Search results

Although research has uncovered important predictors of managerial career success, the causal relationships between these predictors has not been fully explored. Accordingly, we propose and test a model that establishes a link between individual differences, salient career‐related beliefs, career enhancing outcomes and managerial career success. Using path analysis, we found that education and career impatience directly affected willingness to relocate and perceived marketability, which in turn led to more promotions offered and greater exposure to powerful networks. Finally, the number of promotions offered directly affected management level, which in turn affected compensation level. With respect to gender differences, we found that beliefs regarding the efficacy of mentoring positively influenced a woman's sense of marketability, and like her male counterpart, exposure to powerful networks. However, we also found that for women managers, unlike men, such exposure did not affect the number of promotions they were offered.

Given the ubiquity of Internet access in the business world, the question for strategy researchers is no longer over whether or not Internet surveys are viable, but rather over the comparative advantages and disadvantages of this modality. To address this question, we provide guidelines for researchers to help minimize the challenges while still reaping the benefits. We begin by first defining Internet survey modalities and some of their benefits, and then we focus on the associated sampling challenges and often ways that strategy researchers can address them. To further assist researchers in using this survey modality, we present a comparison of some software packages that might be useful, followed by a discussion of the lessons that we have learned from our own use of Internet surveys.

Historically, performance appraisals were intended to focus on three areas: development, motivation, and recognition of achievement. One major purpose of performance appraisals is to determine individual merit, especially where pay for performance systems are employed. Based upon expectancy theory, high performance ratings should entail high merit increases while low performance ratings result in low merit increases. However, it appears that decoupling performance ratings and merit increases is common practice. This paper explores the effects of receiving a low performance rating and high merit increase or a high performance rating and a low merit increase and empirically investigate its impact on knowledge workers’ motivational and general morale.

Purpose – Past literature suggests that the performance and turnover of the subordinate are affected by the support, abuse, and feedback provided by the supervisor. In this study, we posit that support, abuse, and feedback in an accounting firm, are in turn, affected by the supervisor's personality, as defined by the Big Five personality factors.

Methodology/approach – We conducted a web-based study with 115 accountants from a top 100 US accounting firm. The accountants completed questionnaires related to the personality of their supervisors along with questionnaires related to the support, abuse, and feedback they received from their supervisors. We analyzed the data using factor analysis and multiple regression.

Findings – We hypothesize that Openness and Agreeableness increase support; Neuroticism increases abuse, but less so if the supervisor is an Extravert; and Extraversion and Conscientiousness increase feedback. Among the hypothesized relationships, all are supported except the relationship between Openness and support. Additional findings are that Extraversion and Conscientiousness increase support; Agreeableness and Conscientiousness decrease abuse; and Agreeableness increases feedback.

Research implications – Our study contributes to the literature by demonstrating the relationship between the personality traits of supervisors and their behavior toward subordinates in an accounting setting. The results of our study can be used in identifying the supervisors who have the right personality for the position, which will likely improve the work environment and reduce turnover.

Barriers to employment are a significant issue in the United States and abroad. As civil rights legislation continues to be enforced and as employers seek to diversify their workplaces, it is incumbent upon the management field to offer insights that address obstacles to work. Although barriers to employment have been addressed in various fields such as psychology and economics, management scholars have addressed this issue in a piecemeal fashion. As such, our review will offer a comprehensive, integrative model of barriers to employment that addresses both individual and organizational perspectives. We will also address societal-level concerns involving these barriers. An integrative perspective is necessary for research to progress in this area because many individuals with barriers to employment face multiple challenges that prevent them from obtaining and maintaining full employment. While the additive, or possibly multiplicative, effect of employment barriers have been acknowledged in related fields like rehabilitation counseling and vocational psychology, the Human Resource Management (HRM) literature has virtually ignored this issue. We discuss suggestions for the reduction or elimination of barriers to employment. We also provide an integrative model of employment barriers that addresses the mutable (amenable to change) nature of some barriers, while acknowledging the less mutable nature of others.

This chapter focuses on the types of roles, responsibilities, and competencies essential to organizational intelligence. The authors draw upon earlier series authors’ important work (Drucker, 2012; Garcia-Perez et al., 2019; Lafayette, Curtis, Bedford, & Iyer, 2019; Reinhardt, Schmidt, Sloep, & Drachsler, 2011) to define competencies. The authors define four categories of intelligence competencies, including those suited to strategic roles, those that support specialized intelligence work, those that support embedded intelligence roles, and universal competencies that apply to everyone.

In one of his most cited works, March (1991) observed that “The basic problem confronting an organization is to engage in sufficient exploitation to ensure its current viability and, at the same time, devote enough energy to exploration to exploration to ensure its future viability” (p. 105). The need to simultaneously pursue exploration and exploitation is a cornerstone of organizational ambidexterity, with the embedded assumption that exploratory ventures require organic management systems and exploitative activities benefit from more mechanistic management systems. The authors argue that this assumption about system alignment is neither well-supported by empirical evidence nor well-grounded in March’s original ideas about exploration and exploitation. The authors review the existing empirical evidence on the management systems that support exploration and exploitation and reveal some of the empirical and conceptual challenges. The authors then share a quasi-experimental study of 49 project teams over an 18-month period where they investigated how components of the management system – formalization, specialization, hierarchy, and leadership – differentially affect project success for explore and exploit projects. The authors find that exploitation projects can succeed under either mechanistic or organic systems, but that exploratory project performance suffers under a mechanistic system. In addition, the authors also find that leadership is the most important determinant of project success or failure. The authors discuss the implications of these results for future studies of organizational ambidexterity and draw attention to some of the underdeveloped ideas in March’s original article that might further advance the field.