The impact of supply base complexity on disruptions and performance:the moderating effects of slack and visibility

Contains fulltext : 191671pre.pdf (preprint version ) (Open Access

Correction: Protocol of the Healthy Brain Study:An accessible resource for understanding the human brain and how it dynamically and individually operates in its bio-social context

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260952.]

Bringing IO Psychology to the Public: But What if We Have Nothing to Say?

We argue that viewing communication between scholars and the public as unidirectional, in the way that only scientists act as the senders of messages while the public passively receives them, is providing only a partial and limited view. In the light of examples presented in the focal article and previously published research in the Industrial and Organizational Psychology journal, not only is it evident that scientists and the public are disconnected, but they have very little in common to share. In addition, this gap between research and practice continues to widen. Thus, we seek to unpack the underlying reasons why existing mechanisms do not allow any relevant and meaningful exchange between theory and practice. We further discuss how this lack of meaningful interaction hinders effective communication between scholars, practitioners, and the broader public in general

How Does Scientific Argumentation Differ from the Opinion of Scientists? A Response to Siegel (2022)

Recently, the Journal of Management Studies (JMS) has published an interesting debate on the Responsible Research in Business and Management Initiative (RRBM) and the role of our research for the benefit of society, organizations, and workers (Siegel, 2022; Tsui & McKiernan, 2022). While this discussion published in the JMS Point-Counterpoint section is very relevant, in this blog we want to raise some issues in response to Siegel’s (2022) contribution. The discussion published in JMS was meant to provoke debate, and explicitly aimed at capturing ‘extreme opinions’. The question, however, is where are the boundaries of such ‘extreme opinions’? What does actually constitute valid academic argumentation? In this blog, we problematize some of Siegel’s statements. Siegel has an extended publication record in top-tier journals, as well as editorial positions, including a former editor-in-chief for JMS. He, therefore, carries an additional responsibility due to his elite status. Likewise, his former editorship of JMS may have given him a special status, which allows him greater freedom in writing compared to those who may not have such privileges. At the same time, critique on his work is more difficult to publish, based on his elite status

The baby and the bathwater: On the need for substantive-methodological synergy in organizational research

The baby and the bathwater: on the need for substantive-methodological synergy in organizational researc