Principles and principals: Do customer stewardship and agency control compete or complement when shaping frontline employee behavior?

This article introduces customer stewardship control (CSC) to the marketing field. This concept represents a frontline employee's felt ownership of and moral responsibility for customers' overall welfare. In two studies, the authors show that CSC is a more encompassing construct than customer orientation, which reflects a frontline employee's focus on meeting customers' needs. They provide evidence that the former is more potent in shaping in- and extra-role employee behaviors. Moreover, they highlight how CSC operates in conjunction with an organization's agency control system: Stewardship's positive influence on in- and extra-role behavior is weaker in the presence of high agency control. They offer actionable advice about how to solve the resulting managerial control dilemma. Finally, the authors show that CSC depends on drivers that reside at the individual level (employee relatedness), the team level (team competence), or both levels of aggregation (employee and team autonomy). These findings show how to effectively design a frontline employee's work environment to ensure optimal frontline performance

Crafting organization

The recent shift in attention away from organization studies as science has allowed for consideration of new ways of thinking about both organization and organizing and has led to several recent attempts to \u27bring down\u27 organizational theorizing. In this paper, we extend calls for organization to be represented as a creative process by considering organization as craft. Organizational craft, we argue, is attractive, accessible, malleable, reproducible, and marketable. It is also a tangible way of considering organization studies with irreverence. We draw on the hierarchy of distinctions among fine art, decorative art, and craft to suggest that understanding the organization of craft assists in complicating our understanding of marginality. We illustrate our argument by drawing on the case of a contemporary Australian craftworks and marketplace known initially as the Meat Market Craft Centre (\u27MMCC\u27) and then, until its recent closure, as Metro! &Dagger; Stella Minahan was a board member and then the Chief Executive Officer of the Metro! Craft Centre.<br /

Pemimpin karismatik. : Di balik mistik tentang kepemimpinan yang luar biasa.

Jakartaix, 385 p.; 18 cm

Pemimpim Karismatik

18 cm; 385 ha

Shared leadership theory

Edwin Locke contributed a chapter to the critique section of Craig Pearce and Jay Conger’s (2003a) edited book, Shared Leadership: Reframing the Hows and Whys of Leadership, published by Sage. In this letter exchange, they continue their dialogue on this important topic. They focus in particular on clarifying what each means by “shared leadership” and on what shared leadership can and should look like at the top of organizations

360-degree assessment: time for reinvention

ABSTRACT One of the most popular management development tools in use today is the 360-degree assessment instrument. In recent years, however, its popularity has led to uses beyond its original application for management development. In particular, 360-degree assessment is now replacing the traditional performance appraisal. This trend toward multiple uses--especially administrative ones--should raise concerns, and we discuss its implications. In particular, our focus is on dilemmas created when a feedback tool is stretched to include potentially conflicting aims. We carry out our analysis on three levels (individual, interpersonal, and organizational) using three frames (cognitive, psychometric, and game-theoretical). It leads to the conclusion that if used for multiple purposes 360-degree assessment is in danger of losing its efficacy as a process to deliver honest and constructive feedback. We suggest that it is time for reinvention of the tool and its process methodology. In particular, we argue for the development of two distinct tools--one for management development and one for performance feedback. The management development tool would rely more heavily upon qualitative feedback and competences for development. The performance appraisal feedback tool would be designed around quantitative feedback and measuring performance outcomes