Search results

San Jose State University’s (SJSU’s) Global Leadership Advancement Center (GLAC) was established in 2007 in response to a reported scarcity of global leaders in all sectors. Its mission is to advance, foster, and disseminate knowledge on global leadership and its development. The center created various programs in three focal areas: Knowledge Creation and Dissemination, Development and Training, and the Social Innovation Initiative. We briefly explain the assessment center, the GLLab (Global Leadership Laboratory), used to varying degrees in all development programs and courses. This chapter describes in detail three of GLAC’s innovative global leadership efforts and their theoretical foundations – an undergraduate global leadership course, the GLLab Exchange Program, and the Global Leadership Passport Program. All GLAC programs are based on research and best practices, which are referenced.

Occupational stress and well-being continues to be an intriguing and exciting area for researchers. In our 5th volume of Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, we offer outstanding papers that examine several key issues in occupational stress. The theme for this volume is employee health, coping, and methodologies. The first four chapters take an in-depth look at the role of stress in physiological reactions and health consequences. The last three chapters examine the role of control and cynicism in occupational stress and also call for some new methodologies and the examination of nonlinear relationships in the study of occupational stress and well-being.

In our 8th volume of Research in Occupational Stress and Well Being, we offer eight chapters that examine theoretical, conceptual, and methodological advances to job stress research. Our lead chapter, by Christopher Rosen, Chu-Hsiang Chang, Emilija Djurdjevic, and Erin Eatough, provides a thorough review of conceptual and empirical research examining occupational stress and performance. They review and critique theories that help to explain the workplace stressor–performance relationship and they develop an eight-category taxonomy of workplace stressors. Finally, they evaluate how well contemporary research has dealt with limitations and weaknesses previously identified in earlier research.