Search results

Both uncertainty reduction theory and uncertainty management theory suggest that uncertainty reduction during organizational change is imperative as it may influence positively employees’ attitudes and behaviors. By drawing on the theory of planned behavior that links individual’s beliefs and behavior, the study seeks to examine how employees’ self- and other-interest in change may reduce perceptions of change uncertainty and consequently, foster their behavioral change support (i.e. compliance, cooperation and championing).

The study hypothesizes that employees’ self- and other-interest in change mediate the relationship between perceptions of change uncertainty and behavioral change support. The research was conducted in two large IT companies co-located in a big science park in an EU country in South-eastern Europe. Data were collected from 105 employees and their supervisors in three sequential phases.

The research findings suggest that both self- and other-interest in change partially mediate the negative relationship between perceptions of change uncertainty and behavioral change support.

The findings indicate that change management practitioners will benefit considerably if they try to decrease employees’ perceived change uncertainty by increasing their self- and other-interest in change to provoke supportive behaviors. Relevant suggestions are made.

The findings provide new insights into how perceptions of change uncertainty and self- and other-interest in change can affect employees’ change participation. Further, the research findings add to the uncertainty reduction theory and uncertainty management theory as well as, other related notions.

A species of moral malaise afflicts the professions today, a malaise that may prove fatal to their moral identities and perilous to our whole society. It is manifest in a growing conviction even among conscientious doctors, lawyers, and ministers that it is no longer possible to practice their professions within traditional ethical constraints. More specifically, the belief is taking hold that unless professionals look out for their own self‐interest, they will be crushed by commercialization, competition, government regulation, malpractice actions, advertising, public and media hostility, and a host of other inimical socio‐economic forces. This line of reasoning leads the professional to infer that self‐interest justifies compromises in, and even rejection of, obligations that standards of professional ethics have traditionally imposed.

The aim of this paper is to critically explore the behavioral assumptions of organizational politics, as well as to reconsider and redefine the premises of political behavior in the workplace. The main objective is examination of the presuppositions associated with the possibility of constructive politics in organizational settings.

The deficiencies of explaining managerial activity as solely regulated by self‐interest are discussed, as well as a revised version of self‐interest that may enrich current understanding of workplace politics. Drawing on the respective literature, the authors develop some propositions and suggest, assess and discuss a conceptual framework that integrates self‐interest and constructive politics.

The paper represents an attempt toward inferring positive political behavior through adopting an alternative view of established behavioral assumptions. This view purports to reduce the existing discrepancy between different types of political behavior in defending the possibility of an inclusive, participative and welfare‐enhancing political process, founded on the pro‐social and reciprocating aspects of human interaction. Boundedly selfish organizational members are expected to demonstrate these qualities that are in position to transform the very nature of political activities to the direction of greater organizational good.

The paper reevaluates the self‐interested nature of organizational politics through the introduction of a bounded self‐interest assumption as more representative of actual human behavior. This new construct embodies those constraints that make trust formation, networking and reciprocities operative in environments effectively embedding political behavior in broader, organizational goal‐oriented processes and structures.

Challenges of teamwork in online classes may adversely affect students’ future attitudes toward teamwork. Further, there is a concern about whether online programs foster students’ teamwork skills. To answer these questions, the purpose of this paper is to compare online and face-to-face students’ attitudes toward teamwork, interest in learning teamwork skills and teamwork self-efficacy.

The authors developed a conceptual model explaining how students’ background, engagement in learning teamwork, teamwork self-efficacy and interest in learning teamwork affect attitudes toward teamwork and rigorously tested the model for a meaningful comparison between online and face-to-face students. Attitudes toward teamwork, teamwork interest and teamwork self-efficacy of 582 online and face-to-face students who attend the same academic program were compared.

The results suggest that online students have less positive attitudes towards teamwork compared to face-to-face students although online students have a higher level of teamwork self-efficacy. Therefore, online students’ relative less positive attitudes toward teamwork cannot be explained by the lack of engagement, teamwork skills or interest.

The homogeneity of the sample population is one of the limitations of the paper although it provides the opportunity for a comparative study of online and face-to-face students by controlling the majors.

Instructors should evaluate the appropriateness of team assignments while incorporating teamwork in online classes.

Concerns about online teamwork are discussed but have not been rigorously investigated in the literature. The authors conducted a comprehensive study involving 582 undergraduate students. The findings of this paper suggest that new approaches are needed to incorporate teamwork in online classes. The results also show that importance of building teamwork self-efficacy.

This paper aims to elucidate some of the arguments against egoism in the current debate, as well as to create some new arguments, or rather objections (epistemological and ontological from the position of egoism as moral solipsism), and to explicate some arguments against egoism (descriptive, normative, and ideological) as being not so convincing. It also aims to explicate Jesus's second commandment in a fashion similar to that of Adam Smith when he tried to combine self‐love with sympathy.

This paper is based on the premise that some foundational philosophies, worldviews, or paradigms exemplify at least one type of egoism/selfish strategy. In that light the analysis of egoism and the objections are formulated.

They paper finds that present arguments in favour of egoism in business, and especially as certain “business ethics”, are not acceptable, at least on the practical and theoretical grounds on which they are presented as sound arguments.

The paper implies that there is fundamental difference between theoretical and practical egoism, and that practical egoism sometimes uses the theoretical one as its “quasi‐justification”.

The paper can be summarized in a series of general advices about an altruistic attitude and practices which in the long term show more benefits than costs for any group, and consequently for business organizations as well.

The paper presents ontological and epistemological interpretations and objections against egoism, emphasizing the somewhat neutral or at least bivalent position of Adam Smith regarding the matter in question, and introducing altruistic strategies as being compatible with the basic ideas of a free‐market system.

The affinities of Smith′s invisible hand notion and Hegel′s cunning of reason are examined through a study of all the key locations in which the invisible hand and cunning of reason are introduced. Despite their differences in orientation and philosophy, both writers reach similar conclusions regarding the play of self‐interest and the emergence of the social good. Specifically, each requires a deus ex machina – Providence or Geist – to generate the necessary telosthat supplements their respective logical arguments concerning the concrete play of interest. At the same time, each view provides little to explain how individualism creates the greater social good, so that recourse in each argument to an extra‐social entity obscures the actual functioning of the social order. The common approaches of the two very different thinkers thus reflects on the general requirements and dilemmas of arguments concerning the social good and individual interest.

This work aims to use equity theory to explore how consumers assess prosocial actions as part of a mental portfolio of purchases and behaviors in a broader marketplace, seeking balance in market exchanges. Conceptualizing marketing exchange as both an exchange of perceived value and a balance between self- and collective-interest allows for segmentation by consumer sensitivity to equity and sheds light on why prosocial consumption might occur.

Two studies validate and segment consumers via their equity sensitivity. Between-subject designs with samples of consumers and marketing managers validate an equity sensitivity index that segments how people balance self- and collective-interests in marketplace exchange and predicts prosocial consumption choices.

The results indicate that Entitled decision makers are more willing to exchange collective-interest for self-interest and emphasize choices that maximize lower prices for consumers or greater profits for firms in lieu of prosocial outcomes. Benevolent decision makers, however, are more willing to exchange self-interest for collective-interest and support prosocial outcomes.

This work moves beyond research that focuses on attitudes, values and situational factors, instead using equity theory to uncover broader marketplace motivations for prosocial consumption. The research reveals that a motivating force behind prosocial consumption is how much consumers perceive they have given to, and gotten, from, the marketplace. Segmenting the market according to how consumers balance gains and losses provides an alternate approach to studying prosocial consumption, as well as a practical approach to developing targeted marketing strategies.

This study examines users' information selection strategy on knowledge-sharing platforms from the individual level, peer level and societal level. Though previous literature has explained these three levels separately, few have simultaneously examined their impacts and identified the dominant one according to their effect strengths. The study aims to fill this research gap of the competitions among different levels of information selection mechanisms. Besides, this study also proposes a three-step decision-tree approach to depict the consumption process, including the decision of first-time exposure, the decision of continuous consumption and the decision of feedback behavior participation.

This study analyzed a clickstream dataset of a Chinese information technology blogging site, CSDN.net. Employing a sequential logit model, it examined the impacts of self-level interest similarity, peer-level interest similarity and global popularity simultaneously on each turning point in the consumption process.

The authors’ findings indicate that self-level interest similarity is the most dominant factor influencing users to browse a knowledge-sharing blog, followed by peer-level interest similarity and then global popularity. All three mechanisms have consistent influences on decision-making in continuous information consumption. Surprisingly, the authors find self-level interest similarity negatively influences users to give feedback on knowledge-sharing blogs.

This paper fulfills the research gap of the dominance among three-levels of selection mechanisms. This study's findings not only could contribute to information consumption studies by providing theoretical insights on audience behavior patterns, but also help the industry advance its recommendation algorithm design and improve users' experience satisfaction.

Peer review – The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-10-2020-0475

This paper aims to compare Pareto optimality for altruistic and individualistic societies to show whether it is possible to have Pareto improvement through altruistic acts even after free market equilibrium.

The paper follows conceptual, axiomatic and theoretical approaches to show Pareto efficiency in altruistic versus individualistic societies. The paper first outlines the welfare axioms of Islamic economics compared to those of capitalism. Second, it defines Pareto efficiency within capitalist and Islamic economic systems. Third, it compares and contrasts the concept in the two systems based on their epistemological and anthropological worldviews. Fourth, it shows how – even under the efficient allocation of material goods – room for Pareto improvement still exists through the redistribution of resources. Finally, it demonstrates optimum income transfer for social welfare maximization.

The paper shows that Islamic economics relying on certain welfare axioms aim for an altruistic society. It then theoretically proves that social well-being would be greater in such an altruistic society in comparison to an individualistic society promoted by capitalism, holding everything else constant. The paper clearly shows that free market equilibrium does not maximize social utility. It theoretically demonstrates that even under efficient allocation of material goods, there is still room for Pareto improvement through redistribution of resources. It reveals that optimum income transfer might not be possible through voluntary altruistic behaviors unless people transcend self-interest and begin to value social interest as important as their own interest. Therefore, the paper suggests a role for the government to reach optimum-level income transfer for social welfare maximization.

The paper is purely theoretical. Its main limitation is not to be empirically tested. Future studies might shed light on the issue through empirical evidence

Pareto improvement provides important guidance or at least moral justification for welfare programs. The paper might directly affect welfare policy of Muslim countries.

The paper suggests income transfer through altruistic acts would provide higher social welfare. Therefore, it is in the best interest of nations to promote altruistic behaviors and support voluntary welfare programs for higher social utility.

The paper contributes to the Islamic moral economy doctrine by proving that altruistic behaviors encouraged by Islamic teaching could provide higher social welfare.

The purpose of this paper is to explore and examine the different word-of-mouth (WOM) acceptance and diffusion in social brand communities according to the level of self-monitoring.

A web-based experimental design was used. The design consisted of three-mixed design of 2 (type of social networking sites) × 2 (type of online brand communities) × 2 (self-monitoring). ANOVA analysis was conducted.

Findings indicate that the differences in acceptance and diffusion of WOM according to online brand community type, and there was a significant three-way interaction effect. Specifically, people who have high propensity to self-monitor showed greater WOM acceptance in a consumer-driven community in either type of social networking sites while people who have low propensity to self-monitor showed greater WOM diffusion in a consumer-driven community only in interest-based social networking sites.

An important implication is that the social networking sites where brand communities can be placed should be chosen with the full consideration of different desires consumers have in terms of their level of self-monitoring to increase WOM effects.

This paper proposes the self-monitoring tendency as the key factor that predicts WOM effects with revealing the optimal combination of types of social networking sites and online brand communities that is most preferable for consumers with different self-monitoring level.