Search results

The purpose of this research is to describe organization members' attributions for managerial responses to obviously externally caused crises. The authors draw from attribution theory research and the actor-observer bias to argue that organization members' proximity to managerial crisis response is a key determinant of organization members' affective and behavioral outcomes following a crisis.

The authors develop a conceptual dual-process model of attributions that explains why organization members' judgments of managerial responsibility and associated outcomes differ depending on organization members' proximity to crisis response action.

The authors focus on organization members' attributions for the failure of managerial crisis responses to obviously externally caused crisis events. The authors present propositions regarding the impact of organization members' potential biases on their attributions for managerial crisis response. Then, the authors delineate how action proximity can assuage negative outcomes of managerial crisis response failure by encouraging an attitude of understanding and awareness of situational challenges.

The authors diverge from prior applications of attribution theory to crisis management by focusing on organization members' attributions of managerial crisis response failure, rather than attributions for the initial cause of the crisis itself. The authors also extend prior work that primarily focuses on crisis response strategies by instead elaborating on how organization members' attributions operate in the wake of their management's failure to effectively respond to an obviously externally caused crisis.

COVID-19 affects the peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation industry. With regard to prospect theory, individuals’ negative emotions, such as institutional distrust, are easily evoked and impede consumption intention in an environment of permeating uncertainty and risks. While existing research indicates the negative effects of institutional distrust, scant research has explored its antecedents and intervention mechanisms. This study thus aims to unveil the influencing factors and explore mitigating mechanisms of customers’ institutional distrust of P2P accommodations.

Online reviews data were used to identify the underlying critical issues. The authors developed a model to depict how institutional distrust is formed under the boundary condition of subjective norm by the results. The model was verified using a questionnaire survey. Finally, in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted to ensure its robustness.

The external environment and internal platform effectiveness are two critical aspects affecting institutional distrust of P2P accommodations. The external environment influences institutional distrust through perceived threat, explaining the formation mechanism of customers’ institutional distrust through customers’ internal psychology. Furthermore, the authors found subjective norm moderating the effect of perceived threat on customers’ institutional distrust.

This is one of the first studies, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to explore institutional distrust of P2P accommodations after COVID-19. The finding contributes to studies on P2P accommodation by uncovering the contingent role of subjective norm in influencing customers’ institutional distrust.

This is a pioneering study that explores the antecedents and mitigating mechanisms of institutional distrust of P2P accommodations during the new normal of COVID-19.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of the neutrality literature and suggests areas ripe for future research.

The authors reviewed journal articles on the topic of neutrality in mediation, which included theoretical viewpoints and empirical research on practicing mediators’ understanding of neutrality.

The review of literature revealed that party perspectives are largely missing from current neutrality literature. Two potential concepts emerged from the authors' review of literature that could potentially influence parties’ attributions of mediator neutrality: symmetry and transparency. Symmetry refers to the equal treatment of parties, whereas transparency refers to providing an explanation of past or future behavior. Research on whether symmetry and transparency are key influences on party assessment of mediator neutrality could make a significant contribution to the field.

The authors call on researchers with diverse methodological perspectives to examine, from the party’s perspective, important questions regarding the meaning of neutrality, mediator strategies to successfully enact neutrality and the impact of neutrality on mediation outcomes.

Neutrality is arguably one of the most important concepts to the mediation field. Despite its significance to the field, only limited research has been conducted to better understand how neutrality is enacted in practice. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the literature and provides a launching point for future research.

The purpose of this study is to examine how customer race (Black vs White) influences the extent to which customers attribute an ambiguous service failure (i.e. subtle degradation of service) to discrimination and how perceived discrimination relates to customer anger and on-site coping behaviors (vindictive complaining, problem-solving complaining and avoidance). This study further investigated how customer race affects the strength of relationships among perceived discrimination, anger and these three coping behaviors.

This study used a video-based simulation in which participants watched a subtle service failure from the customer’s viewpoint before completing a survey. A total of 421 participants – 210 Blacks and 211 Whites – were recruited through Qualtrics. Multigroup structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis was used to test hypotheses.

Compared with White customers, Black customers were more likely to attribute a service failure to discrimination and exhibited a stronger relationship between perceived discrimination and anger. In addition, increasing anger in White customers tended to lead to more active coping strategies (i.e. vindictive complaining, problem-solving complaining). For Black customers, increasing anger tended to lead to vindictive complaining at a similar level to White customers. However, the impact of anger on problem-solving complaining – known to be a more beneficial coping strategy – was stronger among White customers than among Black customers.

This study advances hospitality practitioners’ understanding of how customers respond on-site to a service failure that can be interpreted as discrimination. The varying effects of race on customer-coping behavior are also identified. In addition, this study offers practical advice to develop organizational strategies to dissuade customers from attributing service failure to discrimination and to respond effectively to customer-coping behaviors.

Complementing and extending past research documenting the prevalence and causes of racial discrimination in service settings, the present study advances prior work by developing and testing a comprehensive structural model linking race with coping responses via perceived discrimination and anger, and by exploring how race affects the strength of relationships among perceived discrimination, anger and coping strategies.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between perceptions of mediators acting symmetrically (treating parties equally) and transparently (providing an explanation of past or future behavior) with parties’ assessments of the neutrality of their mediator and satisfaction with the mediation process.

This mixed-method study surveyed parties and mediators from 35 naturally occurring mediation sessions at community mediation centers about their perceptions of neutrality, symmetry, transparency and satisfaction.

The results showed that parties overwhelmingly assessed their mediators as acting neutrally. Compared to parties’ assessments of mediator neutrality, mediators rated their own neutrality even higher. Symmetry and transparency were both positively correlated with parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality and also emerged as qualitative themes. Speaking order and talk time did not significantly correlate with perception of symmetry. Overall, symmetry appeared to be a more salient factor in parties’ assessment of mediator neutrality than transparency. Both neutrality and symmetry were positively correlated with party satisfaction with the mediation process, but transparency was not.

The present study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives. The primary limitation was a small sample size and possible selection bias in achieving the sample.

The study found that symmetry and transparency are useful strategies for managing party perceptions of mediator neutrality and party satisfaction with the mediation process.

This study is one of only a few empirical research studies that investigated the parties’ perspective of mediator neutrality. The study provides a foundation for future research in understanding neutrality from both parties and mediators’ perspectives.

There is a growing trend of brand resurrections that are driven by consumer power. Millennials play a critical role in initiating most of these brand resurrection movements using social media. This study aims to explore the factors that drive consumers’ participation in brand resurrection movements – an outcome of brand cocreation.

Data were collected using self-administered survey. This study uses the partial least squares-structural equation modeling to empirically examine the factors that motivate consumers to participate in brand resurrection movements.

The results indicate that consumers’ beliefs about the functional and value-expressive utilities, and their judgments of the perceived brand superiority of the defunct brand are significantly associated with brand resurrection movements. Nostalgia moderates the relationship between social-adjustive utility and brand resurrection movement, which shows that consumers’ social-adjustive utility becomes relevant when triggered with a strong sense of the past.

From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to literature on reviving defunct brands. This study also identifies additional factors that determine the success of brands that are being relaunched.

From a managerial perspective, the study provides insights into when and how organizations can consider bringing back defunct brands. Future studies should introduce additional variables to the model such as product category involvement that may be associated with consumers’ willingness to bring back defunct brands.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first of its kind that empirically examines the motivations behind consumer participation in bringing back defunct brands. The importance of this study is highlighted in the fact that several defunct brands are being revived by organizations due to consumer-brand co-creation movements.

It is hypothesized that the growing body of empirical data concerning the naive psychology of the assignment of cause — attribution theory — yields a substantial number of concepts which are logically assumed to offer significant potential insight into the administrative process. In order to stimulate the research necessary to test this hypothesis the existing research is presented and a theoretical formulation entitled Administrative Attribution Theory is offered. The structural framework of this conceptualization rests with five constructs: (1) asymmetry, i.e., attributions reflect a general positive bias; (2) concomitance, i.e., attributions vary with pre‐conditioned mind sets; (3) enhancement, i.e., attributions provide the individual psychological control of the environment; (4) process, i.e., the attributional process is highly generalizable, and (5) reconstruction, i.e., existing attributions may be altered through the manipulation of external variables. Examples of researchable questions are given to further facilitate field testing in educational administration.

We review literature linking patterns of vocal accommodation in the paraverbal range of the voice to small group structures of status and dominance. We provide a thorough overview of the current state of vocal accommodation research, tracing the development of the model from its early focus on patterns of mutual vocal adaptation, to the current focus on structural factors producing patterns of unequal accommodation between group members. We also highlight gaps in existing knowledge and opportunities to contribute to the development of vocal accommodation as an unobtrusive, nonconscious measure of small group hierarchies.

We trace the empirical development of vocal accommodation as a measure of status and power, and discuss connections between vocal accommodation and two prominent theoretical frameworks: communication accommodation theory (CAT) and expectation states theory. We also provide readers with a guide for collecting and analyzing vocal data and for calculating two related measures of vocal accommodation.

Across multiple studies, vocal accommodation significantly predicts observers’ perceptions regarding interactants engaged in debates and interviews. Studies have specifically linked vocal accommodation to perceptions of relative power or dominance, but have not shown a relationship between accommodation and perceptions of prestige.

Vocal accommodation measures have clear applications for measuring and modeling group dynamics. More work is needed to understand how accommodation functions in clearly-defined status situations, how the magnitude of status differences affects the degree of accommodation inequality, and how vocal accommodation is related to other correlates of social status, including openness to influence and contributions to group tasks.

It is natural for interacting organisational actors and environmental agents to experience complexity asymmetries. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the balancing of these complexities at a level of performance that not only maintains the organisation’s viability but also the health of its ecosystem.

Ashby (1964) proposed variety, or the number of possible states of a situation, as a measure of complexity and the Law of Requisite Variety as an ontology and heuristic for complexity management strategies. Following these propositions Beer’s variety engineering (Beer, 1979) is a construct to design these strategies.

This paper offers epistemological and methodological considerations to discuss the viability and performance of organisational systems.

Measuring organisational performance needs powerful methodological support. This paper offers to some extend this support but it needs further development.

Performance is related to the concept of dynamic capabilities, which in recent times has had important practical implications.

Though the concepts of this paper have a long history, their methodological articulation is original.

Attributing blame for performance failure and credit for success is ubiquitous in organizations. These responsibility attributions can play an important role in aligning individual and organizational performance expectations, but may also exacerbate conflict in groups and organizations. Theory suggests that an actor's organizational role will affect blame and credit attributions, yet empirical work on this prediction is lacking. This article tests an organizational role approach by assessing the effect of the responsible actor's hierarchical position and whether he or she acted as an individual or as part of a group on blame and credit attributions. The study finds that in response to organizational failures and successes leadership roles attract more blame than other positions, but in contrast to previous predictions, these roles do not attract more credit than lower level roles. In addition, upper level positions tend to be assigned greater blame than credit, while lower level positions show a reversed pattern: they attract more credit than blame. Groups are less likely to be assigned blame and more likely to be credited than are individuals, and occupants in flat organizational structures are assigned higher levels of blame and credit than are occupants in taller organizational structures.