Suchergebnisse

PurposeThis research paper aims to elucidate why and how a fair supervisor influences an employee's job satisfaction. While various theoretical approaches have been explored and numerous explanatory mechanisms investigated in prior organizational justice research, it is still unclear which explanatory mechanism is the dominant one to explain fairness effects. To address this gap, the author compares six distinct explanatory mechanisms of fairness effects on job satisfaction.Design/methodology/approachThe author conducted a three-phase survey study with 309 employees from diverse organizations. The author measured all variables twice to control for stability effects and ensure stable findings. The author combined a path analysis with bootstrapping procedures using Mplus 8.3 software.FindingsThe influence of supervisor fairness on job satisfaction is primarily transmitted through an employee's negative emotions, a mechanism often examined in previous organizational justice research adopting the moral perspective of fairness.Practical implicationsSupervisors can increase employees' satisfaction with their jobs by treating them fairly and promoting a fair work environment. To increase the benefits of workplace fairness, supervisors can focus on the intervening mechanisms, such as emotions.Originality/valueFirst, the author provides a fine-grained understanding of why supervisor fairness increases job satisfaction. Second, the author clarifies how the effects of supervisor fairness are transmitted. Third, the author identifies the most critical mediator to explain how supervisor fairness affects job satisfaction.

PurposeA dynamic and changing international business environment and higher needs for innovation have increased the importance of creativity in organizations. Organizations need creative employees to develop new methods and procedures that stimulate innovation. However, prior research indicates that employees are sometimes passive and avoid engaging in creative behavior. To promote individual creative behavior, this study aims to better understand the role of task conflict and conflict management. More specifically, the authors draw on Deutsch's conflict theory of cooperation and competition to test whether an employee's conflict management moderates the indirect relationship between task conflict and creativity through cooperation.Design/methodology/approachTo test the hypotheses, the authors conducted a three-phase survey study with 428 employees from different German organizations.FindingsThe results suggest that task conflict has only a positive indirect relationship with creativity through cooperation with teammates when employees avoid a competitive conflict management style.Originality/valueThe authors draw on Deutsch's conflict theory of cooperation and competition to integrate research on task conflict and conflict management, allowing them to explain why and when task conflict with teammates influences an employee's creativity. The findings show that task conflict is particularly beneficial for cooperation and creativity if employees avoid closed-minded discussions and competitive interactions with coworkers.

PurposeTeams often cannot fulfill their managers' expectations due to unfairness issues and dysfunctional conflicts with teammates. This paper aims to create a fair team environment, it is important to analyze the interrelationship between unfairness and conflict. However, only a few studies have done this and reported inconsistent results. Using negative reciprocity research as a theoretical foundation, this paper analyzes the interconnection between unfairness and conflict dimensions in the team context. This paper further integrates conflict management research to show employees and managers how to handle unfairness and conflict in teams.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted a longitudinal survey study (three points in time) with 237 employees from different German organizations.FindingsThe results of cross-lagged structural equation modeling provide some evidence that interpersonal, procedural and informational unfairness predict relationship conflict and process conflict. Several of these effects become non-significant over time. Further, relationship and process conflict have several significant relationships with the unfairness dimensions, while task conflict did not have any significant relationship. The results also suggest that employees can break up the vicious cycle of unfairness and conflict by using a cooperative conflict management approach.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper focuses on members of autonomous, interdependent and existing teams and the interpersonal relationship of a team member with her or his teammates. Future research could analyze leader-member relationships in different team types.Practical implicationsThe application of cooperative conflict management enables employees to break up the vicious cycle of unfairness.Originality/valueThis paper clarifies the interrelationship between unfairness and conflict and shows that a team member can apply a cooperative conflict management style to handle effectively unfairness and conflict.

AbstractAs recent research indicates, refugees and people seeking asylum are suffering disproportionately from the COVID‐19 pandemic and have become more and more "shut out" and marginalised. An important pathway to integration and self‐reliance is sustainable employment. To explore the impacts of COVID‐19 on the employment prospects of refugees and people seeking asylum, we conducted 35 interviews with managers from Australian organisations that employ or assist refugees and asylum seekers in finding employment and 20 interviews with refugees and people seeking asylum. Our interviews indicate that the labour market has become more difficult for these groups in the COVID‐19 era due to (1) declines in job availabilities, (2) loss of jobs, (3) increased competition in the labour market and (4) increased discrimination and an "Australian first" mentality. Our interviews further suggest four strategies to improve employment prospects in the current situation: (1) pathways to permanent residency and citizenship for people seeking asylum; (2) access to healthcare and a financial safety net; (3) online training and education; and (4) social procurement.

Purpose
Stress issues are a major concern for public organisations, especially in law enforcement. Organisational context is to blame for high levels of stress and low performance. Thus, the purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the authors aim to understand how one contextual variable – organisational stressors that emanate from the police station's characteristics – affect organisational citizenship behaviour (OCB). The second research aim is to assess how promoting trust in the police station can help mitigate the negative effects of these stressors. Based on the job demands – resources framework, the model posits that organisational stressors initiate a health-impairment process through an emotional-exhaustion climate, that can ultimately damage collective OCBs. The authors also propose that fostering a trust climate, as job resource, buffer the undesirable and negative impact of organisational stressors on exhaustion climate and collective OCB.


Design/methodology/approach
The paper opted for a quantitative study. Based on a sample of 718 police officers from 70 French Police stations, the authors follow the procedure outlined by Preacher (2013) to test the moderated-mediation model.


Findings
The study show that organisational stressors initiate a health-impairment process through an emotional-exhaustion climate, that can ultimately damage collective OCBs. The authors also demonstrate that fostering a trust climate, as job resource, will not decrease negative effects of organisational stressors but only contained them. Low-trust climate and moderate trust climate will, on the contrary, amplified the negative effects of these organisational stressors.


Originality/value
This paper fulfils an identified need to study stressors-strain-performance relationship at the collective level in a large sample of police officers. The paper includes implications for the development of interventions at the collective level.

With the diffusion of team-based work organizations and flatter organizational hierarchies, many leaders empower employees to perform their work. Empowerment creates an interesting tension regarding coworker conflict, enhancing trust and giving employees more autonomy to prevent conflict, while also increasing workload and the potential for coworker conflict. Recent conflict research has focused on how characteristics of individuals, groups, and tasks contribute to conflict among coworkers. We extend this work by exploring the role of leader empowerment behavior (LEB) in influencing coworker conflict. Our model integrates research on LEB and coworker conflict to help organizations manage coworker conflict effectively. To test our model at the workplace level, we utilize data drawn from matched surveys of leaders and employees in 317 workplaces. We find that LEB relates negatively to relationship and task conflict through affective and cognitive trust in leaders. We further find that LEB relates negatively to relationship and task conflict through reduced workload, but only when employees have a clear role description. In contrast, if employees have unclear roles, LEB has a U-curve relationship with workload: a moderate level of LEB reduces workload, but a high level of LEB increases workload, in turn increasing coworker conflict. Finally, relationship conflict has a direct negative effect on task performance, whereas task conflict has an indirect negative effect through relationship conflict.

Teams with shared leadership arrangements are ubiquitous in twenty-first century organizations. Although transitions in leadership are a common and key feature of such teams, there is little insight into how and when leadership arrangements transition over time. Bridging the shared leadership and team adaptation literatures, we present a model of Leadership Transitions in Teams to describe the adaptive process through which teams intentionally modify the existing leadership arrangement. The basic assumption underlying this model is that leadership transitions occur when there is a mismatch between the team's needs and its current leadership arrangement. Such a mismatch results from an anticipated or observed change. If it is anticipated, team members can democratically discuss and try out a new leadership arrangement, preventing mismatch and thus lowered team effectiveness. In contrast, if the mismatch has already occurred, teams are more likely to adopt a less democratic process—either a coalition-based or intervening-based process—to change the leadership arrangement in their team to counteract faltering team effectiveness. We propose that the ways in which leadership transition episodes can unfold and relate to team effectiveness will depend on the type (determined by the timing of the leadership transition episode in relation to the change), approach (determined by the extent to which there is consensus on if and how to change the leadership transition episode), and boundary conditions of leadership transition episodes. We advance an agenda for research on leadership transitions in teams and outline practical implications for teams with shared leadership structures.