Search results

Although scholarly inquiry into entrepreneurial stress has existed for nearly 40 years, little is known about how events drive stress responses in entrepreneurs, and how entrepreneur coping responses impact their well-being, relationships, and venture performance. In response to these deficiencies, the authors propose a stress events theory (SET) which they apply to an entrepreneurial context. The authors begin by providing a brief review of existing literature on entrepreneurial stress, which highlights unique stressors and events that entrepreneurs encounter. The authors then introduce event systems theory as developed by Morgeson, Mitchell, and Liu (2015). From this foundation, the authors develop SET, which describes how entrepreneurs react to particular event characteristics (novelty, disruptiveness, criticality, and duration). Additionally, the authors propose that how entrepreneurs interpret events drives coping choices, and that the accuracy of these coping choices subsequently differentiates the quality of entrepreneur well-being, interpersonal relationships, and venture-related consequences. The authors conclude with a discussion of contributions and areas of future research using our proposed theory.

Coalitions are informal and interdependent groups of actors operating within organizations, yet their effects in organizations are not widely understood. In this paper, we develop a model of coalition formation and functioning inside organizations. By extrapolating the behavioral intentions (i.e., altruistic or antagonistic) and compositional differences (i.e., supplementary or complementary) among these informal group structures, we classify coalitions into four forms (i.e., lobby, cartel, circle, and alliance), theorizing how each coalition form affects work role innovation, resource allocations, and work performance. Our conceptualization helps clarify previous theoretical inconsistencies and establish an agenda for the study of coalitions at work. Furthermore, this paper provides insights into the ways that coalitions support or impede the organization’s objectives.

Executives exert a pervasive influence on the organizations they lead. As such, scholars have long considered how to calibrate the risks inherent in executive decision making, often relying on incentives and compensation to calibrate executive risk behavior. However, there are shortcomings that reduce the efficacy of this approach, largely because incentives and compensation do not alter the work environment itself, which play a significant role influencing executive risk behavior. Consequently, in this chapter, we propose a conceptualization that integrates executive risk-taking with work design, framing three central features of the strategic leader job and work environment that may be manipulated to channel and shape executive risk-taking. Specifically, accountability, discretion, and relationships are proposed as the key higher-order characteristics of the executive work context, and they are examined with respect to optimal calibration in order to maximize both executive performance and well-being, as well as organizational coordination and control. Implications of this conceptualization and directions for future research are discussed.

This chapter examines the role of political skill in relation to employee psychological and physiological health and well-being. First, we begin by providing a review of the current research on the relationship of political skill to stress and strain; additionally, areas in this literature that are in need of greater theoretical specification are identified. A multi-mediation organizing framework is proposed, which suggests that political skill impacts intrapsychic (i.e., constructs residing within an individual such as control, self-esteem) and interpersonal processes (i.e., authenticity, trustworthiness, affability, and humility), which subsequently influence the development and maintenance of work relationships, networks, and coalitions, and ultimately affects individual psychological and physiological health and well-being. The implications of this framework, and directions for future research, are discussed.

Teams in extreme and disruptive contexts face unique challenges that can undermine coordination and decision-making. In this study, we evaluated how affective differences between team members and team process norms affected the team's decision-making effectiveness.

Teams were placed in a survival simulation where they evaluated how best to maximize the team's survival prospects given scarce resources. We incorporated multisource and multirater (i.e., team, observer, and archival) data to ascertain the impacts of affect asymmetry and team process norms on decision-making effectiveness.

Results suggest that teams with low positive affect asymmetry and low process norms generate the most effective decisions. The least effective team decision performance occurred in teams characterized by high variance in team positive affectivity (high positive affect asymmetry) and low process norms. We found no similar effect for teams with high process norms and no effect for negative affect asymmetry, however, irrespective of team process norms.

These findings support the affect infusion model and extend cognitive resource theory, by highlighting how affect infusion processes and situational constraints influence team decision-making in extreme and disruptive contexts.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual model that discerns when and how extra role behaviors result in positive versus negative outcomes for individuals and organizations. The focus is on how employees' citizenship identities shape extra‐role behaviors which include both organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) and contextual performance behaviors (CPBs).

The paper uses role identity theory as the theoretical lens to develop the model of extra‐role behaviors, distinguishing between OCBs and CPBs.

While extra‐role behaviors are generally associated with positive organizational functioning, these behaviors also have been linked to negative individual outcomes, such as work‐family conflict, role overload, and reduced task performance. Based on previous research and theory, a conceptual model is developed that explains when extra‐role behaviors will occur, when and why these behaviors will be internalized as an identity, and how identities affect whether employees engage in OCBs or CPBs. Further, the paper examines the influence of these extra‐role behaviors on long term positive and negative outcomes.

The main research implication of this paper is the use of role identity theory to further understanding of the nature of extra‐role behaviors.

The paper aims to offer a comprehensive theoretically based model to explain OCBs and incorporates research conducted to date to develop the model.

Building on reciprocity and crossover theory, this paper aims to examine how mood crossover from one partner in a relational dyad influences the likelihood of reciprocal mood crossover from the other partner.

Using a survey sample of 180 dual‐career married couples, the paper explores this phenomenon for both positive and negative mood crossover from husbands to wives and wives to husbands.

The data supported the paper's four hypotheses. Mood crossover was found to operate in a similar fashion for both husbands and wives after controlling for negative and positive affectivity, work and home demands, work autonomy, and support from the organization, non‐work friends, and spouse. Specifically, when wives (husbands) reported positive (negative) mood crossover from their husbands (wives), their husbands (wives) also reported positive (negative) mood crossover from them.

The findings suggest positive and negative mood crossover is reciprocated among individuals in a dual‐career marriage context. This implies that the effects of positive and negative crossover may be magnified through relational interactions at home. However, the design of this study is not sufficient to determine the causality of this relationship.

The findings suggest that the positive and negative work experiences of one partner in a relationship affect the well being and moods of their partner at home. Consequently, organizations may consider wellness or positive reinforcement programs to encourage positive crossover between the domains of work and home.

This study examines how individuals in a dual‐partner reciprocate the negative and positive crossover of moods of their partner from work to home.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether political skill is equally effective in its prediction of job performance for different job demands.

This paper uses self‐report sources of employee performance and self‐report of political skill after several weeks along with three ratings of target individuals' job demands.

Results support the hypothesis that Holland's enterprising category (i.e. because of its job demands and requisite job competencies to be effective) will moderate the relationship between political skill and job performance, demonstrating stronger predictability under high enterprising job demands.

The present results suggest that political skill is a better predictor of job performance under situations of high enterprising job demands than under conditions of low enterprising job demands. Furthermore, social and conventional job demands do not significantly moderate the political skill‐job performance relationships, implying that these job demands act as an important boundary condition.

Politically skilled individuals are more likely to succeed in environments (e.g. enterprising jobs) where they have the opportunity to exercise interpersonal influence, and where that interpersonal influence is directly related to their performance.

This paper makes several contributions to theory and practice in vocational achievement and political skill. Perhaps, most significant is the identification of job demands as a boundary condition in the political skill‐job performance relationship.