Search results

In response to demands and opportunities of the labor market, contemporary employers and employees voluntarily are entering into highly customized agreements regarding nonstandard employment terms. We refer to such idiosyncratic deals as “i-deals,” acknowledging that these arrangements are intended to benefit all parties. Examples of i-deals include an employee with highly coveted skills who is compensated more generously than other employees doing comparable work, and an employee who is granted atypically flexible working hours to accommodate certain personal life demands. The nonstandard nature of i-deals is likely to prompt questions about the fairness of the arrangement among three principal stakeholders – employees who receive the i-deal, managers with whom the i-deal is negotiated, and the co-workers of these employees and managers. We analyze issues of fairness that arise in the relationships among all three pairings of these stakeholders through the lenses of four established forms of organizational justice – distributive justice, procedural justice, interpersonal justice, and informational justice. Our discussion sheds light on previously unexplored nuances of i-deals and identifies several neglected theoretical issues of organizational justice. In addition to highlighting these conceptual advances, we also discuss methods by which the fairness of i-deals can be promoted.

Idiosyncratic jobs occur when formal job duties match the abilities or interests of a specific person. New duties can accrue or be negotiated to match an existing employee or a potential hire. Idiosyncratic jobs can help organizations deal with changing contexts, and influence organizational goals and structure. They can affect job holders’ careers and organizational job structures. The evolutionary accumulation of idiosyncratic jobs can potentially generate unplanned organizational learning. Promising research frontiers include links to work on job crafting, I-Deals, negotiated joining, and ecologies of jobs. Deeper exploration of these domains can advance core theories of job design and organizational transformation and inform normative theory on organizational use of idiosyncratic jobs without falling into cronyism, inefficiency, or injustice.

As demographic changes impact the workplace, governments, organizations, and workers are looking for ways to sustain optimal working lives at higher ages. Workplace flexibility has been introduced as a potential way workers can have more satisfying working lives until their retirement ages. This chapter presents a critical review of the literature on workplace flexibility across the lifespan. It discusses how flexibility has been conceptualized across different disciplines, and postulates a definition that captures the joint roles of employer and employee in negotiating workplace flexibility that contributes to both employee and organization benefits. Moreover, it reviews how flexibility has been theorized and investigated in relation to older workers. The chapter ends with a future research agenda for advancing understanding of how workplace flexibility may enhance working experiences of older workers, and in particular focuses on the critical investigation of uses of flexibility in relation to older workers.

The purpose of this conceptual study is to explain the way in which employees influence social innovation in the employee–organization relationship, such as job crafting, i-deals, New World of Work, talent management, or high performance work practices.

This study applies a practice perspective in order to explain how employees affect their employee–organization relationship and thus influence the outcomes of social innovation.

The theoretical exploration suggest that employees can engage in the enactment of the employee–organization relationship in three ways: enacting employment relationships, enacting employment practices, and enacting employment practices’ outcomes. In doing so, they can draw on interpretive schemes, resources, and norms for realizing the benefits of social innovation for themselves and/or their employer.

Although organizations have started social innovation initiatives that allow employees to actively shape the employee–organization relationship, existing studies still treat employees as inactive recipients in the relationship with their employer. As a result, it remains unclear how social innovation in employee–organization relationships is implemented in practice and thus, how social innovation provides benefits to the employee and the organization. The originality of this study is its focus on how employees, as (pro-)active constituents, shape the employee–organization relationship, for finding better explanations of the outcomes of social innovation initiatives.

I am pleased to present Volume 23 of Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management that contains seven interesting papers. These papers are interesting because each one establishes a strong case for bringing somewhat understudied topics into the research mainstream of the human resources management field, brings to our attention the need to critically examine conventional, conceptual and methodological approaches used in HRM research, or builds creative paths in our thinking about commonly studied topics. Some of you may find one or more papers to be controversial in nature, and this is by design. I encourage authors to challenge convention in order to stimulate healthy debates and discussions between HRM researchers.

Burnout has been recognized and measured in the workplace since the 1970s, particularly in service industries. Libraries can be viewed as service providers. Burnout is the result of chronically high work demands combined with emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and diminished personal accomplishment. Burnout components have been linked to physical, emotional, and behavioral consequences, and to high turnover and loss of engagement. Libraries can evaluate burnout levels among staff and address burnout on an individual, management, and organizational level. The Nurse-Experienced Time Pressure, Burnout, and Patient Interaction Questionnaire is modified to identify and quantify activities individuals might use to reduce burnout. The survey is administered to librarians and staff at an academic library and to self-chosen attendees at a conference session on avoiding burnout. Feedback is also solicited in terms of burnout avoidance strategies and possible library responses. Most respondents feel burned out but also committed to providing excellent service to patrons. Respondents have a genuine interest in making work less prone to burnout. Sample sizes were small but gave consistent responses. Burnout can be addressed on an institutional, management, and personal level, with each entity having equal responsibility. Leadership, management, communication, and support efforts can counteract burnout threats. Burnout causes disengagement at work and in personal lives. In terms of personality, neuroticism is a strong predictor of burnout. Making efforts to counteract burnout will lead to a healthier, balanced life. This book chapter is based on research done for a presentation at ER&L 2016 on Avoiding E-Burnout. Causes and counteractions to burnout have been expanded.

In this chapter, I present the scientific pillar of the project. Given the political proposal that informs the book, it is necessary for me to show why and how such an activist endeavour as I propose produces valid and reliable knowledge. To this end, I deal with the historical debate about the role of the intellectual in society based on the ideal types of the neutral expert and the academic activist introduced in Chapter 2.