Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore newcomers as active participants within their own socialization, through the influence of self-leadership on proactivity and subsequently organizational socialization and organizational commitment.

Data collected from 193 organizational newcomers (i.e. individuals within their first year at an organization) working in a variety of industries were examined within three serial mediation models in PROCESS.

The results of these analyses suggest that self-leadership influences organizational newcomers’ adjustment and subsequent commitment by assisting them in seeking organizational resources.

This study answers calls to explore both the mediating mechanisms through which self-leadership processes influence organizational outcomes and the complex relationships between human workplace interactions and the proximal and distal outcomes of socialization.

The findings indicate that organizational stakeholders should enhance the self-leadership abilities of newcomer, thereby easing the socialization burden on organizations.

This paper offers a novel framework (i.e. self-leadership) for understanding newcomer socialization and provides an encompassing model that recognizes individual capacities, communicative behaviors, adjustment and subsequent organizational attitudes.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a thorough review of self‐leadership literature past and present, including a historical overview of how the concept was created and expanded as well as a detailed look at more recent self‐leadership research trends and directions. The paper also presents a theoretical and conceptual explanation and differentiation of the self‐leadership concept relative to other related motivational, personality, and self‐influence constructs.

Self‐leadership research and related literatures of motivation, personality and self‐influence are discussed and described in order to present the current state of the self‐leadership body of knowledge and to suggest future directions to explore and study.

It is suggested that self‐leadership is a normative model of self‐influence that operates within the framework of more descriptive and deductive theories such as self‐regulation and social cognitive theory.

While self‐leadership research composes an impressive body of knowledge, it is a domain of study that has been under‐investigated in some aspects, both empirically and conceptually.

This paper suggests several future directions that researchers can undertake to advance self‐leadership knowledge.

This paper fills a void in the organizational literature by reviewing the body of self‐leadership knowledge, by stating how self‐leadership is a distinctive theory in its own, and by presenting directions for future self‐leadership research.

In terms of the body of knowledge examining work teams, several books and articles have attempted to address the underlying causes of why work teams fail. However, a scarcity of writings has focused on the issue of work team sustainability. The dictionary defines “sustain” as “to prevent from falling, collapsing, or giving way,” and “to endure.” This definition gives rise to the following question: “What are the factors that contribute to those work teams that ‘endure’ and that do not ‘fall, collapse, or give way’ during challenging organizational experiences?” In this paper, we will take an initial step toward answering this question by presenting a cognitive model of work team sustainability based upon established cognitive principles of individual‐level effort and performance sustainability. This model is designed to provide some practical insights into the long‐term team performance sustainability issue while also serving as a possible foundation for future research efforts.

This study examined the relationship between self‐leadership and personality through an analysis and comparison of hierarchical factor structures. Structural equation modeling techniques were used to examine several competing models combining the hierarchical factor structures of self‐leadership and personality. Model fit increased significantly through a progression of models that reflected increasingly greater distinction between self‐leadership skill dimensions and key personality traits. The best fitting model consisted of a hierarchical factor structure with three first‐order self‐leadership factors, three first‐order personality factors, and two correlated second‐order factors. Unexpectedly, the general second‐order factors of self‐leadership and personality were statistically indistinguishable. Nevertheless, these results seem to provide some initial evidence that self‐leadership dimensions are distinct from, yet related to, certain key personality traits. The implications of these results for future self‐leadership research and practice are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and present a model of self‐leadership, innovation and creativity.

Drawing upon existing theoretical and empirical evidence the paper develops and presents a conceptual model of the relationships between self‐leadership, innovation, creativity, and organizational support. The paper also presents research propositions based upon the relationships suggested by the model.

The model suggests that individuals with strong self‐leadership will consider themselves to have more innovation and creativity potential than individuals who have weak self‐leadership, and that individuals who have innovation and creativity potential will be more likely to practise innovation and creativity when they perceive strong support from the workplace than individuals who perceive weak support from the workplace.

Future researchers should examine empirically the linkages suggested by this model along with other relationships asserted or implied by the creativity and self‐leadership literature as summarized in the paper.

The model suggests that organizational leaders would be well advised to encourage the practice of self‐leadership among the members of organizations while striving to build work environments that support of creativity and innovation at the group, supervisor, and organizational levels.

This paper makes a valuable contribution to both the self‐leadership and creativity literatures by being one of the first to examine the relationships between these important organizational concepts.

The purpose of this brief commentary is to provide a brief overview of Max Weber's life, work, and contributions to management thought before addressing the question of whether his notion of authority still holds in the twenty‐first century.

The commentary begins with a brief biographical sketch followed by an examination of Weber's conceptualization of authority, its influence on the field of management and its relevancy in the twenty‐first century.

Weber's writings on charismatic authority have been and continue to be instrumental in shaping modern leadership theory, that the charismatic form of authority may be particularly applicable and effective in today's chaotic and rapidly changing environments, and that the empowered and self‐managing organizational forms of the twenty‐first century may represent merely a different incarnation of Weber's iron cage of legal/rational authority.

This commentary makes an important contribution to the management history literature by examining an important aspect of Weber's influence on management thought, theory, and practice.

This paper seeks to provide a review and analysis of the contributions and influence of Alfred P. Sloan, Jr, to contemporary business practices and management thought.

The paper begins with an introduction and brief biographical sketch followed by an overview of Sloan's administrative principles as applied at GM. The paper continues with a review of empirical evidence supporting the efficacy of Sloan's principles along with some theoretical explanations for their success. The paper then examines some criticisms surrounding Sloan's contributions before concluding with a discussion of the impact that Sloan's ideas have had on organizational and managerial thought in the context of today's rapidly evolving organizational realities.

Although he was not a management scholar, Sloan's applied work at General Motors resulted in significant and enduring contributions to business practices and management theory. Yet Sloan's contributions are somewhat overlooked today and have not been extensively or critically examined in the current business and managerial contexts.

This paper makes an important contribution to the management history literature by being among the first to offer a comprehensive critical review of the ways in which Sloan has influenced contemporary management thought, theory, and practice.

This paper sets out to develop and test a hypothesized model of the role of adult leadership development and youth leadership development as possible moderators of the relationships between creative self‐efficacy, perceived support for creativity, and individual creativity.

The study employs the multi‐group nested goodness‐of‐fit strategy in LISREL 8.53 to test the interaction effects of two qualitative moderator variables.

Results suggest that adult leadership development may moderate the relationship between perceived organizational support for creativity and individual creativity, while youth leadership development may moderate the relationship between creative self‐efficacy and individual creativity.

Limitations include concerns regarding generalizability, possible social desirability and response set biases, self‐report data, and causality. The primary implication is that leadership development, targeted at adults as well as children, may represent one important key for unlocking idle creative potential and enhancing overall organizational effectiveness.

Organizations may wish to consider youth leadership development experiences as potential behaviorally based predictors of future job success for jobs that require creativity. Organizational decision makers should also carefully consider making leadership development opportunities available to organizational members at all levels.

The study is among the first to examine both adult and youth leadership development as potential facilitators of creativity in organizations and has value for practitioners as well as for future creativity and leadership development researchers.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the primary basis upon which raters make decisions in the context of selection for formal leadership positions. Specifically, this paper examines the applicant’s personality, the rater’s personality, and the congruence between the applicant’s personality and the rater’s implicit leadership theories (ILTs) as predictors of interview scores.

The hypotheses were tested via random coefficient modeling analyses using HLM software with the control variables included in Step 1 and the main effects entered in Step 2, and interaction effects in Step 3 as appropriate.

Analyses suggest that both applicant and rater personality impact interview scores, but raters do not appear to select leaders on the basis of their conceptualization of an ideal leader.

The results suggest that raters may not consider their own ILTs when attempting to identify future leaders. Given this lack of a natural tendency toward selecting individuals that match one’s perceptions of an ideal leader, future research should focus on adapting current selection methods to leader selection and the development of new selection methods that are more valid.

These findings suggest that current staffing practices may not encompass the most effective tools for selecting future leaders of the organization. These results highlight the importance of clarifying the outcome goals of the selection process in advance by giving raters a clear representation of the qualities and ideals that should be present in potential leaders.

This study is among the first to examine the relationships between personality and ILTs in the context of a formal leadership selection process and makes a significant contribution to the literature by providing insight into the influence of both rater and applicant personality differences along with rater conceptualizations of ideal leadership in the context of formal leadership selection.

The aim of this study is to take a construct validation approach toward developing and testing a parsimonious, yet comprehensive, higher‐order factor model of arbitrator acceptability that helps to identify what matters most in the arbitrator selection process.

The paper uses structural equation modeling (SEM) techniques to examine data from a sample of union advocates attending an arbitration conference to test a hypothesized model of arbitrator acceptability that includes procedural justice, experience, and education as first‐order indicators of arbitrator acceptability. Three competing alternative models that add age, race/gender, and distributive justice, respectively, to the hypothesized model as an additional indicator of arbitrator acceptability were also examined.

Results suggest that the hypothesized model is the best fitting of the four models tested. In addition, the path coefficients of the added paths in each of the alternative models were non‐significant.

Knowledge regarding the relative importance of the various factors involved in arbitrator acceptability will be of interest to future researchers in determining which variables to study in arbitrator selection research as well as to practitioners seeking to better understand and manage the complex arbitrator selection process.

This study makes an important contribution to the literature by being among the first to examine both arbitrator characteristics and organizational justice concepts simultaneously in a single model. This study also takes an important step toward more clearly defining and validating the arbitrator acceptability construct. Finally, this study helps to provide an answer to the question of what matters most in the arbitrator selection process.