It’s not charisma that makes extraordinarily successful entrepreneurs, but extraordinary success that makes entrepreneurs charismatic : a second-order observation of the self-reinforcing entrepreneurial ideology

Extreme success among entrepreneurs is often attributed to their charisma. In contrast, this essay claims that success causes the ascription of charisma to entrepreneurs. The proponents of the entrepreneurial ideology uphold successful charismatic entrepreneurs as role models to attract aspiring entrepreneurs in the face of deterrent information like the share of luck accountable for many prosperous entrepreneurial projects, startups’ low success rate, the entrepreneur’s restricted role in creating economic growth, and the routinization of the entrepreneurial function. Yet, due to the ideological functionality of attributing charisma to successful entrepreneurs, we suggest that – despite the strong contrary evidence – the glorification of entrepreneurs will continue to exist (and might become even stronger) in times of “alternative facts”. Yet, such a strategy of biased fact interpretation may have considerable negative side effects on society and individuals striving for entrepreneurship. Therefore, we not only call for more research taking into account the multidimensional nature of entrepreneurship, but also sensitize researchers for the threat of post-factual thinking when engaging in an ideological intervened research stream

A Conceptual Framework of How Meeting Mindsets Shape and Are Shaped by Leader–Follower Interactions in Meetings

In this conceptual paper, we define a person's meeting mindset as the individual belief that meetings represent opportunities to realize goals falling into one of three categories: personal, relational, and collective. We propose that in alignment with their respective meeting mindsets, managers use specific leadership claiming behaviors in team meetings and express these behaviors in alignment with the meeting setting (virtual or face-to-face) and their prior experiences with their employees. Employees’ responses, however, are also influenced by their meeting mindsets, the meeting setting, and prior experiences with their managers. The interplay between managers’ leadership claiming behavior and their employees’ responses shapes leader–follower relations. Embedded in the team context, the emerging leader–follower relations impact the meaning of meetings. We outline match/mismatch combinations of manager–employee meeting mindsets and discuss the influence that a manager and employee can have on each other's meeting mindset through their behavior in a meeting. Plain Language Summary Have you ever had the experience of entering a team meeting and quickly realizing that your idea of how the meeting conversation should be approached did not align with your boss's understanding of the meeting purpose? This is indeed a common experience in meetings between managers and their employees. While we understand much about the communication dynamics that occur in meetings, we know less about what motivates people to communicate in certain ways in meetings. In this conceptual paper, we classify people's understanding of meetings as being driven by one of three purposes: [1] to strategically position and promote themselves (which reflects a personal meeting mindset), [2] to shape collaborations and to ensure reciprocation (which reflects a relational meeting mindset), or [3] to strengthen the team identity and increase the willingness to go the extra mile for the team (which reflects a collective meeting mindset). Meeting mindsets shape how people enact their leader or follower role in meetings—that is, how a manager exhibits leadership and how employees react. However, managers’ and employees’ meeting mindsets may not necessarily match, which can trigger tensions and may ultimately change the way in which managers or employees define the meaning of meetings. Our research helps managers to comprehend the reasoning behind their own and other people's meeting behavior and may promote reflection on one's leadership approach, particularly in a team meeting context. It can also help employees to grasp the power they can have in terms of actively shaping their managers’ meeting mindsets

Autonomous or controlled self-regulation, that is the question: A self-determination perspective on the impact of commuting on employees’ domain-specific functioning

The few studies that have considered psychological processes during the commute have drawn an ambiguous picture, with some emphasizing the negative and others the positive consequences of commuting. Drawing on self-determination theory, we develop a framework that expands on the costs and benefits of commuting for employees’ subsequent domain-related functioning at work and home. Specifically, we propose employees’ basic needs satisfaction and processes of autonomous and controlled self-regulation as mechanisms that explain how psychological commute characteristics spill over to domain-related functioning through experienced subjective vitality. In doing so, we introduce a taxonomy of psychological commute characteristics and highlight the importance of separating these underlying subjective characteristics from objective aspects of the commuting environment. Our research encourages scholars to conduct within- and between-person studies to examine how the objective commute environment and associated psychological commute characteristics affect employees’ self-regulation

Is Work and Aging Research a Science of Questionnaires? Moving the Field Forward by Considering Perceived Versus Actual Behaviors

Research on work and aging predominantly relies on self-report data to create new insights relevant to individuals, organizations, and society. Whereas surveys and interviews based on self-reports offer a valuable inward-directed perspective on individuals and their understanding of others, they can only provide limited knowledge on the behaviors of employees at different ages and in age-diverse settings. This is because what employees actually do is often considerably different from their survey-based reports of what they or others do. In this commentary, we challenge the field to move beyond a science of questionnaires by complementing survey research with behavioral data. First, this would allow scholars to identify when and how behaviors accurately translate into surveyed perceptions of behaviors. Second, such an approach can advance our understanding of the micro-dynamics occurring in age-diverse workforces that ultimately manifest in emerging phenomena (e.g., age-inclusive climate, psychological safety perceptions, or group affective tone). Lastly, studying concrete and specific behaviors also allows scholars to develop better interventions and provide meaningful recommendations for practice that differentiate actual from perceived behaviors

Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Role of Daily Presenteeism as an Adaptive Response to Perform at Work Despite Somatic Complaints for Employee Effectiveness

Our study seeks to contribute to scholarly understanding of the antecedents and consequences of the crucial, but so far overlooked within-person daily fluctuations in presenteeism. Drawing on theoretical frameworks of presenteeism, which conceptualize presenteeism as an adaptive behavior to deliver work performance despite limitations due to ill-health, we develop a within-person model of daily presenteeism and examine somatic complaints and work-goal progress as crucial joint determinants of daily fluctuations in presenteeism. We further integrate the aforementioned theoretical frameworks with ego-depletion theory to argue that presenteeism requires self-regulation to suppress cognitions, emotions, and behavioral responses associated with ill-health and instead focus on completing one’s work tasks. Accordingly, we predict that presenteeism depletes employees’ regulatory resources and impairs employees’ next-day work engagement and task performance. The results of a daily-diary study across 15 workdays with N = 995 daily observations nested in N = 126 employees show that daily work-goal progress attenuates the daily relation between somatic complaints and presenteeism, thereby also reducing the indirect effect of somatic complaints on employees’ next-day work engagement and task performance through presenteeism and ego depletion. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of shifting presenteeism research from the macro- to the micro-level. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved

Give and take? Knowledge exchange between older and younger employees as a function of generativity and development striving

Purpose Knowledge exchange between older and younger employees enhances the collective memory of an organization and therefore contributes to its business success. The purpose of this paper is to take a motivational perspective to better understand why older and younger employees share and receive knowledge with and from each other. Specifically, this study focuses on generativity striving – the motivation to teach, train and guide others – as well as development striving – the motivation to grow, increase competence and master something new – and argues that both motives need to be considered to fully understand intergenerational knowledge exchange. Design/methodology/approach This paper takes a dyadic approach to disentangle how older employees’ knowledge sharing is linked to their younger colleagues’ knowledge receiving and vice versa. The study applied an actor-partner interdependence model based on survey data from 145 age-diverse coworker dyads to test the hypotheses. Findings Results showed that older and younger employees’ generativity striving affected their knowledge sharing, which, in turn, predicted their colleagues’ knowledge receiving. Moreover, the study found that younger employees were more likely to receive knowledge that their older colleagues shared with them when they scored higher (vs lower) on development striving. Originality/value By studying the age-specific dyadic cross-over between knowledge sharing and knowledge receiving, this research adds to the knowledge exchange literature. This study challenges the current age-blind view on knowledge exchange motivation and provides novel insights into the interplay of motivational forces involved in knowledge exchange between older and younger employees

Stop and go, where is my flow? How and when daily aversive morning commutes are negatively related to employees’ motivational states and behavior at work

Despite convincing evidence about the general negative consequences of commuting for individuals and societies, our understanding of how aversive commutes are linked to employees’ effectiveness at work is limited. Drawing on theories of self-regulation and by extension a conservation of resources perspective, we develop a framework that explains how an aversive morning commute—a resource-depleting experience characterized by interruptions of automated travel behaviors—impairs employees’ immersion in uninterrupted work (i.e., flow), which in turn reduces employee effectiveness (i.e., work engagement, subjective performance, and OCB-I). We further delineate theoretical arguments for daily self-control demands as a boundary condition that amplifies this relation and propose the satisfaction of employees’ basic needs as protective factors. Two diary studies across 10 workdays each (Study 1: 53 employees, 411 day-level data points; Study 2: 91 employees, 719 day-level data points) support most of our hypotheses. Study 1 demonstrates that daily aversive morning commutes negatively affect employees’ daily work engagement through lower levels of flow experiences, but only on days with high impulse control demands. In addition, we find initial support that employees’ general autonomy and competence needs satisfaction attenuate this interaction. Study 2 rules out alternative mechanisms (negative affect and tension), demonstrates ego depletion as an additional mediator of the relation between aversive morning commutes and work effectiveness, and replicates the hypothesized three-way interaction for daily competence need satisfaction. We critically discuss the findings and reflect on corporate interventions, which may allow people to more easily flow to and at work

Autonomous or controlled self-regulation, that is the question: A self-determination perspective on the impact of commuting on employees’ domain-specific functioning

The few studies that have considered psychological processes during the commute have drawn an ambiguous picture, with some emphasizing the negative and others the positive consequences of commuting. Drawing on self-determination theory, we develop a framework that expands on the costs and benefits of commuting for employees’ subsequent domain-related functioning at work and home. Specifically, we propose employees’ basic needs satisfaction and processes of autonomous and controlled self-regulation as mechanisms that explain how psychological commute characteristics spill over to domain-related functioning through experienced subjective vitality. In doing so, we introduce a taxonomy of psychological commute characteristics and highlight the importance of separating these underlying subjective characteristics from objective aspects of the commuting environment. Our research encourages scholars to conduct within- and between-person studies to examine how the objective commute environment and associated psychological commute characteristics affect employees’ self-regulation

How do people think about interdependence? A multidimensional model of subjective outcome interdependence

Interdependence is a fundamental characteristic of social interactions. Interdependence Theory states that 6 dimensions describe differences between social situations. Here we examine if these 6 dimensions describe how people think about their interdependence with others in a situation. We find that people (in situ and ex situ) can reliably differentiate situations according to 5, but not 6, dimensions of interdependence: (a) mutual dependence, (b) power, (c) conflict, (d) future interdependence, and (e) information certainty. This model offers a unique framework for understanding how people think about social situations compared to another recent model of situation construal (DIAMONDS). Furthermore, we examine factors that are theorized to shape perceptions of interdependence, such as situational cues (e.g., nonverbal behavior) and personality (e.g., HEXACO and Social Value Orientation). We also study the implications of subjective interdependence for emotions and cooperative behavior during social interactions. This model of subjective interdependence explains substantial variation in the emotions people experience in situations (i.e., happiness, sadness, anger, and disgust), and explains 24% of the variance in cooperation, above and beyond the DIAMONDS model. Throughout these studies, we develop and validate a multidimensional measure of subjective outcome interdependence that can be used in diverse situations and relationships-the Situational Interdependence Scale (SIS). We discuss how this model of interdependence can be used to better understand how people think about social situations encountered in close relationships, organizations, and society