Choices, Challenges, and Career Consequences of Global Work Experiences: A Review and Future Agenda

Over the past 20 years, there has been increased interest in global forms of employment. Researchers have identified and investigated a number of global work experiences, including corporate and self-initiated expatriates as well as more novel forms of corporate global employees (flexpatriates, short-term assignees, and international business travelers). In this article, the authors review the empirical research that has investigated individual choices, challenges, and career consequences associated with the various types of global work. They summarize and synthesize this growing body of literature and then develop a taxonomy of global work experiences. Based on their review of this literature and their taxonomy, the authors outline an agenda for future research on global work experiences.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline

A transactional stress theory of global work demands : A challenge, hindrance, or both?

We integrate research on global work demands (Shaffer et al., 2012) with transactional stress theory to examine both the harmful and beneficial effects of three global work demands—international travel, cognitive flexibility, and nonwork disruption—for employees engaged in global work. We propose that global work demands have indirect, and conditional, effects on burnout and work-to-family conflict (WFC), as well as thriving and work–family enrichment, through employees’ appraisals that their global work is both hindering and challenging, respectively. We tested the hypotheses with a matched sample of 229 global employees and their spouses. We found that cognitive flexibility demands are related to harmful and beneficial outcomes: It increases WFC through hindrance appraisals of the global work, but also increases thriving through challenge appraisals. In comparison, international travel demands have only beneficial outcomes, such that it positively related to employee thriving through challenge appraisals, but only among employees working in jobs that have fewer nonwork disruption demands. Finally, nonwork disruption demands had only harmful effects in that it positively related to burnout and WFC through hindrance appraisals. Exploratory analyses also revealed that nonwork disruption demands negatively related to employee thriving, through challenge appraisals, when employees experienced lower levels of cognitive flexibility demands. These findings contribute to our understanding of how employees may react to their global work demands and to the transactional theory of stress by providing a more nuanced understanding of when and why job demands contribute to appraisals that work is hindering and/or challenging.© 2022, American Psychological Association. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors' permission. The final article will be available, upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/apl0001009fi=vertaisarvioitu|en=peerReviewed

Will a Good Citizen Actively Support Organizational Change? Investigation of Psychological Processes Underlying Active Change Support

The present study investigated motivational factors of employees active change support (ACS). It also investigated good citizens response to the change by highlighting convergence and divergence of motivational factors between ACS and traditional extra-role behavior. The findings based on 166 staff responses and 346 supervisor assessments in a hospital that recently implemented a sharedgovernance structure suggest that active change support is a result of an active thinking process that involves perception of potential benefit from change but not necessarily the consequence of conventional predictors of extra-role behaviors (i.e., positive attitudes). The findings also suggest that good citizens are not necessarily the supporters of organizational change and that in actuality they confront motivational dilemma especially when they hold high quality relationship with their employer because they are reluctant to challenge the status quo

The Power of Stressors: New Directions in the Challenge and Hindrance Stressor Framework

The focus of this research symposium centers on new lines of inquiry related to the challenge/hindrance stressor framework. Prior research has shown that job demands (or stressors) can have either a debilitating or a motivating effect on individuals, depending on whether the stressor is viewed by the individual as a hindrance (e.g., politics, “red tape”, role ambiguity) or a challenge (e.g., workload, time pressure, task complexity; Cavanaugh, Boswell, Roehling, & Boudreau, 2000; LePine, Podsakoff, & LePine, 2005; Seley, 1976). Building on prior work that has generally focused on re-examining past research, the proposed symposium brings together five studies that offer new insights into the challenge and hindrance framework from a number of different perspectives. The first two papers look at the mediating role of stressor appraisals in the relationship between various job characteristics and attitudinal outcomes. Our third paper examines the crossover effects of family-related stressors on both work and family engagement perceptions. In turn, the fourth paper explores a new temporal perspective of the challenge/hindrance framework by investigating the effects of job demands on a daily basis. Finally, our last paper takes this research stream into the global arena, and looks at how partner/relationship attributes moderate the relationships between multiple global work-related demands and challenge/hindrance perceptions. Our proposed symposium ends with a panel discussion with three of the participants who have focused (or will focus) on this framework for their dissertation research

Why do international assignees stay? An organizational embeddedness perspective

We apply an organizational embeddedness perspective to examine international assignees’ retention with the organization. Specifically, we hypothesize that assignees’ social ties within and their perceived fit with the host unit positively relate to two sacrifices on leaving the organization: their firm-specific learning during the assignment, and their perceived career prospects in the organization. Perceived career prospects are expected to predict subsequent retention, moderated by firm-specific learning. These hypotheses are tested using a sample of 143 inpatriates in 10 German multinationals, with retention measured 2 and 4 years later. We show that inpatriates’ trusting ties with HQ staff and their fit with the HQ positively relate to their firm-specific learning and their perceived career prospects, and that the latter predicts their retention 2 and 4 years later. Perceived career prospects mediate the direct relationship between inpatriates’ fit with the HQ and inpatriate retention, and the indirect relationship between inpatriates’ trusting ties with HQ staff and their retention. Furthermore, inpatriates’ firm-specific learning mitigates the effect of perceived career prospects on retention decisions 2 years later. We contribute to the organizational embeddedness, careers, and international business literatures by explaining when and how facets of organizational embeddedness relate to assignee retention.