Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of leaders' managerial coaching on followers' organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), creativity and task performance. This study also examined the mediating role of intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy, recognizing the follower’s attitude and cognition as essential elements of behavioral changes.

This study collected data from 20 companies across multiple industries in South Korea, and a total of 386 leader–follower dyads' data were used.

The results show that leaders' coaching is positively associated with OCB directly, but a direct impact of coaching on creativity and task performance was not supported. The results also showed that intrinsic motivation partially mediates the effect of coaching on OCB and fully mediates the effect of coaching on creativity and task performance. Self-efficacy played a role as a full mediator between coaching and task performance.

This study considered both the cognitive and affective aspects of managerial coaching and examined the influence of managerial coaching on the followers' in-role and extra-role behaviors (i.e. OCB, creativity and task performance) using responses from both the leaders and the followers at multiple organizations. Specifically, the results of this study empirically illustrated that managerial coaching by leaders serves as a mechanism mediated through intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy, linking to employees' OCB, creativity and task performance. This provides a clear explanation of the processes through which managerial coaching impacts employees and offers insights into the specific aspects that organizational leaders should focus on when engaging in managerial coaching.

Working conditions, pay rates and the rights of workers to collectively negotiate have become important points of discussions in recent years, with support for unions and union applications rising to levels long unseen in America. In many instances, though, companies have responded aggressively. This is not the first time such a dynamic has played out in American business. This study aims to take a fresh look at one of America’s most prominent historical disputes between labor and ownership – the Homestead Massacre of 1892 – to glean lessons from that conflict that remain relevant to today’s business environment.

This study adopts game theory and the principles of repeated interaction to assess how differing discount factors led to differences in time orientations between the workers and the Carnegie company. These differing time orientations affected both the strategy each side deployed in the negotiations and the payoffs received by the parties. Letters, contemporary news reports and histories of the events leading up to and immediately following the 1892 Homestead Massacre are qualitatively analyzed with a genealogical pragmatic approach.

Differences in temporal orientation between management and workers exacerbated the conflict, with the workers adopting a more cooperative stance and distal time orientation, while the Carnegie company negotiated with a proximal time orientation and played to “win” a game that, in fact, could not be fully won or lost given its infinitely repeating nature. The result was a short-term victory for the Carnegie company but with long-term negative consequences that highlight the suboptimal outcome the company achieved by playing a proximal strategy in an infinite game.

Although the incident at Homestead is a well-studied labor dispute, many of the themes that preceded the incident have resurfaced in the modern work context. This work, by adopting game theory as an analytical framework, provides new insights into management mistakes that led to the labor conflict and lessons for what present-day managers can do to avoid exacerbating labor strife.