Search results

This chapter addresses one aspect of the broad issue of the psychological foundations of the dimensions of multidimensional scaling (MDS) solutions. Using empirical data from three independent studies, it is shown that the dimensionality of MDS solutions is negatively related to individual differences in the level of cognitive differentiation and integrative complexity of individuals and positively related to the individual's ability to discriminate within dimensions. MDS dimensionality is also shown to be affected by a variety of task-related variables such as perceived task difficulty, consistency in providing similarity judgments, confidence, familiarity, and importance attached to the stimuli. The chapter concludes by raising the issue of whether MDS can be validly used to describe complex cognitive processes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the literature on the antecedents and consequences of group cognitive complexity (GCC) and integrate the empirical work by using the composition/compilation framework of emergence and the input-mediator-output-input (I-M-O-I) model of team effectiveness.

Through a systematic search in extant databases, the authors found 27 empirical studies exploring the antecedents and consequences of GCC.

The extant literature is dominated by a compilational approach on GCC, experimental designs and a focus on exploring the antecedents of GCC (group composition and processes mostly), thus providing useful insights for organizational interventions. The work on the implications of GCC for individual or organizational level outcomes is however scant. Future endeavors could rely more on a multilevel exploration of GCC, take a developmental rather than a one-shot approach and explore the impact of new ways of working on the emergence of GCC.

The authors propose an integration of extant empirical work on GCC by using two complementary frameworks: the I-M-O-I model and the composition/compilation framework. The authors highlight the implications for practice and draw future research directions.

The purpose of this study is to examine how individuals cognitively process work‐family conflict (WFC), specifically whether differences in tolerance for uncertainty and cognitive complexity influence individuals' affective response to WFC.

Using a sample of 157 employees who completed a survey on work‐family issues, the hypotheses were tested using correlation and regression analyses.

The results suggest that cognitive differences may moderate the negative impacts of WFC. It was found that while WFC (i.e. work interference with family) lowers job satisfaction, this effect is less strong for those high in tolerance for uncertainty. The same was true for the ameliorating effect of cognitive complexity and tolerance for uncertainty on the link between WFC and (i.e. family interference with work) organizational commitment.

Because of its cross‐sectional design, the causality of the findings cannot be confirmed. Further, while the sample contained both parents and non‐parents, and men and women, due to power concerns, our analyses did not account for these demographic differences. Future research should be designed to correct for these issues.

Organizations may need to rethink their programs and policies aimed at assisting employees in balancing work and family. Simple options (e.g. time off) may appeal to all employees; however others (e.g. job sharing and flextime) require complicated arrangements or behavior changes and may only appeal to or be utilized successfully by employees with high tolerance for uncertainty and cognitive complexity.

Within work‐family research, few studies look at how individual cognitive processes influence whether and how potentially conflictual situations are perceived and their impact on individual outcomes such as satisfaction and commitment. The research investigates two such cognitive differences and demonstrates the role that tolerance for uncertainty and cognitive complexity may play in reducing the negative impact of work‐family conflict.

The purpose of the paper is to develop a theoretical framework with testable propositions discussing the role of counterfactual thinking in fostering accurate decision-making in groups and preventing catastrophes, being mediated by information searching, sharing, task conflict and conflict management mechanisms, moderated by task complexity, cognitive complexity, cognitive closure and tolerance of ambiguity.

A theoretical framework is formulated and propositions are postulated involving independent, mediating, moderating and dependent variables.

This paper recommends a helpful framework for understanding of how counterfactual thinking affects information searching, sharing and decision-making accuracy in groups, thereby preventing catastrophes.

The proposed framework might be of assistance in managing complex group decision-making and information sharing in organizations. Decision-makers may become aware that activating counterfactual mind-set enables them to search for critical information facilitating accurate decision-making in groups leading to catastrophe prevention.

This paper adds value to the field of counterfactual thinking theory applied to group decision-making. Moreover, the paper provides a novel framework for group decision-making which sheds light on pertinent variables, which can either ameliorate or exacerbate the accuracy of decision-making by information searching and sharing in groups under varying context of high/low task complexity. The ramifications of task conflict, conflict management mechanisms, team diversity and size are explored alongside the moderating role of cognitive complexity, cognitive closure and tolerance for ambiguity.

Research has begun to explore how individuals perceive and respond to institutional complexity differently. The authors extend such efforts and theorize how the complexity of individuals’ cognitive representations of the institutional logics (based on their perceived differentiation and integration of the external environment) and of their role identities (based on the pluralism and unity of their self-representations) can predict such variation. The authors argue that the former explains whether individuals are capable of enacting norms and beliefs from different logics and of envisioning possibilities to reconcile their contradictory demands, whereas the latter explains whether they are motivated to implement a given response.

Global mindset is an important theme in the international business strategy and organizational behavior literatures. However, these different paradigms define and operationalize global mindset in disparate ways, which creates problems for conducting empirical research as the disparity hampers the development of testable models. This article seeks to unify the different paradigms by introducing a third perspective from cognitive psychology that clarifies the process of mindset activation. We apply a process model of mindset activation to global mindset to build a theory of mindset switching relevant for global leaders. We operationalize global mindset as a dynamic process of mindset switching and suggest that the most appropriate mindset for a situation can be primed to activate. We also propose cosmopolitanism and cognitive complexity as antecedents to appropriate mindset activation and mindset switching. Finally, we suggest that mindset/situation congruence results in global leader creativity and boundary spanning. By applying the cognitive psychology literature to global mindset research, we clarify the process of global mindset and why it is important for leaders to understand how different primes might activate the most appropriate mindset. Our model provides a means for managers to become more cognitively aware of how they problem solve in a highly complex and multilayered world. This paper proposes a unique, dynamic model that captures dualities of global leadership. The model provides a new perspective of global mindset that is testable with existing measures and procedures.

Inherent in the meaning of global mindset is the dilemma of an appropriate level of analysis at which we define, measure, and research this construct. This chapter addresses the individual level of analysis using social cognition, which explains how the development process of global mindset helps individuals make sense of unfamiliar stimuli, broaden their cognitive capacities, adjust their behavior accordingly, and have a positive influence on others. Our recently developed core construct of positive psychological capital, or PsyCap (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007), and the overarching process of authentic leadership development (Avolio & Luthans, 2006) are used to explicate the theoretical social cognitive framework. The “influence on others” implies a leadership process, and that is why we address the role that global mindset may have in the authentic leadership development process (Avolio & Luthans, 2006).

Drawing on proactivity literature, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between employee’s proactive career planning (taking initiative to prepare for one’s career) and proactive career enacting (taking initiative to act on career plans). This study also looks into the influence of proactive personality and cognitive complexity in the relationship between proactive career planning and proactive career enacting.

Survey data were collected in Australia (study 1; n=271) and were tested using structural equation modeling. Another set of survey data were collected in a different cultural context in the Philippines (study 2; n=215) for cross-cultural validation.

Results show that proactive career planning and proactive career enacting are positively and significantly related in both cultural contexts. Results also show that proactive personality or the stable disposition of an individual to take initiative and be involved in future-oriented actions plays a significant role in moderating the relationship between proactive career planning and proactive career enacting. In addition, results show that cognitive complexity which pertains to an individual’s capacity to construe social behaviors in multidimensional ways moderates the relationship between proactive career planning and proactive career enacting.

In today’s turbulent environment, employees need to be proactive when developing their careers. This study highlights the importance of being proactive when managing one’s career. Employees’ proactive personality and cognitive complexity also help in strengthening the link between proactive career planning and proactive career enacting, hence, these individual-level characteristics need to be developed and enhanced in organizations.

This study is valuable as it extends and advances the understanding on how proactivity (proactive career planning, proactive career enacting, proactive personality) and cognitive complexity can contribute to career development of employees.

Global Mindset (GM) is a multifaceted construct that has received broad interest among practitioners and academics. It is a fragmented construct at this point in time, due to definitional overlap with other constructs such as global leadership and cultural intelligence. This overlap has created complexity for research that attempts to understand GM in isolation. Lack of clear boundaries in defining and conceptualizing this construct challenges researchers who are attempting to capture fully what constitutes GM. Our work seeks to better understand and explain what underlines the individual GM construct and how does this impact the development of global competencies in individual managers.

We systematically review and analyze the individual GM literature thematically to provide an overview of the extant research from a broad array of scholarly sources dating from 1994 to 2017. Our work offers a thematic analysis that provides a visual guide to GM by tracking the corpus of individual-level GM studies. We categorize the research according to its theoretical groundings and basic concepts and proceed review how GM has been operationalized at the individual level and measured. Next, we integrate major dimensions in the GM research and propose a framework to enhance understanding of the phenomenon. Finally, we discuss the implications of our review for the development of GM for practitioners, coaches and trainers.

Prior work has suggested that individual decision-making is influenced by the emotions and cognition of the decision-maker. Within the firm context, the chief executive officer (CEO) is required to make many decisions that will meaningfully impact the firm. However, little is known about how CEO emotions and cognition influence not only firm decision-making but also the performance consequences of those decisions. Within this chapter, the authors conceptually explore (1) how CEO affect intensity moderates the relationship between performance below aspirations and risk-taking; and (2) how CEO cognitive complexity determines the directional effect of the risk-performance relationship.