Suchergebnisse

In today's business environment, competition arises when other organizations seek to do something your company does, only better. Competitive advantage is further secured when competitors cannot duplicate your company's special advantage at all. Authors John Wagner and John Hollenbeck contend, based on solid research ,that an especially strong competitive advantage rests in the hands of the people who make up your organization. One of the most effective ways to secure competitive advantage lies in the best use of the knowledge, skill, and other human assets possessed by your company's emp

"Our intent is to provide students with the background to be successful HRM professionals, to manage human resources effectively, and to be knowledgeable consumers of HRM products. Managers must be able to identify effective HRM practices to purchase these services from a consultant, to work with the HRM department, or to design and implement them personally. Human Resources Management: Gaining a Competitive Advantage, 13th edition, emphasizes how a manager can more effectively manage human resources and highlights important issues in current HRM practice"--

"Managing human resources is a critical component of any company's overall mission to provide val-ue to customers, shareholders, employees, and the community in which it does business. Value includes profits as well as employee growth and satisfaction, creation of new jobs, contributions to community programs, protection of the environment, and innovative use of new technologies Each chapter includes several different pedagogical features. 'Best Practices' provides examples of companies whose HR activities work well. 'HR Oops!' highlights HRM issues that have been handled poorly. 'Did You Know?' offers interesting statistics about chapter topics and how they play out in real-world companies. 'HRM Social' demonstrates how social media and the Internet can be useful in managing HR activities in any organization. 'Thinking Ethically' confronts students with issues that occur in managing human resources. Each feature includes questions to assist students with critical thinking and to spark classroom discussions"--

Using attribution theory, this study examined the effects of team leader race on subordinate performance evaluations. The authors found that the team leader's performance was a major determinant of subordinate performance ratings. However, the team leader's performance, in combination with race, also affected performance attributions. In high performing teams with a Black leader, subordinates were more likely to attribute the leader's performance to internal causes (i.e., ability and effort) rather than external causes (i.e., luck and the ease of the game). Alternatively, in low performing teams with a Black leader, subordinates were more likely to attribute the leader's performance to external causes. These causal attributions then tempered the direct effect of the team leader's performance on subordinate performance ratings. Leaders who performed well received higher ratings when performance was attributed to internal rather than external factors. On the other hand, leaders who performed poorly received higher ratings when performance was attributed to external rather than internal factors.

Some leaders tend to use their intuition to think and make decisions more than others do. This individual difference (i.e., an intuitive cognitive style) may have important implications for the collectives of people they lead. Unfortunately, scholars lack a clear understanding of the conditions under which intuition is effective, especially in the context of large and complex organizational structures such as multiteam systems (MTSs). We argue that the effects of leaders' intuitive cognitive style on MTS performance depends on the amount of information load they face in their roles, as well as their level of introversion: a personality characteristic that is associated with an inward and reflective focus. Using a sample of 222 MTSs comprised of Captains in the United States Air Force, our study demonstrated that the intuitive cognitive style of leaders in high information load roles positively affected MTS performance, especially if they were high in introversion. In low information load roles, however, an intuitive cognitive style had a negative effect on MTS performance, especially for leaders low in introversion. We also argued and found that MTS coordination effectiveness played a key mediating role. Our study advances research in multiple areas of work, including intuition, MTSs, and leadership.

This study demonstrates that the initial performance expectations of teams, formed even before members are very familiar with each other or the team's task, are a key determinant of the team's ultimate success. Specifically, we argue that such early formed beliefs determine the extent to which teams frame their task as a gain or loss context, which affects their orientation toward risk-taking. Our results suggest a self-fulfilling prophecy effect: Initial team performance expectations lead to the fulfillment of such expectations via risk-taking behavior. We also show that teams are less susceptible to this "risk-taking trap" to the extent that members have low avoidant or high dependent decision-making styles. We tested and found support for our predictions in a study of 540 individuals comprising 108 five-member teams working in a controlled environment. Our study contributes to theory on emergent states and decision biases in teams, and we offer a number of practical implications.

Scholars have long wrestled with whether hierarchical differentiation is functional or dysfunctional for teams. Building on emerging research that emphasizes the distinction between power (i.e., control over resources) and status (i.e., respect from others), we aim to help reconcile the functional and dysfunctional accounts of hierarchy by examining the effects of power differentiation on team performance, contingent on status differentiation. We theorize that power differentiation is dysfunctional for teams with high status differentiation by increasing knowledge hiding, which undermines team performance. In contrast, we predict that power differentiation is functional for teams with low status differentiation by decreasing knowledge hiding, which improves team performance. In a field study, we found that power differentiation harmed team performance via knowledge hiding in teams with high status differentiation, but power differentiation had no effect on knowledge hiding or performance in teams with low status differentiation. In an experiment, we again found that power differentiation harmed team performance by increasing knowledge hiding in teams with high status differentiation. However, power differentiation improved team performance by decreasing knowledge hiding in teams with status equality. Finally, in a third study, we confirm the role of status differentiation in making team climates more competitive and examine the effect of power-status alignment within teams, finding that misalignment exacerbates the dysfunctional effects of power differentiation in teams with high status differentiation. By examining how power and status hierarchies operate in tandem, this work underscores the need to take a more nuanced approach to studying hierarchy in teams. Funding: This research is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [Grants 71572079 and 71872086]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1540 .