Search results

Guided by Hobfoll’s (1989) conservation of resources theory, we examined how psychological entitlement moderates the negative relationship between work-family conflict (WFC) and job satisfaction.

Using a sample of 119 accountants from the Midwestern United States, we tested our hypotheses with hierarchical regression analysis.

Results indicate a strong, negative relationship between WFC and job satisfaction for employees low in psychological entitlement, but an insignificant relationship for entitled employees.

The results suggest that some entitlement may be beneficial to employees when coping with WFC. However, organizations should limit WFC in order to foster their least entitled employees’ job satisfaction.

This is the first study that investigates how psychological entitlement affects employees' reactions to WFC. Not only does it contribute to the growing body of research that examines how this individual difference affects workplace functioning, but it suggests there may be some benefits to entitlement, which largely has been disparaged.

The purpose of this article is to understand the role of individual and relational self‐concepts on various team processes and outcomes in a team context.

Participants (n=470) worked in dyads on a computer‐based truck dispatching task, deciding as a team which task activities to perform and in what order. The authors assessed differential relationships between individual and relational self‐concepts and various team processes (e.g. trust) and outcomes (satisfaction).

Subjective task complexity was influenced primarily by individual self‐concept, specifically their core self‐evaluations. Trust in others was influenced primarily by individuals' relational self‐concepts, specifically their teamwork predisposition. Intrinsic motivation and satisfaction were influenced by both individual and relational self‐concepts.

Future research should examine these effects in teams larger than dyads, with other types of tasks, over longer time periods, and with non‐college student samples.

Depending on the task type, a practitioner might cue different self‐concepts to increase individuals' focus on team performance, individual performance, or both. For example, if the team task is highly interdependent and reciprocal in nature, then the team can be trained together or provided information to cue relational self‐concept.

This paper focuses on the construct of individual and relational self‐concepts and their effects on individual functioning in a team context. The results support and extend prior research by demonstrating that outcomes in a team context can be identified and examined in relation to individual conceptions of the self, relational conceptions of the self, or by both.

The purpose of this article is to address and gain a more complete understanding of the effects on performance attributable to the gender composition of teams.

The authors examined gender as a team composition variable that influences performance on a computer‐based task, and we investigated task framing (masculine/feminine) and competition (isolated/dyad) as explanatory factors in the gender composition‐performance relationship. Whereas previous research combines matched gender dyads in analyses, we distinguished male/male from female/female dyads to isolate the effects on performance and examine competition effects.

Distinguishing between male/male and female/female dyads revealed only male/male dyads had superior performance. Task framing was not supported as an explanation for the observed performance differences, but competition was. Contrasting the gender effect in competitive conditions relative to isolated conditions revealed a gender difference in performance between competitive conditions only.

Given competition's clear role in the gender composition‐performance relationship, a more rigorous examination and manipulation of competition is needed beyond the comparison of isolated and dyadic conditions.

Previous research suggests to organizations/practitioners that matching teams by gender will result in optimal performance. Based on our findings, such an implementation would be to the detriment of female teams in the organization, and associated legal issues could arise.

The authors found the superior performance of matched teams to be attributable to the matching of male/male teams and the associated competitive context, and not attributable to matched teams in general. The results should be considered as a caution for both the academic and applied domain alike.