The Positive Spillover of Managers’ Ally Work: Perceptions of Manager Liberalism and Its Effect on Employee Volunteering

IF 3.7 2区 心理学 Q2 BUSINESS
Carolyn T. Dang, Marie S. Mitchell
{"title":"The Positive Spillover of Managers’ Ally Work: Perceptions of Manager Liberalism and Its Effect on Employee Volunteering","authors":"Carolyn T. Dang, Marie S. Mitchell","doi":"10.1007/s10869-024-09952-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ally work, or actions to support those from less advantaged social groups, shows promise in advancing social welfare in workplaces. Although much of the literature has explained factors that predict ally work, in this paper, we shift the conversation to understand the positive spillover of managers’ ally work on observing employees. We focus specifically on self ally work. Drawing from the theory of political ideology-as-motivated cognition, we propose that employees perceive managers who enact self ally work as more liberal (rather than conservative). Employees’ perceptions of managers’ liberalism, then, promote a positive unintended consequence in the form of increased employee engagement in volunteering. The spillover benefit, however, is limited to employees who share the manager’s political worldview (i.e., employees who are more liberal vs. conservative). In all, we predict that when managers enact self ally work, employees will perceive their manager as more liberal and be more likely to agree to managers’ volunteering requests if they are also more liberal. We identify positive appraisal of managers’ request as an additional causal mechanism that explains these effects. Findings across six studies—both field and experimental—support our proposals. Implications for theory and practice are reviewed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Business and Psychology","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Business and Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-024-09952-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ally work, or actions to support those from less advantaged social groups, shows promise in advancing social welfare in workplaces. Although much of the literature has explained factors that predict ally work, in this paper, we shift the conversation to understand the positive spillover of managers’ ally work on observing employees. We focus specifically on self ally work. Drawing from the theory of political ideology-as-motivated cognition, we propose that employees perceive managers who enact self ally work as more liberal (rather than conservative). Employees’ perceptions of managers’ liberalism, then, promote a positive unintended consequence in the form of increased employee engagement in volunteering. The spillover benefit, however, is limited to employees who share the manager’s political worldview (i.e., employees who are more liberal vs. conservative). In all, we predict that when managers enact self ally work, employees will perceive their manager as more liberal and be more likely to agree to managers’ volunteering requests if they are also more liberal. We identify positive appraisal of managers’ request as an additional causal mechanism that explains these effects. Findings across six studies—both field and experimental—support our proposals. Implications for theory and practice are reviewed.

Abstract Image

管理者盟友工作的积极溢出效应:对管理者自由主义的看法及其对员工志愿服务的影响
盟友工作,即支持弱势群体的行动,有望促进工作场所的社会福利。尽管许多文献都解释了预测盟友工作的因素,但在本文中,我们将话题转向了解管理者的盟友工作对观察员工的积极溢出效应。我们特别关注自我盟友工作。借鉴政治意识形态即动机认知理论,我们提出,员工认为开展自我同盟工作的管理者更自由(而非保守)。因此,员工对管理者自由主义的认知会产生意想不到的积极结果,即员工参与志愿服务的程度会提高。然而,这种溢出效益仅限于那些与管理者的政治世界观相同的员工(即更自由与更保守的员工)。总之,我们预测,当管理者开展自我盟友工作时,员工会认为他们的管理者更自由,如果管理者也更自由,员工就更有可能同意管理者的志愿服务要求。我们认为,对管理者要求的积极评价是解释这些影响的另一个因果机制。六项研究(包括实地研究和实验研究)的结果都支持我们的建议。本文对理论和实践的影响进行了综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: The Journal of Business and Psychology (JBP) is an international outlet publishing high quality research designed to advance organizational science and practice. Since its inception in 1986, the journal has published impactful scholarship in Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Organizational Behavior, Human Resources Management, Work Psychology, Occupational Psychology, and Vocational Psychology. Typical subject matters include Team processes and effectiveness Customer service and satisfaction Employee recruitment, selection, and promotion Employee engagement and withdrawal Organizational culture and climate Training, development and coaching Mentoring and socialization Performance management, appraisal and feedback Workplace diversity Leadership Workplace health, stress, and safety Employee attitudes and satisfaction Careers and retirement Organizational communication Technology and work Employee motivation and job design Organizational change and development Employee citizenship and deviance Organizational effectiveness Work-nonwork/work-family Rigorous quantitative, qualitative, field-based, and lab-based empirical studies are welcome. Interdisciplinary scholarship is valued and encouraged. Submitted manuscripts should be well-grounded conceptually and make meaningful contributions to scientific understandingsand/or the advancement of science-based practice. The Journal of Business and Psychology is - A high quality/impactful outlet for organizational science research - A journal dedicated to bridging the science/practice divide - A journal striving to create interdisciplinary connections For details on submitting manuscripts, please read the author guidelines found in the far right menu.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信