Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes最新文献_第8页

Emotional Deception in Negotiation 谈判中的情绪欺骗

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104193

Polly Kang , Maurice E. Schweitzer

引用次数: 4

Using curiosity to incentivize the choice of “should” options 利用好奇心来激励玩家做出“应该”的选择

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104192

Evan Polman , Rachel L. Ruttan , Joann Peck

引用次数: 6

Embracing multicultural tensions: How team members’ multicultural paradox mindsets foster team information elaboration and creativity 拥抱多元文化的紧张关系:团队成员的多元文化矛盾心态如何培养团队信息的精细化和创造力

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104191

Pier Vittorio Mannucci , Christina E. Shalley

引用次数: 3

How strategic silence enables employee voice to be valued and rewarded 策略性沉默如何使员工的声音得到重视和奖励

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104187

Michael R. Parke , Subrahmaniam Tangirala , Apurva Sanaria , Srinivas Ekkirala

引用次数: 4

Toward a more inclusive academic community: Preface to Holmes et al. editorial 迈向更具包容性的学术社区:Holmes等人社论前言

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104205

Keith Leavitt, Maryam Kouchaki

引用次数: 0

Unethical choice in negotiations: A meta-analysis on gender differences and their moderators 谈判中的不道德选择:性别差异及其调节因素的元分析

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104189

Christoph Nohe , Joachim Hüffmeier , Paul Bürkner , Jens Mazei , Dominik Sondern , Antonia Runte , Franziska Sieber , Guido Hertel

{"title":"Unethical choice in negotiations: A meta-analysis on gender differences and their moderators","authors":"Christoph Nohe , Joachim Hüffmeier , Paul Bürkner , Jens Mazei , Dominik Sondern , Antonia Runte , Franziska Sieber , Guido Hertel","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104189","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104189","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Based on role congruity theory, this preregistered <em>meta</em>-analysis examines whether women negotiate less unethically than men. We predicted that moderators related to the person (negotiation experience) and the negotiation context (e.g., advocacy, cultural gender-role inequality) influence the proposed gender difference. We conducted a Bayesian three-level <em>meta</em>-analysis to test our predictions on a sample of 116 effect sizes from 70 samples (overall <em>N</em> = 14,028, including employees, MBA students, undergraduate students). As predicted, women negotiated less unethically than men (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 0.25). The gender difference held for unethical judgements (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 0.29), unethical intentions (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 0.21), and unethical behaviors (Hedges’ <em>g</em> = 0.17). The gender difference decreased when parties negotiated for others as compared to for themselves, when parties strategically used positive affect, and tended to decrease when parties were experienced as compared to inexperienced negotiators. We discuss implications for theory and research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 104189"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41255278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Social undermining as a dark side of symbolic awards: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design 社会破坏作为象征性奖项的黑暗面:来自回归不连续设计的证据

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104184

Teng Li , Runjing Lu

引用次数: 0

The limits of inconspicuous incentives 不起眼的激励措施的局限性

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104180

Leslie K. John , Hayley Blunden , Katherine L. Milkman , Luca Foschini , Bradford Tuckfield

{"title":"The limits of inconspicuous incentives","authors":"Leslie K. John , Hayley Blunden , Katherine L. Milkman , Luca Foschini , Bradford Tuckfield","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104180","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104180","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Managers and policymakers regularly rely on incentives to encourage valued behaviors. While incentives are often successful, there are also notable and surprising examples of their ineffectiveness. Why? We propose a contributing factor may be that they are not sufficiently conspicuous. In a large-scale field experiment (Experiment 1) and three online experiments (Experiments 2–4), we show that even when incentives are transparently provided, failing to make them conspicuous vastly undermines their ability to shift behavior. Online experiments indicate that conspicuous incentives work by increasing people’s extrinsic motivation to earn an incentive (Experiment 2) and do not merely serve as reminders to act (Experiment 3). We also assess whether people intuit that incentive conspicuousness matters (Experiment 4); nearly half of participants reject a costless opportunity to make their own incentives conspicuous, which leads them to earn less than they otherwise would. Yet, our results also hint at some degree of sophistication: those who benefit most from making incentives conspicuous are particularly likely to choose to make their incentives conspicuous.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 104180"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45624701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Mixed Messages: Why managers (do not) endorse employee voice 矛盾的信息:为什么管理者(不)支持员工的声音

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104185

Ethan R. Burris , Luis L. Martins , Yurianna Kimmons

{"title":"Mixed Messages: Why managers (do not) endorse employee voice","authors":"Ethan R. Burris , Luis L. Martins , Yurianna Kimmons","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104185","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104185","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We develop and test a theory of how managerial endorsement is influenced by how employees voice their ideas – whether they engage in promotive voice, prohibitive voice, or a mix of these two types together. Drawing on research on cognitive fluency resulting from consistency in information, we argue and show that managers are less likely to endorse voice that mixes both promotive and prohibitive elements within the same instance of speaking up, compared to voice that is uniformly promotive or prohibitive. Extending these arguments about cognitive fluency, we further show that endorsement is contingent on whether each uniform type is consistent with managerial regulatory focus. Our findings, based on five studies – a survey study of managers from a wide range of organizations, a field study in a hospital, and three experiments – enrich our theoretical understanding of the cognitive paths through which the type(s) of voice, and whether voice mixes these types, shapes which ideas are endorsed for implementation. They also reveal important implications for managers about why they may systematically gravitate toward (and miss out on) certain ideas when they evaluate employee voice, and for employees about the tactical choices they should use in voicing ideas to their managers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"172 ","pages":"Article 104185"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49122629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Corrigendum to “Don’t fear the meter: How longer time limits bias managers to prefer hiring with flat fee compensation” [Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 162 (2021) 42–58] 更正“不要害怕计量表：更长的时间如何限制偏见经理更喜欢用固定费用薪酬招聘”[Org.Behav.Hum.Decis.Process.162（2021）42-58]

IF 4.6 2区管理学

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104183

Indranil Goswami , Oleg Urminsky

引用次数: 0