While it is well-known that employees with disabilities have significantly more negative work experiences compared to other employees, research geared towards understanding how employers could improve some of these experiences is still underdeveloped. To advance this research agenda, this study investigates links between five distinct types of discretionary arrangements (work discretion, scheduling discretion, part-timing, homeworking and pay for individual performance), and outcomes related to work experiences and the wellbeing of employees with disabilities (job satisfaction, perception of fairness, recognition, motivation, engagement, work stress and work-life interference). To explore these links, we use data from the European Working Conditions Survey (2015). We find that not all work arrangements that increase discretion at the workplace have a positive impact on employees with disabilities and that some can be especially detrimental. By unpacking the multiple ways in which various types of discretion at the workplace affect employees with disabilities, this study not only makes a theoretical contribution but also provides employers who aim to improve the working experiences of employees with disabilities with some empirical evidence to help them take more inclusive actions.

Drawing on theoretical insights from the cross-domain scholarship, this article proposes and tests multiple linkages between employees' workplace experiences and their participation in different types of civic activities. Using data from the European Working Conditions Survey (2015), it explores both positive spillover effects due to work autonomy, decision participation, complex problem solving and satisfaction with work experiences, as well as negative cross-domain links due to both desirable work experiences, such as accomplishment, and undesirable experiences, such as discrimination. Furthermore, the data allow for exploring the extent to which these links might vary with the type of civic activity: voluntary/charitable or political/union activities. Overall, by unpacking multiple relationships between the workplace and the civic domain, this article advances scholarship on how work conditions and experiences shape employees' participation in the civic life, and provides some practical implications for employers, civic organizations and policy makers.

While there exist extensive literatures on both distributive justice and senior executive pay, and a number of authors (notably the French economist Thomas Piketty) have addressed the implications of high pay for distributive justice, the existing literature fails to address what senior executives themselves think about distributive justice and whether they consider high income inequalities to be morally acceptable. We address this gap by analysing a unique dataset comprising the views of over 1000 senior executives from across the world, which was constructed using a survey instrument designed by the authors based on a thought experiment resembling John Rawls’s original position. We report four main findings. First, executives conceptualise distributive justice in a pluralistic manner, endorsing different and sometimes apparently conflicting philosophical principles: to explain how this plurality can be accounted for we propose a novel field-theory framework for conceptualising beliefs about distributive justice. Second, executives support similar philosophical approaches at both society and company levels of analysis, thus countering the idea that companies should leave matters of distributive justice exclusively for governments to deal with via the tax system. Third, executives believe that they live in societies and work for companies that fall short of desirable distributive justice outcomes. Fourth, the distributive justice views of the executives in our sample fall into four distinct clusters that are correlated with certain socio-demographic markers. Finally, we note the distinction between distributive justice beliefs and behaviours, from which we derive a number of managerial and public policy implications.

ABSTRACTWe investigate how the relevance of the Lean Production System (LPS) as perceived by employees of a Russian bank depends on whether LPS practices are labeled with transliterated original Japanese words or translated Russian words. Building on organizational translation scholarship contextualized to Russia, we formulate hypotheses about the mechanism through which labels affect the perceived relevance of practices. The results of an experimental study situated in a Russian bank show that transliterated Japanese labels have a negative impact on the perceived relevance of LPS practices by Russian employees. Further analysis reveals that this negative perception is fully mediated by the label's semantic fit, that is, the extent to which the label complies with the linguistic codes of the Russian language. Specifically, we find that, on average, the transliterated Japanese labels have a lower semantic fit than the translated Russian labels, and this difference in semantic fit explains the Japanese labels’ lower relevance as perceived by the bank's employees. By unpacking the causal effect of the labels used for management practices on the practices’ perceived relevance, this study advances our understanding of how organizations could influence employees’ acceptance of foreign management practices.

This study examines the effect of work‐related experiences on employees’ engagement in community volunteering, using data from a British longitudinal panel of employees. Using a novel analytical approach that separates variation in volunteering due to within‐person changes in work conditions from variation due to between‐person work differences, we more robustly test existing and new hypotheses about the effects of work on volunteering. New to this literature, we find that commuting and satisfaction with job experiences are significant predictors of community volunteering, both the likelihood to volunteer and volunteering frequency. In turn, volunteering determinants previously explored with cross‐sectional data, such as managerial and professional jobs, employment sector and hourly paid contracts, are no longer statistically significant in the within‐person models. We discuss a number of important theoretical and practical consequences of these findings.

The collection of articles included in this first thematic issue addresses gender inequalities, a theme that has featured intensively in the public sphere in these past months, including high profile revelations about gender pay discrimination such as those at the BBC and others in the UK, the #MeToo and #TimesUp campaigns, and ongoing debates about gender inequalities in the global labour market. Our assembling of this particular issue also coincides with UK employers’ compulsory reporting, for the first time, on the gender pay gap and the solutions they envision for closing this gap, including plans around increasing the number of women in the upper echelons of organisations. In our view, all the articles in this issue have a link to this pressing problem, in that they highlight how solutions to gender gaps depend on factors that reside not only within the organisation, but also at family and societal levels. Moreover, these factors are constantly reshaped by changing economic contexts and national policies. The articles we present in this issue cover not only a variety of factors and contexts, but also document the sources and outcomes of gender inequalities across six countries from four continents, including a cross-country analysis. Together, they provide a snapshot of the rich empirical evidence available to researchers interested in further developing our theoretical understanding of gender inequalities.

The collection of articles included in this first thematic issue addresses gender inequalities, a theme that has featured intensively in the public sphere in these past months, including high profile revelations about gender pay discrimination such as those at the BBC and others in the UK, the #MeToo and #TimesUp campaigns, and ongoing debates about gender inequalities in the global labour market. Our assembling of this particular issue also coincides with UK employers’ compulsory reporting, for the first time, on the gender pay gap and the solutions they envision for closing this gap, including plans around increasing the number of women in the upper echelons of organisations. In our view, all the articles in this issue have a link to this pressing problem, in that they highlight how solutions to gender gaps depend on factors that reside not only within the organisation, but also at family and societal levels. Moreover, these factors are constantly reshaped by changing economic contexts and national policies. The articles we present in this issue cover not only a variety of factors and contexts, but also document the sources and outcomes of gender inequalities across six countries from four continents, including a cross-country analysis. Together, they provide a snapshot of the rich empirical evidence available to researchers interested in further developing our theoretical understanding of gender inequalities.

The literatures on gender status stereotyping and the ‘glass-ceiling’ have shown that women managers have more difficult job experiences than men, but whether these experiences result in lower job satisfaction is still an open question. Using fixed-effects models in a longitudinal national sample, this study examines differences in job satisfaction between women and men promoted into lower and higher-level management, after controlling for key determinants of job satisfaction. Results indicate that promotions to management are accompanied by an increase in job satisfaction for men but not for women, and that the differing effect lasts beyond the promotion year. Moreover, following promotion, the job satisfaction of women promoted to higher-level management even starts declining. The type of promotion (internal or lateral) does not modify this effect. By clarifying the relationship between gender, promotion to managerial position and job satisfaction, the study contributes to the literature on the gender gap in managerial representation.

Using U.S. panel data from 2001–2011, the authors examine general differences in charitable giving between union members, free-riders, and the nonunionized. Results indicate that union members are more likely to give and to give more to charity relative to the nonunionized, whereas free-riders are the least generous. Similar effects are found when examining the question of who joins a union or who becomes a free-rider: joining a union positively affects charitable giving, while becoming a free-rider makes individuals’ behavior less charitable. Evidence also suggests that the positive effect of union membership on giving does not diminish over time. Taken together, these results provide new evidence that union membership generates civic engagement in the form of charitable behavior; results also suggest the need to further investigate the civic behavior of free-riders.

Previous research has demonstrated that aside from the value that volunteering brings to organizations and society at large, individual volunteers also benefit from their volunteering activities by experiencing enhanced personal satisfaction, social connectedness, and meaningfulness in both their paid and unpaid work. Organizations in both profit and nonprofit sectors have therefore become increasingly interested in identifying workplace practices designed to enhance meaningful experiences through encouraging people to volunteer their time to important causes. This symposium brings together leading scholars who will make a contribution to current debates on volunteering by (a) identifying different human resource management practices that can be implemented to increase participation and retention of volunteers within nonprofit organizations as well as paid sector organizations as part of employer-sponsored volunteering programs, (b) analyzing the positive outcomes that can be generated from both forms of volunteering with regards to individual volunteers and their respective organizations, and (c) exploring the type of spillover effects between employees’ job attitudes and their volunteering activities. How Inclusive are Voluntary Organizations? Presenter: Georg von Schnurbein; U. of Basel Presenter: Sibylle Studer; U. of Lucerne The Job Satisfaction and Volunteering Link: A Compensation Spillover Longitudinal Investigation Presenter: Jonathan Edward Booth; London School of Economics Presenter: Daniela Lup; London School of Economics Accelerating Volunteering through Employee Volunteer Programs Presenter: Benjamin J. Lough; U. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Presenter: Yvonne Siu Turner; Points of Light Corporate Institute The Relationship between Performance and Volunteering and the moderating Influence of Commitment Presenter: Alexander Gloss; North Carolina State U. Presenter: Paul W Mulvey; North Carolina State U. Presenter: Beth Ritter; North Carolina State U. Strategic HR Management of Volunteer/Employee Interchangeability: A Social Enterprise Case Study Presenter: Kunle Akingbola; Lakehead U.

This inductive study of Michelin-starred restaurants in Britain and Germany examines how organizations attend to tensions between idea creation and implementation that characterize innovation processes. Based on the analysis of in-depth interviews with 40 chefs-de-cuisine, we identify tensions at two distinct levels of analysis. The first tension, situated at the individual level, occurs between the artistic identity of the chefs-de-cuisine and their work identity; the second one, at the organizational level, arises because creativity and implementation are equally important for the organizational success, thus making it impossible to disentangle chefs' contribution from that of the kitchen brigade. Case evidence shows that effective tactics for managing these tensions simultaneously emphasize distinctions and create synergies between the contradictory elements of each tension. Moreover, our cross-national sample allows us to show how differences at the national institutional level affect the management of tensions and thus shed light on the mechanisms through which institutional environments affect innovation. These insights contribute to existing research in creativity and innovation.

Through exposure to heterogeneous sources of knowledge, actors who broker between unconnected contacts are more likely to generate valuable output. We contribute to the theory of social capital of brokerage by considering the impact of field maturity. Using longitudinal data from the field of strategic management we find that the benefits of network brokerage are stronger during the early stages of field development and diminish as the field matures. The results of our study call for further research on the interplay between network structures and processes of field emergence.

A wide range of evidence confirms that in markets characterized by high informational uncertainty a firm’s status position is a signal of that firm’s quality, and that resource holders are more likely to select and invest in high status firms. The central question of this paper is if status as a signal of the quality of the firm remains relevant when more informative data about the firm’s performance becomes public, and if so how is a firm’s status affecting market reaction to new information. To answer this question I draw from status literature, economics of information and signalling, and from decision making theory. I propose that under uncertainty investors are attentive to status as a signal of quality, but once new information becomes public there is a shift in attention from the content of the signal to the accuracy of the signal. I also propose that the perceived accuracy of the signal is positively correlated with the status position and that the reaction to surprises depends on the perceived accuracy. As a result the magnitude of the market reaction to new information is moderated by the status of the firm. I use this framework to analyze a phenomenon which has generated a wide debate across disciplines, that is the reaction to earnings announcements released by public firms at the end of the financial periods. I provide evidence that status magnifies the reaction to surprises by showing that the return on the stock of high status firms which deliver negative (positive) surprises is lower (higher) than the return on the stock of lower status firms which deliver similar results. Daniela Lup, Chicago GSB 2 Introduction The image of markets as socially constructed structures is one of the crucial insights that sociology has contributed to the understanding of economic activity (Blau 1964, Granovetter 1985, White 1981). One of the most compelling ideas growing from this body of research is that actors’ position in the social structures determines their opportunities and constraints by shaping others’ beliefs and actions toward them. A wide range of evidence confirms that social status is one of the key sources of differentiation in markets and that a high status position confers advantages and influence that often extend beyond the actor’s specific competencies (Podolny 1993, Benjamin and Podolny 1999, Stuart, Hoang and Hybels 1999). The existing literature proposes that this phenomenon is the consequence of a generalized assumption that status is a signal of quality. The most pervasive mechanism that explains the link between the status of an actor and its quality is association with prominent partners (Blau 1964:67, Podolny and Philips 1996, Stuart, Hoang and Hybels 1999, Podolny 2001, Higgings and Gulati 2003, Washington and Zajac 2005). Since most markets are characterized by informational uncertainty concerning the true worth of a firm market participants look at a firm’s relationships and assume a positive correlation between the quality of the firm and the prominence of its partners. The more prominent its partners are, the higher the status of the firm and consequently, the higher the perceived quality. While the metaphor of status as signal of quality provides a useful framework for explaining the discrepancy in advantages accrued to high status firms in settings characterized by high informational uncertainty it is not clear if status plays any role once information about the actual performance of the firm becomes public. This gap is Daniela Lup, Chicago GSB 3 surprising in the light of an increased quest for and availability of information that characterizes most markets. Even more puzzling is the fact that current theories propose contradictory answers to the question. Sociological theory of status suggests that new information is often inconsequential for status hierarchies and that, at the limit, the benefits of a high status position will prevail. Indeed the prevalent view is that a status position is relatively sticky (Podolny 2005) and therefore transitional events do not matter too much. The underlying assumption is that market participants are rather slow to recognize shifts in quality and therefore, at any given time, the relation between status and quality is quite loose (Podolny 1993). This leaves most of the prestige of the firm in the hands of its partners which tend to perpetuate the status-quo. A connected argument is that high status actors have access to a perpetual “reservoir of goodwill” (Jones et al. 2000) or “credit” (Hollander 1958, Blau 1964) which allows them more freedom of action, even if some of their actions have negative effects. Additional evidence from the sociology of deviance compounds the puzzle even further. While in some instances high status actors who violate group norms receive more severe sanctions than their low status peers, in other cases their crimes are treated with more lenience (Rosoff 1989, Shaw and Skolnick 1996, Wiggins, Dill and Schwartz 1965). Sociological evidence stands however in opposition with the view of economics of information and decision making which proposes that when more informative data about an actor’s quality becomes available the weaker signal used to assess quality receives less attention or becomes irrelevant (Milgrom and Weber 1982, Alles and Lundholm 1993). Under this view status plays no significant role once information about Daniela Lup, Chicago GSB 4 firm performance becomes available and interested resource holders react only to the type of news. Concretely, a firm which reveals positive news about its performance will see its stock price increase, while a firm with negative news is likely to witness a fall in the price of its stock (Milgrom 1981) but the status of the firm will not affect the investors’ reaction. However, finding an answer to the question concerning the role of status when information about performance becomes public is important for a number of reasons. First, existing evidence shows that information from high status actors is often treated differently and that both underand overreaction to information is present. Second, new information provided by firms is often re-interpreted and re-packaged by other market actors, actors which often are also responsible for the construction of status hierarchies (Zuckerman 1999, Basuroy, Chatterjee, Ravid 2003, Hsu 2006). In fact, firms often complain that they are victims of financial analysts, media or other information providers and mediators (Solomon and Frank, 2003). Third, because of the interconnection between market performance and status accumulation (Shipilov and Li 2008) even a short term reaction to new information about the firms’ performance can have considerable consequences for the status hierarchy. Consequently, by understanding the connection between performance and status we can account better for changes in status hierarchies. From a strategic point of view it is important for firms to know if relevant stakeholders react differently to information coming from firms of different social status; by knowing this, firms are more likely to pay attention to the type of information and the timing so that they can ensure the highest benefits and the least sanction, respectively. Daniela Lup, Chicago GSB 5 In order to answer the question if and how the relatively stable status effects observed under uncertainty change as a result of new information about performance I develop a theoretical framework and derived hypotheses about the likely market reaction to new information for firms from different status strata. My argument builds on the relational character of a status position (Podolny 1993). More precisely, I argue that a firm’s partners have a double role. On one hand they render status to the firm, by allowing their connection to the firm to be visible (ties as prisms, Podolny 2001) and on the other hand they create specific expectations about the firm’s quality by indicating the type and performance range that we should expect from the endorsed firm (Ruef and Scott 1998, Durand, Rao and Monin 2007). To explain how a firm’s status position influences reaction to new information I develop an attention shift hypothesis. My proposition is that under uncertainty investors are attentive to the content of status as signal of quality, but once new information becomes public there is a shift in attention from the content of the signal to the accuracy of the signal. I also propose that the perceived accuracy of the signal is positively correlated with the status position and that the reaction to new information depends on the perceived accuracy. As a result, the magnitude of the reaction to new information which departs from expectations (surprises) also depends on status. I use this framework to analyze a phenomenon which has generated a wide debate across disciplines, that is the reaction to earnings announcements released by public firms at the end of the financial periods. To document the difference in market reaction to new information about firms of different social standings my strategy is to compare the market response to earnings announcements issued by firms of higher and lower status at Daniela Lup, Chicago GSB 6 the end of the fiscal period. I provide evidence that the reaction to surprises is larger for high status firms by showing that the return on the stock of high status firms which deliver negative (positive) surprises is lower (higher) than the return on the stock of lower status firms which deliver negative (positive) surprises. Status as signal of quality under uncertainty Although specific definitions vary (Gould 2002, Podolny 1993, Washington and Zajac 2005) the term status typically refers to the prestige associated with a position in the social structure. In organizational theory and strategy status is usually operationalized by analyzing patterns of relations of the focal actor such that the actor with the most prominent partne

Although the existing theory predicts that a referral’s chances of being hired increase with the job performance of the referrer, no empirical evidence is available to support this claim. To address this discrepancy, we decompose the recruitment process into objective selection, subjective selection, and self-selection and theorize that the likelihood of passing a particular recruitment stage increases with the performance of the referrer under objective selection and self-selection, but remains undetermined at a stage of subjective selection. Our analysis of unique comprehensive data on online recruitment of sales agents in a virtual call center supports these arguments. The effectiveness of personnel as a recruitment channel varies with the type of the recruitment stage and performance of the referrer. When the firm evaluates candidates by an objective criterion, the advantage of a referral increases with the performance of his or her referrer; those referred by relatively high-performing workers are significantly better than the applicants who learned about the job from Internet ads. When job candidates self-select into the next stage of the online application process, the referral of any agent is more likely to continue than a nonreferral, and this likelihood increases with the performance of the referrer. On a subjective stage, the outcome is contingent on the intricacies of the recruitment process. In our case, an applicant’s chances of being hired increase with the performance of his or her referrer because the firm rejects the referrals of low-performing workers at a higher rate than it does nonreferrals, while it treats equally the referrals of high-performing workers and nonreferrals. The study’s contributions to the literature on social networks in labor markets are discussed.

Abstract We explore network recruitment in a new Internet-basedorganizational setting characterized by arm’s-length relationships between the employer and workers and heightened competition among,workers. Personal contacts remain a salient recruitment channel, although their effectiveness varies with the type of the recruitment stage: self- selection, objective selection, and subjective selection. We argue that on a self-selection stage, where a job candidate decides herself whether to proceed to the next stage of the on-line application process, referrals of current agents are more likely to follow through. On an objective selection stage, where the firm evaluates candidates by an objective criterion, the advantage of a referral increases with the performance of her referrer; the referrals of relatively higher-performing workers do better than the applicants referred by inferior candidates. Finally, on a subjective stage, where HR personnel make a judgment about a candidate’s qualifications, the outcome is contingent on the intricacies of the recruitment process. In our case, an applicant’s chances increase with the performance of