OBHR Speaker Series

Speaker: Matt Cronin, PhD
Costello College of Business 
George Mason University

Topic: The Knowledge Production System 

Abstract:
Many bemoan the limited influence that management science has on management practice. Many have offered reasons for this state, and solutions to those issues. Yet these address symptoms, not root causes. The problem is the fields’ perspective on how knowledge is produced and disseminated. We treat scholarly activities as portfolio of loosely coupled functions as opposed to a production system. Reinterpreting the field as a production system that should be specialized and coordinated makes it easier to identify who does what, and more importantly how these activities come together to produce and disseminate what is new, true, and important. This means re-thinking many fundamental beliefs about what constitutes impact, and what constitutes translation. In the end, field could use this as a model to better integrate research as well as more fairly evaluate its people.

Bio:
Dr. Matt Cronin is a professor of management at George Mason University, holding a PhD in organizational behaviour from Carnegie Mellon University. His research examines the inter- and intra- personal processes that make collaboration more creative and effective. He is also interested in system dynamics, and the nature of knowledge creation in management research. His work has appeared in top-tier management publications such as The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Academy of Management Review, Academy of Management Annals, Management Science, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. This work has been featured in The Boston Globe, Fortune, and was presented at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. He has served as Co-Editor-in-Chief of Organizational Psychology Review and now Academy of Management Annals. He has coauthored two books: The Influential Negotiator (Sage Publishing, 2020) and The Craft of Creativity (Stanford University Press, 2018)

Speaker: Lucas Dufour
Ted Rogers School of Management
Toronto Metropolitan University

Topic: Now the Army is who I am: Socializing for identity fusion in French military cadets

Abstract: 
In this paper, we qualitatively investigate how an organization like the Army strategically employs a broad range of intensive socialization tactics to attain newcomer identity fusion (a visceral feeling of oneness with one’s group) while limiting the disadvantages normally associated with this approach (attrition and ambivalence). We use data collected from 71 longitudinal interviews conducted over two-years during the initial three-month training periods with cadets, instructors, and staff members of an Army training camp, supplemented with observation data and archival data. We find that the Army and its instructors engage with cadets with the objective of altering their values (e.g., from individuality to collectiveness; from understanding to obeying), which commonly results in identity denial. To combat this outcome, instructors use a specific set of socialization tactics (e.g., extreme physical training; isolation; process standardization) to help newcomers limit their time spent on self-reflection and to instead encourage them to experience identity revealing (i.e., becoming the best version of themselves). In parallel, another set of tactics is used (e.g., constant group interactions; instructor’s unwavering support) to achieve group cohesion and trust in the organization. When successful, this process ultimately results in an ideal socialization outcome: identity fusion. We further discuss implications for managers, employees, and organizations.

Bio: Lucas Dufour is an Assistant Professor of Human Resources Management and Organizational Behaviour at the Ted Rogers School of Management, Toronto Metropolitan University. His areas of research are primarily the socialization of newcomers, creativity/innovation, ethics, and emotions. His research has been published in journals such as Academy of Management Review, Organization Science, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics and Journal of Business Research. He particularly enjoys teaching in a concrete and applicable way using his field experience with companies to enrich his classes.

Speaker: Meena Andiappan
Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation
University of Toronto

Topic: We are “dogs of the docks”: Maintaining occupational entitativity in the face of diminishing stigma  

Abstract: 
This longitudinal study explores how and why a historically stigmatized occupation, longshore workers, choose to maintain the tainted nature of their occupation even as the stigma that once characterized their work largely fades. Relying on data collected from 72 interviews, supplemented with observational and archival data over a 70-year period, we examine how factors both internal (e.g., changes in hiring practices) and external (e.g., technological advances) to the occupation influence longshoremen’s response to diminishing stigma. Significantly, we find that longshoremen work to actively disengage from certain forms of stigma (e.g., theft), while simultaneously strategically retaining other forms (e.g., violence). Our data suggests that to retain the stigmas that they consider central to the maintenance of their entitativity, longshoremen employ various strategies, including reviving past stigmas and overemphasizing current taint. Answering why an occupation would actively insist on retaining parts of their stigma, we find that longshoremen’s stigma allowed them to enact and justify occupational closure when their jobs – once reviled – become coveted. In contrast to previous work on occupational stigma cooptation, we find stigma being used to repel outsiders, reinforce misconceptions, and maintain negative occupational evaluations. Our findings contribute to the literatures on stigma, entitativity, and occupational closure. 

Bio: Meena Andiappan is an Assistant Professor of Management & Organization at the Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto. She received her doctorate in Organization Studies from Boston College. Her work has been published in Academy of Management Review, Health Services Management Research, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Business Ethics, and PLOS One, amongst other outlets. Dr. Andiappan’ s research focuses on the intersections of ethics, emotions, AI, and health. Her current projects include theoretical studies on healthcare workers' moral emotions; quantitative work on jealousy, envy, and ostracism; longitudinal qualitative work on misconduct evolution; the effects on necessary evil enactment on healthcare workers; and attitudes towards AI in healthcare organizations. She is a phenomenon-driven researcher.

Speaker: Lindsay Dhanani
School of Management and Labor Relations,
Rutgers University

Topic: You Made Your Choice: Stigma Controllability as a Barrier to Bystander Intervention following Mistreatment Targeting Gender and Sexual Minorities

Abstract:
Workplace discrimination often unfolds in front of others who have the opportunity to take action to positively change the course of the situation or its outcomes. However, despite the benefits associated with bystanders engaging in prosocial responses to workplace discrimination, many employees who witness discrimination choose inaction. It is thus critical to understand the potential barriers that reduce bystanders’ intervention willingness to help organizations capitalize on this intervention strategy. In this paper, we propose there are pervasive beliefs that are used to justify mistreatment towards minoritized groups and these beliefs may reduce intervention willingness among bystanders. Specifically, we predict that stigma controllability, or the perception that one’s stigmatized identity is a choice, is one such belief that may affect bystanders’ responses. Results across three studies demonstrate that perceiving an identity as controllable is associated with reduced willingness to punish the perpetrator and support the target and that those relationships are mediated by perpetrator-directed anger and target-directed empathy. Study 1 demonstrates this phenomenon for mistreatment targeting transgender identities. In study 2, we then design a brief educational intervention to reduce perceptions of stigma controllability. Receiving the intervention was associated with lower perceptions of controllability and, in turn, increased moral emotional responses and intervention willingness. Finally, in Study 3, we replicate the results in a recall study in which employees are asked to indicate how they felt and responded after witnessing a co-worker mistreated based on their sexual orientation. Implications for bystander intervention theories and bystander intervention training are discussed.

Bio: Lindsay Dhanani is an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Management in the School of Management and Labor Relations at Rutgers University. Dr. Dhanani’s research centers on identifying the organizational and personal characteristics that give rise to workplace mistreatment, the intersection between experiencing and witnessing workplace mistreatment and employee well-being, and interventions that can help mitigate the occurrence of mistreatment and/or its associated harms. Dr. Dhanani is particularly interested in forms of workplace mistreatment that target immutable social identities, such as race/ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, and religion. Dr. Dhanani’s research has been published outlets such as the Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Journal of Management, and Journal of Organizational Behavior. Dr. Dhanani has also received funding from the National Institute of Occupational Stress and Health, the National Institutes of Health, and the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

Speaker: Julian Barling
Smith School of Business, 
Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario

Topic: Brave New Workplace: Toward a Model of Healthy, Safe & Productive Work

Abstract: 
Organizations are facing challenges due to recent events such as the climate crisis, COVID-19, and Black Lives Matter. They must now find new ways of working that are healthy, safe, and productive. As experts in organizational behaviour and industrial-organizational psychology, we can provide insights on what such work should look like. I have synthesized almost a century of research and identified seven key elements that are essential for creating healthy, safe, and productive workplaces. These elements include high-quality leadership, autonomy, belonging, fairness, growth, meaning, and safety. The model is based on the idea that we should focus on creating environments that allow employees to flourish, rather than expecting them to be resilient to difficult working conditions. It also emphasizes that small changes can make a big difference in the long term.

Bio: Julian Barling is the Stephen Giymah Distinguished University Professor and Queen’s Research Chair at the Smith School of Business, Queen’s University in Kingston, Canada. His research work in the areas of leadership, health and safety, work-family relationships, and unions has been widely recognized and cited over 45,000 times. He is committed to educating students and has supervised over 25 doctoral and 30 masters students. Additionally, he has contributed significantly to the field through his editorial work and workshops that focus on evidence-based leadership development. He is among only five Canadian business school scholars to have been elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.

Speaker: Alicia A. Grandey 
Liberal Arts Professor of Psychology,  
The Pennsylvania State University 

Topic: Menopausal Stigma and Implications for Leadership Judgements

Abstract: 
Middle age is a time when employees are often assumed to have greater expertise and stability, making them potential candidates for leadership positions. However, for women experiencing menopause, this life stage is often ignored in organizational scholarship. Research has shown that women are often hesitant to share their menopausal status at work, but physical symptoms such as hot flashes can reveal this information. This stigma around menopause may limit leadership opportunities for women. By using the social cognitive view of stigma, this research investigates the impact of menopause on organizational contexts. It examines the stereotypes associated with menopause and how they contribute to leadership disparities, as well as the dilemma of whether menopausal status should be disclosed or concealed from work colleagues. Through a series of survey and experimental vignette studies, this research aims to shed light on the importance of studying menopause in organizational science and how we can reduce biased decisions about leadership potential.

Bio: Dr. Alicia Grandey is an accomplished industrial-organizational psychologist who received her doctorate in 1999 and was recognized as a Liberal Arts Professor of Psychology. Over the past 25 years, she has published more than 60 articles on emotional labour, the practice of managing emotions while performing work, as well as workforce diversity related to gender, race, politics, and culture. Her work has had a significant impact, with her articles cited over 30,000 times, ranking her among the top 1% of business and management scholars. Dr. Grandey writes translational articles for Harvard Business Review and The Conversation to bridge the gap between research and practice. She recently established Penn State’s Healthy-Inclusive-Productive (H.I.P.) Workplace Initiative, which comprises interdisciplinary scholars and an industry advisory board. Additionally, Dr. Grandey has served as an associate editor for the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology and is currently an associate editor for the Journal of Applied Psychology. She is a Fellow of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and the Association for Psychological Science, and she is active on Twitter as @AliciaGrandey.

Speaker: Samantha Hancock
DAN Department of Management & Organizational Studies
Western University of Ontario

Topic: Why do women accept leadership positions? The Glass Cliff phenomenon and the importance of communality 

Abstract:
Women are accessing leadership positions in organizations at increasingly higher levels, however previous research shows that more often, these leadership positions come with a high risk of failure. That is, women leaders are perched on a “glass cliff,” which ultimately undermines their career goals and gender equity more broadly. In a series of seven studies, we investigate why women choose to accept such positions, and why women see themselves as suitable for glass cliff positions and leadership roles in general. Drawing on role congruity theory we argue that women perceive glass cliff positions as requiring more traditionally feminine characteristics (i.e., communality), to suggest that women may see themselves as more suitable for glass cliff positions and are thus more likely to accept offers for such positions. Our results provide inconsistent support for our hypotheses but shed light on why women perceive themselves as suitable for leadership positions more generally, highlighting the importance of communality perceptions. 

Bio:
Sam is an Assistant Professor in the DAN Department of Management & Organizational Studies at Western University. Her research interests are guided by the theme of women in leadership and the challenges faced by women pursuing these roles. Through her research, she has the goal of helping to increase gender equity in leadership in two main ways: 1) by investigating how others’ perceptions and reactions to women’s characteristics or behaviours impact their workplace outcomes and 2) examining the barriers women face once they obtain leadership positions. She also has a new stream of research examining the perceptions and experiences of neurodivergent individuals in the workplace. Her work has been published in journals such as the Psychology of Women Quarterly, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Group Decision and Negotiation, and Negotiation and Conflict Management Research. She is also actively involved with the Canadian Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

Speaker: Kristopher J. Preacher
Psychology & Human Development
Vanderbilt University

Topic: Embracing Nonlinear Regression Without Getting All Bent Out of Shape 

Abstract:
Most social scientists are trained in the use of multiple linear regression and its many extensions, including structural equation modeling and multilevel modeling. Linear models have enjoyed unrivaled dominance in the field because of their perceived simplicity and generality. Yet, in many settings, linearity is highly restrictive and unrealistic. Nonlinear regression and nonlinear mixed-effects modeling offer a flexible set of alternatives that often are more faithful to reality, better reflect theory, and apply directly to interesting research hypotheses. Moreover, nonlinear models are surprisingly simple to apply, yet relative to linear models they are rarely used. We deconstruct the familiar linear regression model and frame it as a restrictive special case of a much broader class of nonlinear models. We explain how parameters of nonlinear models can be moderated, and we generalize familiar methods for plotting and probing linear interactions to the case of intrinsically nonlinear functions like logistic curves, exponential curves, and trigonometric functions. All of the options that are familiar from multiple linear regression are still available with nonlinear regression.

Bio:
Kris is Professor of Psychology and Human Development at Vanderbilt University, where he contributes to the graduate program in Quantitative Methods. His research concerns the use (and combination) of structural equation modeling and multilevel modeling to model correlational and longitudinal data. Other interests include developing techniques to test mediation and moderation hypotheses, bridging the gap between substantive theory and statistical practice, and studying model evaluation and model selection in the application of multivariate methods to social science questions. His work is transdisciplinary in nature and has been cited over 125,000 times according to Google Scholar. He serves on the editorial boards of Multivariate Behavioral Research, Behavior Research Methods, Communication Methods and Measures, Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, and Organizational Research Methods.

Speaker: Amanda Hancock
Hill and Levene Schools of Business 
University of Regina

Topic: One Size Does Not Fit All: Leader Disclosures of Concealable Stigmatized Identities 

Abstract:
The intersection of organizational leadership and concealable stigmatized identities has not received adequate scholarly attention. Despite media coverage of high-profile leaders who openly share their personal stories, management research lacks an empirical understanding of the consequences of such disclosures. Idealist and conceptual perspectives suggest leader disclosures will be met with positive outcomes, but emerging empirical investigations suggest this is not always the case. Drawing on stigma and role congruity theories, a time-lagged survey (n = 326) and a series of experimental vignettes (N = 635, N = 478, N=487) were conducted to investigate the leader disclosure process from the employee’s perspective. Followers’ evaluations were dependent on the identity of the discloser and content of the disclosure. Leaders who self-disclose a history of mental illness are rated as more vulnerable, less intelligent, and less effective than those who self-disclose a stigmatized sexual orientation. History of substance use-disorder consistently received the lowest ratings of leadership effectiveness. Disclosure appropriateness moderates the relationship such that when leaders self-disclose mental disorder/disease and minority sexual orientation appropriately, a positive effect on leader evaluations through affective trust in leader is observed. This buffering effect was not observed for substance use disorder. These results suggest existing theory around workplace disclosure and identity management models will work differently depending on the content of the disclosure and the identity of the discloser. Theoretical and practical contributions will be discussed.

Bio:
Dr. Amanda Hancock, Assistant Professor in Leadership and PhD in OB/HR was awarded the Governor General’s Gold Medal of Academic Merit for her doctoral dissertation on leader disclosures of concealable stigmatized identities at work. On September 20^th, 2023, she will be hosting a Research Seminar at the Haskayne School of Business to discuss her contributions to scholarship on several equity-deserving groups including women, sexual minorities, and persons with mental illness. She will also discuss her ongoing research and future plans to study organizational interventions for inclusion, and the application of person-centred methodological approaches in management research. Dr. Hancock pursues research to progress knowledge about social groups that have been historically disadvantaged from organizational advancement. Her work has been published in the Journal of Management, Journal of Managerial Psychology, and Journal of Vocational Behaviour. In her spare time, Dr. Hancock is a volunteer media host and contributor, and enjoys spending time in nature with her dogs.

Speaker: Jennifer Nelson, PhD
Department of Education Policy, Organization  
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

Topic: Navigating cascades of change across workplace hierarchy: The case of an academic library.

Abstract:
This study investigates how long reorganization periods in an organization affect its internal workplace dynamics, using an academic library as an illustrative case. Drawing on organizational theory about the hazards of long and “cascading” reorganization periods (Hannan, Pólos, and Carroll 2003), I examine how multiple and different organizational changes within one time period—a technological change; a consolidation; a two-part equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) intervention; and a downgrading of the middle-ranking classification group—affected professionals’ work processes and experiences, especially as they relate to fair working conditions for faculty and staff. Drawing on 99 employee interviews and 14 months of ethnographic fieldwork, this study illustrates how processes of structural change and systemic issues of fairness and inequality in the workplace are mutually constituted. This study contributes to research on organizational change, change management, and EDI, highlighting how these are related, overlapping, and sometimes conflicting organizational goals. While existing studies tend to analyze single changes in isolation, this study goes beyond that to recognize that changes occur contemporaneously, interact with each other, and bear on issues of intergroup fairness.

Bio:
Dr. Jennifer Nelson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Education Policy, Organization, and Leadership, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Her research explores work and organizations through a sociological lens, specifically focusing on structures of social inequality related to race, class, and gender, as well as the organizational practices that contribute to these inequalities. As an organizational ethnographer, she investigates how structures and practices within educational institutions influence the behaviour, attitudes, and social interactions of teachers and other school personnel. Before pursuing her PhD in Sociology at Emory University, Jennifer taught in a public urban high school for three years. She also served as an IES Postdoctoral Fellow at Vanderbilt University.

Speaker: Nicolas Roulin
Department of Psychology, 
Saint Mary’s University, Halifax, Canada

Topic: Can We Identify the “Snakes in Suits”? An Overview of Initial Findings with the Conditional Reasoning Test for Workplace Psychopathy 

Abstract:
Individuals with high levels of the personality trait of psychopathy, often described as “snakes in suits” in the workplace, gravitate towards leadership roles but frequently engage in problematic behaviors such as theft, interpersonal abuse, and unethical decisions. They are adept at deception, making the trait of psychopathy challenging to assess in high-stakes settings like selection or promotion. Conditional Reasoning Tests (CRTs) are implicit measures resistant to faking, offering a promising approach to measuring “dark” personality traits like psychopathy. This presentation will provide an overview of a research program focused on the Conditional Reasoning Test for Workplace Psychopathy (CRT-WP). It will highlight findings on the CRT-WP’s psychometric properties, its prediction of counterproductive work behaviors, resistance to faking, and test-taker perceptions. The talk concludes with future research directions and discusses potential advantages of using CRTs, especially the CRT-WP, in professional settings.

Bio:
Dr. Nicolas Roulin is a Full Professor of Industrial/Organizational Psychology at Saint Mary’s University, Halifax. His research in personnel selection spans topics like employment interviewing, impression management, employment discrimination, and novel assessment methods like conditional reasoning tests. He has published 52 peer-reviewed articles in academic journals, such as the Journal of Applied Psychology and Human Relations, and over 100 conference presentations. Notably, he’s authored the book “The Psychology of Job Interviews” with editions in 2017 and 2022, translating academic findings into practical advice. He co-authored the best-selling Canadian textbook “Recruitment and Selection in Canada” (2021). Dr. Roulin serves as an Associate Editor for the International Journal of Selection and Assessment, is on the editorial boards of four journals, and has held leadership roles in the Canadian Psychological Association among others. His expertise has led to consultancy roles with international organizations and mentorship of numerous psychology and management students.

Speaker: McKenzie Rees
Department of Management, 
BYU School of Business

Topic: Bank of the Future: Non-Specific Compensation for Prosperous Negotiation 

Abstract:
Professional and personal relationships often involve interdependence, which individuals
seek to navigate through negotiation. The current work studies negotiations within
extended relationships to expand negotiation strategy in general. Namely, we integrate negotiation theory with social exchange theory to suggest that individuals within extended relationships use a unique negotiation strategy that has received little attention in previous studies: non-specific compensation (NSC). With NSC, individuals compensate each other at different times using differing resources to increase the value to both negotiators. Five studies (a field study at a major university, an archival study in the U.S. Senate, and three experiments) document two of NSC’s foundational forms (purchase banking and favor banking) and features (timing and explicitness), as well as its benefits for negotiators in relationships. Overall, this research builds new negotiation theory of relevance to anyone who knows or expects to remain connected with their negotiation partner. 

Bio:
Dr. McKenzie Rees joined BYU Marriott in 2021. Her research focuses on the situational factors that encourage employees to engage in behavior that is inconsistent with their own, and the organization's, values, as well as strategies that organizations and leaders can implement to mitigate such behavior. In recent years, she has focused on the situational factors that negotiators uniquely face and looked at solutions that can be implemented with ethical leadership.

McKenzie received her Ph.D. from the University of Utah in 2015. Prior to joining the faculty at BYU, she was at the University of Notre Dame and Southern Methodist University.

Speaker: Dr. Lilia Cortina
Department of Psychology, 
University of Michigan

Topic: Sexual Harassment: From Science to Solutions

Abstract:
Sexual harassment is common in organizations but remains poorly understood. What actions “count” as sexual harassment, and what might we be missing? How does harassment affect work and wellbeing? How can we better prevent and respond to sexual harassment? Several decades of social science have taken up questions such as these. According to that research, sexual harassment is typically a put-down, not a come-on. It involves insult, intimidation, and assault on human dignity. To move the needle on this problem, we need nothing short of a radical redesign of anti-harassment efforts in organizations. This was the focus of a 2018 report published by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. This presentation will cover key conclusions from that report, and key action steps that followed.

Bio:
Professor Lilia M. Cortina serves as University Diversity and Social Transformation Professor of Psychology, Women’s Studies, and Management at the University of Michigan. Her research primarily addresses workplace victimization, focusing on harassment and incivility. Additionally, Professor Cortina has contributed her expertise as an expert witness to high-profile institutions, including the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Defense. Her significant contributions to her field have earned her the distinction of Fellow by both the American Psychological Association and the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology.

Speaker: Samantha J. Dodson, PhD
Sauder School of Business,  
University of British Columbia

Speaker: He Sees the Forest, She Sees the Trees: A Construal-Level Stereotype

Abstract:
The present research utilizes social role and construal level theories to identify and explain descriptive expectations of men’s and women’s cognition. Four studies reveal evidence of a gendered construal-level stereotype. First, people tend to implicitly associate the names of men with high-construal terms and the names of women with low-construal terms (Study 1; N = 229) and explicitly ascribe abstraction characteristics (e.g., focusing on the big picture and outcomes) to men and concreteness characteristics (e.g., focusing on the details and processes) to women (Study 2; N = 150). Moreover, the stereotypic associations between women and concreteness and men and abstraction are observable in the language used in LinkedIn recommendations of users from varying industries and occupations (Study 3; N = 549,059). Finally, Study 4 (N = 224) shows how these stereotypes perpetuate gender roles, demonstrating that beliefs that women are more concrete than men affect their relegation to non-promotable tasks in the workplace. In my talk, I will discuss the theoretical contributions of this research and provide managerial recommendations to address gendered construal-level stereotypes in the workplace. 

Bio:
Dr. Samantha "Sammi" Dodson is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Montalbano Centre for Responsible Leadership Development, Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia. Her research, focusing on issues like workplace discrimination and suffering, uses experimental designs and qualitative analysis to understand the impact of employees' thoughts and feelings on interpersonal outcomes. Dr. Dodson's work has been featured in prestigious journals like Organization Science. She holds a Ph.D. in Management from the University of Utah's Eccles School of Business. Before her academic career, she consulted for over 40 global organizations, collecting data from over 50,000 employees to devise strategies to enhance workplace experiences.

Speaker: Laurie Barclay, PhD

Topic: Exploring the Emotional Landscape of Workplace Unfairness: New Insights and Theoretical Foundations

Abstract:

Emotions are a fundamental aspect of organizational life—they characterize our experiences, direct our focus, and guide our attitudinal and behavioral reactions. Despite the recognition that experiencing unfairness in the workplace is inherently emotional, scholarly attention on fairness issues has been dominated by a focus on the cognitive landscape of these experiences whereas emotions have been “underemphasized and underappreciated.” In this presentation, I highlight the pervasive and influential role of emotions within the context of fairness and how delving into this emotional landscape can open important new research avenues. Specifically, I focus on how emotions can guide important behavioral responses to (un)fairness, impact the value that employees place on fairness, influence recovery from unfairness, and facilitate and/or hinder leaders’ delivery of fairness.

Bio: 

Dr. Laurie Barclay is an Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management in the Lazaridis School of Business & Economics at Wilfrid Laurier University. Her research interests focus on fairness issues in the workplace, including how to facilitate recovery from unfair experiences, the role of emotions in experiences of injustice, and how to overcome the obstacles that can hinder managers and organizations from fostering fairness. Laurie’s publications have appeared in outlets such as the Academy of Management Annals, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, and Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Her research has received numerous awards, has been profiled in the media (e.g., Financial Times, NBC News), and supported by prestigious grants including the Ontario Early Researcher Award and multiple grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). Laurie is also an enthusiastic teacher and mentor who has received multiple teaching awards, including the Alumni Award of Excellence for Mentoring. Laurie has also made extensive service contributions to the academic community. She is currently serving a second term as an Associate Editor at the Journal of Organizational Behavior and also serves on the editorial boards for Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Organizational Psychology Review, and the Journal of Business & Psychology.

Speaker: Ernest O’Boyle, PhD

Topic: The ‘Goldilocks’ Zone: Why So Many Confidence Intervals in Tests of Mediation Just Exclude Zero

Abstract:

Emotions are a fundamental aspect of organizational life—they characterize our experiences, direct our focus, and guide our attitudinal and behavioral reactions. Despite the recognition that experiencing unfairness in the workplace is inherently emotional, scholarly attention on fairness issues has been dominated by a focus on the cognitive landscape of these experiences whereas emotions have been “underemphasized and underappreciated.” In this presentation, I highlight the pervasive and influential role of emotions within the context of fairness and how delving into this emotional landscape can open important new research avenues. Specifically, I focus on how emotions can guide important behavioral responses to (un)fairness, impact the value that employees place on fairness, influence recovery from unfairness, and facilitate and/or hinder leaders’ delivery of fairness.

Bio: 

Ernest H. O’Boyle earned his doctorate from Virginia Commonwealth University in 2010. He is an associate professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resources and holds the Dale M. Coleman Chair of Management in the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. His research interests include individual differences, counterproductive work behavior, research methods, and ethical issues surrounding publication practices. His work has appeared in a number of leading outlets including Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Organizational Research Methods, and Personnel Psychology. He is the recipient of the Academy of Management Early Career Awards for the Research Methods Division and Human Resources Division. O’Boyle is an associate editor at Journal of Management and sits on the editorial boards of Personnel Psychology, Organization Research Methods, and Journal of Applied Psychology.

Speaker: Rachel Doern, PhD

Topic: Mentor/Schmentor: How chef-owners separate from mentors and redefine their relationships

Abstract:

This study investigates how chef-owners once working as culinary protégés in professional kitchens separate from their mentors and redefine their relationships to them. Based on interviews with 35 chef-owners in the UK, it examines the experiences of elite chefs as they leave mentors’ kitchens and open their own restaurant. Findings suggest that chef-owners separate and redefine their relationships to their mentors (Kram, 1983) differently, based on gender. Female chef-owners framed separation as a difficult process and expressed an “inclusionary rhetoric” during the redefinition phase, which maintained a continued symbolic connection to their mentors. Meanwhile, male chef-owners spoke of separation with greater ease and deployed a “distancing rhetoric” when redefining their relationships, which served to emphasize their independence and autonomy from prior mentors. These findings contribute to the literature on mentorship by revealing the complexities of the separation and redefinition phases between mentor and protégé and how these phases are expressed through gendered cultural narratives. Whereas women exercised the resonant trope “I wouldn’t be where I am today” without their mentor, men spoke of the importance of “tough love” mentorship. Our research has implications for the mentor-protégé relationships common to craft work and the gendered form they take.

Bio: 

Much of Rachel’s research examines the cognitions, emotions and behaviours of entrepreneurs in adverse conditions. Her research is inter-disciplinary in nature, drawing on different micro-sociological and psychological approaches to understanding entrepreneurship. Previous work has looked at resilience and vulnerability in an entrepreneurial context and how entrepreneurs interact with different stakeholders as they develop their businesses, particularly during times of crisis. Her recent research projects look at entrepreneurial diversity, different entrepreneurial identities and communities. In the latter case, her research talk will focus on the craft-based culinary world and the experiences of elite chefs as they leave the professional kitchens where they trained to create their own restaurants, becoming chef-owners.

Speaker: David A. Jones, PhD.

Topic: Do all Roads Lead to Rome? A Two-Study Investigation of Employee Responses to Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility through Identity- and Exchange-based Processes

Abstract:

A recent flurry of research on employee responses to corporate social responsibility (CSR) has documented several relationships between employees’ perceptions of CSR and various job attitudes and performance behaviors.  The exponential growth of work in this area, however, has produced a fragmented literature that begs for systematic testing of theoretically-grounded processes through which responses to perceived CSR unfold (Gond et al., 2017), rather than continued testing of conceptually-related mediators that are almost always examined in isolation from other underlying mechanisms (Jones, 2019; Jones & Rupp, 2018).  In particular, De Roeck and Maon (2018) urged researchers to assess multiple mechanisms derived from both foundational theories that have informed much of the scholarly research on employee responses to CSR: social exchange (Cropanzano et al., 2017) and social identity (Ashforth et al., 2008).

We tested novel hypotheses about the unique indirect effects of perceived CSR on employee outcomes through identity-based mediators (i.e., two mediational chains reflecting self-enhancement and self-consistency motives that link perceived CSR to organizational identification), while accounting for effects through an exchange-based mediator (i.e., organizational trust).  In Study 1, we collected cross-sectional survey data from employees of a single company (N = 177), and tested hypotheses via a path model.  In Study 2, we collected longitudinal survey data from employees of multiple companies (N = 484), and tested hypothesis via a structural equation model using measures of perceived CSR at Time 1, four mediators at Time 2, and two employee outcomes at Time 3.

Results from both studies showed the same pattern of significant paths and unique indirect effects.  As hypothesized, perceived CSR had unique indirect effects on organizational identification via perceptions of value fit, and through either organizational pride (Study 1) or prestige (Study 2).  On the two employee outcomes, the pattern of indirect effects was remarkably consistent with what we speculated through research questions in Study 1, and tested as hypotheses in Study 2:  Support for hypothesized indirect effects transmitted through identity-based mediators was only found on organizational citizenship behavior, and support for hypothesized effects through the exchange-based mediator (trust) was only found on turnover intentions.  Implications for future research and managerial practice follow from these findings.

Bio:

David A. Jones is the John L. Beckley Professor of Management at the Grossman School of Business, University of Vermont, where he served from 2015 to 2019 as Director of The Sustainable Innovation MBA—the #1 ranked “Green MBA” in the U.S. for three consecutive years (Princeton Review, 2018-2020).  Since completing his PhD in Industrial and Organizational Psychology at The University of Calgary in 2004, David has been a passionate educator and scholar who is a recognized thought leader in the areas of employee and job seekers responses to socially and environmentally sustainable business practices. Professor Jones has published his research in leading academic journals, including Academy of Management Journal and Journal of Applied Psychology. He has served on the editorial boards of five peer-reviewed journals, including two in which he has also published his work: The Journal of Management where he currently serves on the editorial board, and the Journal of Organizational Behavior where he currently serves as an Associate Editor.

Speaker: Erica Carleton

Topic:   Indirect effects of obstructive sleep apnea on work withdrawal: A quasi-experimental treatment outcome study

Abstract:

The effect of sleep on work is now receiving appropriate research attention, yet most results have been based on community (i.e., non-clinical) populations. Based on prior findings that clinical treatment for diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea benefits sleep quality, we hypothesized that sleep quality would mediate the effects of such treatment on work withdrawal behaviors (emotional exhaustion, cognitive exhaustion, work neglect and partial absenteeism). 125 adults with potential sleep apnea, who were referred to a mid-sized hospital$B!G(Js sleep laboratory, participated in this three-wave (pretest, posttest one month following initial treatment, and a follow-up three months later), quasi-experimental study. Clinical assessment using pretest data resulted in 83 participants being diagnosed with sleep apnea and receiving treatment (i.e., continuous positive airway pressure n = 62; or positional therapy, n = 21); 42 patients who were not diagnosed with sleep apnea comprised the control group. Consistent with our hypotheses, treatment positively affected sleep quality, indirectly decreasing emotional exhaustion, cognitive exhaustion, and partial absenteeism (but not work neglect). We discuss the implications of these findings for future research on sleep and its work-related consequences, and organizational practice.

Bio: 

Dr. Carleton's research interests include two separate but often overlapping research passions, namely (1) leadership and (2) employee health and well-being. She is fascinated by leadership behaviors and what predicts high and low quality leadership. Her interest in employee well-being has led her to investigate the non-work antecedents of well-being, especially different physiological and psychological predictors, such as sleep. She conducted her dissertation research on sleep, well-being and leadership. She is a co-editor (with Julian Barling, Christopher Barnes and David Wagner) of the book Sleep and Work: Research Insights for the Workplace (Oxford University Press, 2016). Prior to joining the Edwards School of Business in July of 2016, she was a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Ian O. Ihnatowycz Institute for Leadership in Ivey Business School at Western University. While there, she conducted research on the validation and outcomes of leader character. She completed her PhD in Organizational Behavior at the Smith School of Business at Queen’s University.

Speaker: Ann-Frances Cameron

Topic: Multicommunicating during team meetings and its effect on team functioning

Abstract:

Team meetings are a ubiquitous and important, yet costly, workplace tool. However, increases in time spent in meetings, the availability of mobile communication technologies, and expectations of constant connectivity have led to one behavior that may be reducing the effectiveness of meetings: Meeting multicommunicating (Meeting MC). Meeting MC is defined as being simultaneously engaged in an organizational meeting and one or more technology-mediated secondary conversations. Examples include checking or sending emails and texts, and many employees report frequently engaging in this type of multitasking during workplace meetings. This behavior is a complex type of multitasking and thus may suffer from the task performance detriments associated with juggling multiple tasks. While Meeting MC can be useful for accessing information needed for the meeting, in certain situations it can also increase perceptions of incivility and reduce meeting effectiveness. Individual-level effects of Meeting MC may also spill over and affect team-level functioning and performance. The key challenge is determining how to use Meeting MC to enhance team functioning and performance during the meeting while mitigating its negative effects. A program of research will be presented which examines the effects of Meeting MC on outcomes including (i) perceptions of incivility, (ii) deception detection accuracy, and (iii) team adaptability.

Bio:

Ann-Frances Cameron is an associate professor of Information Technology (IT) at HEC Montréal and is the holder of the HEC Professorship in Information Technology and Multitasking. She received a PhD from the Queen’s School of Business at Queen’s University. She is credited with over 30 publications—scientific and professional articles, book chapters, and papers in conference proceedings. Of these, several have been published in high quality journals such as Organization Science, Information Systems Research, Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, and Accident Analysis & Prevention.  Since 2012, Professor Cameron has been the director of the Research Group in Information Systems (GReSI), which brings together 25 researchers from Quebec institutions including HEC Montréal, McGill, Concordia, Université du Québec à Montréal, and TELUQ. She is also an active member of the Tech3Lab, a multidisciplinary laboratory that uses neuroscience tools to examine the interactions between technologies used by organizations and their employees and customers. She additionally has been a visiting scholar and adjunct assistant professor at the Smith School of Business at Queens University, and is involved as an instructor for NextAI Montréal, an accelerator for early or idea stage AI-enabled start-ups.  Her main research interests include the use and impact of emerging technologies for inter- and intra-organizational communication, including how these technologies influence individual task performance, team communication, and inter-organizational partnerships. She is keenly interested in how these emerging technologies give rise to workplace multitasking and its impacts.

Speaker: Tom Lawrence

Topic: Talking about work: theories of agency and social construction in organizational life

Abstract:

Although there have emerged a wide range of literatures that examine how actors socially construct aspects of organizational life, such as emotions, identities, and practices, these literatures have tended to treat those forms of work as isolated forms of action. In this talk, I explore some of the implications of examining theories of social construction in organizational life as a broad family of ideas with essential commonalities as well as important differences. In particular, I show that isolated theories of social construction have failed to account for the deeply “situated” nature of social construction, and the impacts of social construction on individual and organizational “performance”. The presentation is based on a forthcoming book, Constructing organizational life: How social-symbolic work shapes selves, organizations, and institutions (Thomas Lawrence and Nelson Phillips, Oxford University Press, 2019).

Bio:

Tom is a Professor of Strategy at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, UK. His areas of expertise include strategic management, organizational change, social innovation, institutional theory, and social change. This work has appeared in the leading organization and strategy journals, including Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Harvard Business Review, Sloan Management Review, Organization Studies, Journal of Management Studies, Human Relations, and Journal of Management. He is also a co-editor of the Sage Handbook of Organization Studies and the Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Before joining Saïd Business School, Tom was the W. J. VanDusen Professor of Management at the Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, and has held permanent or visiting positions at the University of Victoria, University of British Columbia, Cambridge University, McGill University, St. Andrews University, and Chulalongkorn University. He received his PhD in organisational analysis and BComm in finance from the University of Alberta.

Speaker: David Day

Topic: Identity-based perspectives on the leadership journey

Abstract:

The role of the self in the development of leaders is explored across several perspectives. An overview will be first provided of the focus, mission, and principles of the Kravis Leadership Institute at Claremont McKenna College (USA) as a frame for ongoing work on leader development. Research to be discussed includes the role of leader identity in the context of personal trajectories of development of high-potential corporate executives. Another project examines the effects of parenting orientation on self-efficacy, self-esteem, and leader emergence in adolescent youth. An overarching goal is to extend and further develop a lifespan approach to understanding leader development and the supporting role of self-views in that process.

Bio:

David V. Day is Professor of Psychology and Academic Director of the Kravis Leadership Institute at Claremont McKenna College. He also holds the titles of Steven L. Eggert ‘82 P’15 Professor of Leadership and George R. Roberts Research Fellow at the College. He is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, American Psychological Society, International Association of Applied Psychology, and the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Day has published more than 100 peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and book chapters, many pertaining to the core topics of leadership and leadership development. He serves on numerous editorial boards and as the editor of The Leadership Quarterly Yearly Review. His article titled “Leadership Development: A Review in Context” received the 2010 Decennial Influential Article Award as the most influential article published in The Leadership Quarterly in 2000. He also was awarded the Walter F. Ulmer Research Award from the Center for Creative Leadership in 2010 for outstanding, career-long contributions to applied leadership research.

Speaker: Denise M. Rousseau, PhD

Topic: Researching and Teaching Evidence-Based Management

Abstract:

The trend toward evidence-based practice in policy and management challenges conventions of both how we study organizations and teach management. Its central tenet is that decisions should be made using best available evidence from multiple sources, vetted for quality. I will detail ways that taking up evidence-based practices changes the key tasks of management educators and its implications for management scholarship.

Bio:

Denise M. Rousseau is the H.J. Heinz II University Professor of Organizational Behavior and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy and the Tepper School of Business. Her research focuses upon the impact workers have on the employment relationship and the firms that employ them. Recognized in particular for developing the theory of the psychological contract, her work addresses the powerful reach individual employee's understanding of the employment relationship has on work groups, firms, and society. Her publications include over a dozen books and 200 articles and monographs in top management and psychology journals, all cited over 72,000 times (Google Scholar). She is the two-time winner of the Academy of Management's George Terry Award for best management books (I-Deals, 2006; Psychological Contracts, 1996), received the 2009 Lifetime Career Achievement Award from the Organizational Behavior Division of the Academy of Management, and in 2013 received an honorary doctorate from the Athens University of Economics and Business. She was the 2004-2005 President of the Academy of Management and Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Organizational Behavior from 1998-2007.

Speaker: D. Lance Ferris, PhD

Topic: Publishing 101: Tips and Tricks for Crafting Contributions and Responding to Reviewers

Abstract:

Publishing in academic journals can seem daunting. Particularly for new PhD students, sitting down to write a 30-40 page paper can be confusing without guidance on where or even how to start. And to make matters worse, after months of effort, your cherished final manuscript can then be met with a firm “reject” from journals. My talk describes tips and tricks intended to make this writing process easier and, ideally, more likely to lead to a publishable paper. In particular, I will cover a “fill-in-the-blanks” article structure used by most management journals that, once known, simplifies the writing process considerably. I will then cover some of the more effective ways to fill in those blanks (i.e., how to frame the contributions of your article), as well as general approaches for dealing with reviewer comments (including but not limited to cursing out reviewers).

Bio:

Lance Ferris is an Associate Professor in the Department of Management at the Eli Broad College of Business at Michigan State University. Prior to joining Broad, Lance was an Assistant Professor at the Lee Kong Chian School of Business at Singapore Management University from 2008-2011, and an Associate Professor at the Smeal College of Business at the Pennsylvania State University from 2011-2017. He currently serves on the editorial board of Academy of Management Journal and Journal of Applied Psychology. His work has been published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Annals, Organization Science, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, and Personnel Psychology. He likes nothing better than to write short biographies about himself in the third person, where no one can stop him from writing whatever he wants, no matter how absurd. Most Marvel films are based on his life story.

Speaker: Lisa Bäulke, MSc

Topic: Making Massive Meta-Analyses Marvelously Manageable

Abstract:

Thinking about a meta-analysis? An order of magnitude increase in coding speed is what we are providing, shaving months off your time to publication. With over a hundred active users already, HubMeta is a new platform that brings the field more fully into the modern age, using automated and cloud-based processes, specifically: built-in analysis, easy export functions, automated data extraction, and taxonomic features. HubMeta is free (and always will be) so you can try it out now (https://www.hubmeta.com). Lisa Bäulke, Hadi Fariborzi, and Piers Steel will demonstrate how we are using the platform to tackle one of the largest meta-analyses ever attempted, as well as preview upcoming new features. Our goal is to inspire people to collaborate and tackle meta-analyses of previous unreachable scope with just weeks or a few months of effort, so perfect for those aiming for a top tier.

Bio:

Lisa Bäulke is a doctoral student in the Department of Psychology at Augsburg University, studying under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Markus Dresel. Within this role, she is also an active member of the Empirical Education Research Program of the Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences. Previously, she completed her Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in Psychology at Ulm University. Lisa is a primary investigator in the “ProkRASt” research project, which is focused on better understanding academic procrastination as a risk factor for study dropout. Her main research interests consist of self-regulated learning in higher education (with a focus on academic procrastination and motivation) and motivational regulation in educational settings.

Speaker: Jeffrey Vancouver, PhD

Topic: Won’t get fooled again: The Roles of Statistics and Theory in the Practice of Safety

Abstract and Bio: Not available

Speaker: Tara Reich Title: Making sense of witnessed mistreatment at work Abstract: Workplace mistreatment regularly occurs in the presence of others and how others make sense of the mistreatment is likely to influence their responses. In the current set of studies, we draw on research on perspective-taking to consider how this behavior, a form of interpersonal sensemaking, influences observer attributions and empathy for each of the perpetrator and target, as well as their reactions toward each. Across three studies, we find that instructions to perspective-take primarily influence observer reactions toward perpetrators. Moreover, we find that the positive interpersonal effects of perspective-taking can be explained by the attributions observers make and empathy observers experience for the individual whose perspective is taken. Although observers seem generally inclined to take the perspective of and react positively toward the target, our results also suggest at conditions under which observers may react negatively toward the target or positively toward the perpetrator. We also find evidence to suggest that observer gender, and by extension power, may influence observer reactions. Limitations, future directions, and implications for theory and practice will be discussed. Bio: Dr Tara Reich received her BA (Hons) in Psychology from the University of Western Ontario and her MA in Social Psychology and her PhD in Organizational Behaviour from the University of Manitoba. Dr Reich has published her work in the Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, the Journal of Organizational Behaviour, and Work & Stress. Dr Reich's research interests are broadly in the area of employee well-being, with a specific focus on the psychology of workplace mistreatment. Her research investigates how observers are influenced by witnessing mistreatment in the workplace as well as the consequences of observers’ reactions for targets and perpetrators.

Speaker: Elizabeth Campbell Title: Hidden Predictors of Bosses’ Bad Behavior: An Expanded Model of Performance and Abusive Supervision Abstract: This research seeks to clarify and more comprehensively explain how job performance of the target and the perpetrator precipitate an expensive and destructive workplace phenomenon: abusive supervision. We offer theoretical account for why both low and high performing subordinates are more likely to experience abusive supervision and why both low and high performing supervisors are more likely to engage in abusive supervision. Adopting the social interactionist view of aggression, we explain why the impact of subordinate and supervisor performance on abusive supervision can be better explained with curvilinear relationships (U-shaped). We also consider how subordinate-supervisor performance dissimilarity and supervisor threat sensitivity strengthen these U-shaped relationships. Results from an experiment of 176 business school students offered initial support and established causal main effects. Then, findings from a multisource field study of 422 supervisor-subordinate dyads offered support of our broader predictions: low and high performing subordinates faced more abuse than average performers, while low and high performing supervisors were more abusive than their average performing counterparts. We discuss the implications of these results for theory and practice.

Speaker: Sabine Sonnentag Title: Can Work Support a Healthy Lifestyle? Organizational Climate, Healthy Eating, and Physical Exercise Abstract: In this presentation I shall discuss how experiences in organisational life are linked to individual health behavior, particularly eating behavior and physical exercise. I shall focus on job stress as a factor that potentially compromises health behavior, and organisational climate that can encourage health behavior. I shall introduce the concept of Organizational Health Behavior Climate (OHBC) and present a measure that captures values and expectations, organisational practices, and communication as core dimensions. Validation data show that OHBC relates to other climate dimensions such as employees welfare and safety climate, but is distinct from these other dimensions. OBHC is positively related to health behaviour and negatively correlated with employees’ body mass index (BMI). I shall present data from a daily-survey study and a longitudinal study that shed more light on how OHBC might trigger healthy eating. For instance, findings from the daily-survey study show that OHBC predicts snacking fresh fruit at work (as opposed to snacking sweets) by activating "health" as food-choice motive. In addition, this study showed that high self-control demands at work may undermine healthy eating by activation "affect regulation" as food-choice motive. As a whole these data demonstrate that organisational climate may help employees to stick to a healthy diet and to engage in physical exercise. I shall discuss practical implications and shall address avenues for future research. Bio: Sabine Sonnentag is a full professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at the University of Mannheim, Germany. Her research addresses the question of how individuals can stay healthy, energetic, and productive on the job. She studies job stress and job-stress recovery, health behavior (eating, physical exercise), proactive behavior, and self-regulation. Dr. Sonnentag’s work has been published in leading journals of the field, including the Journal of Applied Psychology and Personnel Psychology. She is an Associate Editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology, the Journal of Organizational Behavior, and the Journal of Business and Psychology; in addition she serves on the editorial boards of numerous journals, including the Academy of Management Journal, Personnel Psychology, and the Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. She is a fellow of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) and an elected member of the German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina. She holds a doctoral degree (Dr. rer. nat.) from the Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany.

Speaker: Neil Conway Title: The enacting and thwarting of occupational calling and its implications for leadership, motivation, and well-being Abstract: Research on occupational calling is an emerging field. Researchers have considered links between callings and occupational fit, career and life satisfaction, and calling has been examined across a wide range of occupational groups and job types, such as medics, artists, college presidents, and leaders. It is generally assume that calling contributes to well-being and life satisfaction as people with a calling pursue goals that they find deeply meaningful.  Nonetheless, how and why calling relates to well-being is acknowledged as under-researched and complex as enacting a calling may require people to make considerable sacrifices and therefore detract from well-being. Some calling behaviours may reflect intrinsic interests, whereas others are the result of fulfilling an unbending duty. In the presentation I introduce calling and consider its motivational and wellbeing implications. I draw on self-determination theory – a theory that makes distinctions between different types of motivation – to understand how enacting a calling relates both positively and negatively to daily well-being. I present findings from a daily diary method novel to the calling field and a sample with a distinctive calling, Church of England clergy. The context to the study was a concern that clergy callings were being thwarted due to the ever increasing intrusion of administrative and so-called leadership activities, familiar no doubt to many academics. Bio: Neil Conway is a Professor in Organizational Behaviour at the School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London. His main research interests include psychological approaches to understanding the employment relationship, work motivation and performance, occupational identity, and the psychological contract. Current projects include investigating the role of calling and its implications for motivation and well-being, the effects of UK Government austerity measures on public sector psychological contracts, and examining the reciprocal links between driving commutes and daily work experiences. Neil is currently a visiting lecturer at the University of Toulouse, France, Paris Dauphine University, France.

Speaker: Sandra Robinson Title: Ostracism and Social Exclusion at Work Abstract: This talk addresses past, present and future empirical studies of mine addressing ostracism and social exclusion at work. Using a range of methodological approaches, from organizational surveys to lab experiments, these studies try to answer a number of questions: What does ostracism at work look like and how frequent is it? What are the effects of feeling left out, snubbed, ignored or avoided at work? How impactful is ostracism, in comparison to other forms of workplace mistreatment? How do employees make meaning of being ostracized and what are the implications of those meanings? And are there differences between being ostracized from task interactions and being excluded from purely social interactions at work? Bio: Sandra Robinson (PhD Northwestern) is a Professor and Distinguished University Scholar in the Sauder School of Business at the University of British Columbia, where she has served as chair of the tenure and promotion committee and is the upcoming Director of the PhD Program. Sandra is known for her research on the 'darkside' of organization behavior, and has had a keen interest in introducing and developing new focal areas of study under this umbrella. Her work has been some of the earliest in the areas of psychological contract breach and trust betrayal, workplace deviance, territorial behavior and workplace ostracism. She has published in a wide range of well regarded journals, such as Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly and Journal of Applied Psychology, and her work has been covered in numerous popular press outlets, such as the Wall Street Journal, the Economist and CNN. Sandra has earned numerous awards for her research record, such as the Ascendant Scholar of the Western Academy of Management, the JMI Distinguished Scholar, and the Cummings Award from the OB Division of the AoM. She has also earned awards for reviewing, such as from Academy of Management Journal and Academy of Management Discoveries, along with various awards for service. On service, Sandra has held a number of elected professional roles, including Rep-at-Large for the Western Academy, Rep-at-large for the OB Division, of AoM, in addition to serving five years on the Chair Track of the OB Division of AOM, starting with the role of Program Chair and ending with the role of Division Chair.

Speaker: Rob Briner, PhD Topic: Understanding barriers to evidence-based practice in management: the roles of organizations and consultants (a bit) and universities and academics (a bit more) Abstract: Concerns about the ‘gap’ between management research produced in business schools and management practice are long-standing and well-documented.  Management practices do not seem often to be based much on research evidence and the research produced by management researchers seems to be of limited interest to managers.  Many approaches to solving this problem have been proposed including, most recently, evidence-based management. Evidence-based practice has been adopted by many professions and is a way of making better-informed decisions that enhance the effectiveness of practitioners.  I will argue that academic practices around both research and teaching act as a barrier to the further development of evidence-based practice in management.  Such practices include poor methods, focusing on publishing as the goal of science, and using student satisfaction as a proxy for teaching quality and learning.  I will then consider what business schools can do to more actively promote evidence-based management and teach and train students in ways that are more likely to help them become evidence-based managers. Bio: Rob is Professor of Organizational Psychology at Queen Mary, University of London and also Scientific Director of the Center for Evidence-Based Management (www.cebma.org).  His research has focused on several topics including well-being, emotions, stress, ethnicity, the psychological contract, absence from work, motivation, work-nonwork and everyday work behaviour.  Beyond academic research, Rob helps practitioners and organizations make better use of evidence, including research evidence, in decision-making as well as encouraging academics to make research more accessible.  He has written for and presented to practitioners on many aspects of HR and organizational psychology and is now involved in many initiatives aimed at developing and promoting evidence-based practice. He has received several awards for his work in this area including the British Psychological Society Division of Occupational Psychology Academic Contribution to Practice Award in 2014 and topped HR Magazine’s Most Influential Thinker list in 2016.

Speaker: Jennifer Berdahl Title: Harassment and Contest Culture in Organizations Abstract: The #MeToo movement has highlighted the ubiquity of sexual harassment, as well as its costs -- to its targets, and increasingly, to its perpetrators and the organizations that tolerate them. This talk presents two decades of research into sex-based harassment that reveals its systemic patterns, forms, and the organizational cultures in which it thrives. Bio: Jennifer L. Berdahl (PhD, University of Illinois) is the Professor of Leadership Studies: Gender and Diversity, at the University of British Columbia. Her research focuses on the social psychology of gender and power at work, with a focus on sexual harassment. Berdahl regularly appears in the media to discuss her research and contemporary gender issues at work and serves as an expert witness on individual and class action sex discrimination cases in the U.S. and Canada.

Speaker: Jose Cortina Topic: Don’t feel restricted with restricted variance interactions Abstract: Although interaction hypotheses are increasingly common in our field, many recent papers have pointed out that authors often have difficulty justifying interaction hypotheses.  The purpose of this talk is to describe a particular type of interaction, the restricted variance (RV) interaction.  The essence of the RV interaction is that, as the value of one variable in a system changes, certain values of another variable in the system become less plausible, thus restricting its variance. This, in turn, influences relationships between that variable and other variables. I will explain and illustrate the forms that RV interactions can take and the implications, often counterintuitive, of many of the forms.  I also describe how one should go about testing them. Bio: Jose M. Cortina is a Professor in the Department of Management and Entrepreneurship at (you guessed it) Virginia Commonwealth University.  He received his Ph.D. from Michigan State University in 1994.  He is best known for his papers and books on research methods, although he has dabbled in many different areas including, most recently, the effects of music characteristics on workplace outcomes.  Dr. Cortina is a former Editor of Organizational Research Methods (ORM) and a former Associate Editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology.  He was honored by the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) with the 2001 Distinguished Early Career Contributions Award and the 2011 Distinguished Teaching Award.  He was also honored by the Research Methods Division of The Academy of Management with the 2004 Best Paper Award and by the ORM Editorial Board with the 2012 and 2017 Best Paper Awards.  Dr. Cortina served as President of SIOP from 2014-2015.  Back when he had spare time, his hobby was competitive bridge.

Speaker: Paul Bliese

Topic: Randomized Trials, Events, and Emergence: Exploring variants of Longitudinal Models

Abstract:

Longitudinal data are common in organizational behavior and numerous variants of longitudinal models are available for refining and advancing theory. This talk focuses on the analysis of longitudinal data starting with alternative methods for the common two-wave randomized trial (Bodner & Bliese, R&R). Building off the simple design, the talk extends to growth models and discontinuous growth models as a way to understand transitions and events (Bliese & Lang, 2016; Bliese, Adler, & Flynn, 2017).  Finally, the talk concludes with a variant of models useful for detecting changes in residual patterns consistent with the emergence of consensus (Lang, Bliese, & de Voogt, under review; Lang & Bliese, forthcoming).  For instance, the models can test whether members of a group show increased similarity in ratings of affect over time, and the models can test whether certain group members such as leaders are differentially responsible for driving uniformity in affect over time.

Bio: 

Dr. Paul D. Bliese received a Ph.D. from Texas Tech University and a B.A. from Texas Lutheran University. In 1992, he joined the US Army where he spent 22 years as a research psychologist at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR).  In 2009, he formed the Center for Military Psychiatry and Neuroscience at WRAIR, and served as the Director until he retired at the rank of Colonel in 2014. Over his military career, Dr. Bliese directed a large portfolio of research initiatives examining stress, leadership, well-being, and performance.  In this capacity, from 2007 to 2014 he oversaw the US Army’s Mental Health Advisory Team program assessing the morale and well-being of Soldiers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.  Throughout his professional career, Dr. Bliese has led efforts to advance statistical methods and apply analytics to complex organizational data.  He developed the multilevel package for the open-source statistical programming language R, and was instrumental in funding the development of the lme4 package.  His research has been influential in advancing organizational multilevel theory, and has had a demonstrable impact on health and Human Resource policy decisions within the US Army and the Department of Defense. Currently, Dr. Bliese is an associate professor in the Management Department of the Darla Moore School of Business at the University of South Carolina.  He also serves as an associated editor for the Journal of Applied Psychology.

Speaker: Ramona Bobocel

Topic:Forgiving interpersonal wrongs: The role of psychological distance and construal level

Abstract:

Interpersonal forgiveness has been associated with a number of benefits for the victim, such as greater mental health and psychological well-being, as well as for the victim-offender relationship. The benefits associated with forgiveness have motivated scholars to investigate a number of personality and contextual predictors of forgiveness. More recently, researchers have begun to investigate cognitive factors that might promote forgiveness. In our laboratory, we have been extending this line of inquiry by examining the role of psychological distance and construal level on interpersonal forgiveness. In the present talk, I will review our findings and discuss current directions. Our research has implications for understanding cognitive processes underlying forgiveness, and it suggests a novel approach to facilitating forgiveness.

Bio:

Ramona Bobocel received her PhD from Western University in 1992, and is a Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Waterloo. Her research focuses on social and organizational justice, with a continuing interest in understanding how people form judgments of fairness and how they cope with unfair treatment. Recent work has included the study of forgiveness as a prosocial response to interpersonal wrongs. Dr. Bobocel’s research has appeared in top-tier scientific journals, such as the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Management. She has received several awards in recognition of her scientific contributions, including the Ontario Premier’s Research Excellence Award, and is Fellow of the Canadian Psychological and the Association for Psychological Sciences. Dr. Bobocel has served as Associate Editor for the flagship journal of the International Society for Justice Research, and as Consulting Editor for several journals, including Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Journal of Management, European Journal of Social Psychology, and Journal of Organizational Behavior. She has also served as Past President of the Canadian Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

Speaker: Lukas Neville

Topic: To Err Is Human, To Forgive is… Trustworthy? Effects of Victim Forgiveness on Observer Trust

Abstract:

Research on the effects of interpersonal forgiveness usually focuses on the transgressor-victim dyad.  But victims' forgiveness for mistreatment or transgressions may also influence their relationships with third-party observers in the workplace -- the victim's peers and coworkers.  Drawing on theory of forgiveness as a signal of self-control (Burnette, Davisson, Finkel, Van Tongeren, Hui & Hoyle, 2013; Righetti & Finkhanuer, 2011), I argue that observers will be more likely to trust forgiving victims than victims who hold a grudge. 

A vignette experiment (n=80) comparing forgiveness and grudge demonstrates that forgiving victims are more trusted by observers, both in terms of disclosure-based trust and reliance-based trust.  In a second recall-based study (n=197), I show that the effect of forgiveness on observers' trust in victims is conditional on the victim's choice to enact or forgo punishment.  Punitive-but-forgiving victims trigger victim-blaming, reducing the trust-building effect of forgiveness.

I discuss this finding in terms of a paradox it presents for victims of workplace transgressions.  Previous research shows that forgiveness can be enhanced by attempts to seek justice, and that forgiveness without some form of amends can have negative effects for victims.  But the conclusion we would draw from those prior results (punish, then forgive) is at odds with the finding of these two studies that forgiveness' positive effect on trust is attenuated by the choice to punish.  I conclude by discussing how restorative approaches to justice might help reconcile this tension.

Bio:

Lukas Neville is an assistant professor of organizational behaviour at the Asper School of Business, University of Manitoba.  He holds a Ph.D. from the Smith School of Business at Queen's University.  His research interests include trust and conflict management, and he teaches organizational behaviour and negotiation in Asper's undergraduate, MBA, and executive-education programs.

Speaker: Lilia Cortina

Topic: Gender Harassment: A Technology of Oppression in Organizations

Abstract:

When people hear the term sexual harassment, they typically think only about unwanted sexual pursuit. This term is misleading, however, because oftentimes “sexual” harassment has little if anything to do with sexuality - instead it’s about gender. This talk will highlight new findings on gender harassment: conduct that disparages employees of one gender but implies no sexual advance. I will present evidence on the pervasiveness of gender harassment, work environments associated with it, and its implications for worker wellbeing. I will argue that this harassment puts pressure on all employees (both women and men) to conform to a narrow standard of gender “appropriate” behavior. As a result, gender oppression is maintained in society and replicated on the job.

Bio:

Lilia M. Cortina is Professor of Psychology, Women’s Studies, and Management at the University of Michigan. She is also Associate Director of Michigan’s ADVANCE Program, which works to enhance faculty diversity, inclusion, retention, and leadership. Her research revolves around workplace victimization, with a particular focus on (1) harassment based on sex, sexuality, and gender, as well as (2) incivility on the job. In addition, she occasionally serves as an expert witness in forensic venues, for example testifying on sexual harassment and assault to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and the Department of Defense Judicial Proceedings Panel (commissioned by Congress to review military judicial procedures surrounding sexual assault). In recognition of unusual and outstanding contributions to the field, Professor Cortina has been named Fellow of the American Psychological Association and the Society for Industrial/Organizational Psychology.

Speaker: James Beck

Topic: A Formal Model of Adverse Workplace Outcomes: Counterintuitive Findings from the Lab and Field

Abstract:

Within most occupations it is important to maintain low levels of adverse outcomes, which are broadly defined as negative results contrary to an organization’s goals (e.g., defective products, damaged property, workplace injuries). To this end, individuals engage in preventative behaviours (e.g., inspecting products for defects, wearing protective gear) to limit adverse outcomes. However, preventative behaviours often come with costs. For instance, inspecting products takes time and slows productivity. Likewise, protective gear is often uncomfortable and cumbersome. As such, workers tend to keep these behaviours to a minimum when the likelihood of an adverse event is low, yet compensate for increases in the likelihood of an adverse event occurring by increasing preventative behaviours. Unfortunately, individuals are not particularly adept at making such behavioural adjustments, and instead tend to undercompensate. In the current research I seek to understand this problem by developing a formal (i.e., mathematical) model of adverse outcomes and preventative behaviours. The model’s results indicate that a sharp non-linear increase in preventative behaviour is needed to fully compensate for increased likelihood of an adverse outcome occurring. I argue that this pattern of behaviour may not be intuitive or obvious, and thus individuals may fail to fully compensate for an increased likelihood of an adverse event occurring due to a lack of understanding of this relationship. Data from three studies using various methodologies provide support for the model’s predictions. I will conclude the talk by discussing the implications of these results for self-regulatory theory, as well as the implications for designing interventions to limit adverse outcomes in the workplace.

Bio:

James Beck is an Associate Professor of industrial/organizational psychology at the University of Waterloo. He primarily studies the processes involved as individuals allocate time, effort, and attention toward multiple work goals. His work has been published in several top-tier outlets, including Journal of Applied Psychology, Personnel Psychology, and Journal of Management.

Speaker: Winny Shen

Title: Flipping the script: Expanding our understanding of leadership behaviors by exploring leader outcomes and follower antecedents

Abstract: 

Although leadership has long been defined and recognized as a mutual social influence process between leaders and followers, leadership research has historically focused almost exclusively on certain directions of influence (e.g., the impact of leader behaviors on follower outcomes, the impact of leader personality on leadership behaviors). In this presentation, I explore relatively neglected areas and directions of influence between leaders and followers. Specifically, I examine the impact of follower performance on leader well-being as well as the relationship between follower personality and leadership behavior ratings. Implications for the expansion of leadership research are then discussed. 

Bio: 

Winny Shen is an Assistant Professor of Industrial/Organizational Psychology at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. Her research focuses on issues of diversity/inclusion, leadership, and occupational health psychology (i.e., work-family issues, understaffing, and worker health and well-being). Her research has has been published in leading psychology and management journals, including the Journal of Applied Psychology and Academy of Management Journal. Recently, the Association for Psychological Science recognized the contribution and potential of this body of work by designating Dr. Shen as a 2016 Rising Star in Psychological Science. 

Speaker: Sandeep Mishra

Topic: Inequality, health, and risk-sensitive decision-making

Abstract: 

Substantial epidemiological evidence has shown that higher levels of income inequality are associated with poorer societal outcomes, including lower social capital, lower trust, greater crime and risk-taking, and worse mental and physical health. However, surprisingly little research has examined individual-level (vs. societal-level) consequences of inequality. Using the theoretical framework of risk-sensitivity theory, I present experimental and survey evidence linking individual-level inequality and relative deprivation (a downstream emotional consequence of inequality) with various decision-making and health-related outcomes, including behavioral risk-taking and gambling. In particular, I highlight some counterintuitive, but predicted findings indicating that chronically risk-persistent individuals (e.g., problem gamblers, convicts, drug addicts) are actually "rational" risk-sensitive decision-makers. Finally, I summarize some future lines of research that will further examine attitudes toward, and consequences of, inequality and relative deprivation. Together, this research demonstrates how understanding the risk-sensitive processes underlying decision-making has wide-ranging implications for individuals and society more generally.

Bio:           

Sandeep Mishra is Assistant Professor of Organizational Behavior in the Faculty of Business Administration at the University of Regina. Prior to this position, he was a postdoctoral research fellow in Industrial/Organizational psychology at the University of Guelph, externally funded by NSERC and the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. Sandeep received his Ph.D. and M.Sc. degrees in psychology from the University of Lethbridge, and his B.Sc. in psychology from McMaster University. Sandeep’s research interests are broadly in the areas of judgment and decision-making, behavioral economics, personality and individual differences, health and well-being, and evolutionary theory. He has over 30 publications in diverse fields, including social psychology, personality psychology, and health.

Speaker: Jose Cortina

Topic: On the cutting edge or falling over the side?  Rethinking the way that we evaluate research.

Abstract:

There is an increasing disconnect between best and actual research practices. Hypotheses are unjustified, research designs are inappropriate, results are not replicated, and analyses are misapplied. The first purpose of this talk is to describe some of these problems and present evidence that they exist. The second is to identify the reasons that they exist. Having identified these reasons, the third purpose of this talk is to discuss how to replace these reasons with reasons that would lead to a true Organizational Science.

Bio:

Jose M. Cortina is a Professor in the I/O Psychology program at George Mason University.  He is past Editor of Organizational Research Methods and a former Associate Editor of the Journal of Applied Psychology.  Dr. Cortina was honored by the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology with the 2001 Distinguished Early Career Contributions Award, by the Research Methods Division of AOM with the 2004 Best Paper Award and by the ORM Editorial Board with the 2012 Best Paper Award.  He was honored by GMU with a 2010 Teaching Excellence Award and by SIOP with the 2011 Distinguished Teaching Award.  Dr. Cortina currently serves as Past President of SIOP.

Speaker: Christopher Berry

Topic: Revisiting the Hispanic-White Mean Difference on Job Performance

Abstract:

Job performance is most commonly measured via supervisor ratings and is associated with various positive outcomes for employees and organizations. However, a substantial mean difference between racial/ethnic subgroups on job performance could have significant negative implications, ranging from concerns over possible bias in subjective supervisor ratings to legal action. Although much research has addressed mean job performance differences between Black and White employees, very little has addressed this issue for Hispanic and White employees, despite Hispanic persons facing many of the same societal challenges as Black persons (e.g., discrimination, SES) and despite Hispanic persons representing one of the largest and/or fastest-growing racial/ethnic subgroups in the USA and Canada. The present meta-analysis revisited the Hispanic-White mean difference on job performance, including approximately 17 times more samples than a smaller, previous meta-analysis. Although the smaller, previous meta-analysis found essentially no mean Hispanic-White job performance difference, the present meta-analysis found sizable mean differences in favor of White employees on supervisor ratings; there was no significant Hispanic-White mean difference for objective measures of job performance. The results have negative implications for Hispanic employees and highlight the need for research investigating why this mean difference on supervisor ratings exists.

Bio:

Chris Berry is an Associate Professor in the Organizational Behavior and Human Resources Department at Indiana University Kelly School of Business. He received his PhD from University of Minnesota in Industrial/Organizational Psychology. He is an associate editor for Journal of Applied Psychology. He has won numerous awards including Distinguished Early Career Contributions –Science Award, Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (2015).

Speaker: Sharon Toker

Topic: Should we be stressed about stress?

Abstract:

The scientific debate over the conceptualization of stress has been ongoing since the 1950s'. Still, stress is a leading cause for suffering, with one in four Europeans reporting being stressed at work. Thus, critical questions that researchers should ask themselves are: What do people mean when they say they are "stressed"? Can we measure stress? Can we study stress? Is 'stress' indeed harmful? The pursuit of answers to these questions is important and timely, as 'stress' is portrayed as the 'number 1 killer'. In an attempt to answer some of these questions, my presentation will include two main parts. First, I'll review different conceptualizations of stress and discuss them using multiple points of view (psychological, sociological and physiological). I will claim that the use of the word "stress" in research is somewhat problematic. Second, I'll review various findings (published and unpublished) from a large scale cohort study I have initiated in 2003 (n=19,500). In this study, the associations between stressors (e.g., workload, fear of terror), resources (e.g., control, support), affective states (e.g., vigor, burnout, depression) and health (e.g., CVD, diabetes), have been the focal point of interest. 

Bio:

Professor Sharon Toker (Ph.D., Tel Aviv University), after completing her post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford University, joined the Faculty of Management at Tel Aviv University. She has served as the head of the organizational behavior department and as the academic head of the organizational consulting program.  In 2013, Prof. Toker won the Early Career Achievement Award, given by the American Psychological Association (APA) and the National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH).

Prof. Toker is a dedicated researcher in the field of organizational behavior and occupational health, with experience in large-scale field studies and quantitative and qualitative methods. Her academically diverse background (Psychology, Sociology, Organizational Behavior, Coaching and Health Promotion) complements a high motivation to engage in interdisciplinary research approaches and concepts. Prof. Toker is the author of 33 papers, integrating psychological and medical issues. She has published in leading academic journals, such as Psychological Bulletin, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Organizational Behavior. Her interests include: Stress theory; The influence of work characteristics on employees' mental and physical health; Health promotion in organizations; Employees' well-being, burnout, and health; Organizational cynicism. https://en-recanati.tau.ac.il/profile/tokersha

Speaker: Eric Surface

Topic: Trainer Management and Development by the Numbers: Using Data to Improve Instruction and Learning

Abstract: 

Organizations rely on workplace learning as an important strategy to ensure individuals and teams have the capabilities needed to perform work activities, achieve outcomes and accomplish organizational objectives. Individuals rely on workplace learning to develop capabilities needed on their current job or to remain competitive in the labor market. Formal instructor-led training is still a key component of workplace learning. Although the efficacy of such training is often assumed, training effectiveness can vary greatly across learners, instructors, courses, events and programs. Opportunities exist to improve the effectiveness of learning, instruction and learning transfer.

In our practice, at ALPS Solutions, we have identified several leverage points or key factors in the learning process by approaching training effectiveness from the perspective of integrating existing training research and practice with formative, multilevel, interactionist and dynamic perspectives learning and measurement. One key training effectiveness factor is the trainer or instructor. My talk focuses on our research and practice related to using formative evaluation in combination with learner assessment and other data to improve instructor effectiveness and, therefore, learning and training program effectiveness.

The main focus of the talk will be on instructor performance and effectiveness, how it is defined and measured, and how it can be improved using evidence-based feedback and development interventions. The presentation will cover the following:

• Background, including models that guide our work
• Instructor performance verse instructor effectiveness and whether learner scores are (or can be used as) measures of instructor performance or effectiveness
• Example of the impact of instructors on learner outcomes and how this led to our focus on instructor performance and effectiveness and a web-based feedback intervention
• Overview of our research supporting the intervention approach—including the development and validation of measures
• Example of how our research and interventions have become tools used for instructional improvement and instructor management and development
• Future directions for research and practice, including implications for other fields, such as education

Bio: 

Dr. Eric A. Surface is the president and principal scientist of ALPS Solutions, where he advocates for the use of evidence-based practices and the ALPS model (analyze, learn, perform and succeed) to help clients accomplish their objectives. ALPS focuses on research- and evidence-based solutions in the areas of learning and performance. ALPS does projects in needs assessment, evaluation, assessment, learning design/delivery and performance management. Eric has led numerous applied research and consulting engagements in military/government, corporate and non-profit organizations since 1997. Currently, he is leading the development of a software product, based on ALPS research and interventions, to improve training effectiveness for clients.

Eric believes strongly in the scientist-practitioner model and has presented at numerous conferences, such as SIOP and Academy of Management, and published in peer-reviewed journals, such as Journal of Management, Journal of Applied Psychology, Military Psychology, Personnel Psychology, Human Performance, Organizational Research Methods, Foreign Language Annals, and Journal of Managerial Psychology.

Eric is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the Society for Military Psychology (Division 19, APA). He is currently the Secretary of the Society for Military Psychology (2014-2016). He earned his PhD in I/O Psychology at North Carolina State University and was an Army Research Institute Consortium Research Fellow and Post-Doctoral Fellow.

Speaker: Tom Lawrence

Topic: High stakes Institutional Translation:  Establishing North America’s First Government-Sanctioned Supervised Injection Site

Abstract:

Around the world, potentially effective responses to serious social problems are left untried because those responses are politically, culturally or morally problematic in affected communities. I describe the process through which communities import such practices as “high-stakes institutional translation”. Drawing on a study of North America’s first supervised injection site for users of illegal drugs, I propose a process model of high-stakes institutional translation that involves a triggering period of public expressions of intense emotion, followed by waves of translations in which the controversial practice is constructed in discursive and material terms many times over.

Bio: 

Tom is a Professor of Strategy at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford, UK. His areas of expertise include strategic management, organizational change, social innovation, institutional theory, and social change. This work has appeared in the leading organization and strategy journals, including Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Harvard Business Review, Sloan Management Review, Organization Studies, Journal of Management Studies, Human Relations, and Journal of Management. He is also a co-editor of the Sage Handbook of Organization Studies and the Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism. Before joining Saïd Business School, Tom was the W. J. VanDusen Professor of Management at the Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser University, and has held permanent or visiting positions at the University of Victoria, University of British Columbia, Cambridge University, McGill University, St. Andrews University, and Chulalongkorn University. He received his PhD in organisational analysis and BComm in finance from the University of Alberta.

Speakers: Peter Hom, Tom Lee, Terence Mitchell, and Rodger Griffeth

Topic: Empirical Tests of Proximal Withdrawal States Theory (PWST)

Abstract: 

In a variety of samples, funded in part by the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM), we will present the first major findings of recent conceptual developments of employee turnover (Hom, Mitchell, Lee & Griffeth, 2012; Griffeth, Lee, Mitchell & Hom, 2012) called Proximal Withdrawal States Theory (PWST). Grounded in reviews of past theory and empirical research of stayers and leavers, PWST develops a model of four groups of employees based on their preferences and control over leaving and staying.  We labeled these groups enthusiastic stayers and leavers, and reluctant stayers and leavers. The presentation will describe the creation, development, and validation of measures of these states, and substantive tests of differences and similarities among the four groups.

Bios:

Peter Hom is a Professor at the Department of Management Arizona State University. Peter has published over 40 journal articles and published 3 books. He is currently on the editorial board of JOM and JAP and was on the editorial board of AMJ for over a decade.

Tom Lee is the Hughes M. Blake Professor of Management and Associate Dean for Academic and Faculty Affairs at the Foster School of Business, University of Washington. Tom has published over 85 academic articles and 1 book, and received numerous research awards. Tom served as Editor of the Academy of Management Journal, as President of the Academy of Management and on eight editorial boards. 

Terence Mitchel is Edward Carlson Professor of Business Administration and Professor of Psychology at University of Washington. Terence has published over 169 articles and 9 books.

 Rodger Griffeth is the Byham Chair of I-O Psychology and Professor of Psychology at Ohio University. Rodger has published over 115 journal articles and has published 3 books. Rodger is the Editor of both Human Resource Management Review and Research in Human Resource Management and on the editorial board of a number of other journals.

Speaker: Ken Brown

Topic: Unfreezing change as three steps: Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management

Abstract: 

Kurt Lewin’s ‘changing as three steps’ (unfreezingàchangingàrefreezing) is regarded by many as the classic or fundamental approach to managing change. Lewin has been criticized by scholars for over-simplifying the change process and has been defended by others against such charges.  However, what has remained unquestioned is the model’s foundational significance. It is sometimes traced (if it is traced at all) to the first article ever published in Human Relations. Based on a comparison of what Lewin wrote about changing as three steps with how this is presented in later works, we argue that he never developed such a model and it took form after his death. We investigate how and why ‘changing as three steps’ came to be understood as the foundation of the fledgling subfield of change management and to influence change theory and practice to this day, and how questioning this supposed foundation can encourage innovation. 

Bio:           

Dr. Ken Brown, Associate Dean, Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa. Ken is a top training and development researcher, having published over 15 journal articles in ABS 4/FT45, and is the Former Editor of Academy of Management Learning and Education.

Speaker: Julian Barling

Topic: The Science of Leadership

Bio: Julian Barling is the Borden Chair of Leadership at Queen's University. .His research examines transformational leadership and employee well-being, including how leaders can create safe and healthy work environments. He has authored over 150 research articles and chapters, and is the recent author of the book "The Science of Leadership: Lessons from Research for Organizational Leaders."