An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the 'Save PDF' action button.

AbstractHRMJ is a business and management journal: we seek to publish excellent work that deals not simply with people and organisations, but with the management of people and the issues and tensions around the latter. As such, the journal is broadly multidisciplinary, the key focus being on advancing theory through empirical evidence, through consolidations and extensions of conceptual knowledge, through revisiting and extending existing theory, literature reviews, as well as the development of salient research methods. This extended editorial brings together a range of perspectives from and beyond the editorial team to advance understanding around developing work for publication. As such, it is intended not only to guide authors interested in publishing in HRMJ, but all with an interest in advancing their scholarly work.

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted the relational nature of work, particularly for frontline workers who provide their labor in person. However, little is known about how relational job characteristics during the pandemic may affect workers or how frontline and nonfrontline workers may respond differently. We integrate theory on relational job architecture with the job demands-resources model to understand the effects of contact and impact during the pandemic. We propose contact as a job demand that increases strain outcomes among frontline workers and impact as a job resource that increases motivational outcomes among all workers. In addition, we propose perceived safety climate as a critical resource for mitigating the negative effects of contact among frontline workers and amplifying the positive effects of impact among all workers. We test hypotheses among 452 full-time workers (209 frontline, 243 nonfrontline) using a two-wave survey design. We find no support for the idea that contact operates as a job demand among frontline workers. In contrast, among nonfrontline workers, contact was associated with higher levels of burnout at lower levels of job impact and perceived safety climate. Impact and perceived safety climate acted as important resources among all workers, predicting both motivational and strain outcomes 4 months later. In addition, the positive effects of impact on prosocial motivation were amplified at higher levels of perceived safety climate among all workers. Our results suggest that impactful work, when conducted in a safe climate, is a key resource for enhancing prosocial motivation during crisis situations.

AbstractDespite becoming increasingly represented in academic departments, women scholars face a critical lack of support as they navigate demands pertaining to pregnancy, motherhood, and child caregiving. In addition, cultural norms surrounding how faculty and academic leaders discuss and talk about tenure, promotion, and career success have created pressure for women who wish to grow their family and care for their children, leading to questions about whether it is possible for these women to have a family and an academic career. This paper is a call to action for academia to build structures that support professors who are women as they navigate the complexities of pregnancy, the postpartum period, and the caregiving demands of their children. We specifically call on those of us in I-O psychology, management, and related departments to lead the way. In making this call, we first present the realistic, moral, and financial cases for why this issue needs to be at the forefront of discussions surrounding success in the academy. We then discuss how, in the U.S. and elsewhere, an absence of policies supporting women places two groups of academics—department heads (as the leaders of departments who have discretion outside of formal policies to make work better for women) and other faculty members (as potential allies both in the department and within our professional organizations)—in a critical position to enact support and change. We conclude with our boldest call—to make a cultural shift that shatters the assumption that having a family is not compatible with academic success. Combined, we seek to launch a discussion that leads directly to necessary and overdue changes in how women scholars are supported in academia.

In response to Aguinis et al.' s (2022) thought-provoking article on the lack of policy implications in organizational behavior and human resource management research, we provide an alternative perspective focusing on four main questions. These questions are: (1) is our scholarship sufficiently focused on important policy-relevant issues ? (2) if authors include policy recommendations, will nonacademics use the information ? (3) would policy implications in research articles translate into actual policy change ? and (4) what other strategies can be used to increase the uptake of research to shape policy ? In so doing, we offer specific suggestions and potential remedies to address the research-policy gap.

Many workers are at risk of contracting COVID-19 through work, and subjective perceptions of COVID-19 risk are important predictors of worker attitudes and behaviours. However, little to no research provides comprehensive examination of objective COVID-19 occupational risk factors and how, or under what conditions, these factors relate to subjective risk perceptions. Using two wave survey data matched with archival data from the Occupational Information Network (O*Net) and county-level COVID-19 case data (N = 295), we examine how objective COVID-19 occupational risk relates to workers' subjective risk of contracting COVID-19 at work. We also examine the moderating roles of financial frailty, adherence to governmental workplace safety recommendations, and local COVID-19 threat. Results indicate that objective COVID-19 occupational risk significantly predicts subjective risk of contracting COVID-19 at work. Moreover, factors representing in-person work conducted in close proximity to others accounted for a large proportion of explained variance in subjective risk. There was no support for moderation; however, financial frailty and workplace safety had independent main effects on subjective risk perceptions. Our results have theoretical implications for the Economic Stress and COVID-19 Occupational Risk model (Sinclair et al., Appl. Psychol., 70, 2021, 85), individual models of subjective risk perceptions, and practical implications for mitigating occupational risk at work.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Gender equity and inclusion has taken center stage in business, science, and policy making. We reflect on three systemic challenges that might hinder the rise of qualified women scholars to leadership positions in business schools: (a) The masculine social structure of business schools, (b) a muddled approach to performance evaluation, and (c) an under-representation of research topics that affect women in the workplace. Drawing on the extant science in gender bias and gender equity combined with the collective expertise and experience of the author team, we offer 12 actionable solutions for gender-inclusive leadership in business schools. We believe that addressing these challenges could benefit all members, not just women, because it could signal more equitable pathways to multiple business school stakeholders and intended beneficiaries, such as students, donors, practitioners, and policy makers.

Policymakers are regularly named as one of the targeted audiences of management research. However, Aguinis, Jensen, and Kraus (in press) found that policy implications are underutilized and not part of organizational behavior and human resource management’s zeitgeist because only 1.5% of the articles (i.e., N = 61) from a sample of journals included such issues. Consistent with the conference theme, the goal of our panel symposium is to discuss how together we create a better world—specifically by using management research for policymaking. To achieve this goal, our symposium includes panelists who are purposefully diverse in terms of research interests, ontological perspectives, and geographic location (i.e., combined, they are members of more than 10 different AOM Divisions). As such, panelists will address issues of interest to both micro and macro management researchers, and those from a range of disciplinary backgrounds. Again, the symposium will have both a past and a future orientation. Regarding the past, panelists will address existing research and theories that can be used for policymaking to create a better world; what worked, what did not work, and the limits and possibilities for reviving and renovating past policy options. We can certainly learn from policy successes and failures in the past, at the same time as considering novel policy options at firm, social, economic and governmental level in the future. Regarding the future, panelists will also address what research should be conducted (i.e., which topics, theories, types of research designs) so that results are useful for firm and societal policymaking that will result in creating a better world. Overall, we hope our symposium will serve as a catalyst for a better understanding of what types of management research-informed policies are useful for creating a world in which we will all be better off together.

This editorial focuses on two major initiatives that we undertook during these turbulent times at the Journal of Applied Psychology: The Call for Papers on the COVID-19 Pandemic With a Rapid Review Process and the implementation of the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines (https://www .cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines) on November 1, 2021. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Perceptions of who makes an effective leader are altered in crises. One perspective from which leadership effectiveness can be evaluated is gender differences. In this panel symposium, we will disc...

This study examines the association between grandchild care—a prevalent form of family support in which a grandparent provides non-custodial care to their grandchildren—and parents' work-family conflict. Drawing from the work-family and intergenerational support literatures, we propose a bidirectional association between grandchild care and parents' work-family conflict and examine parent-grandparent conflict regarding caregiving as a boundary condition. Participants included 347 working parents whose own parents provided grandchild care. Results from a cross-lagged panel model indicated that grandchild care at Time 1 was associated with lower levels of time- and strain-based family-interference-with-work (FIW) one year later. By contrast, Time 1 grandchild care was not associated with Time 2 work-interference-with-family. Contrary to predictions, Time 1 work-family conflict did not predict grandchild care at Time 2. However, caregiving conflict moderated the association between both time- and strain-based FIW at Time 2 and grandchild care at Time 2, such that there was a negative association when caregiving conflict was at average or above-average levels. Interestingly, caregiving conflict at Time 1 was associated with higher levels of FIW at Time 2, and supplemental analyses indicated that both grandchild care and WIF at Time 1 predicted higher levels of caregiving conflict at Time 2. These results support the proposition that family support may reduce FIW and suggest that grandchild care can be a mixed blessing for employees' work-family conflict.

The focal article by Köhler et al. (2020) provides a useful framework for promoting robust, rigorous, and reliable reviewing by developing a competency framework for reviewers.We applaud important efforts such as this, aimed at enhancing the peer review process and creating common peer review expectations.It is also useful that Köhler et al. tackled this complex issue from the vantage point of multiple stakeholders (e.g., academia, organizations, granting agencies).In this commentary, we focus specifically on the peer review process in academic journals, given our reviewing and editorial experience.The author team's experience includes 157 collective years reviewing for peer-reviewed academic journals, membership on 33 different editorial boards, serving as associate editors for 15 different journals, and leading 7 journals as editor-in-chief, guest editor, or special issue editor.As outlined by Köhler et al. (2020), clear standards for what constitutes an effective review have potential benefits for authors (e.g., more developmental and actionable feedback), reviewers (e.g., clearer reviewing expectations, improved knowledge and skills for reviews), and journal editors and associate editors (henceforth referred to as "editors"; e.g., greater efficiency in processing reviews and reaching decisions), as well as the field as a whole (e.g., improved scientific rigor, reliability, and reproducibility).One of the approaches proposed in the focal article was training on the competency framework (1) in academic classes that discuss peer reviewing, (2) when providing feedback to PhD students who prepare reviews, and (3) at conferences and through the Consortium for the Advancement of Research Methods and Analysis (CARMA).As important and useful as training-based approaches are, such efforts tend to have a relatively limited reach, relative to the number of authors and reviewers (and editors) for which such training would be beneficial.More specifically, although there is overlap in membership, The Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology has over 10,000 members, the Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior Divisions of the Academy of Management have over 9,000 members, and the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology has approximately 2,000 members.Thus, providing formal training for industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologist reviewers on the large-and-growing scale seems formidable or perhaps even prohibitive.Reviewing is also a volunteer activity, so it may be unrealistic to expect individuals to invest a great deal of time on reviewer training given many superseding obligations (e.g., for faculty, this may include teaching, conducting research, mentoring students, applying for grants,The third through ninth authors contributed equally and are listed alphabetically.The ideas presented in this commentary do

Workplace mentoring relationships have been advanced as critical to employee development. However, mentoring research has tended to find small to moderate effects of mentoring on protégé and mentor outcomes and considerable heterogeneity in effect sizes. These findings underscore the need to better understand the psychology of mentoring relationships in order to maximize the benefits of mentoring for mentors, protégés, and organizations. In this article, after briefly reviewing established research on workplace mentoring relationships, we introduce five relationship science theories from outside organizational psychology and organizational behavior that provide new insight into the psychology of workplace mentoring: attachment theory, interdependence theory, self-expansion theory, Rhodes’ model of formal youth mentoring, and the working alliance. We then discuss several unique features of workplace mentoring that should be considered when applying these relationship science theories and introduce provocative ideas for future research. We conclude by discussing practical implications for mentors, protégés, and organizations.

Many occupations involve mortality cues, or external stimuli that remind employees of death. Yet we know relatively little about: (1) how employees experience mortality cues in workplaces and (2) the effect of mortality cues on employees and organizations. On one hand, mortality cues can trigger employee stress, trauma, and uncertainty. On the other hand, employees can bond and find humor and purpose in these experiences. Our symposium reports qualitative and quantitative research that extends the understanding of mortality in the management literature, and, in so doing, strongly contributes to the Academy of Management’s conference theme “20/20: Broadening our Sight”. The symposium includes four papers showcasing the influence of mortality cues on employees’ emotions, work orientations, well-being, and performance. We address dichotomies in this symposium – that mortality cue exposure has both positive (e.g., work engagement, meaning) and negative (e.g., emotional exhaustion) employee outcomes – and clarify mechanisms and boundary conditions contributing to these dichotomies. Taken together, our papers and discussion, led by Dr. Peter Bamberger, endeavors to provide insight into the consequences of mortality cues for employees and organizations, deliver actionable recommendations for managers, and generate future academic research. Called to Cure: Patient Deaths, Death Fear, and Calling of Substance Abuse Treatment Counselors Presenter: Zhenyu Yuan; U. of Illinois at Chicago Presenter: Lisa E. Baranik; U. at Albany, State U. of New York Presenter: Lillian Eby; U. of Georgia Presenter: Robert R Sinclair; Clemson U. Another Day, Another Death? The Impact of Mortality Cues on Employees Exposed to Death at Work Presenter: Pascale Fricke; U. of British Columbia Presenter: Danielle Van Jaarsveld; U. of British Columbia Presenter: David Douglas Walker; U. of British Columbia Mortality Cue Threats, Death Anxiety, and Employee Well-Being: A Moderated-Mediation Model Presenter: Alexandra Jacobsen; Central Michigan U. Presenter: Terry A Beehr; Central Michigan U. Song of Sorrow: A Longitudinal Study of Work-Related Grief and Organizational Change Presenter: Elizabeth E. Stillwell; U. of Minnesota Presenter: Angelica Leigh; U. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Presenter: Olivia Amanda O'Neill; George Mason U.

Despite considerable advances, existing work-family conflict research tends to ignore the possibility that some behaviors may transcend work and nonwork, potentially causing interference in both domains. One such experience is gambling, which involves staking something of material value (often money) on an event with an uncertain outcome in an attempt to win additional goods of material values. The current study builds on and extends recent research by examining gambling behavior as a potential source of strain-based interference with both work and nonwork within a sample of 259 working adults who gamble at least weekly. A framework is developed and tested that links gambling behavior to strain-based gambling interference with both work and nonwork, and then links gambling interference to reduced role performance in each respective domain. We also investigate whether reduced cognitive engagement in each domain serves as a partial explanatory mechanism for the deleterious effects of gambling interference. These links are tested controlling for the effects of overall strain-based work interference with family and family interference with work, in order to isolate the effects of gambling interference and provide a rigorous test of the study predictions. Strong support was found for the proposed framework.

The current article integrates research on proactive personality, career theory, and perceived organizational career growth opportunities to propose a typology describing four career scenarios that may occur for individuals based on their level of proactivity (high or low) and perceived organizational career growth (high or low). We present turnover intention and performance as career-related outcomes that characterize these scenarios, ultimately arguing that proactive personality likely moderates the positive effects of organizational career growth opportunities on individual career outcomes, such that the benefits of organizational career growth are likely to be most beneficial for highly proactive individuals. Using an interactionist perspective and social cognitive career theory as foundations, this conceptual article illustrates how the benefit of organizational career growth opportunities for individual career development may depend on the individual characteristics of employees.

We provide a comprehensive qualitative review of 67 published studies that have examined mindfulness-based training interventions conducted with employees. The findings indicate that the most common research designs were the pre-test/post-test only design (35.8%) and the randomized waitlist control group design (26.9%). About two-thirds of the studies included a control group (61.2%), with approximately three-quarters (75.6%) of these studies using random assignment. Of the 63 studies that used a conventional experimental design, the majority (65.1%) included only one follow-up assessment, most often immediately after training. Results indicated a great degree of heterogeneity in terms of program content, although many studies used some adaptation of Kabat-Zinn's (1990) Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (41.8%), an approach with a strong evidentiary base with clinical populations. All training programs incorporated practice, most (85.1%) used multiple methods of delivering the training material, and training varied considerably in total duration, session length, and the number of training sessions. Our review also found that the intended purpose of mindfulness-based training for employees was most commonly the reduction of stress/strain (80.6%), although a wide range of other targeted outcomes were documented. Based on our findings, we offer suggestions for future research aimed at advancing our understanding of mindfulness-based training interventions with employees.

Most young managers view having a mentor as their ticket to the big leagues—to greater visibility, exciting assignments and big promotions. To be clear, mentoring can be invaluable, not only to proteges and mentors, but also to organizations. It is important, however, to manage the relationships appropriately and be aware of early signs of potential problems. Most valuable experiences in mentoring feature trust, rapport and a general affinity between the two parties. Manipulation is most common when the mentor is the protege's direct supervisor or a manager up the ladder in the same department. When proteges try to damage their mentor's career, it's typically motivated by revenge, say, for failing to win a promotion. Everyone should be clear on the fact that mentoring eventually ends, when the protege has learned all that he or she can, or when the mentor no longer provides guidance or satisfaction.