Fostering Ethical Conduct Through Psychological Safety

In a world of increased scrutiny for corporations of all types, it is more essential than ever that when misconduct happens or difficult problems arise, there is a strong ethical climate for surfacing information so that leaders can respond quickly and appropriately. An environment in which employees feel comfortable reporting such issues is also vital to preventing future misconduct. Here, Ferrere et al analyze the perceptions of those who report misconduct against those of "silent bystanders"

The Rich Get Richer: Enabling Conditions for Knowledge Use in Organizational Work Teams

Individuals on the periphery of organizational knowledge sharing networks, due to inexperience, location, or lack of social capital, may struggle to access useful knowledge at work. An electronic knowledge repository (KR) has the potential to help peripheral individuals gain access to valuable knowledge because a KR is universally and constantly available and can be used without social interaction. However, for it to serve this equalizing function, those on the periphery of the organization must actually use it, possibly overcoming barriers to doing so. In this paper, we develop a multi-level model of knowledge use in teams and show that individuals whose experience and position already provide them access to vital knowledge use a KR more frequently than individuals on the organizational periphery. We argue that this occurs because the KR – despite its appearance of equivalent accessibility to all – is actually more accessible to central than peripheral players due to their greater experience and access to colleagues. Thus, KR use is not driven primarily by the need to overcome limited access to other knowledge sources. Rather KR use is enabled when actors know how to reap value from the KR, which ironically improves with increasing access to other sources of knowledge. Implications for both team effectiveness and knowledge management research are offered. We conclude that KRs are unlikely to serve as a knowledge equalizer without intervention

Measuring Beliefs about Suffering: Development of the Views of Suffering Scale

Efforts to measure religion have intensified and many specific dimensions have been identified. However, although belief is a core dimension of all world religions, little attention has been given to assessment of religious beliefs. In particular, one essential set of religious beliefs, those concerning the reasons for human suffering, has remained virtually unexamined in spite of the potential clinical relevance of these beliefs. To fill the need for a measure of people’s beliefs about suffering, we developed the Views of Suffering Scale (VOSS). Analyses identified factors related to traditional Christian teachings, unorthodox theistic beliefs, karma, and randomness. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability for VOSS subscale scores were good (α’s and r’s ≥ .70). Comparisons to measures of related constructs suggest that the VOSS scores demonstrate good convergent validity. One subscale score was modestly correlated with social desirability related to image management, and seven were positively correlated to self-deceptive enhancement. These preliminary studies suggest that the VOSS differentiates religious perspectives on suffering among a sample of US university students, though more research is needed to confirm its utility in diverse populations. The VOSS provides a valid way to measure individuals’ beliefs about suffering, allowing for inquiry into the factors that lead to various beliefs about suffering and the roles of these beliefs in adjusting to stressful life events

Cross-Boundary Teaming for Innovation: Integrating Research on Teams and Knowledge in Organizations

Cross-boundary teaming, within and across organizations, is an increasingly popular strategy for innovation. Knowledge diversity is seen to expand the range of views and ideas that teams can draw upon to innovate. Yet, case studies of practice reveal that teaming across knowledge boundaries can be difficult, and innovation is not always realized. Two streams of research are particularly relevant for understanding this challenge: research on team effectiveness and research on knowledge in organizations. They offer complementary insights: the former stream focuses on group dynamics and measures team inputs, processes, emergent states, and outcomes, while the latter closely investigates dialogue and objects in recurrent social practices. Drawing from both streams, this paper seeks to shed light on the complexity of cross-boundary teaming, while highlighting factors that may enhance its effectiveness. We develop an integrative model to provide greater explanatory power than previous approaches to assess cross-boundary teaming efforts and their innovation performance