Rethinking managership,leadership, followership,and partnership

Organizations underperform, or fail, when members avoid partnering with managers—whether through subtle resistance, disagreement, protest, or walkout—to achieve common purpose. Managers should boost partnering not by affecting a pretense of leadership but through a nuanced balance of managerial authority and understanding of members’ points of view. The objective of this article is to sharpen attention on the concept of partnership with organization members and how it relates to some of the important previous literature. We also argue that some of the previous scholarly work contributes to misconceptions related to these concepts. Our work is forward-looking in that it is motivated by the dangerous societal and cultural differences evident in the world, differences that surround management’s decisions and that may induce an overuse of authority to quash disquiet. Using our experiences in both industry and academia, we argue that the crucial link between managers and members is leadership—not leadership thought of as directional and inspirational, but leadership as building a relationship toward common purpose through partnership. “Lead” and “leader” are sorely misused terms, and worse, substituting “leader” for “manager” is just plain wrong. We believe that managers become leaders only when followers agree to follow, not when the managers simply step forward energetically with direction. Managers are cheated by mistaken definitions. Reviewing past perspectives about what makes good leaders and managers, we rethink ways to enhance organizational harmony through a clearer understanding of managership, leadership, followership, and partnership. Only by thinking and acting as partners in common purpose can managers and members form the core of success in organizational endeavors.     

Reconceptualizing value creation: Exploring the role of goal congruence in the Co-creation process

As companies gradually shift from the exchange view to the resource integration view, the creation of value also shifts from the customer sphere to the joint sphere. As a result, the customer and service provider are responsible for co-creating value through resource integration. However, it raises the question of whether customers are capable of contributing to the co-creation of value. Our study proposes a framework of how goal congruence plays a pivotal role in the resource integration process between all actors in the joint sphere. When the level of goal congruence between customer and service provider actors is high, it stimulates the exchange of valuable resources from all actors, which leads to the actual experience of co-creation resulting in value-in-use and improves service outcomes, i.e., customer satisfaction and loyalty. Data were collected through a field survey from salon-and-spa customers (n = 530) and PLS-SEM was employed to test the hypotheses and further analysis. The results show that goal congruence impacts customer satisfaction and loyalty through value-in-use. Therefore, suggesting service providers to properly socialize their goals will be a good strategy to increase customer capability to co-create value and ultimately enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty.     

工作要求与创新工作行为关系的研究

员工创新工作行为是员工有效完成工作任务和目标,达到组织既定工作标准的有效途径,对组织的生存与发展具有重要作用。本文基于工作要求一工作控制模型与社会交换理论,探讨在中国情号下,工作要求、员工感知的组织支持与创新工作行为的关系。通过296个有效样本,研究结果表明：工作要求与创新工作行为显著正相关;员工感知的组织支持对工作要求与创新工作行为具有正向调节作用,在工作要求压力下,相对于感知到较低组织支持的员工,感知到较高组织支持的员工更容易产生创新工作行为,并基于中国本土文化的角度分析其内在原因。研究告诉企业领导者,提高工作要求可以提高员工创新工作行为,同时要提高员工对组织支持的感知,这样才可能使员工在面临高强度的工作要求时,更积极主动地开展创新工作行为,提高工作效率和工作绩效。     

Supply structure: The pendulum in action

Using an in-depth longitudinal case study based on an “historical retrospective”, this article focuses on how some factors (“drivers”) set into motion the pendulum of change in supply structures, a research theme neglected in the supply field. It examines, over a 20-year period, the changes made to the supply structure of a well-known organization. The data comes mainly from: (a) semi-structured interviews with 21 managers and professionals within eight operating units, and (b) documentary analyses of the archives. This article shows how to map structural changes of the supply function, while explaining the nature and the causes of these changes. Understanding the pendulum movement from one supply structure to another can be very valuable, as well for academics as for managers.     

Estimating the impact of Denison's (1996), “What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native's point of view on a decade of paradigm wars”

Denison [Denison, D.R. (1996), What is the difference between organizational culture and organizational climate? A native's point of view on a decade of paradigm wars, The Academy of Management Review, 21 (3), 619-654] offers a paradigm to comprehend the difference between studying organizational culture and organizational climate from a methodological perspective. The present study uses a Scopus analysis to understand the contributions of Denison's work in contemporary research of organization studies, and to recognize benefits of his discussion on organizational culture and organizational climate. The Scopus analysis shows that Denison's article is seminal across academic disciplines from its appearance.     

Effects of mentoring functions on receivers' organizational citizenship behavior in a Chinese context: A two-study investigation

This research examines the relationship between mentoring functions received by employees and their organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), and the moderating effects of perceived quality relationships with mentoring function providers in China. Results of Study 1 from a sample of 385 supervisor-subordinate dyads reveal that role modeling received by protégés positively relates to their OCB, and perceived mentoring relationship quality moderates the association between career support received and protégés' OCB. Moreover, nonprotégés and protégés who receive high levels of overall mentoring functions perform more OCB than protégés who receive low levels of mentoring functions. Results of Study 2 from 258 supervisor-subordinate dyads show that role modeling received by subordinates positively relates to their OCB directed at individuals (OCBI) and at the organization (OCBO) while career support received positively relates to OCBO. Additionally, leader-member exchange moderates the linkages of role modeling with OCBI and OCBO.     

Organizational governance and TMT pay level adjustment

This paper analyzes how the characteristics of boards and structure of ownership moderate a firm's capacity to adjust top management team (TMT) pay levels in the face of changes in its economic and complexity conditions. Using panel data from Spanish listed companies between 2003 and 2007, the results indicate that, over time, characteristics of corporate governance system contribute to give a fundamental importance to boards and ownership structure in the determination and adjustment of TMT pay. These associations appear to be even stronger than those that in other Western European and North American countries. Both the Spanish cross-holding and concentrated firms' ownership structure, and socially intervened boards play a major role in the high levels of pay received by the TMT, which, in turn, reflect a moderate adjustment of compensation practices to variations of surrounded environment factors.     

国内外养老保险制度的状况及差异分析

国内外养老保险在模式上、养老保险基金运作机制以及养老保险管理制度上存在差异.美国的养老保险制度注重政府保障与雇主保障、个人保障的有机结合、充分发挥市场功能、注重养老金投资管理;英国养老金个人账户体系更加适合现代快节奏生活和工作经常变化的社会需求;日本农民在许多方面享有与城市居民同等的待遇;韩国采取的是双轨并行的养老金制...     

网络经济条件下企业技术创新与组织创新互动研究

在网络经济条件下,技术创新与组织创新是企业提高竞争能力,应对激烈竞争的重要战略。本文分析了以信息技术、互联网技术广泛应用为特征的网络经济对技术创新与组织创新产生的重大影响,认为在网络经济条件下,企业只有实现技术创新与组织创新的互动,才能适应复杂多变的外部环境,更好地利用信患技术实现企业最大化的价值,创造更多的财富。在此基础上,构建了以组织学习为纽带的技术创新与组织创新互动模型。最后,指出今后进一步研究的方向。     

网络强度、组织冗余与创新模式——对200家样本企业问卷调研数据的实证检验

通过社会网络带来资源冗余进而对创新选择产生影响,这一机制已成为当今企业可持续发展的重要路径。运用200份企业样本调研数据,对网络强度、不同类型组织冗余及两种创新模式进行实证检验,结果发现,网络强度显著正向直接影响利用式创新和探索式创新;网络强度还通过正向影响未吸收冗余对两种创新产生正向间接影响作用;未吸收冗余与创新模式间具有显著正向影响关系,而吸收冗余在三者影响路径关系中检验结果不显著,可能是受企业自身因素或条件影响所致。最后,根据研究结论提出3点重要管理启示。