目次

For the HR function to have a positive impact on performance and thus strategically add value to the organization, it has been suggested to redefine its traditional operational role. However, to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between these HR roles and performance, their alignment with the organizational strategy should not be ignored. In this paper, we therefore focus not only on whether the operational and strategic HR roles are linked to performance, but also on the extent to which their alignment with the applied organizational strategy actually matters for performance. We carried out a survey study among 336 respondents either holding an HR function or being responsible for HR-related tasks in various organizations. We found a positive effect of the strategic role on performance, and also how it might substitute a lack of innovation strategy. Further, we found an alignment effect between a cost strategy and the operational HR role in relation to organizational performance. We discuss these findings based on the literature and provide some practical recommendations for further developing the role of HR

Timeliness: How Span of Control Facilitates Timely Decision-Making

This research empirically introduces and explores the concept of timeliness, i.e., making decisions in a time-appropriate manner depending on situational velocity. Building on the situated focus theory of power (Guinote, 2007, 2010), we predicted that span of control (i.e., number of subordinates) facilitates timeliness such that organizational managers with a wide span of control decide fast when fast action is needed (i.e., high situational velocity) but also slowly when slow action is needed (i.e., low situational velocity). We also argued that the role of wide (vs. narrow) span of control in facilitating timeliness is explained (mediated) by subjectively experienced power. Results from two experience-sampling studies conducted in the US and Europe provided partial support for our predictions. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings

"Is Power so Bad? Power Lowers Moral Reasoning Level, but Not When Construed As Responsibility"

Moral reasoning is usually considered a rational and conscious process that over relatively long periods of time may progress to higher (i.e., more complex) levels. Drawing from theorizing on power and situated cognition, we hypothesized and found in two laboratory studies (Study 1 and 2) that the experience of high power (as opposed to low power and a control condition), as an immediate contextual influence lowers individuals’ moral reasoning level. We further hypothesized and showed in a third laboratory study (Study 3) that the effect of power in lowering moral reasoning levels is weaker when the experience of high power is construed in terms of responsibility, rather than opportunity. Taken together, these studies challenge a widely held assumption that moral reasoning is a long-term developmental process that is relatively immune to immediate contextual influences. Furthermore, they address the question of whether power - a chief component of any leadership or managerial role - corrupts from a different theoretical angle than prior work has done, namely by focusing on the role of a seemingly conscious and deliberative process

When saying sorry may not help: Transgressor power moderates the effect of an apology on forgiveness in the workplace

An apology, as an expression of remorse, can be an effective response from a transgressor to obtain forgiveness from a victim. Yet, to be effective, the victim should not construe the transgressor’s actions in a cynical way. Because low-power people tend to interpret the actions of high-power people in a cynical way, we argue that an apology (versus no apology) from high-power transgressors should be relatively ineffective in increasing forgiveness from low-power victims. We find support for this moderated mediation model in a critical incidents study (Study 1), a forced recall study (Study 2) among employees from various organizations and a controlled laboratory experiment among business students (Study 3). These studies reveal the limited value of expressions of remorse by high-power people in promoting forgiveness

Leader and Employee Well-Being: Identifying Strategies and Overcoming Barriers

Supporting employee well-being is increasingly critical not only for attracting and retaining employees, but also for encouraging performance. Yet, many leaders and organizations are ill-equipped to effectively foster well-being. This symposium brings together stellar junior and senior academics who will present novel research insights on how to promote and support workplace well-being. Specifically, the set of papers included in the symposium challenge erroneous assumptions about well-being, such as whether and how disclosure of mental health challenges backfires, or whether employees should be solely responsible for maintaining their well-being. Moreover, the papers explore a critical yet often overlooked challenge around workplace well-being, namely, how the well-being of leaders is as, if not more important for supporting the well-being of those they lead. Taken together, this symposium underscores the importance of overcoming barriers to workplace well-being and offers research-driven solutions for protecting the well-being of both leaders and employees