Search results

Large organizations typically mandate that managers attend budget meetings and exchange budget reports with their immediate supervisor and budget staff. We explored whether such organization-mandated budgetary involvement is related to managers’ budgetary communication with their supervisor in terms of budgetary participation, budgetary explanation, and budgetary feedback. Questionnaire data from 148 managers employed by 94 different companies were analyzed with regression. Mandatory budget meetings with supervisor had a positive relationship with all three forms of budgetary communication with supervisor, and mandatory budget reports from supervisor had a positive relationship with budgetary explanation from supervisor. Mandatory budget meetings with budget staff had a positive relationship with both budgetary participation with supervisor and budgetary feedback from supervisor. Mandatory budget reports from budget staff had a negative relationship with all three forms of budgetary communication with supervisor. The results failed to support proposed relationships between mandatory budget reports to supervisor and budgetary participation with supervisor, and between mandatory budget reports from supervisor and budgetary explanation from supervisor. Implications of the results for future research and budgetary system design are discussed.

There are numerous existing resources which claim to discuss the most important factors a potential PhD student should consider when looking for a possible supervisor. Commonly discussed topics include the supervisors’ record and approach, but there is much more to finding a reciprocal and beneficial relationship. This chapter will address some of these less discussed factors to look for when selecting a supervisor, including sense of humor. This chapter will help the hopeful PhD student maneuver the uncomfortable − and often overwhelming − waters of selecting a supervisor by pointing out the questions students forget to ask, the character traits they don’t think to consider, and examples of supervision selection gone wrong. It starts with the often-confusing process of knowing where to start looking, then highlights five frequently ignored factors that deserve more consideration, and finishes with warning signs to look for that mark supervisors to avoid.

Is co-supervision (i.e., two or more supervisors) a blessing or a torture? While co-supervision enables doctoral students to embrace a greater breadth of expertise, studying under the supervision of two or more supervisors can also be frustrating, especially when they have different requirements and expectations. Co-supervision is sometimes like living on the edge of two “systems” of theories and paradigms. It is important for doctoral students to be academically, emotionally, and interpersonally prepared to maximize the value of co-supervision, which often requires special management skills and techniques. Based on the experiences and stories of doctoral students from Hong Kong, this chapter will provide practical tips to navigate co-supervision.

“I just finished my meeting with one supervisor and need to prepare for the other now!”

“I just finished my meeting with one supervisor and need to prepare for the other now!”

“I can learn different things from each supervisor. It is very helpful.”

“I can learn different things from each supervisor. It is very helpful.”

“I am quite confused! My supervisors have totally different stands on this issue.”

“I am quite confused! My supervisors have totally different stands on this issue.”

Does any of the comments ring a bell with you? If you studied or are studying for a doctoral degree in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, or Hong Kong, you are likely to find yourself in similar situations. With the development of distributed supervisory practice in higher education and the growing number of doctoral candidates, more and more doctoral students are likely to be supervised by two or more academics, that is, co-supervision.

This study aims to use a social exchange perspective to investigate the influence of organizational justice on organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).

Survey and interview data were collected from a sample of insurance firm sales representatives in Taiwan. Structural equation modeling was deployed to explore the relationship between organizational justice, trust, supervisor–subordinate guanxi and OCB.

The findings offer important theoretical, managerial and social implications for life insurers’ human resource managers.

Organizational justice is a primary influence on OCB, which is connected with the underlying mediating mechanism of trust (trust in supervisor and trust in subordinate) and supervisor–subordinate guanxi (i.e. off-the-job activities).

Subordinates can enhance guanxi with their supervisors to create a more harmonious working environment, creating mutual trust. The results suggest that supervisor–subordinate guanxi is based on long-term social exchange. How to balance fairness and efficiency is an import question for decision-makers.

This study’s examination of the role of trust and supervisor–subordinate guanxi in mediating the relationship between organizational justice and OCB expands the organizational behavior literature into a different industry (life insurance) and cultural context (Taiwan).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the joint effect of supervisor influence and investor perspective on novice auditors’ assessments of accounting estimates.

The experiment used a 2 × 2 between-subjects design, randomly assigning proxies of novice auditors among four conditions. The authors manipulated the supervisor’s level of emphasis on evidence that suggests accounting estimate adjustment and whether auditors are prompted to take an investor perspective. Participants were asked to assess the misstatement risk of the allowance for doubtful accounts of the client company.

The authors find that auditors assign a higher (lower) risk of misstatement when their supervisor places high (low) emphasis on evidence suggesting accounting adjustment. The authors also find that contrary to the belief that taking the perspective of investors could enhance objectivity and independence, investor perspective leads to a decrease (rather than an increase) in auditors’ perceived risk of misstatement when the supervisor places low emphasis on evidence suggesting accounting adjustment.

This study provides early evidence on the efficacy of investor perspective and is one of the first to document an unintended consequence of asking auditors to take an investor perspective.

Past studies have largely focused on leaders' influence on employees' attitudes and behaviors, largely ignoring the followership and its consequences. This study investigates the social impact that followers induce on leaders through their intentions and actions. Following social impact theory (SIT), this study contributes to the growing research on supervisory knowledge hiding (KH) and related positive consequences beyond the traditional leader-centered approach. This paper investigates the serial mediation link between supervisory KH and supervisory knowledge-based trust (KBT) via perceived prosocial impact and supervisor directed citizenship behavior.

Time-lagged dyadic data of 348 employees working in a bank under 54 supervisors were collected from Saudi Arabia.

The findings suggest that supervisory KH entails a potential prosocial impact on employees to engage in supervisor-directed citizenship behavior that builds the KBT in supervisors about subordinates. The empirical support provides an understanding of the social impact of subordinates' influence on supervisors above and beyond traditional leadership literature by depicting the active role of followers in influencing leaders' behavior in building trust in knowledge management. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are also discussed.

By studying the followership effect on leadership, this study extends the social impact process beyond a social phenomenon to the workplace in a supervisor–subordinate relationship. Moreover, examining the positive framing of a leader's KH to transform such behaviors through active followership role provides a new insight into positive consequences of supervisory behavior through social impact.

This study's main objective is to investigate the influence of flexible working arrangements (FWAs) on employee job performance. In addition, this research studies the mediating role of supervisor's support on the relationship between FWAs and job performance.

To test the hypothesised model, cross-sectional data were collected from 214 employees working in 46 service firms in India. The data were analysed by structural equation modelling.

The supervisor's support mediated the relationship between FWAs and job performance. The study’s results show that role of supervisors shapes the collective social exchange relationship between the organisation and employees. These findings highlight the importance of shared experiences, values and norms, which reciprocate with change-supportive behaviours and abilities. Moreover, supervisors’ support transmits signals through which employees feel more valued and eventually affect their job performance.

The research is confined to India's service industries settings only.

Service firm management recommended implementing FWAs with appropriate organisation level planning, which directly benefits employees' well-being, improves work–life balance, reduces the rate of employee turnover and leads to increased employee productivity.

The study's result is that supervisor's support has a significant influence on employee uptake of FWAs, and understanding how the service firm's context shapes supervisors’ support is critical to improving FWAs implementation.

This study explores how the relationship between supervisor's proactivity, job demands and job outcomes is based on dyadic interpersonal interaction based on the literature of the job demands-resources model and conservation of resources theory.

In this work, valid data from 272 participants (241 information technology subordinates and 31 project managers) in professional service firms are used in measurement and structural analyses based on a cross-level research framework. Additionally, the hierarchical linear modeling technique and a cross-sectional dataset were used to evaluate the proposed hypotheses.

The results reveal that supervisor proactivity is a critical resource during the execution of professional service projects and is significantly related to perceptions of job demands on the part of subordinates while positively moderating the relationship between job demands and job satisfaction and job demands organizational commitment.

The answer to the question as to whether extensive use of job resources (i.e. supervisor proactivity) in service projects is beneficial and inconclusive in the current information technology (IT) industry literature. Currently, the IT industry continues to experience rapid growth and is a dynamic sector in the global economy that results in increased demands on supervisors because of the specific characteristics of their positions. Consequently, it is necessary further to examine both the direct and moderating effects of resource crossover driven by supervisor proactivity on subordinate behavior, including job demands, job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Although proactivity is a relatively mature concept, some issues related to the negative effects of proactivity on factors, such as job demands, technostress and addiction, need to be further addressed. However, studies specifically focus on investigating this issue are missing from the literature. The findings of this paper thus address these research gaps by validating the direct and moderating relationships of such factors using the proposed cross-level research model.

Little consideration has been given to the role supervisors play in managing the introduction of new technology. Ignoring their role is shortsighted since supervisors can have a significant effect on the success of new systems. Drawing on research conducted in nine engineering companies, little awareness of forward planning in relation to the human dimensions of technical change is found. There is a crucial need for proper training of supervisors, although the exact approach will depend on the position occupied by them.

Examines the relationships between subordinates′ ratings of boss‐subordinate relationships and supervisors′ overall performance ratings. Data were collected from 3,232 managers (499 work groups) in a large North American information systems firm. Shows that supervisor and subordinate performance ratings were significantly, but not highly‐related. Moderators of this relationship included agreement among subordinates, organizational level, and function. The results have implications for the likely value of upward feedback to managers in different units and the need to educate supervisors in broader aspects of subordinate performance.