Contributions published at Human Resource Management and Leadership (Jochen Menges)

How might irrelevant events infiltrate voting decisions? The current research introduces a new mechanism - regulatory focus—by which incidental environmental factors can affect vote choice. Regulatory focus theory proposes that there are two fundamental psychological orientations in how people navigate their worlds: A prevention focus tunes cognition towards security, safety, protection, and risk aversion, whereas a promotion focus orients attention toward achieving growth and positive outcomes. We present a model for how wind speed on Election Day affects voting by shifting the regulatory focus of voters. We propose that increased wind speed shifts voters toward selecting prevention-focused options (e.g., restricting immigration, rejecting Brexit, rejecting Scottish Independence) over promotion-focused options (e.g., promoting immigration, favoring Brexit, favoring Scottish Independence). We further argue that wind speed only affects voting when an election clearly offers a choice between prevention and promotion-focused options. Using a mixed-method approach—archival analyses of the “Brexit” vote, the Scotland independence referendum, and 10 years of Swiss referendums, as well as one field study and one experiment - we find that individuals exposed to higher wind speeds become more prevention-focused and more likely to support prevention-focused electoral options. The findings highlight the political importance of incidental environmental factors. Practically, they speak to the benefit of absentee voting and expanding voting periods beyond traditional election days.

To remain competitive, organizations tend to change their established ways of working, their strategy, the core values, and the organizational structure. Such thorough changes are referred to as transformational change. Unfortunately, transformational change is often unsuccessful because organizational members do not always welcome the change. Although organizations often expect their supervisors to be successful role-models and change-agents during the transformational change process, we argue that initiating transformational change could increase supervisors' hindrance stress levels, which may result in abusive behaviors towards employees. More specifically, in a multi-source survey and an experimental study, we find evidence that transformational change is associated with supervisors' experienced hindrance stress, which subsequently led to more abusive behaviors towards employees.

Research suggests that firms with family CEOs differ from other types of businesses, yet surprisingly little is known about how employees in these firms feel and behave compared to those working in other firms. We draw from family science and management research to suggest that family CEOs, because of their emotion-evoking double role as family members and business leaders, are, on average, more likely to infuse employees with positive emotions, such as enthusiasm and excitement, than hired professional CEOs. We suggest that these emotions spread through firms by way of emotional contagion during interactions with employees, thereby setting the organizational affective tone. In turn, we hypothesize that in firms with family CEOs the voluntary turnover rate is lower. In considering structural features as boundary conditions, we propose that family CEOs have stronger effects in smaller and centralized firms, and weaker effects in formalized firms. Multilevel data from 41,200 employees and 2,246 direct reports of CEOs from 497 firms with and without family CEOs provide support for our model. This research suggests that firms managed by family CEOs, despite often being criticized as nepotistic relics of the past, tend to offer pleasant work environments.

Diversity is a topic that is garnering much attention in society and organizations. We use a paradox lens to suggest a tendency of diversity practices to focus on diversity only, and to essentially neglect unity. We identify two categories of strategies to address diversity: (1) “woke”, and (2) “integrative.” Woke strategies take a single-edged approach to diversity, whereby concerns for diversity are pursued without concern for potentially detrimental effects on unity. In contrast, integrative strategies simultaneously activate the advantages of both diversity and unity, while neutralizing their downsides. In support of this reasoning, we also refer to positive organizational behavior (POB) theory, which would suggest that “woke” strategies run counter to the development of psychological capital on the part of both minority and majority group members. Despite the arguments in this article, it is clear that research is necessary to better understand these alternative approaches to diversity, as well as their effects on individuals, organizations, and society as a whole. Thus, we conclude with a consideration of research needs, as well as practical and policy implications

Corporate–startup collaboration (CSC) allows the co-development of innovations for pressing societal needs. Paradoxically, CSC is both fueled and challenged by diverging interests and approaches of the unequal actors. We apply a paradox lens to better understand the complex collaborative demands of CSC from the perspective of the corporate actors involved. Over the course of three years, we conducted 52 contextualized semi-structured interviews in a corporate-sponsored accelerator pursuing sustainability improvements. We identify five CSC paradoxes, which we translate into guiding principles for managing such paradoxes with a both/and mindset. Further, we show how these guiding principles help to address interdependencies between the CSC paradoxes. By disentangling the inherently paradoxical nature of the collaborative demands, we contribute to a fuller theoretical understanding of how organizational actors can manage these demands. We encourage companies engaging in CSC to use the guiding principles for empowering organizational actors’ understanding and approaches to CSC paradoxes.

Over the last 30 years, mounting insights into paradox have enabled a paradigm shift in organizational theory from linear, static, and rational toward more holistic, dynamic, and dualistic thinking. To gain insight into the nature and development of this scholarship, we curated articles from Academy of Management journals. We identified four approaches to paradox—as a label, a lens, a theory, and a metatheory. Pioneering and prototypical articles have illustrated how each approach expands our understanding of paradox, elucidating unresolved issues in and between established literatures. The collection displays both the progression of abstraction and complexity in paradox scholarship over time, and the recursive process accentuating the value of each approach and their interplay, thus offering three contributions. First, our delineation of these approaches demonstrates the development of paradox scholarship, helping scholars situate their own work in this expanding canon, while inviting new scholars to find their entry point to engage with paradox. Second, by tracking the journey from label to metatheory, we offer a model that may inform similar paths for other literatures. Third, the collection suggests that insights into paradox are fostering a paradigm shift from linear and binary toward dynamic and holistic ontologies in the organizational sciences.

Millions of employees across the globe, including a large proportion of knowledge workers, transitioned to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic. As remote work continues to characterize work post-crisis, it is imperative to understand how employees adjust to remote work. The current research explores the extent to which knowledge workers hold a fixed mindset about remote work (e.g., that a person either is or is not suited to remote work and this cannot be changed) and tested how this mindset shaped well-being during coronavirus-related lockdown. In a longitudinal five-week study of 113 knowledge workers transitioning to remote work, we find that knowledge workers who endorsed a more fixed mindset about remote work experienced more negative and less positive emotion during remote work. The increased negative emotion prompted by fixed mindsets was associated with lesser perceived productivity among these knowledge workers in subsequent weeks. We conclude that understanding how fundamental beliefs (e.g., beliefs about the learnability of remote work) affect employee experiences can help create a brighter future as technology further enables remote work. Encouraging employees to view remote work as a skill that can be learned and developed could help people thrive in the new world of work.

Emotion recognition ability of emotions expressed by other people (ERA-O) can be important for job performance, leadership, bargaining, and career success. Traditional personnel assessment tools of this ability, however, are contaminated by linguistic skills. In a time of global work migration, more and more people speak a language at work that is not their mother tongue. Consequently, we developed and validated the Face-Based Emotion Matching Test (FEMT), a nonlinguistic objective test of ERA-O in gainfully employed adults. We demonstrate the FEMT’s validity with psychological constructs (cognitive and emotional intelligence, Big Five personality traits) and its criterion validity and interethnic fit.

Employees are often reluctant to ask for advice, despite its potential benefits. Giving employees unsolicited advice may be a way to realize the benefits of advice without relying on them to ask for it. However, for these benefits to surface, it is critical to understand how employees react to unsolicited and solicited advice. Here, we suggest that recipients are likely to attribute self-serving motives to those providing unsolicited advice and prosocial motives to those providing solicited advice. These motives shape the extent to which recipients use advice, learn from it, and perform better as a result of receiving it. In an organizational network study of unsolicited and solicited advice ties (Study 1), an experience-sampling study of daily episodes of receiving unsolicited and solicited advice across two workweeks (Study 2), and an experiment where we manipulated advice solicitation and whether the advisor was a friend or a coworker (Study 3), we found general support for our model. Moderation analyses revealed that recipient reactions were not affected by friendship with the advisor, the number of overlapping advice ties between the advisor and recipient, or the position of the advisor in the social network. By showing how perceptions of the advisor’s motive can explain variability in the impact of unsolicited and solicited advice on recipients, this research clarifies the recipient reactions that advisors must navigate if their advice is to have impact at work.

With more and more people quitting, leaders need to find new ways to boost retention. One under-recognized way to keep employees on board is to give them the flexibility and resources they need to pursue their out-of-work passions. Drawing on their research, the authors offer practical strategies for creating “passion opportunities” so that you can attract and retain employees who want to pursue their passions outside of work. Beyond simply providing employees with flexibility, leaders need to make sure that employees feel comfortable actually using this flexibility. Given longstanding ideas about the “ideal worker,” or the notion prevalent in the U.S. that a good employee is one who dedicates their time and energy solely to work, embracing non-work passions requires igniting a mindset shift, including explicit endorsement from leaders.

Research on envy is dominated by a focus on approach-oriented behaviors—when envious employees take action to reduce the gap between the self and envied targets. Surprisingly, little research has examined the relationship between envy and avoidance-oriented behaviors, even though emotion regulation research suggests that avoidance is a common reaction to unpleasant, painful emotions such as envy. We seek to understand envy's consequences for workplace avoidance—namely, absenteeism and turnover. Drawing on theories about how people interpret and regulate emotions according to their goals, we suggest that employees' individual differences in motivational strivings shape the relationship between envy and avoidance behaviors. We propose that for employees high in communion or status striving, envy is associated with more absences and thereby increased turnover; for employees high in achievement striving, envy is associated with fewer absences and ultimately reduced turnover. A field study of supermarket employees shows general support for our conceptual model regarding communion and achievement strivings but a null effect for status striving. Our research expands the nomological network of envy by examining its impact on workplace avoidance, helps to shed light on contradictory findings in envy research, and offers implications for theories on work motivation, emotions, and avoidance behaviors.

We examine the role of employee mindfulness in the context of highly monotonous work conditions. Integrating research on task monotony with theorizing on mindfulness, we hypothesized that mindfulness is negatively associated with the extent to which employees feel generally bored by their jobs. We further hypothesized that this lower employee boredom would relate to downstream outcomes in the form of job attitudes (job satisfaction and turnover intentions) and task performance. We examined both objective task performance quality and quantity to shed light on the complexity of the mindfulness–task performance relation, which has so far mostly been investigated using subjective supervisor ratings. In a sample of 174 blue-collar workers in a Mexican company, results showed that employee mindfulness was negatively related to boredom. Further, mindfulness was positively related to job satisfaction and negatively to turnover intentions, partly mediated through boredom. Mindfulness turned out to be a double-edged sword for task performance in monotonous jobs: Mindfulness was positively related to task performance quality but negatively related to quantity.

The way people feel is important for how they behave and perform in the workplace. Experiencing more positive−and less negative−emotions at work is often associated with greater status and power. But there may be differences in how men and women feel at work, particularly at different levels in their organizations. Using data from a nation-wide sample of working adults, we examine differences in the emotions that men and women experience at work, how gender interacts with rank to predict emotions, if the association between gender and emotions is accounted for by emotional labor demands, and if this relationship differs according to the proportion of women in an industry or organizational rank. Results demonstrate that women experience emotions associated with disvalue and strain at work more frequently than men and that organizational rank moderates the relationship between gender and several discrete emotions. Some of the effects are partially accounted for by occupational emotion demands, differing by organizational rank and/or the proportion of women employed in an industry.

Now more than ever, leaders are struggling with anxieties, fears, and all sorts of difficult emotions. What’s the best way to handle these internal struggles at work? The authors analyzed journal entries from thirty global leaders in May and June of 2020 and identified three distinct leadership styles: Heroes, who focused on the positive; Technocrats, who focused on results; and Sharers, who openly shared both positive and negative experiences. Despite a common assumption that the Hero and Technocrat leadership styles are best, the authors found that Sharers were in fact most effective when it came to building cohesive, high-performing teams that were resilient in the face of the myriad challenges posed by the pandemic. Based on both their own study and extensive secondary research, the authors go on to offer several strategies to help leaders get more comfortable sharing negative emotions in a helpful, appropriate manner.

The pandemic has been a wake-up call for a lot of people, causing us to reevaluate our lives and our careers. It’s natural to think: “If I’m going to spend so much time at work, I might as well do something I’m passionate about.” But there are also benefits to thinking about it differently: Instead of pursuing a career based on your passion, how can you career be a conduit to your passion? Pursuing a passion outside of work can be less risky. And some research suggests transforming hobbies into work can actually undermine your enjoyment of these activities. Instead, look for a job that will give you the resources - time, money, and energy - to pursue your passion. If time is your scarcest resource, look for a job that offers schedule flexibility so that you can structure your work around your passions. If money is the issue, look for a job that allows you to pay for the life you want to lead. When it comes to energy, don’t think of your passion as something that provides fuel to energize you for work. Instead, look at your job as giving you the security and income to pursue your passion.

In a national study of employees across industries (N = 14,645), we examined the role of supervisor emotionally intelligent behavior for employee opportunity to grow, their affect at work, and creativity/innovation at work. Employees reported on their supervisors’ emotionally intelligent behavior (perceiving, using, understanding, and managing emotions), and self-reported about their job experiences and creativity/innovation at work. Supervisor emotionally intelligent behavior was related to employee affect at work assessed using both open-ended questions and emotion rating scales. Furthermore, supervisor emotionally intelligent behavior was linked to employee creativity/innovation through its effect on employee opportunity to grow and higher experience of positive affect (supporting a serial mediation model). We discuss the implications of the results for creativity/innovation research and innovation management.

The future of work is central to discussions in society, but surprisingly absent as a theme in management scholarship. Although there is scattered research on topics related to the future of work, conceptually there is a lack of clarity about what “the future of work” means and entails, and empirically, its temporal positioning in the future has made it challenging to gather data in the present. We resolve these issues by drawing on literature on prospective cognition to offer a novel conceptualization of the future of work as an individual’s mental representation of how work will change; these representations can be assessed in the present. Here we build theory about and study empirically whether people systematically differ in how they feel about, prepare for and thus ultimately shape the future of work. Across a series of archival, survey, and experimental studies focused specifically on skills needed in the future of work, we find general support for our theoretical framework that people overrepresent technical (as opposed to socioemotional) aspects, that this systematic distortion has adverse emotional effects on women (but not men), and that shifts in mental representations can change how people feel about and prepare for the future of work.

Across the globe, every workday people commute an average of 38 minutes each way, yet surprisingly little research has examined the implications of this daily routine for work-related outcomes. Integrating theories of boundary work, self-control, and work-family conflict, we propose that the commute to work serves as a liminal role transition between home and work roles, prompting employees to engage in boundary management strategies. Across three field studies (n = 1,736), including a four-week-long intervention study, we find that lengthy morning commutes are more aversive for employees with lower trait self-control and greater work-family conflict, leading to decreased job satisfaction and increased turnover. In addition, we find that employees who engage in a specific boundary management strategy we term role-clarifying prospection (i.e., thinking about the upcoming work role) are less likely to be negatively affected by lengthy commutes to work. Results further show that employees with higher levels of trait self-control are more likely to engage in role-clarifying prospection, and employees who experience higher levels of work-family conflict are more likely to benefit from role-clarifying prospection. Although the commute to work is typically seen as an undesirable part of the workday, our theory and results point to the benefits of using it as an opportunity to transition into one’s work role.