nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

17.09.2018 | Original Paper

Abusive Supervision and Organizational Dehumanization

verfasst von: Gaëtane Caesens, Nathan Nguyen, Florence Stinglhamber

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 5/2019

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Across three studies, we examined whether and to what extent experiencing abusive supervision leads employees to feel dehumanized by their organization and explored the consequences of this relationship. First, an experimental study manipulating abusive supervision shows that abusive supervision leads to organizational dehumanization perceptions, which in turn have negative consequences (i.e., decreased employees’ job satisfaction, affective commitment, and increased turnover intentions). Based on a cross-lagged panel design, Study 2 confirmed the directionality of the relationship between abusive supervision and organizational dehumanization, by showing the antecedence of abusive supervision on organizational dehumanization. Finally, the results of Study 3 indicated that the indirect effects of organizational dehumanization in the relationships between abusive supervision on the one hand and job satisfaction, affective commitment, and turnover intentions on the other hand are moderated by perceived coworker support.

Vorheriger Artikel Lay Beliefs About Attention to and Awareness of the Present: Implicit Mindfulness Theory (IMT) and Its Workplace Implications

Nächster Artikel Correction to: Abusive Supervision and Organizational Dehumanization

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

In response to the comment of an anonymous reviewer, we included job autonomy (three items; Fuller, Marler, & Hester, 2006), professional isolation (six items, Golden, Veiga, & Dino, 2008), and meaning of work (four items; Kristensen & Borg, 2003) as additional variables explaining organizational dehumanization in the final model. This additional analysis aimed to test whether the effect of abusive supervision remains significant over and beyond other variables that may have an impact on dehumanization. This model showed a good fit to the data (χ² (664) = 1433.90; RMSEA = .06; SRMR = .06; CFI = .91; TLI = .90). Importantly, the results were essentially identical and did not change the interpretation of the findings as both abusive supervision and the interaction term remained positively related to organizational dehumanization. The only difference found is that the direct remaining relationships of abusive supervision and perceived coworker support on affective commitment and job satisfaction were not significant when autonomy, professional isolation, and meaning of work were controlled for.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Andrighetto, L., Baldissarri, C., & Volpato, C. (2017). (Still) modern times: Evidence of objectification within working domain. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 25–35.CrossRef

Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 1086–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.010.CrossRef

Aquino, K., & Lamertz, K. (2004). A relational model of workplace victimization: Social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1023.CrossRefPubMed

Ashforth, B. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47, 755–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679404700701.CrossRef

Ashforth, B. A., Schinoff, B. S., & Brickson, S. L. (2018). “My company is friendly,” “Mine’s a rebel”: Anthropomorphism and shifting organizational identity from “what” to “who”. Academy of Management Review. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0496.

Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484.CrossRef

Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2011). Experiencing dehumanization: Cognitive and emotional effects of everyday dehumanization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33, 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.614132.CrossRef

Becker, T. E. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105278021.CrossRef

Becker, T. E., Atinc, G., Breaugh, J. A., Carlson, K. D., Edwards, J. R., & Spector, P. E. (2016). Statistical control in correlational studies: 10 essential recommendations for organizational researchers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2053.CrossRef

Bell, C. M., & Khoury, C. (2011). Organizational de/humanization, deindividuation, anomie, and in/justice. In S. Gilliland, D. Steiner, & D. Skarlicki (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on organizational justice and ethics (pp. 167–197). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Bell, C. M., & Khoury, C. (2016). Organizational powerlessness, dehumanization, and gendered effects of procedural justice. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31, 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-09-2014-0267.CrossRef

Bishop, J. W., Scott, K. D., & Burroughs, S. M. (2000). Support, commitment, and employee outcomes in a team environment. Journal of Management, 26, 1113–1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600603.CrossRef

Burton, J. P., & Hoobler, J. M. (2011). Aggressive reactions to abusive supervision: The role of interactional justice and narcissism. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52, 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2011.00886.x.CrossRefPubMed

Caesens, G., Stinglhamber, F., Demoulin, S., & De Wilde, M. (2017). Perceived organizational support and employees’ well-being: The mediating role of organizational dehumanization. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26, 527–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2017.1319817.CrossRef

Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 296–325.CrossRef

Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2017). Accuracy of parameter estimates and confidence intervals in moderated mediation models: A comparison of regression and latent moderated structural equations. Organizational Research Methods, 20, 746–769.CrossRef

Christoff, K. (2014). Dehumanization in organizational settings: Some scientific and ethical considerations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 748. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00748.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6.CrossRef

Duffy, M. K., Ganster, D. C., & Pagon, M. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069350.CrossRef

Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.002.CrossRef

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 812–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.5.812.CrossRefPubMed

Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 500–507. https://doi.org/10.1037//00219010.71.3.500.CrossRef

Eisenberger, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Perceived organizational support: Fostering enthusiastic and productive employees. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books. https://doi.org/10.1037/12318-000.CrossRef

Finkel, S. E. (1995). Causal analysis with panel data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRef

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. (1991). Coping and emotion. In A. Monat & R. Lazarus (Eds.), Stress and coping: An anthology (3rd ed., pp. 207–227). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.CrossRef

Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. (2006). Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: Exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 1089–1120.CrossRef

Gibney, R., Zagenczyk, T. J., & Masters, M. F. (2009). The negative aspects of social exchange: An introduction to perceived organizational obstruction. Group & Organization Management, 34, 665–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601109350987.CrossRef

Glaser, D. N., Tatum, B. C., Nebeker, D. M., Sorenson, R. C., & Aiello, J. R. (1999). Workload and social support: Effects on performance and stress. Human Performance, 12, 155–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959289909539865.CrossRef

Gleibs, I. H. (2016). Are all “research fields” equal? Rethinking practice for the use of data from crowdsourcing market places. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0789-y.CrossRef

Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Dino, R. N. (2008). The impact of professional isolation on teleworker job performance and turnover intentions: Does time spent teleworking, interacting face-to-face, or having access to communication-enhancing technology matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1412–1421.CrossRefPubMed

Hackney, K. J., & Perrewé, P. L. (2018). A review of abusive behaviors at work: The development of a process model for studying abuse. Organizational Psychology Review, 8, 70–92.CrossRef

Hadikin, R., & O'Driscoll, M. (2000). The bullying culture: Cause, effect, harm reduction. Oxford: Books for Midwives Press.

Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., & Zivnuska, S. (2007). An investigation of abusive supervision as a predictor of performance and the meaning of work as a moderator of the relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 252–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.007.CrossRef

Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 252–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4.CrossRefPubMed

Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevpsych-010213-115045.CrossRefPubMed

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44, 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513.CrossRefPubMed

Huang, X., Wright, R., Chiu, W., & Wang, C. (2008). Relational schemas as sources of evaluation and misevaluation of leader-member exchanges: Some initial evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 266–282.CrossRef

Jaros, S. J. (1997). An assessment of Meyer and Allen's (1991) three-component model of organizational commitment and turnover intentions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 51, 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1995.1553.CrossRef

Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

Kristensen, T. S., & Borg, V. (2003). The Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire (COPSOQ): A questionnaire on psychosocial working conditions, health and well-being in three versions [internet]. Denmark: The National Institute of Occupational Health.

Ladd, D., & Henry, R. A. (2000). Helping coworkers and helping the organization: The role of support perceptions, exchange ideology, and conscientiousness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2028–2049. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02422.x.CrossRef

Landers, R. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2015). An inconvenient truth: Arbitrary distinctions between organizational, mechanical Turk, and other convenience samples. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 142–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2015.13.CrossRef

Lang, J., Bliese, P. D., Lang, J. W., & Adler, A. B. (2011). Work gets unfair for the depressed: Cross-lagged relations between organizational justice perceptions and depressive symptoms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 602–618. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022463.CrossRefPubMed

Lavelle, J. J., Rupp, D. E., & Brockner, J. (2007). Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior: The target similarity model. Journal of Management, 33, 841–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307307635.CrossRef

Levinson, H. (1965). Reciprocation: The relationship between man and organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 370–390. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391032.CrossRef

Leyens, J. P., Paladino, P. M., Rodriguez-Torres, R., Vaes, J., Demoulin, S., Rodriguez-Perez, A., & Gaunt, R. (2000). The emotional side of prejudice: The attribution of secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_06.CrossRef

Leyens, J. P., Rodriguez-Perez, A., Rodriguez-Torres, R., Gaunt, R., Paladino, M. P., Vaes, J., & Demoulin, S. (2001). Psychological essentialism and the differential attribution of uniquely human emotions to ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 395–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.50.CrossRef

Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, D. J. (2012). Does power distance exacerbate or mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? It depends on the outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024610.CrossRefPubMed

Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why followers rarely escape their clutches. Ivey Business Journal, 69, 1–8.

Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1.CrossRef

Little, T. D., Preacher, K. J., Selig, J. P., & Card, N. A. (2007). New developments in latent variable panel analysis of longitudinal data. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 357–365.CrossRef

Little, T. D., Rhemtulla, M., Gibson, K., & Schoemann, A. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods, 18, 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033266.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43, 1940–1965.CrossRef

Markel, K. S., & Frone, M. R. (1998). Job characteristics, work-school conflict, and school outcomes among adolescents: Testing a structural model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.277.CrossRefPubMed

Marsh, H. W., Wen, Z., & Hau, K. T. (2004). Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction. Psychological Methods, 9, 275–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.9.3.275.CrossRefPubMed

Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRef

Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 538–551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.538.CrossRef

Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159.CrossRefPubMed

Morgan-Lopez, A. A., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2006). Demonstration and evaluation of a method for assessing mediated moderation. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 77–87. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192752.CrossRefPubMed

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998-2017). Mplus User’s Guide (Eighth ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

Ng, T. W., & Sorensen, K. L. (2008). Toward a further understanding of the relationships between perceptions of support and work attitudes: A meta-analysis. Group & Organization Management, 33, 243–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601107313307.CrossRef

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.CrossRefPubMed

Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514.CrossRef

Schat, A. C. H., Desmarais, S., & Kelloway, E. K. (2006). Exposure to workplace aggression from multiple sources: Validation of a measure and test of a model. Unpublished manuscript. In McMaster University. Canada: Hamilton.

Shore, L. M., & Coyle-Shapiro, J. A. M. (2012). Perceived organizational cruelty: An expansion of the negative employee-organization relationship domain. In L. M. Shore, J. A. Coyle-Shapiro, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.), The employee organization relationship: Applications for the 21 ^st century (pp. 139–157). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRef

Shoss, M. K., Eisenberger, R., Restubog, S. L. D., & Zagenczyk, T. J. (2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030687.CrossRefPubMed

Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 456–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109351241.CrossRef

Smircich, L., & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership: The management of meaning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18, 257–273.CrossRefPubMed

Stahl, G. K., & Caligiuri, P. (2005). The effectiveness of expatriate coping strategies: The moderating role of cultural distance, position level, and time on the international assignment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 603–615. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.603.CrossRefPubMed

Stinglhamber, F., Marique, G., Caesens, G., Hanin, D., & De Zanet, F. (2015). The influence of transformational leadership on followers’ affective commitment: The role of perceived organizational support and supervisor’s organizational embodiment. Career Development International, 20, 583–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-12-2014-0158.CrossRef

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556375.CrossRef

Tepper, B. J. (2006). Abusive supervision. In S. Rogelberg & C. Reeve (Eds.), Encyclopedia of industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 1–4). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812.CrossRef

Tepper, B. J. (2016). Preface to N. Ashkanasy, R. Bennett, & M. Martinko (Eds.), Understanding the high performance workplace: The line between motivation and abuse. New York, NY: Routledge.

Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Henle, C. A., & Lambert, L. S. (2006). Procedural injustice, victim precipitation, and abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 59, 101–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00725.x.CrossRef

Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers' organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees' attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 455–465. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.455.CrossRefPubMed

Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. (2001). Personality moderators of the relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates' resistance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 974–983. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.5.974.CrossRefPubMed

Tepper, B. J., Moss, S., & Duffy, M. K. (2011). Predictors of abusive supervision: Supervisor perceptions of deep-level dissimilarity, relationship conflict, and subordinate performance. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 279–294. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.60263085.CrossRef

Tepper, B. J., Moss, S. E., Lockhart, D. E., & Carr, J. C. (2007). Abusive supervision, upward maintenance communication, and subordinates' psychological distress. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1169–1180 https://doi.org/10.2307/20159918.

Thau, S., Bennett, R. J., Mitchell, M. S., & Marrs, M. B. (2009). How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.06.003.CrossRef

Väyrynen, T., & Laari-Salmela, S. (2018). Men, mammals, or machines? Dehumanization embedded in organizational practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 147, 95–113.CrossRef

Walter, F., Lam, C. K., Van Der Vegt, G. S., Huang, X., & Miao, Q. (2015). Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1056–1072. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038513.CrossRefPubMed

Wang, M., Liao, H., Zhan, Y., & Shi, J. (2011). Daily customer mistreatment and employee sabotage against customers: Examining emotion and resource perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 312–334. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2011.60263093.CrossRef

Wang, R., & Jiang, J. (2015). How abusive supervisors influence employees’ voice and silence: The effects of interactional justice and organizational attribution. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155, 204–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2014.990410.CrossRefPubMed

Wu, T. Y., & Hu, C. (2009). Abusive supervision and employee emotional exhaustion: Dispositional antecedents and boundaries. Group & Organization Management, 34, 143–169.CrossRef

Zellars, K. L., Tepper, B. J., & Duffy, M. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates' organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1068–1076. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.6.1068.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Abusive Supervision and Organizational Dehumanization
verfasst von: Gaëtane Caesens
Nathan Nguyen
Florence Stinglhamber
Publikationsdatum: 17.09.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 5/2019
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9592-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2019

Understanding Franchisee Performance: The Role of Personal and Contextual Resources

Do Findings from Laboratory Experiments on Preferential Selection Generalize to Cognitively-Oriented Tasks? A Test of Two Perspectives

Lay Beliefs About Attention to and Awareness of the Present: Implicit Mindfulness Theory (IMT) and Its Workplace Implications

I Do Not Want to Trust You, but I Do: on the Relationship Between Trust Intent, Trusting Behavior, and Time Pressure

A story of gains and losses: intra-individual shifts in job characteristics and well-being when transitioning to a managerial role

Experience Sampling Response Modes: Comparing Voice and Online Surveys