically important outcomes (innovative behaviours). Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Reema Harrison,1 Ashfaq Chauhan,1 Amirali Minbashian,2 Ryan McMullan,1 Gavin Schwarz2 1Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, North Ryde, New South Wales, Australia; 2School of Management and Governance, UNSW Business School, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, New South Wales, AustraliaCorrespondence: Reema Harrison, Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, North Ryde, New South Wales, 2109, Australia, Tel +61 2 9850 2425, Email reema.harrison@mq.edu.auAbstract: Despite the requirement for continual change and development, change failure is omnipresent in health care, ranging from small technical errors within new systems, processes or technologies, through to breakdowns and large-scale disaster. Despite decades of research investment, consultancy and initiatives, creating a healthcare context that promotes clinician engagement with change remains elusive, with limited demonstrated progress. Affective commitment to change refers to commitment that is driven by a desire to support change based on its perceived benefits or value, as opposed to commitment that is based on a sense of obligation or the minimization of costs. Recent evidence from health-care contexts indicates that affective commitment to change drives change readiness more so than the individual's self-efficacy for dealing with the change. Considering evidence regarding the effect of affective commitment to change on individual and collective change readiness among health-care staff, we may need to reorient our current strategies for managing change. We explore the opportunities to enhance affective commitment to change and, in turn, change readiness through adopting values-based approaches to designing and executing change proposals with clinicians and service users.Keywords: change readiness, commitment to change, affective commit

In the trait theory of leadership, the Big Five and facets are the main personality traits studied to identify effective leaders. Recently, higher-order personality factors – traits that are broader in content – have emerged as potentially meaningful constructs. As their nature seems aligned to leadership, their effects may be as strong as, if not more so, the effects of the Big Five and facets.This thesis investigated four issues: the effects of higher-order factors – the General Factor of Personality (GFP) and Big Two (Stability and Plasticity) – on leadership, how the effects compared to the Big Five and facets, the conceptual basis of higher-order factors and the way they relate to leadership, and practical issues related to different operationalisation approaches. Study 1 used meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between higher-order factors and leadership compared to the Big Five and whether any of the latter had unique effects. The mediating role of transformational leadership behaviour between the GFP and effective leadership was also examined as a partial test of the GFP’s substantive nature. Study 2 extended the comparison of effects to facets by using a dataset containing the California Psychological Inventory. The possible existence of curvilinear and interactive effects was also explored as well as practical matters related to extraction methods and the potential predictive benefits of using fewer factors at smaller sample sizes. Lastly, Study 3 undertook a quantitative review and used another dataset to investigate whether the higher-order factors of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) represent the GFP and Big Two. The findings had implications for their conceptual basis as the MBTI uniquely considers personality in terms of categorical types and preferences.Overall, higher-order factors had up to strong effects on leadership. The effects were higher than several individual narrower traits, most of which did not possess unique effects. How

Emotional intelligence (EI) exploded in popularity due to widespread claims that it is more important for success than cognitive ability. Whilst this claim is not totally accurate, subsequent research demonstrated that EI is indeed predictive of success in a variety of domains including physical health, mental health, job performance and relationship quality. However, although there is a large volume of research on outcomes of EI, relatively little is known about how EI changes with temporal-related factors. Accordingly, I used random-effects meta-analyses to determine how EI changes with age (k = 270; N = 84,101) and job experience (k = 110; N = 18,388). I used a cross-temporal meta-analysis to determine how EI changes across generations (k = 71; 17,694). For each meta-analysis, an extensive search was conducted to obtain relevant effect sizes from both published and unpublished literature. Overall, the results demonstrated that these relationships are largely dependent on how EI was conceptualised. Specifically, when EI was operationalised as a set of abilities (ability EI), there was a moderate positive relationship with age in children. In adults, ability EI was unrelated to both age and job experience. When EI was operationalised as self-perceptions of abilities (self-perceived EI), there was a small positive relationship with age, but not job experience. When EI was defined as personality (mixed model EI), there was a small positive relationship with age, and a moderate positive relationship with job experience. Occupational characteristics moderated the relationship between mixed model EI and job experience, whereby the relationship was stronger in occupations characterised by higher levels of interpersonal orientation and adjustment. Findings further demonstrated that there are generational changes in mixed model EI, as facets of mixed model EI have declined over time. In conclusion, these body of findings provide evidence that, depending on EI stream, EI ch

Huong Le-Dao,1 Ashfaq Chauhan,1 Ramesh Walpola,1 Sarah Fischer,2,3 Gavin Schwarz,4 Amirali Minbashian,4 Alice Munro,5 Ellie D’Arcy,5 Julaine Allan,6 Reema Harrison1 1School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia; 2Clinical Excellence Commission, New South Wales Health, Sydney, 2065, Australia; 3School of Psychology, Deakin University, Sydney, 3220, Australia; 4Business School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, 2052, Australia; 5Western New South Wales Local Health District, Bathurst, New South Wales 2795, Australia; 6School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales 2500, AustraliaCorrespondence: Reema Harrison Room 229, School of Population HealthUniversity of New South Wales, 2052, AustraliaTel +61 2 93853324Email reema.harrison@unsw.edu.auPurpose: As the cost of healthcare continues to rise, healthcare organizations internationally are seeking long-term solutions to eradicate inefficiency, achieve value-based healthcare, and minimize hospital inpatient services. This requires transformational change in healthcare organizations, and associated change management and leadership capability at multiple levels. Despite the critical need for effective change leadership and management in healthcare, limited evidence exists that this currently occurs in addition to the capability and capacity for managing change in health systems.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 16 healthcare managers and leaders at a range of levels in nine healthcare organizations across the public health system of one Australian state (New South Wales), including metropolitan, regional and rural geographical areas. Thematic content analysis was undertaken with the emergent data.Results: Four key themes emerged from the data: 1) lack of adoption of frameworks and methods for change management for any scope or scale of change, 2) inadequate resources for deliver