Application paper
0084-6570/97/0201-0515$08.00 515
ROUSSEAUOB IN THE NEW ORGANIZATIONAL ERAAnnu.Rev. Psychol. 1997.48:515–46 Copyright© 1997by AnnualReviewsInc. All rightsreserved
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR IN THE NEW ORGANIZATIONAL ERA
DeniseM. Rousseau Heinz School of Public Policy and Management and Graduate School of Industrial Administration,CarnegieMellon University, Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania15213
KEY WORDS: employment relations, performanceparadox, organizational change, organiza- tional learning, organizing, self-management
ABSTRACT
Changes in contemporary firms and their competitive environments translate into anewfocusin organizational research.Thischapterreviewsorganizational behavior researchreflecting theshift from corporatistorganizationsto organiz- ing.Keyresearchthemesincludeemergingemployment relations,managingthe performanceparadox, goal setting and self-management, discontinuousinfor- mation processing,organization learning,organizationalchangeandindividual transitions, and the implications of change for work-nonwork relations. Re- search into organizing is building upon and extending many of the field’s traditional concepts. This chapter suggests that someassumptions of organiza- tional behavior research arebeing superseded by thosemoreresponsive to the neworganizational era.
This chapter is dedicated to Herbert Simon on the occasion of his eightieth birthday.
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 516 A NEW ERA IN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH............................................................. 517 RESEARCH THEMESREGARDING ORGANIZING.......................................................... 518
NewEmploymentRelations................................................................................................. 518 Performance:Measurementand Management................................................................... 525 Goal SettingBecomes Self-Management............................................................................. 527 InformationProcessing: Discontinuousand Multiphased.................................................. 529 Organizational Learning..................................................................................................... 530 ManagingOrganizational Changeand Individual Transitions.......................................... 533
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Leisure,Nonwork, and Community: Personal and Institutional Supports ......................... 535 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 536 APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................... 537
INTRODUCTION
Contemporary organizationsarechanging,andthe field of organizational be- havior is changingwith them.This chapterdescribestheshiftsorganizational researchmanifestsasfirms transitionto a neweraof flexible, lateralformsof organizing(Davis 1987,Miles & Creed1995).It seeksanswersto two ques- tions.First, how arecorefeaturesof organizationalresearchinfluencedby the changescontemporaryorganizationsareundergoing?Second,what new dy- namicsand features are emergingas importantorganizationalresearch issues?
Thecentralproblemsin organizationalbehaviorareinfluencedby changes in organizationsthemselves(Barley & Kunda 1992, Goodman& Whetten 1995). Although Annual Reviewof Psychology(ARP) authorsoften have reportedthe durability of suchtraditionalcategoriesaswork motivation and performance,absenteeismandturnover,climateandculture,andgroupsand leadership(e.g.O’Reilly 1991),other recentcommentariesreportmoresub- stantialshifts. The time frameusedto review a body of researchis probably thegreatestdeterminantof whetherwe observechangeor stability. For exam- ple, Barley & Kunda’s (1992) investigation of trendsin managerialthought rangedfrom the1870sto thepresentandreportedalternating cyclesof rational (e.g. scientific management)and normative(e.g. humanrelations)thinking amongmanagersandscholarspredicatedon the degreeof expansionor con- traction in the economyof the time. From their startingpoint in the 1950s, Goodman& Whetten(1995)notedanadaptivequality in thefield’s work that shifts attentiontowardparticularappliedproblemsfirms facewithin a given decade:Organizationaldevelopmentwasa themein the1950sand1960s,and organizationaldecline and interorganizational relationswere themesin the 1980sand1990s.In the ARP,the historic reachof chapterstypically centers aroundthe intervening yearssincea subject’s last review,a practicethat can highlight stability andmask trends.
SeveralpreviousARPreviewers have characterizedthe field as“moribund” (O’Reilly 1991)or “fallow” (Mowday& Sutton1993),concludingpessimisti- cally thatneitherinnovation nor progress was evident.However,boththe time frameof areviewandthecategoriesreviewersfocusonshapehowdynamic or stablethe field appears.I conducteda contentanalysisof ARPchapters(de- scribedin the Appendixof this chapter)to determinethe field’s key content areasand their stability over time. That analysisprovidesevidenceof both changeandstability in thefield’s majortopics.It suggeststhatthougha stable coreof topics reappear—focusingon organizationaland individual perform-
516 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
ance,motivation, and worker responses—the correlationof categoriesover time is moderate,with issuesemergingandrecedingwith thefield’s advances andshifts in the problemsorganizations face.A trendtoward increasedspe- cializationis evident,which maymakeoverallprogressin thefield difficult to gauge.With this in mind, thepresentchapterfocuseson researchparticularly responsiveto contemporary organizationalchanges.In contrastwith the con- clusionsof earlierreviewers,I showthatthereis causefor optimismaboutthe progress beingmadein organizationalresearch.
A NEW ERAIN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH
This review is predicatedon the premisethat the meaningof organizationis changing.The term organizationhas two principal definitions. “The act or processof organizing”is thelongestestablishedmeaning.Thesecondrefersto “a body of personsorganizedfor someend or work,” or alternatively“the administrative personnelor apparatusof a business”(Merriam-Webster Inc. 1989).As Drucker(1994)noted,theseconddefinition—“the” organizationas an entity—has beenwidely usedonly sincethe 1950s,which is concurrent with the eraof theindustrial state. Thisseconddefinitionhasbeenoperativein organizationalresearch.Now, however,thereis evidencethat organizational behaviorresearchersare reconnectingwith the more traditional meaningof organizationas process,given the increasingattentionto group-level—par- ticularly team-level—phenomena,socialnetworks,managerialcognitionand informationprocessing,andentrepreneurship(e.g.Arthur & Rousseau1996, Drazin& Sandelands1992,Snowetal 1992,Weick1996).In hisARPchapter, Wilpert (1995) describedthe related“social constructionof organizations” perspectiveas a respectedtradition in Europeanresearch.However,more is goingon here thanjust a shiftin epistemological assumptions.
Increasinginterestin socialconstructionoccursat a time whenfirms and work roles themselves have an emergentquality in responseto an era of upheavalandtransition. Changesin severalinstitutional sectorsareinfluenc- ing firms (Davis1987,Handy 1989): TheReagan Era’s conservative approach to antitrust laws opened upa setof previously illegal interorganizational relationships; global competition hasheightened;information technologyhas explodedin the manufacturingandservicesectors;distressededucationalin- stitutionsarestruggling to meetnew skill demands;andescalatingpressures coupledwith lagging resourcesstressfamilies and other social institutions caughtin the transition. Theseinstitutional forcesoften operatequite differ- ently acrosssocietiesand can yielddistinctlocal variationsin firms (Rousseau & Tinsley1996). Inmost industrializedsocieties, institutional forcesaremani- festingthemselvesin severalrelatedorganizationalchanges:themovementto small-fi rm employment in the United States(Small BusinessAssociation
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 517
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
1992), the United Kingdom (Storey 1994), and elsewhere(Castells1992); relianceon interfirm networksto substitute for corporateexpansion,oneprod- uct of which is outsourcing work amongfirms (Bettis et al 1992); new and moredifferentiatedemploymentrelations[e.g. coreandperipheralpart-time workersandindependentcontractors,guestworkerssuchastechnical-support peopleemployedby a vendorbut working insidea client firm (Handy1989)]; andnewformsof interdependenceamongworkersandwork groups,which in turn link rising performancestandardswith the concurrentassertionof the interestsof manystakeholders,suchascustomers,workers,andstockholders (Davis1987).Inevitably,transition costsoccur,for people,firms, andsociety (Mirvis & Hall 1994,Perrow 1996).
Theshift from organizationto organizingtranslatesinto activities thatwere oncepredominately repetitivebecomingpredominately novel, networksfor- merlybased on rolesnow formingaroundknowledge,careersonce firm-based now dependingmore on personalresources,and work structuresoncerule- centerednow constructedby the peopledoing the work (cf Drazin & Sande- lands1992, Manz1992). The disappearanceof old work structures along with expansionof small-firm employmentandthedemiseof hierarchicaladvance- ment—particularly thedeclinein middle-managementpostsandtheconcomi- tant riseof professionalandtechnicaljobs—removescuesprovidedto people from traditional internal labor marketsandcareerpaths.The shif t from mana- gerial prerogativesto self-managementremovesa gooddealof formal control overwork. With theerosionof traditionalexternalguidesfor behavior,inter- nally generatedguidesareneededto operatewithin andaroundthemorefluid boundaries offirms, interfirmnetworks,andwork groups. With fewerexternal guidesfor work, greatervalueis placedon improvisationandlearning(Weick 1996).
RESEARCH THEMES REGARDINGORGANIZING
Shifting to more flexibleways oforganizingwork and employmentintroduces new elementsto established organizationalresearchtopicsand,moresignifi- cantly, gives new meaningsto existing concepts.We can observethe most significantchangesin those areaswheretheeffectsof organizing aregreatest.1
NewEmployment Relations
Since 1987, 7million Americans havelost their jobs (Cascio 1995), and severalindustrial sectorshaveexpandedtheir hiring concomitantly. This evi-
518 ROUSSEAU
1 The present chapter omits areasrelevantto organizing that arealready treatedin contemporary
reviews:teams (Guzzo& Dickson1996), personnel selection, andotherhumanresource practices (Bormanetal 1997, Cascio1995).
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
dent mobility is tied to the formation of new and more varied employment relationshipsacrossindustries as well as within specific firms. Worldwide shifts in personnelmanagementpracticesare evident, including decline of seniority-basedwagesin Japan(Mroczkowski & Hanaoka1989),declinein job securitycoupledwith higherperformancedemandsin England(Herriot & Pemberton1995),andhigherunemployment prolonging postsecondaryschool educationandapprenticeshipsin Germany(Robertset al 1994). In addition, EasternEuropehas undergonea strategicreorientationfrom placementvia centralizedworkforce planning to recruitmentthrough labor markets(Roe 1995).
Researchon the employmentrelationshipreflectsboth new employment arrangementsand the by-productsof transition. The shift to organizing is evidentin theweakerrole of hierarchyandgreaterdecentralizationof person- nel practices,therole of strategicandenvironmentalfactorsin shapingincen- tives for workersand work groups,and generallyincreasedturbulenceand uncertaintyin employment. Central themesinclude rewardsavailablefrom labor forceparticipation andperformance,how workersunderstandnew psy- chological contracts,and the impactof thesecontracts on equity, worker attachment,andother responses.
ACCESSINGREWARDS Therewardsthatmotivate workforceparticipation and performance—suchas compensationand benefits,careeropportunities, and fulfilling work—are centralto researchon motivation. Accessingrewards entailsissuesof who distributesrewards,how theyareallocated,andwhatthe partiesunderstandtheexchangeto mean.Rewarddistribution is amajortheme in organizationalresearch,particularlyregardingthelocusof decisionmaking about incentivesand personnelactions.Control over hiring, firing, and pay levelsappearsto beincreasinglydecentralizedto permitresponsivenessto local market conditions (Cappelli 1996). Wagesare now more sensitiveto the influenceof local labormarkets(Katz& Kruger1991),while rewardsbasedon seniority havedeclined(Chauvin1992). Decentralizingpersonneldecisions meansrelationswith immediatesuperiorsandcoworkersareimportant in the accessing of rewards. Impression management—particularly with supe- riors—hasbeenfound to impactperformanceratingsandtheability to access rewardsbeyondanindividualor group’s actuallevel of performance(Ancona 1990,Tsuietal1995).Mostrewarddistributionremainsmediatedbymanagers, even as theirroles shiftunderself-management(Manz & Sims1987).
Delayering coupledwith broaderspansof control complicatesthe role leadersplay in distributing rewardsandmotivating employees.High-quality leader-memberexchanges(LMX) havebeenfound to increasetheopportuni- tiesbothpartieshaveto performwell andaccessrewards(Graen& Scandura 1987). However,LMX has historically dependedupon two conditions—a
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 519
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
long-term supervisor-subordinate relationship and demographic similarity (Graen& Scandura1987)—thatareincreasinglyunlikely in a mobile, hetero- geneousworkforce.Themeaningof qualityLMX underconditionsof organiz- ing is unclear.Nonetheless,trust-basedrelationsbetweenworkersandmanag- ersappearto be increasinglycritical asworkersareheldaccountablefor their performanceacrossmore dimensions (e.g. internal and externalcustomers) (Miles & Creed1995).Theproblemof howto distributerewardsappropriately with fewer managersincreasesthe relevanceof “substitutes for leadership” (Kerr & Jermier1978,Podsakoffet al 1993) suchas membersocialization, computer-basedperformancemonitoring, andclient/customer feedback(Pod- sakoffet al 1993).Gainsharinghasbeenfoundto increasepeermonitoring of coworkerbehavior(Welbourneet al 1995),which suggeststhat social com- parisonsandpeerpressureincreasewhenan individual’s rewardsaretied to peer performance.Rearrangedjobs anda rising proportion of pay that is performance-contingentcombineto make individual and teamperformance moreobservable,asoccursin organizingaroundprojects.Contingentpayand peer pressure generated by teamsare emergingas substitutes forboth manage- rial influenceandinternalizedmembercommitment, in effect creatingshort- term contractsthatare heavilyleveraged on individual orteam performance.
The rewardsthemselvesarechanging.Promotions andformal statusgains arebeingreducedandreplacedby lateralmovespresentedas“career-building” assignments (Arthur 1994, Kanter 1989).In particular, autonomouswork groups andjob rotation tendto breakdownnarrowjob descriptions andreduce thenumberof job titles,a processreferred to as“broadbanding”(Katz1985). Employability, the ability to accessalternativework on the external labor market(Kanter 1989), is replacingjob security in somesegments. High-in- volvementwork systemshave beenfound to offer job security to valued, highly skilled workersin whomthefirm hasconsiderableinvestments (Handy 1989).Theseshifts areevidencethat externallabor-marketfactorsdrive em- ployee experienceswithin thefirm.
Workersoften perceivetraining as a reward,providing self-actualization andthemotivation to learn;careerdevelopmentwith increasedresponsibility, autonomy, andlikelihood ofadvancement;andpersonalpsychosocialbenefits, including increasedconfidence,new friendships,and better functioning in nonwork life (Noe & Wilk 1993,Nordhaug1989).However,employer-pro- vided training varieswidely with marketforces.Bartel & Sicherman(1994) reportedthat training is more frequentwhereunemployment ratesare low, which suggeststhat employersprovide skills through training where labor marketsaretight but thattheyarelesslikely to do sowhentheycanbuy skills on theoutsidemarket.Hicks & Klimoski (1987)providedevidencethat reac- tions to developmentopportunities canbe enhancedwhenemployeesreceive
520 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
realistic informationaboutthe benefitsof training; yet environmentaluncer- taintycanmakeit difficult to forecastaccuratelythebenefitsof training.In any case,asthe contextof training is altered,the meaningworkersattachto it is likely to change as well.
Traditional organizational researchhas viewed rewards asdiscrete ex- changes(e.g. payfor performance). Increasingly, rewardsandotherconditions of employmentareviewedascompensation “bundles” (Gerhart& Milkovich 1992).Koys (1991)foundthatemployees’ attitudestowardthefirm areinflu- encedby their perceptionsof the motivesthat underlierewardsystemsand otherhumanresourcepractices.Thoughincreasinglythreatenedby costcut- ting andshifts to peripheralemployment(contractors,temporaries),theavail- ability of benefitsand employee perceptionsof their importancecontribute jointly to employeecommitmentandtheirperceptionof organizationalsupport (Eisenberger et al1986,Greenbergeretal 1989,Sinclair etal 1995).
Although rewardsare traditionally thoughtof as static and discrete,with workershavingsimilar understandings of thefirm’s, management’s, or super- visor’s intentions in rewarddistribution, the conceptof a psychologicalcon- tract suggestsotherwise.Psychologicalcontractsarebeliefs individuals hold aboutthe exchangerelationshipbetweenthemselvesandan employer,in es- sence,what peopleunderstandthe employment relationshipto mean[e.g. a high-involvementrelationshipor limited transactionalemployment(Rousseau 1995)].Introducingtheconceptof apsychologicalcontractdistinguishestradi- tional notions of discreterewardsfrom the meaningascribedto the whole exchangerelationship. They havebeencharacterizedas schemasor mental modelsthat capturehow employeesinterpretbundlesof rewards.The same reward(e.g.trainingor development)cansignaldistinctkindsof relationships (e.g.short-termincentiveor long-termbenefit)dependingon theemployment context in which it occurs.Contractsare dynamic, with time playing two important roles: First, employmentduration can alter the rewardsaccrued. Second,psychological contractscanundergounannouncedchangesin terms and meaninggiving riseto idiosyncraticwork roles (Miner 1990) andemploy- ment relationships (Rousseau1995).Trustedseniorworkerswho havemore flexibilit y in responsibilitiesandwork hoursthandotheir junior colleaguesare likely to perceivethemselvesparty to a more relationally orientedcontract with their employer.As mentalmodelsof the employment relationship, psy- chologicalcontractsareformedtypically atcertainpointsin time(e.g.athiring or when undergoingsocializationfor new assignments)and resist revision exceptwhencircumstancessignaltheneedto reviseanold schemaor createa new one (Rousseau1995).Thosewho had the strongestattachmentto their employershave beenfound to react more adverselyto contractviolations (Robinson& Rousseau1994), and theseviolations of promisedcontractual
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 521
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
commitments engendermore adversereactionsthan do unmet expectations (Robinson 1995).When psychological contractsarecongruentwith changesin work practices,workers have beenfound to more fully implement change (Rousseau& Tijori wala 1996).
INEQUALITY AND SHIFTING REWARD ALLOCATIONS Pollsof public opinion in theUnitedStatesobservethattheoptimistic attitudesof the1960stowardone’s economicsuccesshave given way in the 1990sto fear of losing affluence (Yankelovich1993).Workplacejustice,along-standingtopicin organizational research,is an increasingconcernwith the often unevenconsequencesof transitions. Critics of organizational restructuringshaveraisedconcernthat short-termshareholdervalueisbeingincreasedbyappropriatingvaluedemploy- ment conditions, such as job security, for which workers have contracted (Smolowe1996).Compensation researchhasfocusedon specificdistributive issues,includingthedisparitybetween “havesand have nots”across organiza- tional hierarchies(Cowherd& Levine1992),particularlythehigh salariesand bonusesof corporateexecutivesin comparisontothoseof rank-and-fileemploy- ees.Cowherd& Levine reportedhigher product quality in firms with less disparityin compensation betweenexecutivesandtherankandfile. Redistrib- utingrewardsamongworkerswith differentemploymentrelationsraisesissues of employeeequityandof appropriatemanagementpracticesfor firms notused to dealingsimultaneouslywith distinct typesof workers.Firmsmostlikely to have internal labor markets,that is, firms with more than 1000 employees, demonstratethe greatestexpansionin useof temporaryhelp (Magnumet al 1985).This meansthat firms with the mostextensivecommitmentsto some employeesarealsousingworkersto whomtheymakefew commitments,and that these firms arestill learning how to manage eachtype of employee simultaneously.Full-timeemployeesoftenbenefitfrom thepresenceof tempo- raries.Although firms requiringgreateramountsof technicalskills wereless likely to usetemporaries(Davis-Blake& Uzzi 1993),evena limi tedpresence of temporaryworkerscanenhancethe quality of work life for full-time core employeesbecausepromotion opportunitiesaretypically limi tedto corework- ers.Pearce(1993) found that managersaremore likely to assigntemporary workerstasksthat requirelitt le knowledgeandto shift complexassignments involving teamworkto full-ti mers.Although wagesare about the samefor part-time and temporaryworkers as for full-time employees(from a 1988 Bureauof NationalAffairs surveycitedby Cappelli1996,p.19),benefitswere perhaps half aslikely. This rise in dual(or evenmultiple) labor markets within thesameorganizationraisesissuesof socialcomparisonandequity,aswell as broaderissuesof employment relations(e.g.socialquestionssuchaswhether temporaryor noncoreworkersshouldbeinvitedto holidaypartiesorparticipate
522 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
in companyorientations). Legal issuessurroundingthe contingentworkforce arestill beingsortedout (Feldman& Klaas 1996).
NEW EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BRING NEW MEANINGS TO OLD DEPENDENT
VARIAB LES New distinctionsamongcore,peripheral,temporary,andcontin- gentworkersraiseissuesfor microorganizational behavior’s typical measures of individual-levelresponses.Traditionally, commitmenthasbeenviewedasan individual outcome,largely motivated by individual differences(Mathieu & Zajac1990).Commitment—particularlyitsbehavioralcomponent,theintention to remain—hasrecentlybeenexaminedasa two-waystreet(Eisenbergeret al 1986,Shore& Wayne1993),theproductof aninteractionbetweenindividual andemployer.Measuresof employee-firmattachment,suchascommitment,are problematicfor new employment relations.Quite commonly, employeesof temporary-helpagencieswork for morethanoneagency(NationalAssociation of TemporaryStaffing Services1994). Where the employment relationship takeson theform of anorganizedopenmarket,a hiring hall, peoplemaystay within thesameoccupationbutnotnecessarilywith thesameemployerfor any lengthof time. Thus,occupationalcommitmentmay be a betterindicatorof attachmentthanorganizationalcommitment.Increasingly,workersare“partici- pants,”if notnecessarily“employees,”in severalfirms (e.g.thetechnicianpaid byXeroxtoworkoutof anofficeatMotorolaheadquartersexclusivelyservicing theXeroxequipment Motorola uses).However,it is alsopossiblethatoutsour- cinghasmerelyshiftedloyaltiessuchthatoutsourcedinformationsystemsstaff whooncewerecommittedtoamultifunctionalcorporation(e.g.AT&T) arenow similarly committed tothe specialtyfirm for whichthey work(e.g. EDS).
Researchon dual commitmentshasfocusedon union and organizational commitment(e.g.Gordon& Ladd1990),but we know very little aboutmulti- plecommitment to severalemployersor multipleclientsor customers.Hunt & Morgan (1994) testedcompetingmodelscontrastingorganizationalcommit- mentasoneof manydistinct commitments(e.g.commitmentsto work group, supervisor)with organizationalcommitment as a mediatingconstructin the relationsbetweenconstituency-specificcommitmentsandoutcomes,suchas citizenshipandintention to quit. Theiranalysissupportedtherole of organiza- tional commitmentasa mediatorbetweenattachmentto different constituen- ciesandoutcomes.Finding no evidenceof conflict amongdifferent commit- ments,theyconcludedthatemployeecommitmentsto differentpartieswithin the organizationeitherpromoteglobal organizationalcommitmentor arenot significantly relatedto it. More researchcanbe expectedregardingmultiple commitments,that is, commitmentsto occupation,employer,client, internal customers,team,union,andothers.
Trust, particularlybetweenlabor andmanagement,haslong beenconsid- eredimportantto organizationalsuccess(for an extensivehistorical review,
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 523
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
seeMiles & Creed1995).Its baseratemayhavedeclinedin recentyearseven while its valuehas risen (Barney & Hansen1994). Trust for the general managerin a chainof restaurantshasbeenfoundto besignificantly relatedto sales,profits, and employeeturnover(Davis et al 1995).Davis et al (1995) arguedthat trust fulfills Barney’s (1986)requirementsfor competitive advan- tage:Trustaddsvalueby reducingtransactioncosts,it is rarebetweenemploy- eesandmanagement,andit is not easilycopied.Mayer et al (1995)offer an integrativeframeworkdefining organizationaltrust as “the willingnessto be vulnerable”to another.Underconditions of organizing,thepartiesassociated with organizationaltrust includebut arenot limited to coworkers,immediate superiors,seniormanagersand executives,and the organizationin general. Organizingcan,however,signala shift in thedynamicsof trust.Traditionally, trustderived fromlong-termexperiences of reciprocity(Creed &Miles 1996); however,the rise of temporarywork systemssuchasproductdesignteams, film crews,andcampaignorganizationsrequireswhathasbeentermed“swift trust” (Meyersonetal 1996)supportedby socialnetworksandvulnerability to social reputation.In organizing,trust plays a fluid role as both causeand result.
Organizationalcitizenshipis a correlateandpossible outcomeof trust (Or- gan 1990). It hasbeenfound to be influencedby perceptionsof procedural thoughnot distributive fairness(Ball et al 1994,Moorman1991).As competi- tive pressureincreasesperformancedemands,themeaningof citizenshipmay shift as“performance beyondexpectations”becomesexpected. Perhaps dueto organizationaltransitions,therehasbeena shift in the typesof citizenship behaviorsinvestigated,with increasingfocuson morenegativecitizenship, or retributivebehaviors(suchassabotageor theft) thatdirectly work againstthe interestsof the organization.Using multidimensionalscaling, Robinson & Bennett(1995)developeda typologyof deviantworkplacebehaviorthatvar- ies along two dimensions: minor vs serious,and interpersonalvs organiza- tional.Consistentwith distinctions made by Hollinger & Clark (1982), organi- zationally relevantbehaviorsfall into two types: production deviance(e.g. leavingearly, taking excessive breaks),assessed asrelativelyminor; and prop- erty deviance(e.g. sabotagingequipment,stealingfrom the company),as- sessedas serious.In their frameworkfor researchon organizationally moti- vated aggression,O’Leary-Kelly et al (1996) proposedthat organizational insiders(e.g.members)areprimarily responsiblefor violencein theworkplace (as opposedto outsiders),but that poor treatmentby the organizationand hierarchicalor control-oriented organizationalnormsinfluenceboth the inci- denceandtargetsof violence.Surveyinghumanresourcemanagementexecu- tives in public corporations,Griffin (R Griffin, unpublishedmanuscript)re- spondentsreportedthat violence in the form of threats,verbal attacks,and
524 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
racial andsexualharassmentis increasingin their organizations. Humanre- source(HR) managersattributedthesechangesto the effectsof downsizing, reengineering,and increased employeeworkload.
In conclusion, researchon the employment relationshipin the new organ- izational era has two overarching themes: the greater complexity of the worker-firm relationshipthan appreciatedpreviouslyand the often-negative consequencesthat haveresultedin the shift from organizationto organizing. Awarenesshasincreasedregardingtheimportanceof trust in theemployment relationshipas well as how misleading it can be to atomistically study that relationship’s terms inisolation.
Performance:Measurementand Management
Performanceissueshavelong beena centralthemein organizationalresearch. Escalatingcompetition and expandedperformance-measurementcapabilities havemadegreaterscrutinyof organizationalperformanceevidentin all sectors of the economy.This attention has led to the recognitionof a phenomenon referredto as the “performanceparadox” (Meyer & Gupta 1994, National ResearchCouncil 1994). This paradoxhas two features:First, measuresof performanceoften areobservedto be only loosely interrelated.Second,per- formanceimprovementsin subunits do not necessarilytranslateinto produc- tivity gainsfor the firm. An exampleof the first featureis thatorganizational successin obtaining marketshareoften bearslitt le relationship to otherper- formanceindicators:Thoseorganizationsgoodin someareasmaybepoor in others.Although this patternwasobservedin early studiesof organizational performance(e.g.Seashoreetal 1960),it largelywentunnoted.An exampleof the secondwould be a division whosesuccessfulinnovationsdo not lead to firm-wide innovation (e.g. the Saturndivision of GeneralMotors). As com- petitive pressuresand performanceexpectationshave increased,both re- searchersandmanagersarebecomingmoreawareof the two featuresof this paradox,calling attention to the needfor enhancedcoordinationwithin firms (Goodmanet al 1994)aswell asperformancemonitoring, reconcilingdiverse sourcesof performanceinformation (client, peer,subordinate, task/technical), customerresponsiveness,organizationallearning,and more systematic per- formance management(Pritchard 1994,Sink & Smith 1994).2
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 525
2 In this section, we focusprimarily upon researchpertinent to the first feature of the paradox.
The secondis addressedin the latersection on within-firm organizational learning. Research into high-reliabil ity organizations indicatesthatmajor—and sometimescatastrophic—errorscan occur, while otherperformanceindicatorsarepositive(Perrow 1984, Sagan1993). Organizational factors contributing to high performance in indicators such as customer satisfaction are likely to be different from thosecontributing to safetyor costcontainment. Firms may alsohave limitedfocus of attention, which can constrain their abili ty to gather information and provide support for performance inmorethana fewareas.
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
So what doesorganizationalresearchsay for firms seekingto be goodat severalthingsatonce?Morematurefirms havebeenfoundto bemostsuccess- ful in their efforts to performwell on severalindicatorsconcurrently,which suggeststhat it takestime to learn how to do severalthings well at once (Meyer & Gupta1994). A meta-analysisof managementby objectives(an amalgamof participative management,goal setting,and performancefeed- back)andits impacton organizationalproductivity indicatethecritical role of top managementcommitment [56% averagegain underhigh commitmentvs 6% underlow commitment(Rodgers& Hunter1991)].Absenceof top man- agementcommitmentwasreportedalsoto give rise to local innovations that go unusedby thelargerfirm andto coordination problemsfor unitsseekingto obtain a high-priority objective that conflicts with the goalsof anotherunit with which it is interdependent.It is a truism that top managementcommit- mentpromotesproductivity improvement.As firms becomesmallerandless hierarchical,thecritical processesfor productivity improvementmaychange. Researchis neededon theeffectsof concurrentfeedbackfrom amultiplicity of performanceindicatorsfor groups,individuals,and organizations, in decen- tralized as well as hierarchicalsettings. Effects might rangeanywherefrom responsivenessand highperformance tovigilanceandoverload.
The goal of high-performancework teamsis to performwell on multiple dimensions (financial,customer satisfaction, employeewell-being).Huselid’s (1995)study of 968 firms in major industriesindicatesthat humanresource managementpracticesassociatedwith high-performancework systems(bun- dling training, participative decision making, incentive systems,and open communications)impactbothemployeeoutcomes(turnoverandproductivity) andcorporatefinancialresults.Findingssuggestthatfirms thathavetop man- agersfocusedon a set of clearly definedgoalssupportedby integratedHR practices are less likelyto manifestthe suboptimal performance paradox.
ProMES(ProductivityMeasurementandEnhancementSystem),a method- ology for measuringandmanagingorganizationalperformancedevelopedby RobertPritchard(1990),is designedto addresssomeof thedifficulties related to the performanceparadox.Using consensus-building amongstakeholders, ProMEScombinesthe integrationof multiple conflicting goalsandperform- ancefeedbackthat canbe readilyunderstoodandactedupon,with incentives andothermanagerialsupportfor performanceimprovement. As the demand for high performance escalates, successful new performance-management methodologiesarelikely to find waysof increasingthefirm’s capacityto focus its attention broadlyenoughto reflectmajor constituentsandinterests,while beingsufficiently selectiveto providefeedbackusefulin directingandcoordi- natingefforts toimproveperformance.
526 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Goal SettingBecomesSelf-Management Goal settinghasbeenessentialto organizationalresearchon motivation and performanceat manylevels:individual,group,andorganization. Its centrality makesit a bellwetherfor issuesin the new organizationalera.Goal setting’s stylizedfact hasbeenthat moderatelydifficult goalsmotivatehigh perform- ance(Locke& Latham1990).However,researchersin this areaacknowledge that it largelyhasfocusedon repetitivetasks(seeLocke et al 1981),often in thecontextof assignmentof performanceobjectivesby ahierarchicalsuperior. There is a striking shift toward studying goal setting as it relatesto more complextasksand social arrangements(e.g.Smith et al 1990). In field set- tings, researchinvestigatesthe role of goal settingto a firm’s (aswell asan individual’s or group’s) planningprocesses,strategy,andperformance (Rodg- ers& Hunter1991)andhasshownsignificanteffectsof goal settingon firm productivity.
Perhapsthe mostsignificant shift is a new (or perhapsrenewed)focuson self-managementin goal setting (Gist et al 1990, Latham & Locke 1991). Self-regulationhaslong beenimplicit in goal-settingtheory,becausesetting goalsandtranslatingtheminto actionis a volitionalprocess (Latham& Locke 1991),whereacceptanceof goals,whenthey are notself-set, iscritical to their achievement. Frederick Kanfer (1975) focused attention on self-control mechanismsasa basisin clinical practiceto modify addictive behavior,train- ing peopleto stopsmokingor overeating.Self-managementteachespeopleto assesstheir problems,setspecifichardgoalsto addresstheseproblems, self- monitor the effectsof the environmenton goal attainment, andappropriately administer rewardsor penaltieswhile working toward the goals.Although goal setting and self-managementhave beenlinked theoreticallyfor many years,“classic” goal-setting researchemphasizedgoal setting alone, while self-managementfocusedattention on thelearningandorchestrationof cogni- tive processesfor acquiring skills, self-monitoring progress,and providing self-reinforcement(Gist et al 1990).Gist et al foundthatgoalsetting perseis lesseffective in novel, complextasksthan is self-management,a processin which moreskills arelearnedandactivelydisplayed,evenwhentheeffectsof goal level arecontrolled.Goal settingandthe cognitive andbehavioralproc- essessurroundinggoal achievementremainat the core of self-management practices,but the latter focus attention on learning,adaptation, knowledge transfer, and theflexibilit y to adapt tochangingcircumstances.
Organizationaldelayeringand the riseof smaller, often entrepreneur-based, fi rms give self-management new meaning [including self-leading teams, (Manz 1992)]. This new meaninggives rise to debatesover the distinction betweenthe personalautonomyof self-managementand the interdependent forms of sharedgovernance,wherethe self in “self-managed”canmeanper-
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 527
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
son(Gist et al 1991),work group(Manz1992),or broaderinstitution (Welch 1994). At the heartof this shift in meaningsis a debateover who setsthe strategicgoalsfor the firm, coupledwith questionsaboutthe legitimacyand competenceof stakeholdersinvolved in thesestrategicchoices(Manz 1992). Caseanalysisof W.L. GoreandAssociates,thefirm thatdevelopedtheprod- uct Gore-tex,providesevidencethat self-managementpracticeswherelearn- ing is emphasizedcanyield a fluid adhocwork system,reflectingorganizing processesratherthan formal structureand resulting in innovation, high per- formance,and collaborativeshapingof the firm’s goals (Shipper& Manz 1992).In Brazil, similar self-managementpractices—basedon a combination of profit sharing,collaborativedecisionmaking,andsharedfinancialinforma- tion—arereported tobe successful(Semler 1989).
Self-managementin the achievementof personalandorganizationalgoals introducesanewtwist to researchonorganizationalleadership,bothstretching and challenging how leadership is conceptualized.Podsakoffet al (1993) conductedan empirical investigation of Kerr & Jermier’s (1978) model of Substitutesfor Leadership.Originally developedto accountfor theoften-lim- ited effect of managers and supervisorson subordinate performance, this model identified factorsthat might neutralizethe effectsof (or minimize the needfor) leaders.Podsakoffet al reportedthat contingentrewards,profes- sionalorientation, nonroutine work, organizationalformalization,andspatial distancefrom otherscontributeto employeecriterionvariableswhile reducing the impact of leaderbehaviors.However,leadersupportappearsto aid em- ployeesexperiencingrole ambiguity. Under conditionsof organizing,self- managementpracticescoupledwith appropriaterewardsand developments appearto enhanceperformancein the absenceof formal leaders.In a highly turbulentbusinessenvironment,Howell & Avolio (1993)foundthat transfor- mationalleadershippositively predictedbusiness-unit performanceoveraone- year interval, while transactionalleadership,including contingentrewards, wasnegativelyrelatedto business-unitperformance.They suggestit may be counterproductivefor leadersto spendtoo much time focusingon meeting goalsas opposedto promoting freedomof actionin dynamic environments.
Theconceptof stretchgoals(Sherman1996)is predicatedon the ideathat seemingly impossible goals can motivate high performance bymandating creativity andassumption-breakingthinking that takesthe performer“out of thebox.” On thesurface,stretch goals appearto violateanessential premiseof goal theory, that workerscannotaccepta goal that doesnot seemfeasible. Relatedto the conceptsof transformational leadership,where performance expectationsare elevatedwell beyond the limi ts of past experience(Bass 1985),anddouble-looplearning(Argyris & Schoen1996),wherepreviously successfulframeworksarequestioned,revised,or discarded,thefact thatprior
528 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
experienceis often a poor guide for stretch-goalachievementshifts the per- formers’ attention awayfrom old routinesandassumptions towardnoveland creativeapproaches.Wood et al (1987) reportedthat “do-your-best” goals worked betterthan difficult,specific goalswhen the task wasnovel and highly complex.Plausibly,bothworkerself-efficacyandthecredibility of thepeople setting the stretch goal contribute to the resulting performance. Kelly & McGrath(1985)havesuggesteddysfunctionalconsequencesfor groupswork- ing on especiallydifficult tasks,suchasstringenttime deadlines,wherethey spendlesstime discussingtask ideas(e.g.agreementsor modifications) that might affectproductquality or interpersonalissues(e.g.conflicts,needs)that can affect membersupportand well-being.Further,they reportedthat these negativeinteractionprocessescarry over evento later trials for which time limits have changed.
Employersthat rewardonly extreme performancehavebeenfoundto foster someunexpectedconsequences.In a studyof high-technology firms, Zenger (1992) reportedthat performance-basedcompensationthat aggressivelyre- wardsextreme performance whilelargelyignoringperformance distinctionsat moderatelevels yields retentionof extremelyhigh and moderatelylow per- formers. In contrast,moderatelyhigh and extremely low performerswere likely to depart.New issuesariseasorganizationsandgoal-setting researchers turn their attentionto morecomplexcircumstancesandevermorechallenging levelsof performance.
InformationProcessing:DiscontinuousandMultiphased
Turbulentcompetitiveenvironments,technologicalsophistication,andflexible organizinggive riseto greaternoveltyandcomplexity in work, which contrib- utesto anexpandinginterestin individual andmanagerialcognition (Kiesler& Sproull1992)andthebroaderdomainof information processingby firms and individuals (Fiol 1994,Louis & Sutton1991).Evidencethat peopleprocess informationdifferently in novel vs routinesituations hasled to the develop- mentof theconceptof “discontinuousinformationprocessing”(Sims& Gioia 1986).Organizingpromotesuseof controlledinformation processing,where informationis activelysoughtandcarefullyprocessedto makea quality deci- sion when thereis littl e experienceon which to rely. This phenomenonhas beenused to characterizethe vigilance and flexibilit y required to operate American aircraft carriers as “high-reliability organizations” (Weick & Roberts1993),whereevenhierarchymust be adaptable.Models of rational decisionmaking suchasexpectancytheory(Vroom1964)tendto work well in accountingfor behavior in nonroutine decisionssuch as choosinga career (Wanouset al 1983) but do less well in explaining routine behaviors.In routinesituationssuchassustainedperformancein astablesituation overtime, controlledprocessesgive way to relianceon automaticprocessesusingestab-
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 529
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
lishedmentalmodelsandroutines(Bartunek& Moch1987,Fiol 1994,Sims& Gioia1986).
An individual’s capacity to switch back and forth betweenroutine and nonroutine information processing [“ shift ing the gears” (Louis & Sutton 1991)] is postulatedto be influencedby personalitycharacteristics(e.g.locus of control)asis an individual’s capacityto enactthe “weak situations” charac- teristicof work settingswhereorganizingis required(Weick 1996).Research is neededon theimpactof personalityandcognitivestylesonboth discontinu- ous informationprocessingandenactmentof weaksituations.Cascio(1995) hassuggestedthat personalitytestsoffer important predictivepowerfor suc- cessful performance innew formsof work.
“Shifting thegears”in cognitiveprocessesis evidentin researchon training (Heskethet al 1989),socialization (Louis & Sutton1991),andorganizational learning(Argyris 1991,Nicolini & Meznar 1995).In training,unpredictability andvariation tendto causedifficulti es for the learner.Yet thesefactorsalso enhancetheability to applytrainingin thefuture,whendiversecircumstances arise that are not necessarilyanticipatedat the time of training (Neal et al 1995).In socialization, individualsmaybeopento learningabouttheorgani- zationonly at certainpointsin time (Guzzo& Noonan1994,Louis & Sutton 1991).Organizationallearningbasedon active thinking hasbeenadvocated (Fiol & Lyles 1985),while strategicfailings havebeentracedto overreliance uponautomaticprocessing(Starbuck &Millik en 1988).
Organizational Learning Althoughorganizationallearninghasplayeda rolein theorganizational litera- ture for decades(e.g.Congelosi& Dill 1965),until recentlytherewas little empirical researchon the subject.Rising competitive pressureshavefueled interestin organizational learning asamajor determinantof sustainableorgan- izational performance,which suggeststhat to survive and thrive firms will needto learnat an increasinglyrapid rate.Competition hasbeenobservedto promote organizationallearning in single-unit firms, typically small, fre- quentlyentrepreneurialenterprises,while largermultiunit firms tendto mani- fest less learning in responseto competition, insteadlevering their market positionto obtaincompetitive advantage(Barnettet al 1994).Learningneces- sitatesa facility for discontinuousinformationprocessingon the part of both firms and individuals, the capability to deploy knowledgeanddemonstrable skills in novel ways and flexible combinations (Argyris & Schoen1996). Organizationallearningcanoccurwithin a firm whenit involvesdiffusion of knowledgebetween membersand across units(e.g. Epple etal 1996) or betweenfirms, with dissemination and implementationof new knowledge obtainedthroughexternalmonitoring or benchmarkingandinterpersonalcon- tact (Miner& Robinson 1994).
530 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
WITHIN-FIRM: MEMORY AND SHARED UNDERSTANDING To a point, organiza- tional learningdisplaysseveralfeaturesof individual learning,particularlyin its needfor memoryandthetransferof learningto newsettingsandproblems. The major distinction is organizationallearning’s requirementthat members conveytheirlearningtooneanother,developsharedunderstandingsorcommon cognitivestructuresregardingapplicationof sharedknowledge,andotherwise externalizewhattheylearn(Lyles & Schwenk1992;Goodman& Darr 1996). Theprevalenceof thesecondfeatureof theperformanceparadox(above),where innovationsin asubunitdonotnecessarilytranslateinto innovationsfor thefirm asa whole,suggeststhatwithin-firm learningis difficult. Nonetheless,it does occur.In anempiricalstudyof alargefinancial firm, Fiol (1994) observed that gradual consensus building with interactions among different subgroups played acritical rolein overcomingresistanceto changeand ledto acollective understandingthatacknowledgedbothdifferencesandagreementregardinga newventure.In pizzafranchises,unitcostdeclinedsignificantly asstoresgained experiencein production(Darretal 1994).Knowledgetransferredacrossstores ownedby thesamefranchiseebutnotacrossstoresownedby differentfranchi- sees.Employeeturnovercontributedto“forgetting,”orknowledgedepreciation, in thishigh-turnoverindustry.
The repeated finding that turnover leadsto organizational“forgetting” raisesquestionsabout whetherorganizationallearning has really occurred whenperformancegainsaremanifest.It canbedifficult to distinguishbetween gains due to individual learning among many members as opposed to organiza- tional learning embedded in new processes and procedures. In a laboratory simulation, pairedsubjectsdevelopedinterlockedtask-performancepatterns that displayedcharacteristicsof organizational routines(Cohen& Bacdayan 1994). Proceduralmemory explainshow such routinesarise,stabilize, and change. Procedures can become enduring propertiesof organizations.But unlessthey are externalized(e.g.written down or incorporatedinto training programs),they may not be effectively retainedwhen knowledgeableindi- vidualsleave.
Internalorganizational barriersofteninhibit within-firm learning.Goodman & Darr (1996) report that evena multiunit firm ostensiblycommitted to learning may find it difficult to disseminate information and createshared understandings aboutnewprocessesandcapabilities. Ifsharedcognitivestruc- turesarecritical for organizationallearning,thesemaybeeasierto achievein smaller, single-unit fi rms. Embedding knowledgein technologyhas been found to facilitate transferacrossshifts (Epple etal 1996). This research suggestsuseful directionsfor researchinto transfermechanisms(e.g. repre- sentations,flow diagrams,andprocedures)that inhibit forgettinginducedby
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 531
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
employeeturnover.Thesetransfermechanismsthemselvesmay distinguish organizationallearningfrom that ofindividuals.
LEARNING BETWEEN FIRMS: CAREERSAND SOCIAL NETWORKS New organiza- tionalformssuchasjoint ventures,outsourcingamongorganizationalnetworks, researchconsortia,and other forms of organizing(Aldrich & Sasaki1995) provide evidencethat organizationallearningwill occur acrossincreasingly blurry boundaries.While outsourcing hasbeenlinked to declinesin organiza- tional learningin outsourcedfunctions(Bettisetal 1992),networkedorganiza- tions with flexible membershipscan promote it (Snow et al 1992). These “boundaryless”organizations,definedhereas organizationswhosemember- ship,departmentalidentity, andjob responsibilities areflexible (Kanter1989, Miner & Robinson 1994),yield a patternof moreflexibly structuredcareers. Careerpatternsarefoundto contributeto organizationallearningby generating diverseframesof referencefor problemsolving,redirectingold routinesin new ways,andharvestingorganizationalmemory(Miner & Robinson1994).Job transitions(loss,rehire,rotation,transfers,internationalassignments,horizontal moves,demotions) becomecommonplace andcan promoteorganizational and individual learning(Miner & Robinson1994).Transitionsoutof firms compli- cateretentionbut createopportunities for learningin new firms, particularly giventhemovementof employeesfrom largeto smallerfirms whereroutiniza- tion is often lower. Nonhierarchicalcareersrecombinepersonalandorganiza- tional learning in novel ways andthemselves can becomerepositories of knowledge(Bird 1994).
Socialnetworksoutsidecorporationsandotherfirms havebecomesources of career advantage(DeFilippi & Arthur 1994)and expertise(Miner & Robin- son 1994), functioning in ways similar to occupationalcommunitiesthat influ- encecareerdecisionsand transitionsof members(Van Maannen& Barley 1984).Firms that cultivaterelationshipswith educationalinstitutionssuchas high schoolsimprove their accessto appropriatelyskilled workers (Rosen- baumet al 1990).The impactsocialnetworksoutsidethefirm haveon career advancement may be particularly important to the careerdevelopmentof womenandminorities.Evidencesuggests thatwithin-firm socialnetworkscan work to the advantageof white men over women (Ibarra 1992) and over African-Americans (Thomas& Higgins1996).
In sum,organizing—with its flexible work arrangements,personnelmove- ments,relianceuponpersonalexpertise,andsystematic information process- ing—places a premium on experimentation and collective learning. As boundaries betweenfirms blur, we canexpectmore rapid organizational learn- ing and possiblya similar rate of forgetting,along with greaterattention to mechanismsfor retainingknowledgewith or without a stablemembership. Theshift towardnetworkorganizations(Snowetal 1992)suggeststhatknow-
532 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
ing who is becomingas important as knowing how (DeFillippi & Arthur 1994).
Managing OrganizationalChange andIndividual Transitions
Transitionsaboundin the new organizationalera both for firms and for the workforce. Managingorganizationalchangeand individual transitions is an overarching research theme.
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE Changemanagementfocuseson theimplementa- tion andultimately thesuccessfulinstitutionalizationof new technology,cul- ture, strategy, and related employment arrangements. Organizational Development (OD),thetraditional practicesideof organizational research,has longhadashakyreputationamongorganizationalscientists for its lackof rigor and“pop” style.However,theboundarybetweenODandorganizationalscience hasbecomeblurredasmoreresearcherstackletheproblemsof implementing change (e.g. Kiesler& Sproull 1992,Novelli et al 1995).
Organizingis typically a radicaldeparturefrom thetraditional wayspeople think and act in firms. Stableand enduringmentalmodelsor schemashave beenfoundto contribute to reactionsto change(e.g.Bartunek& Moch 1987). Lau & Woodman (1995) identify three features of schemaspertinent for change:causality(attributions usedto understandcausesof change),valence (meaningandsignificance),and inferences(predictionsof future outcomes). They reportedthat organizational commitment is relatedto thesefeaturesof changeschemas,consistentwith theargumentthata fundamentalrealignment in howpeopleunderstandthe firmis neededto fosterorganizationalchange.
Organizationalchangealsohasbecomea justiceissue(Novelli et al 1995). Distributive justice, the perceivedfairnessof the outcomes,is a particular focus becausethe departuresfrom the statusquo that constitutechangeare commonly experiencedas losses,and gains from changemay take time to realize,particularly when masteryof a radical new organizationalform is required.Offsetting lossesfrom work systemchangeshasbeenfound to im- prove distributive fairnessby helping peoplegain the skills neededto be successful andgain rewards underthe new system(Kirkman etal 1994).
Interactionaljustice pertainsto the communication processin managing change.Presentingbad newswith politenessand respect(Folger 1985) and providing credibleexplanationsor socialaccountsfostermorepositivereac- tions (Bies& Moag1986).In labordisputes,thegeneralpublic wasfound to reactwith strongerperceptionsof unfairness,moresympathy,andmoresup- port for grievancesbasedon interactionaljusticeratherthanproceduraljustice, which in turn generatedmore intensereactions than grievances based on distributive injustice (Leung et al 1993). For victims of change,when out- comesareparticularlysevere,explanationshigh on specificitywerejudgedto
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 533
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
be more adequateand led to more positive reactionsthan did explanations emphasizinginterpersonalsensitivity. Effectsareenhancedwhentheexplana- tion is delivered orallyrather thanvia memoor letter (Shapiro etal 1994).
Proceduraljustice in changerefersto the processeswherebyimplementa- tion decisionswere made.Voice mechanismsthat allow affectedpeopleto participatein decidingupon the changeor planning its implementation en- hanceproceduraljustice,asdo proceduresto correctfor biasesor inaccuracy of informationusedin the process(Sheppardet al 1992). In a studyof new technology implementation,employee strain increasedduring theimplementa- tion phaseandwashighestamongthoseindividuals who werenot includedin the implementation process(Korunka et al 1993). However, voice had no effectin reactionsto sevenfacility relocations(Daly & Geyer1994),although the researchersspeculatethat employeesmay not have expectedto havea voicein relocationdecisions. Thetiming andphasesof changemayalsoplaya role in effective implementation(Jick 1993), but thesehave receivedless systematicattention.
INDIVIDUAL TRANSITIONS Employmentdisplacementsareoccurringat faster ratesthanin thepastandarepredictedto continue(Handy1989).Joblosshas beenassociatedwith lower self-esteem(Cohn 1978), increasedanxiety,and psychologicaldistress(Winefield et al 1991). Moreover, workers who are pressured toleave butopt to stayreport unusually high levels ofpsychological distress (Price& Hooijberg 1992).Reemploymentcanmeansettling for unsat- isfactory newjobs(Liem 1992),which canengenderlong-termadverseconse- quences.In alongitudinalstudyof laid-off industrialworkers,Leana& Feldman (1996)found that financial pressures,levelsof optimism andself-blame,and theamountof problem-focusedandsymptom-focusedcopingindividuals en- gagein weresignificantpredictorsof reemployment, which supportsprevious researchon the importanceof individual differencesin successfulsearches (Kanfer& Hulin 1985).Jobsprogramscoupledwith interpersonalsupporthave been foundto playa role insuccessfulreemployment(Vinocuret al1991).
Forecastingrepeatedcyclesof employmentandunemployment for skilled as well as unskilled workers,severalorganizationalresearcherspredict that transitionswill becomelessdisruptive aspeopledevelopskills for adaptingto change(Weick 1995)andaspersonalexpectationsanddefinitionsof psycho- logical successrecast“unemployment” asan opportunity for personaldevel- opmentor family benefit (Mirvis & Hall 1994). A major factor in worker adaptationis likely to be thebroadersocietalsupports—educational,cultural, and economic—forworkers andnonworkers alike.
534 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Leisure,Nonwork, and Community: Personal andInstitutional Supports Escalatingpressureson the workforce due to restructuringmanifest in the attentionpaid to work-nonwork relations(Mirvis & Hall 1994). Decline of corporatistfirms andtheir traditionalbenefitsraisesconcernsaboutthe infra- structureneededto supportbothnewformsof employmentandorganizingand individual workers and theirfamilies—evident inan emergingarea of scholar- shipon socialcapital(Etzioni1993,Perrow 1996).
Socialcapitalrefersto civic life andpublic trust,thesocietalinfrastructure from whichworkersandorganizationsreceivesupport.Socialinstitutionssuch asfamily andschoolsare reportedto havedifficulty respondingto theprevail- ing economicpressures(Etzioni 1993), a fact suggestingthat more active individual involvementin community life may be requiredto sustainthese institutions. Greaterinvolvementin off-the-job activitieshasbeenassociated with reducedrole interferenceand psychologicalstrain (Gutek et al 1991, O’Driscoll et al 1992).Kirchmeyer(1995)found that employeecommitment is enhancedwhen organizationsprovide resourcesto help employeesfulfill family andothernonwork responsibilities. Shefurther reportedthat workers prefer benefits that let them managetheir responsibilities themselves (e.g. flexible scheduling)ratherthanhavethefirm do it for them(e.g.on-sitechild care).
Kanter (1977) suggestedthat early in the twentiethcentury,corporations tried to “swallow the family andtakeover its functions.”Subsequently,firms movedto separatework and family in order to excludecompetingloyalties. Demographicchanges,particularlyworking mothersanddual income-career families,haveincreasedthe interdependenceof work andfamily andintensi- fied conflicts, particularly regardingtime allocation.Recentstudiessupport thesignificanceof institutionalfactors,includingsocietalbeliefsabouttherole of womenandwork-family relations,in expandedorganizationalemphasison work-nonworkrelations(Goodstein1994,Ingram& Simons1995).Consistent with institutional arguments, larger(i.e. more publicly visible) firms seek legitimacy by adopting child-carebenefitsand work flexibil ity (Goodstein 1994).However, Ingram &Simons(1995)reported thatinstitutionalpressures explainlate adoptionof “family friendly” HR practices,while early adopters arelikely to do so insteadto gainstrategicadvantage(e.g.professionalfirms coping with labor shortagesby filling positions with qualified women and dual-career spouses). Early adoption is linked to significant numbers of womenin a firm’s workforce,while late adoptionsarelessaffectedby firm- specific demographics(Galinsky& Stein1990,Goodstein1994).
Traditional corporatefirms havebeenimplicatedin anerosionof commu- nity and civic life (Etzioni 1993, Perrow1996). If corporationsdid in fact
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 535
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
erodesocial capital, the shift to organizingdoesnot reversesuch effects. Organizingmay requiremoresocialcapitalthandid organizationswith huge internal infrastructures, particularly inrespectto education (Handy1989), portableretirementandhealth-carebenefits(Lucero& Allen 1994),andfam- ily support(Mirvis & Hall 1994).As a result,organizationalresearchersare likely to expandtheir considerationof work-nonworkrelationsto include a broader arrayof supportsystemsandcommunity institutions.
CONCLUSION
The evolution from organizationto organizingchangesboth the phenomena traditionally studiedby organizational researchandthemeaningof sometradi- tional concepts.Theanswerto theopeningquestionsof this reviewareappar- ent.Corefeaturesof organizationalresearch,including its focuson perform- anceandworker-firm relations,endure,but they do so with new dimensions. Performancenow involvesa multiplicity of resultspursuedconcurrentlyand with an expandedfocuson adaptiveandsustainedlearning.Goal setting and leadershipmay convergeinto self-management.However,new dynamicsare evidentin theshift towardaninteractiveview of theemployment relationship, reorientedfrom a focus on what managersoffer workers to how workers acrossall ranksaccessrewardscontingentuponthe firm’s strategicconcerns. We seean increasinglycomplexview of information processing,reflectinga more rapid cycling from novel to routineandbackagain,characteristicof a moredynamicenvironment. Thereis alsoa broaderconcernfor the personal and societalimpactof theway work isorganized.
This chapterhasfocusedon topicsparticularlysensitive to thedynamicsof organizing.Assumingthe shift from organizationto organizingwill not be quickly undone,what are its implications for organizationalresearchas a whole?Barley& Kunda(1992)maintainthatperiodsof economiccontraction lead to more emphasison relationshipbuilding, organizational support,and strengtheningof employee-firmcommitment (witnessElton Mayo’s Human Relationsmovementduring the depressionof the 1930s).Formerly, firms displacedworkersonly when the economywasshrinking.Therecent coupling of massive terminations with economicexpansionfragmentsthe managerial ideologiesthatbothjustify andguideorganizationalactions.Theymaydo the same forresearchideologies. Asa result,we might expect to find more researchersinvestigating competinghypothesesfrom moredistinct andoften divergentframeworks.A central thememay be the drive to increaseshare- holdervaluecoupledwith concernaboutthecostsof displacementandtransi- tion for the workforce which createsthat value. Clearly, organizationalre- searchneedsto dig into themessyproblemsof servingmultiple constituencies.
536 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
This chapteris not anattemptto createa “short” list of researchtopics;no prescriptionsare intendedfor future researchersabouttopics to “buy” or to “sell.” Severalkey researchthemes,including customerservice(Schneider& Bowen1995),quality (Dean& Bowen1994),andthe adoption of new tech- nology(Leonard-Barton& Sinha1993)wereomittedbecauseof spacelimita- tions.Rather,this chapterhighlightsbroadareaswheretheeffectsof organiz- ing aremorevisible, whereour learningprogressesevenas further research needsappear.If the pastis a prologue,we canexpectthat relevantorganiza- tional changeswill manifestthemselves in other areas,too. However,while new topics such as the performanceparadoxappear,establishedoneskeep their labelsbut shift their focus.Perhapsit is for this reasonthat in themany yearsof ARPs reviewedin preparationfor this chapter,certaincore themes haveendured.Yet, at somepoint,we might needto acknowledgethatchanges in firms areprofoundenoughto alter furtherbasicassumptions on which the field is based.In anycase,a newerain organizationalbehaviorappearsto be in themaking.
APPENDIX
In preparingthis chapter,a contentanalysiswas conductedon the 23 ARP chapterssince1979 dealingwith organizational research(organizational behav- ior, industrial/organizational psychology, personnel and human resourcemanage- ment,traininganddevelopment, andorganizationaldevelopmentand change). Substantivetopics coveredwere categorizedby having two ratersreadeach chapterandidentify their centralconcepts.Ratersgenerated a setof categories and then codedchaptersaccordingto their content(rate of agreementwas 85%).In thecaseof the1979ARP,for example,Mitchell’s (1979)chapteron organizationalbehavior was coded as including personality,job attitudes, commitment, motivation, and leadership.That volume containeda second organizationallyrelevantchapter,Dunnette& Borman’s (1979) “Personnel SelectionandClassification Systems,”which wascodedasincluding catego- ries of validity, job analysis,performanceratings,equalopportunity, andse- lectionpractices. Content codingidentified94 discretecategories altogether.
Correlations computedbetweencategorymatricesfor each time period assessthe degreeof stability in categorypatternsover time. Using the QAP correlationtechnique(Krackhart1987),correlationswerecomputedbetween entriesin two matrices,and the observedcorrelationswerecomparedto the frequencyof randomcorrelationsto provide a test of statisticalsignificance (basedon 500 permutations).This analysis,usingnormalizeddata(Table1), indicatesmoderatestability in ARP categorieswith slightly greaterconver- gencein categoriesin ARPchaptersacrossperiods1 and3. It alsosuggestsa fair degree of variety overtime in theissuesaddressed.
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 537
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Examination of frequentlycited categoriesacrossthe threeperiods(Table 2) suggeststhat categoriesrelatedto the generaltopicsof performance(e.g. predictorsof individual performance,measurement,organizationalperform- ance,ineffectiveness,andfailure), motivation (e.g.effort resultingfrom goal settingor rewardsoffered),andemployeeresponses(e.g.stress,satisfaction, andcommitment) form a stablecore.Thesecategoriescomprisewhat appar- entlyarethecentraldependentvariablesor outcomesoperationalizedin organ- izationalbehaviorresearch.Otherdurablecategorieswith basicallyconsistent levelsof research/citationthroughout this extendedperiodincludetheperson- nel-relatedareasof job analysisand performanceappraisal.Topics where reports of research activitiesareincreasing over time include individual cogni- tion, organizationalchange,and organizationalperformance.A multidimen- sionalscaling(MDS) of the ARPcategorieswithin eachtime period(Krack- hardt et al 1994) suggeststhat the field has moved from three core areas (Change,Personnel,andMicro OB) of earlieryearsto a morehighly differen- tiated set of categoryclusters(Personnel, MicroOB, Context Power and Influence,Organizationenvironment).Figures1 and 2 display MDS for the first and third periods.Categoriesin ellipsesbridge two or moreareas,thus Pers (Personality)bridges Personneland Micro-OB in both periodswhile Operf (OrganizationalPerformance)emergesas a bridge amongMicro OB, Personnel,andContextin period3. Bridging categoriesprovidean opportu- nity for integration acrossdisciplinesandparadigms.Nonetheless,from 1979 to 1995,a trend toward specialization is evident.Further information about this analysisis availablefrom theauthor.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thankColin Housingfor his helpwith the literaturereview,Tiziana Casciarofor her work with the quantitative review, and both Tiziana and
Table 1 Annual Reviewof Psychology: summaryinformation
Time period ARP# of articles
ARP# of categories
Times ARPa
Time 1: 1979–1984
9 47 1 × 2 .23
Time 2: 1985–1990
8 57 2 × 3 .24
Time 3: 1991–1995
6 44 1 × 3 .34
Totalb 23 94 aCorrelationsaresignif icantly different from .00, the average corre-
lation acrossall cells inmatrix. bRepresentstotal number of total distinct categories where many
categories mayappearin severaltimeperiods.
538 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Kristina Dahlin for their assistance in coding the data. David Krackhardt meritsspecialthanksfor help with the multidimensionalscalinganalysisand the figures.Michael Arthur, Kathleen Carley, Paul Goodman, and Laurie Weingartprovidedusefulinput at variouspoints in this chapter’s preparation. Thanksalso to CatherineSenderlingfor her editorial work and to Carole McCoy for wordprocessing.
Table 2 Frequent categories
ARP TIME 1 Performance predictors= 5
Stress =5 Jobanalysis= 4 EEO= 4 Motivation = 4 Personnel selection= 3 Satisfaction= 3 Equity = 3 Performance appraisal= 3 Jobdesign = 2 Methodology = 2 Fairness= 2 Organizationalperformance= 2 Personality = 2 Individual difference =2 Personnel training= 2
TIME 2 Jobanalysis= 6 Leadership= 6 Motivation = 5 Performance predictors= 3 Affect = 2 Organizationalculture =2 Organizationalchange= 2 Performance appraisal= 2 Personnel selection= 2 Personnel layoffs = 2
TIME 3 Organization context/cross level effects= 3 Motivation = 2 Stress =2 Performance predictors= 2 Organizational technology = 2 Organizationalperformance= 2 Performance appraisal= 2 Personality = 2 Jobanalysis=2 Legal issues= 2 Organizationaldemography = 2
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 539
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
F ig
ur e
1 M
D S
on A
R P
fo r
Pe ri
od 1.
540 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
F ig
ur e
2 M
D S
of A
R P
fo r
P er
io d
3.
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 541
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Aldrich HE, Sasaki T. 1995.R&D consortia in the United Statesand Japan.Res.Policy 24:301–16
Ancona DG. 1990. Outward bound: strategies for teamsurvival in anorganization. Acad. Manage.J. 33:334–65
Argyris C. 1991. Teaching smartpeople how to learn. Harvard Bus.Rev.69:99–109
Argyris C, Schoen DA. 1996. Organizational Learning II. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Arthur MB. 1994. The boundarylesscareer:a newperspective for organizational inquiry. J. Organ. Behav. 15:295–306
Arthur M, Rousseau DM, eds. 1996. The BoundarylessCareer: A NewEmployment Principle for a New Organizational Era. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
Ball GA, Trevino LK, SimsHP Jr. 1994. Just andunjust punishment: influenceson sub- ordinate performance and citizenship. Acad. Manage.J. 37:299–322
Barley S, Kunda G. 1992. Design and devo- tion: surgesof rational andnormative ide- ologies of control in managerial discourse. Adm.Sci. Q. 37:463–99
Barnett WP, Greve HR, Park DY. 1994. An evolutionary model of organizational per- formance.Strateg.Manage.J. 15:11–28
Barney JB. 1986. Organizational culture: Can it be a source of sustained competitive ad- vantage?Acad. Manage.Rev.11:656–65
Barney JB, HansenMH. 1994. Trustworthi- nessasa source of competitive advantage. Strateg. Manage. J.15:175–90
Bartunek JM, Moch MK. 1987. First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organizational development interventions: a cognitive approach. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 23:483–500
BassBM. 1985. Leadershipand Performance Beyond Expectations. NewYork: FreePress
Bettis RA, Bradley SP, Hamel G. 1992. Out- sourcing andindustrial decline.Acad. Man- age. Exec.6:7–22
BiesRJ, Moag JS.1986. Interactional justice: communication criteria of fairness.In Re- searchon Negotiations in Organizations, ed.MH Bazerman,R Lewicki, B Sheppard, pp. 1:43–55. Greenwich,CT: JAI
Bird A. 1994. Careersasrepositoriesof knowl- edge:a new perspective on boundaryless careers.J. Organ. Behav. 15:325–44
BormanW, Hanson M, HedgeJ.1997. Person- nel sel ect i on. Annu. Rev. Psychol . 48:299–337
Cappelli P. 1996. Rethinking employment. Br. J. Ind. Relat. In press
CascioWF. 1995. Whither industrial and or- ganizational psychology in a changing world of work?Am.Psychol. 50:928–39
Castells M. 1992. Four Asian tigers with a dragon head:a comparative analysis of the state, economy and society in the Asian Pacific Rim. In Statesand Developmentin the Asian Pacific Rim, ed.RPApplebaum, J Henderson, pp. 33–70. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Chauvin K. 1992. Declining returns to tenure for managerial jobs.Manage.Econ.
CohenMD, BacdayanP. 1994. Organizational routinesarestored asprocedural memory: evidence from a laboratory study. Organ. Sci. 5:554–68
Cohn R. 1978. The effectsof employment status changeonself-attitudes.Soc.Psychol.41:81–93
Congelosi VE, Dil l WR. 1965. Organizational learning: observations toward a theory. Adm.Sci. Q. 10:175–203
CowherdDM, LevineDI. 1992. Product qual- ity andpayequity betweenlower-levelem- ployeesandtop management: an investiga- tionof distributive justice theory. Adm.Sci. Q. 37:302–20
CreedWED, MilesRE. 1996. Trust in organi- zations: a conceptual framework linking organizational forms, managerial philoso- phies,andtheopportunity costsof controls. SeeKramer& Tyler 1996, pp. 16–38
Daly JP,GeyerPD. 1994. Therole of fairness in implementing large-scalechange: em- ployeeevaluationsof processandoutcome in sevenfacility relocations. J. Organ. Be- hav. 15:623–38
Darr E, Argote L, Epple D. 1994. The acquisi- tion transfer,and depreciation of knowl- edge inservice organizations.Manage.Sci. 41:1750–62
Davis JH, Mayer RC, Schoorman FD. 1995. The trustedgeneral manager and firm per- formance:empirical evidenceof a strategic advantage. Presented at Strateg.Manage. Soc. Meet., Oct., MexicoCity
Davis S. 1987. Future Perfect.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
Davis-Blake A, Uzzi B. 1993. Determinants of employment externationalization: the case of temporary workers and independent contractors.Adm.Sci.Q. 29:195–223
Dean JW Jr, Bowen DE. 1994. Management theory and total quality: improving research andpractice through theory development. Acad. Manage. Rev. 19:392– 418
DeFillippi RJ, Arthur MB. 1994. The bound- aryless career: a competency-based per- spective.J. Organ. Behav. 15:307–24
DrazinR, Sandelands L. 1992. Autogenesis: a perspective on the processof organizing. Organ. Sci. 3:230–49
Drucker PF. 1994. The ageof social transfor- mation. Atl. Mon.275:53–80
LiteratureCited
542 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Dunnette MD, Borman WC. 1979. Personnel selection andclassification systems.Annu. Rev.Psychol. 30:477–526
Eisenberger R, Huntington R, Hutchinson S, Sowa D. 1986. Perceived organizational support. J. Appl. Psychol. 71:500–7
Epple D, Argote L, Murphy K. 1996. An em- pirical investigation of the micro structure of knowledge acquisi tion and transfer through learning bydoing. Manage.Sci. In press
Etzioni A. 1993. The Spirit of Community: Rights,Responsibili ties,and the Communi- tarian Agenda. New York: Crown
FeldmanDC, KlaasBS. 1996. Temporary work- ers:employeerights andemployer respon- sibilities. Empl. Responsib. RightsJ.9:1–21
Fiol M. 1994. Consensus, diversity, andlearn- ing in organizations.Organ. Sci. 5:403–20
Fiol MC, Lyles MA . 1985. Organizational learning. Acad. Manage.Rev.10:803–13
Folger R. 1985. The Churchill Effect. A. B. FreemanSch. Bus.,Tulane Univ., New Or- leans
Galinsky E, Stein PJ.1990. The impactof hu- manresourcepolicies:balancing work and family issues.J. Fam.Issues11:368–83
Gerhart B, Mi lkovich GT. 1992.Employee compensation: research and practice. In Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. MDDunnette, LM Hough, pp. 481–569. PaloAlto, CA: Consult. Psy- chol. Press.2nd ed.
GistME, BavettaAG,StevensCK. 1990. Trans- fer training method: its influence on skill generali zation, skil l repetition, and per- formance level. Pers.Psychol. 43: 501–23
Gist ME, StevensCK, Bavetta AG. 1991. Ef- fects of self-efficacy and post-training in- tervention on the acquisition and mainte- nance of complex interpersonal skills. Pers. Psychol. 44:837–61
GoodmanPS,Darr E. 1996. Exchanging best practicesthrough computer-aidedsystems. Acad. Manage.Exec.10(2):7–19
GoodmanPS, Lerch J, Mukhopadhyay T. 1994. Linkagesand performanceimprovements. See National ResearchCouncil 1994, pp. 54–80
GoodmanPS,WhettenDA. 1997. Fifty years of organizational behavior from multiple perspectives. In A Half Century of Chal- lenge and Change inEmployment Rela- tions, ed. M Neufeld, J McKelvey. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.In press
GoodsteinJD.1994. Institutionalpressuresand strategic responsiveness: employer in- volvement in work-family issues. Acad. Manage.J. 37:350–82
Gordon ME, Ladd RT. 1990. Dual allegiance: renewal,reconsideration, and recantation. Pers. Psychol. 43:37–69
Graen GB, Scandura TA. 1987.Toward a psy- chology of dynamic organizing. In Re-
search in Organizational Behavior, ed.LL Cummings,BM Staw, 9:175–208. Green- wich, CT: JAI
Greenberger E, Goldberg WA, Hamill S, O’Neil l R, Payne CK. 1989. Contributions of a supportive work environment to par- ents’ well-being and orientation to work. Am.J. Commun. Psychol. 17:755–83
Griffin R. 1995. Stress, aggression, and vio- lence in the new workplace. Cent. Hum. Resour. Manage., Tex. A&M Univ., Col- lege Station
Gutek B, Searle S, Klepa L. 1991. Rational versus gender role explanations for work- family conflict. J. Appl. Psychol. 76:560–68
Guzzo RA, Dickson MW. 1996.Teams in or- ganizations: recent research on perform- ance and effectiveness. Annu. Rev. Psy- chol. 47:307–38
Guzzo RA, Noonan KA. 1994. Human re- source practices as communications and the psychological contract. Hum. Res. Manage.33:447–62
Handy C. 1989. The Age of Unreason. Cam- bridge:HarvardBus.Sch.Press
Herriot P,Pemberton C. 1995. NewDeals: The Revolution in Managerial Careers. Chich- ester:Wiley
Hesketh B, Andrews S, Chandler P. 1989. Training for transferable skills: the role of examples andschema.Educ. Train. Tech- nol. Int. 26:156–65
Hicks WD, Kli moski RJ. 1987. Entry into trainingprogramsanditseffectsontraining outcomes.Acad. Manage.J. 30:542– 52
Hollinger RC, Clark JP.1982. Formal andin- formal social controls of employee devi- ance.Sociol. Q. 23:333–43
Howell JM, Avolio B. 1993. Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:891–902
Hunt SD, Morgan RM. 1994. Organizational commitment:one ofmanycommitments or keymediating construct? Acad. Manage. J. 37:1568–87
Huselid MA. 1995. The impact of human re- source managementpracticeson turnover, productivity, and corporate financial per- formance.Acad. Manage.Rev.3:635–72
Ibarra H. 1992. Homophily anddifferential re- turns: sexdifferencesin network structure andaccess inanadvertising firm. Adm.Sci. Q. 37:422–47
Ingram P, Simons T. 1995. Institutional and resource dependence determinants of re- sponsesto work-family issues.Acad. Man- age.J. 38:1466–82
Jick TD. 1993. Managing Change: Casesand Concepts.Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin
Kanfer FH. 1975. Self-management methods. In Helping People Change,ed.FH Kanfer, pp. 309–55. NewYork: Wiley
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 543
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Kanfer R, Hulin CL. 1985. Individual differ- encesin successfuljob searchesfollowing layoff. Pers.Psychol. 38:835–47
Kanter RM. 1977. Work and Family in the United States: A Critical Review and Agenda for Research and Poli cy. New York: RussellSageFound.
Kanter RM. 1989. When Giants Learn to Dance.NewYork: Simon& Schuster
Katz HC. 1985. Shifting Gears:Changing La- bor Relations in the U.S. Automobile In- dustry.Cambridge,MA: MIT Press
Katz LF, Kruger AB. 1991. Changes in the structure of wagesin the public andprivate sectors.In Researchin Labor Economics, ed.RGEhrenberg, 12. Greenwich,CT: JAI
Kelly JR, McGrath J. 1985. Effects of time limits and task typeson task performance and interaction of four-person groups. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49:395–407
Kerr S, JermierJM. 1978. Substitutesfor lead- ership: their meaning and measurement. Organ. Behav.Hum.Perform. 22:375–403
Kiesler S, Sproull L. 1992. Managerial re- sponseto changing environments: perspec- tiveson problem sensing from social cog- nition. Adm.Sci. Q. 27:548–70
KirchmeyerC. 1995. Managing the work-non- work boundary: anassessmentof organiza- tional responses.Hum.Relat. 48:515– 36
KirkmanBL, Shapiro DL, Novelli L Jr. 1994. Employeeresistanceto work teams: a jus- tice perspective. Presented at Acad. Man- age.Meet., Aug., Dallas
Korunka C, WeissA, Karetta B. 1993. Effects of newtechnologieswith specialregardfor the implementation processper se.J. Or- gan. Behav. 14:331–48
Koys DJ. 1991. Fairness, legal compliance, andorganizational commitment.Empl. Re- sponsib. Rights4:283–91
Krackhardt D. 1987. QAP partialling asa test of spuriousness.Soc. Netw. 9:171–86
Krackhardt D, Blythe J, McGrath C. 1994. KrackPlot 3.0: an improvednetwork draw- ing program.Connections17:53–55
KramerRM, Tyler TR, eds.1996. Trustin Or- ganizations: Frontiers of Theory and Re- search.Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage
Latham GP, Locke EA. 1991. Self-regulation through goal setting. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis.Process.50:212–47
Lau C, WoodmanR. 1995. Understanding or- ganizational change: a schematic perspec- tive.Acad. Manage.J. 38:537–54
LeanaCR, Feldman DC. 1996. Finding new jobs after a plant closing: antecedents and outcomesof the occurrenceandquality of reemployment. Hum.Relat. In press
Leonard-Barton D, Sinha DK. 1993. Devel- oper-userinteraction and usersatisfaction in internal technology transfer.Acad. Man- age. J.36:1125–39
Leung K, Chiu W, Au Y. 1993. Sympathy and support for industrial actions. J. Appl. Psy- chol. 78:781–87
Liem R. 1992. Unemployed workersandtheir families:socialvictimsor social critics?In Families and Economic Distress, ed. P Voydanoff, LC Majka, pp. 135–51. Bev- erly Hil ls, CA: Sage
Locke EA, Latham GP. 1990.A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Per formance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall
Locke EA, ShawKN, SaariLM, LathamGP. 1981. Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980. Psychol. Bull . 90:125–52
Louis MR, Sutton RI. 1991. Switching cogni- tive gears:from habits of mind to active thinking. Hum.Relat. 44:55–76
LuceroMA, All en RE. 1994. Employeebene- fits: a growing source of psychological con- tract violations. Hum. Res. Manage.33:425–46
Lyles MA, Schwenk CR. 1992. Top manage- ment, strategy, and organizational knowl- edgestructures.J. Manage. Stud. 29:155–74
Magnum G, Mayhall D, NelsonK. 1985. The temporary help industry: a responseto the dual internal labor market. Ind. Labor Re- lat. Rev.38:599–611
Manz CC. 1992. Self-leading work teams: moving beyond self-management myths. Hum.Relat. 45:1119–40
ManzCC,SimsHP Jr. 1987. Leading workers to leadthemselves:the external leadership of self-managing work teams.Adm.Sci. Q. 32:106–28
Mathieu JE, Zajac DM. 1990. A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents, corre- lates, and consequences of organizational commitment.Psychol. Bull . 98:224–53
Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust.Acad. Manage.Rev.20:709–34
Merriam-Webster Inc. 1985. Webster’s Third International Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster
Meyer M, Gupta V. 1994. The performance paradox. In Research in Organizational Behavior, ed. B Staw,LL Cummings, 16: 309–69. Greenwich,CT: JAI
Meyerson D, Weick KE, Kramer RM. 1996. Swift trust and temporary groups.SeeKra- mer& Tyler1996, pp. 166–95
Miles RE, CreedWED. 1995. Organizational forms andmanagerial philosophies. In Re- searchin Organizational Behavior, ed.LL Cummings, BM Staw, 17:333–72. Green- wich, CT: JAI
Miner AS. 1990. Structural evolution through idiosyncratic jobs: the potential for un- plannedlearning. Organ. Sci. 1:195–210
Miner AS, Robinson DF. 1994. Organization andpopulation level learning asenginesfor career transitions. J. Organ. Behav. 15:345–64
Mirvis PH, Hall DT. 1994. Psychological suc-
544 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
cessandtheboundarylesscareer.J. Organ. Behav. 15:365–80
Mitchell TR. 1979. Organizational behavior. Annu. Rev.Psychol. 30:243–82
MoormanRH. 1991. Relationship betweenor- ganizational justiceandorganizational citi- zenship behaviors: do fairnessperceptions infl uence employee citizenship. J. Appl. Psychol. 76:845–55
Mowday R, Sutton RI. 1993. Organizational behavior: li nking indivi duals and groups to organization contexts. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 44:195–229
Mroczkowski T, Hanaoka M. 1989. Continuity andchange in Japanesemanagement. Cali f. Manage.Rev.31:39–53
National Association of Temporary andStaff- ing Services.1994. Temporary Help/Staff- ing ServicesIndustry Continues to Create Employment Opportunities. Alexandria, VA: Natl. Assoc.Temp. Staff.Serv.
National ResearchCouncil, ed. 1994. Organiza- tional Linkages: Understanding theProductiv- ityParadox.Washington,DC: Natl.Acad.Press
Neal A, Hesketh B, Andrews S. 1995. In- stance-based categorization: intentional versusautomatic forms of retrieval. Mem. Cogn. 23:227–42
Nicolini D, MeznarMB. 1995. The social con- struction of organizational learning: con- ceptual andpractical issues in the field. Hum.Relat. 48:727–46
Noe RA, Wilk SL. 1993. Investigation of the factors that influence employees’ participa- tion in development activities.J. Appl. Psy- chol. 78:291–302
Nordhaug O. 1989. Rewardfunctions of per- sonnel training. Hum.Relat. 42:373–88
Novelli L, Kirkman BL, Shapiro DL. 1995. Effective implementation of organizational change: an organizational justice perspec- tive.In Trends inOrganizational Behavior, ed. CL Cooper, DM Rousseau,pp. 2:15– 36. Chichester:Wiley
O’Dri scoll MP, Ilgen DR, Hildreth K. 1992. Time devoted to job andoff-job activities, interrole confl ict, and affective experi- ences.J. Appl. Psychol. 77:272–79
O’Leary-Kelly AM, Griffin RW, Glew DJ. 1996. Organization-motivated aggression: aresearch framework. Acad. Manage.Rev. 21:225–53
O’Reilly CA. 1991. Organizational behavior: where we’ve been, where we’r e going. Annu. Rev.Psychol. 42:427–58
Organ DW. 1990. The motivational basisof citizenship behavior. In Researchin Or- ganizational Behavior, ed. LL Cummings, BM Staw,12:43–72. Greenwich,CT: JAI
PearceJL. 1993. Toward anorganizational be- havior of contract laborers: their psychologi- cal involvementand effects on employee co-workers.Acad. Manage.J. 36: 1082–96
Perrow C. 1984. Normal Accidents: Living with
High-risk Technologies. New York: Ba- sic Books
Perrow C. 1996. The bounded careerand the demise of civil society. See Arthur & Rousseau1996, pp. 297–313
Podsakoff PM, Niehoff BP, MacKenzie SB, Will iams ML. 1993. Do substitutes for leadership really substitute for leadership? An empirical examination of Kerr andJer- mier’s situational leadership model.Organ. Behav.Hum.Decis.Process.54:1–44
Price RH, Hooijberg R. 1992. Organizational exit pressures and role stress:impact on mental health. J. Organ. Behav. 13:641–52
Pritchard RD. 1990. Measuring and Improving Organizational Productivity. New York: Praeger
Pritchard RD. 1994. Decomposing the produc- tivity linkagesparadox. SeeNational Re- searchCouncil 1994, pp. 161–92
Roberts K, Clark SC,WallaceC. 1994. Flexi- bili ty and individualisation: a comparison of transitions into employment in England andGermany. Soc. 28:31–54
RobinsonSL. 1995. Violation of psychological contracts: impact on employee attitudes. SeeTetrick & Barling 1995, pp. 91–108
Robinson SL, Bennett RJ.1995. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: a multidi - mensional scaling study. Acad. Manage. J. 38:555–72
RobinsonSL, RousseauDM. 1994. Violating the psychological contract: not the excep- tion but the norm. J. Organ. Behav. 15: 245–59
Rodgers R, Hunter JE. 1991. Impact of man- agement by objectives on organizational productivity. J. Appl. Psychol. 76:322–36
Roe RA. 1995. Developments in Eastern Europe and work and organizational psy- chology. In International Reviewof Indus- trial and Organizational Psychology, ed. CL Cooper, IT Robertson. Chichester: Wiley
Rosenbaum JE, Kariya T, SetterstenR, Maier T. 1990. Market and network theories of the transition from high school to work. Annu. Rev.Soc. 16:263–99
RousseauDM. 1995. Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and UnwrittenAgreements.Newbury Park, CA: Sage
RousseauDM, Tijoriwala S. 1996. It takesa good reason to change a psychological contract. Presented at Soc. Ind./Organ. Psychol., April, SanDiego
RousseauDM, Tinsley K. 1996. Human re- sources are local: society and social con- tractsin a global economy. In Handbook of Selectionand Appraisal, ed.N Anderson, P Herriot. London: Wiley. In press
SaganS.1993. The Limitsof Safety: Organiza- tions, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons. Princeton, NJ:Princeton Univ. Press
OB IN THE NEWORGANIZATIONAL ERA 545
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.
Schneider B, Bowen DE. 1995. Winning the ServiceGame.Boston: HarvardBus.Sch.Press
Seashore SE, Indik BP, Georgopolous BS. 1960. Relationships among criteria of job performance.J. Appl. Psychol. 44:195–202
Semler R. 1989. Managing without managers. Harv. Bus. Rev.67(5):76–84
Shapiro DL, Buttner EH, Barry B. 1994. Ex- planations: What factors enhancetheir per- ceived adequacy? Organ. Hum. Decis. Process.58:346–68
Sheppard BH, Lewicki RJ, Minton JW. 1992. Organizational Justice: The Search for Fairness in the Workplace. New York: Lexington Books
ShermanS. 1995. Stretch goals: the dark side of asking for miracles.Fortune, Nov. 13. pp. 231–32
Shipper F, Manz CC. 1992. Employee self- management without formally designated teams: an alternative road to empower- ment. Organ. Dyn.20:48–61
ShoreLM, Wayne SJ.1993. Commitmentand employee behavior: comparison of affec- tive commitment andcontinuancecommit- ment with perceived organizational sup- port. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:774–80
Sims HP, Gioia DA, eds.1986. The Thinking Organization: TheDynamicsof Organiza- tional Social Cognition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Sinclair RR, HanniganMA, Tetrick LE. 1995. Benefit coverageandemployeeattitudes:a social exchangeperspective.SeeTetrick & Barling1995, pp. 163–85
Sink DS, Smith GL. 1994. The influence of organizational linkages and measurement practiceson productivity andmanagement. SeeNational ResearchCouncil 1994, pp. 131–60
Small Business Administration. 1992. The State of Small Business.Washington, DC: US Gov. Print. Off.
Smith KG, Locke EA, Barry D. 1990. Goal setting, planning, and organizational per- formance:an experimental simulation. Or- gan. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 46:118–34
Smolowe J. 1996. Reap as ye shall sow: pay- for-performance standards are a jackpot this yearfor executivesbut not for workers. Time,Feb.5, p. 45
Snow CC, MilesRE,ColemanHJ. 1992. Man- aging 21st century network organizations. Organ. Dyn.20:5–20
Starbuck WH, Mill iken FJ. 1988. Executives’ perceptual fi lters: what they notice and how they makesense.In TheExecutive Ef- fect: Concepts and Methods for Studying Top Managers, ed. D Hambrick. Green- wich, CT: JAI
Storey DJ. 1994. Understanding the Small Business Sector. London: Routledge
Tetrick LE, Barling J, eds. 1995. Changing EmploymentRelations: Behavior and So- cial Perspectives. Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
ThomasD, Higgins M. 1996. Mentoring and the boundarylesscareer:lessons from the minority experience. SeeArthur & Rous- seau1996. In press
Tsui AS, Ashford SJ, St. Clair L, Xin KR. 1995. Dealing with discrepant expectations: response strategies and managerial effec- tiveness.Acad. Manage.J. 38: 1515–43
Van Maannen J, Barley SR. 1984. Occupa- tional communities: culture and control in organizations. In Research in Organiza- tional Behavior, ed.BM Staw,8:287–364. Greenwich,CT: JAI
Vinocur AD, vanRyn M, Gramlich EM, Price RH. 1991. Long-term follow-up andbene- fi t-cost analysis of the jobsprogram:a pre- ventive intervention for the unemployed.J. Appl. Psychol. 76:213–19
Vroom V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York: Wiley
WanousJP,KeonTL, LatackJC.1983. Expec- tancy theory and occupational organiza- tional choices: a review and test. Organ. Behav.Hum.Perform. 32:66–85
Weick KE. 1995. Sensemaking in Organiza- tions.Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage
Weick KE. 1996. Enactment and the bound- arylesscareer:organizing aswe work. See Arthur & Rousseau1996, pp. 40–57
Weick KE, Roberts KH.1993. Collectivemind in organizations.Adm.Sci. Q. 38:357–81
Welbourne TM, Balkin DB, Gomez-Mejia LR. 1995. Gainsharing andmutual monitoring: a combined agency–organizational justice interpretation. Acad. Manage.J. 38:881–99
Welch R. 1994. Europeanworks councils and their implications: the potential impact on employer practicesand tradeunions.Empl. Relat. 16:48–61
Wilpert B. 1995. Organizational behavior. Annu. Rev.Psychol. 46:59–90
WinefieldA, WinefieldH, TiggemanM, Gold- ney R. 1991. A longitudinal study of the psychological effects of unemployment and unsatisfactory employment on young adults.J. Appl. Psychol. 76:424–31
Wood R, Mento A, Locke E. 1987. Taskcom- plexity as a moderator of goal effects: a meta-analysis.J. Appl. Psychol. 72:416–25
Yankelovich D. 1993. How changes in the economy are reshaping American values. In Valuesand Public Policy,ed. HJAaron, TE Mann, T Taylor. Washington, DC: BrookingsInst.
Zenger TR. 1992. Why do employersonly re- ward extremeperformance?Examining the relationships among performance,pay, and turnover.Adm.Sci. Q. 37:198–220
546 ROUSSEAU
A nn
u. R
ev . P
sy ch
ol . 1
99 7.
48 :5
15 -5
46 . D
ow nl
oa de
d fr
om w
w w
.a nn
ua lr
ev ie
w s.
or g
A cc
es s
pr ov
id ed
b y
U ni
ve rs
ity o
f C
al if
or ni
a -
R iv
er si
de o
n 07
/2 9/
22 . F
or p
er so
na l u
se o
nl y.