Search results

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to examine whether polychronicity, an individual difference variable that involves a preference for multitasking, moderates the relationships between work-family conflict (WFC) and two work criteria, job satisfaction and work engagement; second, to examine two measures of polychronicity (the multitasking preference inventory (MPI) and the inventory of polychronic values (IPV)) and investigate whether polychronicity moderates the relationships between WFC and work criteria differently when measured by the MPI or the IPV.

The study’s sample included 257 respondents from the Amazon Mechanical Turk service who completed an online survey. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to test whether polychronicity moderated the relationships between WFC and two work criteria, job satisfaction and work engagement.

Polychronicity was found to significantly moderate the relationship between the work engagement and WFC. Follow-up analyses indicated that those who were lower in polychronicity had a significant decrease in work engagement as WFC increased, whereas those who were higher in polychronicity had relatively the same work engagement level regardless of changes in WFC. The results suggest that individuals higher in polychronicity have more personal resources and may be more resilient than those lower in polychronicity when it comes to not letting conflicts between their work and family lives affect how engaged they feel in their work.

This study extends the application of polychronicity to new domains of WFC and work engagement. The current study also contributed to the literature by investigating two measures of polychronicity (MPI and IPV) and finding that the MPI significantly moderated the relationship between WFC and work engagement, but the IPV did not. These findings indicate that there are important differences between the MPI and the IPV, and additional research is needed in comparing these two polychronicity measures.

This commentary focuses on the measurement of temporal dimensions at different levels of analysis. In particular, it examines the measures that are available for various levels of analysis for four temporal dimensions: polychronicity, speed, punctuality, and temporal depth. The discussion is meant to spur additional research using reliable and valid temporal measures at multiple levels of analysis.

This paper provided construct validity evidence for polychronicity in two related studies. Study 1 assessed the relationship between individuals’ stated polychronicity preferences and peer ratings of polychronicity in a multitrait‐multimethod design, which indicated that different raters were able to agree about an individual’s polychronicity. Additional construct validity evidence was provided by linking polychronicity to several potentially related constructs such as achievement striving, impatience/irritability, stress, and performance. In study 2, hypothesized relationships between polychronicity and both time urgency and time management behavior dimensions were supported. In addition, similar relationships between polychronicity and time urgency dimensions were identified across French and US samples. Together, these two studies provide a clearer understanding of the correlates and potential outcomes of polychronicity. Directions for future research are also discussed.

Joseph A. Alutto is dean, Max M. Fisher College of Business, as well as executive dean of the Professional Colleges, The Ohio State University. He holds the John W. Berry, Sr., Chair in Business. From 1976 to 1990, he was dean of the School of Management, State University of New York at Buffalo. He has published more than 70 articles in leading academic journals and serves on a number of corporate and public sector boards, including Nationwide Financial Services, United Retail Group, Inc., and M/I Homes.

Temporal dimensions of work is about how individuals perceive the concept of “time”. Time is the critical success factor in any organisation. This article focuses on the theme time, diversity and team performance with an attempt to emphasise that time acts as a mediator between the group and its performance in organisations. The question addressed in this paper is whether the different temporal dimensions of the diverse work force affects the team performance. The study also attempts to understand the impact of task meaningfulness, performance norms and organizational temporal orientations on the team performance in diverse work force.

Drawing from findings in sociology and anthropology on time as a symbol of status, this paper examines the role that status differentials affect how group members internally align the pace of their activities over time (group synchronization). We examine the psychological process of group synchronization from the perspective of the individual, the nature of status differentials in work groups, and how one’s status within a group affects a person’s willingness to adjust the timing of his/her activities to match other people’s timing. We then identify three types of status structures within work groups and analyze how each affects the group’s ability to synchronize. We close by considering the implications of our approach for better understanding temporal dynamics in work groups.

In class action antitrust litigation, the standards for acceptable economic analysis at class certification have continued to evolve. The most recent event in this evolution is the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1435 (2013). The evolution of pre-Comcast law on this topic is presented, the Comcast decision is thoroughly assessed, as are the standards for developing reliable economic analysis. This article explains how economic evidence of both antitrust liability and damages ought to be developed in light of the teachings of Comcast, and how liability evidence can be used by economists to support a finding of common impact for certification purposes. In addition, the article addresses how statistical techniques such as averaging, price-dispersion analysis, and multiple regressions have and should be employed to establish common proof of damages.

Existing theoretical and empirical evidence is inconclusive concerning the comparative performance of labor-managed firms (LMFs) and conventional firms. By assembling and analyzing new data for a sample of 51 conventional firms and 26 producer cooperatives in the Italian construction industry during the period 1981–1989 we provide additional evidence. Except for organizational form, the cooperatives in our sample are fairly comparable to our conventional firms. Based on our production function estimates, and unlike some previous econometric studies, we find no significant productivity advantage of cooperatives over conventional firms. Our ordinary least squares (OLS) point estimates generally indicated that output would be lower in a cooperative than in an otherwise identical conventional firm. The only statistically significant measure of financial and decision-making participation is collective reserves. We conclude by offering some possible explanations for why our results may differ from some previous findings, especially those for Italian producer cooperatives. In particular we suggest that research methods that are new to the study of cooperatives are needed to help to resolve these questions.