{"title":"表达:相对地位与二元寻求与给予:过去帮助史与权力距离价值的作用","authors":"Woonki Hong, Lu Zhang, Ravi S. Gajendran","doi":"10.1177/00187267231152055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Employees may not always seek and give help when needed in the dyadic context due to status disparity. Drawing on the cost and benefit framework in social exchange, we examine the effects of relative status on help seeking and giving willingness and behaviors among dyads. We argue that low-status individuals tend to provide more help but seek less help from their high-status counterparts. We further consider two moderators that can help restore the balance in cross-status helping relationships: employees’ past helping history and low power distance value. Additionally, we investigate the mediating roles of perceived entitlement and perceived obligation in the relationships between relative status and help seeking and giving, respectively. We tested our hypotheses in three studies using both dyadic field studies and experiments with employee participants. Our findings consistently demonstrate that low-status employees had a disadvantage in dyadic help-seeking and help-giving relationships. We also find that past helping history mitigated the effects of relative status in predicting help giving, whereas low power distance value attenuated the effects of relative status in predicting help seeking. Finally, we find support for the mediated effects of perceived entitlement and obligation in the hypothesized relationships.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EXPRESS: Relative Status and Dyadic Help Seeking and Giving: The Roles of Past Helping History and Power Distance Value\",\"authors\":\"Woonki Hong, Lu Zhang, Ravi S. Gajendran\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187267231152055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Employees may not always seek and give help when needed in the dyadic context due to status disparity. Drawing on the cost and benefit framework in social exchange, we examine the effects of relative status on help seeking and giving willingness and behaviors among dyads. We argue that low-status individuals tend to provide more help but seek less help from their high-status counterparts. We further consider two moderators that can help restore the balance in cross-status helping relationships: employees’ past helping history and low power distance value. Additionally, we investigate the mediating roles of perceived entitlement and perceived obligation in the relationships between relative status and help seeking and giving, respectively. We tested our hypotheses in three studies using both dyadic field studies and experiments with employee participants. Our findings consistently demonstrate that low-status employees had a disadvantage in dyadic help-seeking and help-giving relationships. We also find that past helping history mitigated the effects of relative status in predicting help giving, whereas low power distance value attenuated the effects of relative status in predicting help seeking. Finally, we find support for the mediated effects of perceived entitlement and obligation in the hypothesized relationships.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Relations\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231152055\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231152055","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
EXPRESS: Relative Status and Dyadic Help Seeking and Giving: The Roles of Past Helping History and Power Distance Value
Employees may not always seek and give help when needed in the dyadic context due to status disparity. Drawing on the cost and benefit framework in social exchange, we examine the effects of relative status on help seeking and giving willingness and behaviors among dyads. We argue that low-status individuals tend to provide more help but seek less help from their high-status counterparts. We further consider two moderators that can help restore the balance in cross-status helping relationships: employees’ past helping history and low power distance value. Additionally, we investigate the mediating roles of perceived entitlement and perceived obligation in the relationships between relative status and help seeking and giving, respectively. We tested our hypotheses in three studies using both dyadic field studies and experiments with employee participants. Our findings consistently demonstrate that low-status employees had a disadvantage in dyadic help-seeking and help-giving relationships. We also find that past helping history mitigated the effects of relative status in predicting help giving, whereas low power distance value attenuated the effects of relative status in predicting help seeking. Finally, we find support for the mediated effects of perceived entitlement and obligation in the hypothesized relationships.
期刊介绍:
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.