Search results

This paper seeks to compare the influence of self‐efficacy, organizational socialization and continuous improvement (CI) practices on the career aspirations of research and development (R&D) professionals in government research institutes (GRIs) and multinational corporations (MNCs) in Malaysia. R&D professionals in this study refer to a specific group of knowledge workers.

Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) was used as this study's theoretical framework. The study involved 164 respondents from GRIs and 120 respondents from MNCs in Malaysia. Descriptive statistics and inferential multiple linear regressions were used to analyse the data.

Self‐efficacy and organizational socialization were found to differ significantly in terms of their levels, and CI practices and career aspirations were not found to be significantly different between the two groups of respondents. Regression results showed MNCs reported higher explanatory power compared to that of the GRIs in terms of the variance in career aspirations.

The insights generated about the factors affecting career aspirations are based on three independent variables, namely: self‐efficacy, organizational socialization and CI practices that are most suitable for a R&D environment.

This study confirms the relevance of CI practices in the existing model of SCCT because it represents the organizational variables. HRD practitioners in both types of organizations should consider changing the work practices of R&D professionals by strengthening the quality improvement procedures because they affect the professionals' career aspirations.

Incorporating CI practices into the SCCT model is believed to be a contribution of this study to the theory.

Resource reconfiguration enables firms to adapt in dynamic environments by supplementing, removing, recombining, or redeploying resources. Whereas prior research has underscored the merits of resource reconfiguration and the modes for implementing it, little is known about the antecedents of this practice. According to prior research, under given industry conditions, resource reconfiguration is prompted by a firm’s corporate strategy and by characteristics of its knowledge assets. We complement this research by identifying learning from performance feedback as a fundamental driver of resource reconfiguration. We claim that performance decline relative to aspiration motivates the firm’s investment in knowledge reconfiguration, and that this investment is reinforced by the munificence of complementary resources in its industry, although uncertainty about the availability of such resources limits that investment. Testing our conjectures with a sample of 248 electronics firms during the period 1993–2001, we reveal a clear distinction between exploitative reconfiguration, which combines existing knowledge elements, and exploratory reconfiguration, which incorporates new knowledge elements. We demonstrate that performance decline relative to aspiration motivates a shift from exploitative reconfiguration to exploratory reconfiguration. Moreover, munificence of complementary resources mitigates the tradeoff between exploratory and exploitative reconfigurations, whereas uncertainty weakens the motivation to engage in both types of reconfiguration, despite the performance gap. Nevertheless, codeployment, which extends the deployment of knowledge assets to additional domains, is more susceptible to uncertainty than redeployment, which withdraws those assets from their original domain and reallocates them to new domains. Our study contributes to emerging research on resource reconfiguration, extends the literature on learning from performance feedback, and advances research on balancing exploration and exploitation.

Performance feedback theory (PFT) has informed analyses in numerous national contexts and has been used to explain various business and management activities of firms. Stemming from behavioral theory and grounded in a cognitive perspective, which views organizational actions as being the results of decisions produced by groups of individual decision-makers, PFT research has mostly assumed the universal nature of cognition and decision-making processes. However, PFT also presumes that individual decision-makers bring with them different backgrounds and experiences. Hence, this paper offers propositions on how cultural differences in individualism-collectivism influence the major components of PFT, including the formation and revision of performance goals (aspiration levels), and search behaviors and risk preferences in response to gaps between goals and actual performance. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

This paper offers theoretical propositions for the above purpose.

This is not an empirical analysis.

By integrating the individualism-collectivism differences framework into the PFT model, the authors answer previous calls to integrate concepts and frameworks from other theories into PFT while considering the role of cultural differences in aspiration-consequence relationships. Additionally, much of PFT research has focused on outcomes, while actual internal processes have remained unobserved. By focusing on how cultural differences influence various PFT processes, this conceptual analysis sheds light on the unobserved bounds of decision-makers' cognitions.

How do organizations respond to negative feedback regarding their innovation activities? In this chapter, the authors reconcile contradictory predictions stemming from behavioral learning and from the escalation of commitment (EoC) perspectives regarding persistence under negative performance feedback. The authors core argument suggests that the seemingly contradictory psychological processes indicated by these two perspectives occur simultaneously in decision makers but that the design of organizational roles and reward systems affects their prevalence in decision-making tasks. Specifically, the authors argue that for decision makers responsible for an individual project, responses given to negative performance feedback regarding a project are dominated by self-justification and loss-avoidance mechanisms predicted by the EoC literature, while for decision makers responsible for a portfolio of projects, responses to negative performance regarding a project are dominated by an under-sampling of poorly performing alternatives that behavioral learning theory predicts. In addition to assigning decision-making authority to different organizational roles, organizational designers shape the strength of these mechanisms through the design of reward systems and specifically by setting more or less ambiguous goals, aspiration levels, time horizons of incentives provided, and levels of failure tolerance.

The purpose of this study was to examine factors affecting teachers’ work performance (i.e., task performance and discretionary performance) and career aspirations (i.e., remaining a teacher, seeking promotion to a principalship, and career change). Applying an inclusive social-cognitive perspective, the study integrated the personal, organizational, and leadership domains to explain teachers’ task performance, discretionary performance, and career aspirations. The three domains, represented by the independent variables of self-efficacy, collective efficacy, perceived organizational support, and principal leadership styles, predicted teachers’ work performance and career aspirations. Participants included 897 public school teachers in a southern state in the United States. The data gathering instrument incorporated several previously validated scales on study constructs. The analyses indicated that teacher self-efficacy, collective efficacy, POS, and principal transformational leadership all significantly predicted the teachers’ task performance, discretionary performance, and career aspirations. Study findings suggest directions for future research on factors influencing teachers’ work performance and career aspirations.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the linkages between two theories of firm performance, aspiration theory and the resource-based view (RBV), possible ways in which these theories may interact, and how the culture from which the firm originated can be a factor in how the firm may react to Schumpeterian shock issues suggested in RBV of the firm.

This paper takes a theoretical approach.

Firms generally look to firms sharing their own cultural backgrounds when selecting similar others. However when the environment is no longer beneficial to firms sharing these goals and objectives, the focal firm may consider firms from other cultural backgrounds when forming aspiration levels.

Empirical studies would be necessary to verify these finding: do firms show a preference to firms from their own cultural backgrounds when choosing firms to serve as reference groups for goals and objectives? Would Schumpeterian Shocks cause firms to seek other firms outside of their own culture to set new goals and objectives?

Firms should be aware of their own possible biases when deciding which firms to base its goals and objectives on, and widen the cultural scope of their competitive views to include firms from other cultural backgrounds, diversifying their repertoire of strategies and improving the survivability of the organization.

The combination of different managerial theories is not common in management literature, and the author was unable to find an article combining the RBV, Aspiration Theory and cultural theories. If management theories are valid, then it is important to understand the relationships between these theories.

The purpose of this paper is to study the self and vicarious learning patterns of organizations through operational success and benchmark failure experiences. The study is specific to the Indian telecom sector.

This study uses published data of four major telecom firms in India reported by Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and analyzed the influence of aspiration performance discrepancy on organizational learning by hypotheses testing. Feasible generalized least square model with year fixed effects is used to run panel data regression.

In the case of operating experience for performance above aspiration, firms fail to learn from their own experience as well as from others’ experiences. For benchmark failure experience under positive discrepancy, firms learn from their own experience. For performance below aspiration, no significant result was found. These insights allow managers to reconfigure their learning orientation and to develop an effective mechanism for absorbing crucial knowledge from themselves and peer firms.

Practitioners should take into account that their knowledge repertoire is essential for learning in good times. This study also motivates managers involved in operating activities to make use of publicly disclosed reports, engage in vicarious learning or form a coalition for developing coping mechanism under negative discrepancy scenarios.

This paper presents a unique context by studying operational success, and failure experiences of telecom sector in India wherein benchmark for failure was decided by the governing regulatory body, TRAI, unlike other studies where success and failures reference points are intrinsically selected.

Corporate illegal activities may result in fatal injuries and economic losses and have been widely reported in the construction industry. This study is to investigate the relationship between top management team (TMT) compensation and corporate illegal activities with the moderating effects of aspiration–performance discrepancies.

Using a multi-year sample of Chinese construction firms from 2011 to 2017, this paper employed a hierarchical logit regression model with fixed effects.

This study indicates that TMT compensation is positively related to the likelihood of corporate illegal activities. It also finds performance higher than aspirations would lower the probability of illegal activities while performance lower than aspirations also decreases the occurrence of illegal behaviors. Finally, the positive relationship between TMT compensation and illegal activities is strengthened by aspiration–performance discrepancies.

It recommended the design of executive compensation may need to be reconsidered. Next, companies need to carefully monitor top management team, especially when performance is lower than the desired level. Finally, debt-to-equity ratio deserves more attention for Chinese construction firms in suppressing illegal activities.

Given the mixed effects of TMT compensation, this study confirms its positive impact on corporate illegal behaviors. Consistent with the behavioral theory of the firm, it unveils the direct and moderating effects of aspiration-performance discrepancies. The findings are beneficial for evaluating firms' performance and considering the prevention of corporate fraudulent activities.

This study investigates how a firm's regulatory focus (i.e. promotion and prevention foci) affects growth- and efficiency-oriented strategic change, highlighting the role of organizational-level regulatory focus as a cognitive frame within which to interpret performance feedback and its subsequent effects on strategic decisions.

The authors collected longitudinal data on 98 S&P 500 manufacturing firms for a seven-year period. The panel data, which includes texts from the firms' 10-K filings, were then analyzed using a feasible generalized least squares (FGLS) regression estimator to test the authors’ hypotheses.

A firm's strategic change orientation is affected by its regulatory focus and performance feedback: a promotion focus increases the magnitude of growth-oriented strategic change, while a prevention focus favors efficiency-oriented strategic change. Furthermore, both foci moderate the effect of performance feedback on the strategic change orientation: under negative performance feedback, a promotion (prevention) focus increases (decreases) the magnitude of growth-oriented strategic change relative to that of efficiency-oriented change. The findings provide robust evidence that regulatory focus can influence how organizations learn from feedback and formulate strategic change.

The authors’ examination of regulatory focus and organizational learning process relied on large manufacturing firms in the USA. However, learning process could be quite different in small and/or young firms. Future work should expand to a wider range of organizational types, such as nascent entrepreneurial ventures. In addition, the authors’ measurement of regulatory focus using corporate text has inherent weakness and could be supplemented with alternative research methods, such as surveys, interviews or experiments. All in all, however, the findings of this study offer a novel behavioral perspective while demonstrating that a regulatory focus is an important antecedent of organizational learning.

This study highlights the importance of motivational characteristics of the top managers in the process of organizational learning from performance feedback. Furthermore, recruitment of a new top manager should be aligned with the organizational context, values and goals. In addition, corporate governance systems such as managerial compensation schemes need to be carefully designed so as to maximize organizational resilience, especially in the context of performance downturn or environmental change. Establishing a constructive organizational culture so that strategic decisions are not overly swayed by the performance outcomes would also be crucial to the organizational learning process.

This study highlights the importance of understanding the motivational orientations of top managers in organizational learning. In terms of managerial compensation, for instance, an optimal incentive system should reflect the desired performance output by encouraging managerial behavior that corresponds to its objective. Furthermore, motivational orientation of new recruits should be considered in the context of the composition of the top management team members in order to achieve “optimal fit.” In addition, this study suggests that top executives' regulatory focus can be a key factor for organizations in balancing goals of different value orientations.

The findings of this study demonstrated that a firm-level regulatory focus has a significant effect on organizational learning and strategic change following performance feedback. The authors hope this study provides an impetus for future discussions on the microcognitive mechanisms of organizational learning by exploring the relations between organizations' regulatory foci, performance feedback and strategic change orientations.

In this chapter, we present a theory on how organizational performance feedback influences individual decision-maker cognitions and thereby changes a team’s attention focus in terms of strategy. We argue that when performance compares unfavorably to aspiration levels, decision-makers reconsider current strategies in favor of unfamiliar, uncertain ones and become more risk tolerant. Furthermore, as decision-makers devote additional cognitive resources to do so, changes in attention focus in a decision-making team will be observed. Using data from a business simulation and repeated questionnaires, we capture the teams’ attention focus and the organizational performance feedback evaluation process of the individuals and teams.