Search results

This study examines subject and self-metaphors in Cantonese in order to understand the impact of self-conceptualization on self-giving in Hong Kong. The bifurcation of the individual in Hong Kong signals the importance of the subject and the relational self in Chinese culture. The word for person (rén) is written as two individuals interacting with each other, so communication between the subject and the relational self has a significant impact on self-giving as evidenced by the most prevalent type of gift – the puritanical one. The mental accounting in this instance reflects the importance given to the consideration of others prior to or simultaneously with rewarding oneself for the successful achievement of a personal goal. Both whimsical and therapeutic gifts are fairly rare and justified in a more elaborate fashion. Indulging oneself by purchasing consumer goods or services for special occasions is acceptable when they are not provided by relevant others, such as close friends or family. Purchasing clothes and shoes for Chinese New Year is not necessarily viewed as a self-gift because this occasion is an auspicious one, requiring the wearer to attire herself in new outfits in order to attract good fortune. Finally, the presence of self-gifts in Hong Kong justifies its inclusion in the gift continuum.

Technology is often defined as a valuable firm resource particularly relative to marketing functions in the organization (Barua, Kriebel, & Mukhopadhyay, 1995; Bharadwaj, 2000; Christensen, Johnson, & Rigby, 2002). When resources are customized to match a marketing strategy, they become firm specific, and thus central to firm performance. Marketing employees also may be defined as an essential resource, in the context of key marketing activities that need to be accomplished (Barney, 1986, 2001; Coff, 2002; Dess & Picken, 1999). Because both employees and technology play key roles, we ground this study in the resource-based view (RBV) of the firm (Barney, 1991, 2001; Peteraf, 1993; Wernerfelt, 1984).

This chapter seeks to integrate and expand on the ideas presented by Cropanzano, Li, and James (this volume), Ambrose and Schminke (this volume), and Rupp, Bashshur, and Liao (this volume). First, it summarizes and comments on the key insights made by each set of authors. It then presents five propositions, along with some preliminary evidence supporting each: (1) employees can and do make source-based justice judgments; (2) justice treatment is directed at different targets (including individuals and groups, both internal and external to the organization); (3) global justice climate may be a useful approach to studying justice once the relationship between more specific justice climates (e.g., interunit or intraunit justice climate) is better understood; (4) it is necessary to study both general and specific justice climates to understand the unfolding of justice reactions over time; and (5) a climate for justice can be behaviorally measured and trained.

This chapter reviews research on multi-level organizational justice. The first half of the chapter provides the historical context for this issue, discusses organizational-level antecedents to individual-level justice perceptions (i.e., culture and organizational structure), and then focuses on the study of justice climate. A summary model depicts the justice climate findings to date and gives recommendations for future research. The second half of the chapter discusses the process of justice climate emergence. Pulling from classical bottom-up and top-down climate emergence models as well as contemporary justice theory, it outlines a theoretical model whereby individual differences and environmental characteristics interact to influence justice judgments. Through a process of information sharing, shared and unique experiences, and interactions among group members, a justice climate emerges. The chapter concludes by presenting ideas about how such a process might be empirically modeled.

The following is an introductory profile of the fastest growing firms over the three-year period of the study listed by corporate reputation ranking order. The business activities in which the firms are engaged are outlined to provide background information for the reader.