Search results

As part of the developing attention being paid to time in organization science, this chapter discusses two temporal dimensions – polychronicity and speed – and develops propositions relating these two temporal dimensions to other organization science variables. The propositions are specified according to levels of analysis, at least three of which are considered in propositions presented for each dimension. Two other temporal dimensions – punctuality and temporal depth – are also described, albeit not as extensively as polychronicity and speed. A fifth temporal phenomenon, entrainment, provides insights into organizational processes as well as the four temporal dimensions. The chapter concludes by outlining some reasons for caution for both theory and practice.

Polychronicity is the extent to which people prefer to be engaged in two or more tasks simultaneously. Relationships between polychronicity and four variables were examined in data from four samples totaling 1,173 participants. Only one statistically significant relationship occurred between polychronicity and propensity for creativity after controlling for other variables. Consistent significant relationships were found, however, between polychronicity and orientation to change (positive), tolerance for ambiguity (positive), and organizational attractiveness (positive or negative depending on whether the organization demonstrated a high or low level of polychronicity, respectively). Concatenated replications reproduced each of these three relationships in at least two samples.

Given the environmental turbulence surrounding organizations today, polychronicity – the preference to attend to more than one task simultaneously – may be an increasingly important characteristic of individuals, groups, and organizations. Polychronicity and its behavioral counterpart, multitasking, are inextricably linked, but high levels of polychronicity may not lead to productive multitasking behavior, as multitasking can vary tremendously in its implementation and effectiveness. This commentary offers further clarification of the differences between polychronicity and multitasking, and it explores the role of task performance strategies in multitasking behavior.

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.

Addressing the challenges of temporal concepts in organizations involves precise measurement and clear definitions. In this essay, we propose a number of future research ideas generated by Waller and Conte's (this volume) thought-provoking essays. Our hope in presenting these ideas is that future studies consider them in efforts to further close the definitional and measurement gaps in current research on temporal variables in organizations. In particular, we invite scholars to consider the implications of the dimensionality of polychronicity, of context on temporal variables, and of temporal variables interacting together.

Prior research into multinational enterprises’ (MNEs) entrepreneurial initiatives has drawn from various theoretical bases, including entrepreneurial cognition, knowledge-based view, and management control theory. Empirical studies and cases have consistently pointed to the temporal dimension, highlighting the dynamic elements of learning, capability development and evolution, and consequences of conflict. By incorporating theory on time use into the analysis, we develop a new theoretical insight regarding the temporal dimension of MNE entrepreneurial initiatives. Our analysis offers a basis for a more explicit focus on time use in studies of entrepreneurial initiatives in MNEs than has been offered to date. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

“Multi-Level Issues in Organizations and Time” is Volume 6 of Research in Multi-Level Issues, an annual series that provides an outlet for the discussion of multi-level problems and solutions across a variety of fields of study. Using a scientific debate format of a key scholarly essay followed by two commentaries and a rebuttal, we present, in this series, theoretical work, significant empirical studies, methodological developments, analytical techniques, and philosophical treatments to advance the field of multi-level studies, regardless of disciplinary perspective.

This paper discusses national differences in the interpretation of time in mixed motive decision contexts, such as negotiation. Specifically, we consider how members of different national cultures (Portugal, Turkey, and the United States) experience temporality in these situations. We argue that cultural temporality such as polychronicity, future orientation, and uncertainty avoidance form part of a broader national environment. The national environment is also expressed in national stability factors such as legal systems, family ties, and homogeneity of populations. We propose that temporality and stability aspects of national environment determine negotiation paradigms, which subsequently influence temporality in negotiations. We conclude by suggesting that inclusion of complex and interdependent national environment factors in the study of negotiation has the potential to substantially advance our understanding of mixed motive decision situations.

The temporal imagination is the understanding of the intersection of one entity’s timescape with the larger timescapes of which that entity is a part. We examine in detail what the temporal imagination is, complemented with a discussion of the related timescape idea, and why the temporal imagination is necessary to function in any timescape. We also discuss group attributes that will likely affect the development of the temporal imagination and its use and how its use in group boundary spanning efforts affect both the groups and the larger organization.

Multicommunicating, the practice of using technology to carry on multiple near-simultaneous conversations, has been studied for almost two decades. This practice has new meaning today as more people carry a mobile device with them, remote working is prominent, and teams are looking for ways to be more productive. This chapter establishes why multicommunicating is an important communication concept that can help scholars interested in teams. After distinguishing multicommunicating from related concepts, such as multitasking, this chapter reviews key findings from literature and highlights the conundrum around whether this is a productive, acceptable practice or one that is rude and increases inefficiency. In conclusion, the proposed research agenda invites studies of multicommunicating in contexts where actual responses to the practice can be observed. Additionally, there are growing opportunities to include mobile communication and human–technology interactions in the multicommunicating mix.