MANA 8336: Seminar in Organizational Behavior
Fall 2008, W 9:00am-12:00pm
_______________________________________________________________________________
Instructor:
Richard S. DeFrank, Ph.D.
Office:
310G Melcher Hall
Office Hours:
1:00pm-3:00pm W
Phone Number:
713-743-4678
Fax Number:
713-743-4652
E-Mail:
rdefrank@uh.edu
WebCT:
http://www.uh.edu/webct
_______________________________________________________________________________
Course Objectives
This course provides a doctoral-level overview of micro topics in Organizational Behavior. The
readings include a mixture of classic and contemporary papers that are both theoretical and
empirical in nature. Through the readings and course requirements, you should (1) gain an
understanding of the major theories and research in Organizational Behavior, and (2) obtain
knowledge and skills to conceptualize and conduct research in Organizational Behavior. Topics
that will be covered include: person v. situation, individual differences, workplace behaviors,
organizational justice, motivation, groups, and leadership.
Academic Honesty
The University of Houston Academic Honesty Policy is strictly enforced by the C.T. Bauer
College of Business. No violations of this policy will be tolerated in this course. A discussion of
the policy is included in the University of Houston Student Handbook which can be found at
http://www.uh.edu/dos/hdbk/acad/achonpol.html. Students are expected to be familiar with this
policy.
Accommodations for Students with Disabilities
The C.T. Bauer College Business would like to help students who have disabilities achieve their
highest potential. To this end, in order to receive academic accommodations, students must
register with the Center for Students with Disabilities (CSD) (telephone 713-743-5400), and
present approved accommodation documentation to their instructors in a timely manner.
Instructor Evaluations
The Bauer College of Business has a policy that requires all of its instructors to be evaluated by
their students. The results of these evaluations are important to provide feedback to instructors
on how their performance can be improved. In addition, these evaluations are carefully
considered in promotion, salary adjustment, and other important decisions. We openly
encourage students to provide feedback to the instructors and to the college through the
evaluation process.
WebCT
WebCT will be used in this class as a course management tool to post announcements, the course
syllabus, lecture outlines and grades. All assignments for the course will be submitted through
the assignments drop-box. E-mail and calendar functions are also available. To access WebCT
for this class, please obtain a WebCT ID and login at: http://www.uh.edu/webct. If you have
questions about WebCT or need technical assistance, you can click on the “get help” link on the
WebCT website, call the help-line at 713-743-1411 (M-F 8am-8pm), or visit the IT Support
Center in room 56 of the library (M-F 8am-8pm). Contact me for any course-related questions.
Student Evaluation
(1) Class Contribution (30%)
Discussion Leadership: You will each take at least one turn in leading class discussions
throughout the semester. The discussion leaders are responsible for being the most
knowledgeable students in the session. The job of discussion leader is to provide a
general overview of the readings, lead discussions on the readings, and provide
integration and synthesis of key themes emerging on the topics. Handouts and/or
PowerPoint presentations may be used to provide the class with discussion questions and
key issues. Discussion leadership is worth 15% of the course grade.
Class Discussion: On days that you are not the discussion leader, you are expected to
have completed all of the readings marked with an asterisk as well as individually
assigned articles prior to class and take an active role in the discussion. For your
individually assigned articles, please prepare a one page single-spaced handout for me
and all class members that includes the citation, summary (theory, hypotheses, findings,
overall message, etc.), critique, and suggestions for future research. Class discussion is
worth 15% of the course grade. This grade will be negatively affected by excessive
absences and tardiness.
I recommend reading the following chapter to help understand how to critically analyze
the readings in preparation for class discussions: K.C. Oleson & R.M. Arkin (2006),
Reviewing and evaluating a research article. In T.L. Leong & J.T. Austin (Eds.), The
psychology research handbook: A guide for graduate students and research assistants
(pp. 59-74). Thousand Oaks, NJ: Sage.
(2) Exams (40%)
There will be two exams given in this class to assess your understanding of the course
material and to help prepare you for qualifying/comprehensive exams. The exams will
consist of essay questions and will be administered in class on October 8th and November
19th. Each exam is worth 20% of the course grade.
(3) Research Proposal (30%)
Paper: You will be required to write a research proposal on an OB topic of your choice.
In the paper, you should identify a researchable question, thoroughly review relevant
literature, develop hypotheses, and propose a study to test the hypotheses. The paper
should be 20-25 double-spaced pages and should follow APA or AMJ style guidelines.
The paper must be your own original work, with appropriate references for all sources.
Papers used for other courses, whether in previous semesters or in the current semester,
are not eligible to meet the requirements for this course. Any violations of this policy
will be addressed through the academic honesty procedures. A 3-5 page topic proposal is
due October 15th for my approval and feedback. The final paper is due by 10:00am
December 3rd. Late papers will receive a penalty of one third of a letter grade per day.
Your paper is worth 25% of the course grade. To help with this process, I recommend
that you read chapters 3-5 and 7-11 of W.C. Booth, G.G. Colomb and J.M. Williams, The
craft of research (3rd Ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008.
Presentation: On November 27th, each student will give a 15 minute Power Point
presentation of their research proposal followed by 5-10 minutes for questions/answers.
This is a typical amount of time allotted for paper presentations at professional
conferences. The presentation is worth 5% of the course grade.
Course Grade
Summary of Points and Percentages
Discussion Leadership
30 points = 15%
Class Discussion
30 points = 15%
Exam 1
40 points = 20%
Exam 2
40 points = 20%
Research Paper
50 points = 25%
Presentation
10 points = 5%
________________________________________
Total
200 points = 100%
Grade Distribution
A ..............186.0 - 200.0 points
A-..............180.0 - 185.9 points
B+.............174.0 - 179.9 points
B ..............166.0 - 173.9 points
B-..............160.0 - 165.9 points
C+.............154.0 - 159.9 points
C ..............146.0 - 153.9 points
C-..............140.0 - 145.9 points
D+.............134.0 - 139.9 points
D ..............126.0 - 133.9 points
D-..............120.0 - 125.9 points
F .....……..000.0 - 119.9 points
(Please note: In the following reading list, AMR = Academy of Management Review; AMJ =
Academy of Management Journal; JAP = Journal of Applied Psychology; JOM = Journal of
Management; Annu. Rev. Psychol.= Annual Review of Psychology; ASQ = Administrative
Science Quarterly; JOB = Journal of Organizational Behavior; JPSP = Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology; PPsych = Personnel Psychology; Res in OB = Research in Organizational
Behavior; Psych Bull = Psychological Bulletin; LQ = Leadership Quarterly; OrgSci =
Organizational Science; OBHP/OBHDP = Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance/Human Decision Processes)
Class Schedule
Aug. 27
Course Overview
Sept. 3
Introduction to Organizational Behavior
* Cummings, L.L. (1978). Toward organizational behavior. AMR, 3, 90-98.
* Staw, B.M. (1984). Organizational behavior: A review and reformulation of the
field’s outcome variables. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 35, 627-666.
* Schneider, B. (1985). Organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 36, 573611.
* Ilgen, D.R. & Klein, H.J. (1988). Organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol.,
40, 327-351.
* O’Reilly, C.A. (1991). Organizational behavior: Where we’ve been, where
we’re going. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 42, 427-458.
* Porter, L.W. (1996). Forty years of organization studies: Reflections from a
micro perspective. ASQ, 41, 262-269.
* Rousseau, D.M. (1997). Organizational behavior in the new organizational era.
Annu. Rev. Psychol., 48, 515-546.
Classic and Supplementary readings (not required):
Mitchell, T.R. (1979). Organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 30, 243281.
Hambrick, D.C. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much
of a good thing? AMJ, 50, 1346-1352.
Hodgkinson, G.P. & Healey, M.P. (2008). Cognition in organizations. Annu. Rev.
Psychol., 59, 387-417.
Sept. 10
Introduction to Individuals:
Person vs. Situation Debate
* Davis-Blake, A. & Pfeffer, J. (1989). Just a mirage: The search for dispositional
effects in organizational research. AMR, 14, 385-400.
* House, R.J., Shane, S.A. & Herold, D.M. (1996). Rumors of the death of
dispositional research are vastly exaggerated. AMR, 21, 203-224.
* Staw, B.M. & Cohen-Charash, Y. (2005). The dispositional approach to job
satisfaction: More than a mirage, but not yet an oasis. JOB, 26, 59-78.
* Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behavior.
AMR, 31, 386-408.
Aptitudes, Abilities, and Skills
* Ackerman, P.L. & Humphreys, L.G. (1990). Individual differences theory in
Industrial and organizational psychology. In M.D. Dunnette & L.M.
Hough (Eds.) (1990-1994). Handbook of industrial and organizational
psychology (vols. 1-4) (second edition). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press. (pp. 223-282).
* Schmidt, F.L. & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work:
Occupational attainment and job performance. JPSP, 86, 162-173.
* Dilchert, S. et al. (2007). Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured
counterproductive work behaviors. JAP, 92, 616-627.
* Law, K.S., Wong, C. & Song, L.J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity
of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies.
JAP, 89, 483-496.
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. PPsych, 40, 437-453.
Mowday, R.T. & Sutton, R.I. (1993). Linking individuals and groups to
organizational contexts. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 44, 195-229.
Schneider, B., Goldstein, H.W. & Smith, D.B. (1995). The ASA framework: An
update. PPsych, 48, 747-773.
House, R., Rousseau, D.M. & Thomas-Hunt, M. (1995). The meso paradigm: A
framework for the integration of micro and macro organizational
behavior. Res in OB, 17, 71-114.
Mischel, W. (2004). Toward an integrative science of the person. Annu. Rev.
Psychol., 55, 1-22.
Anderson, C., Spataro, S.E. & Flynn, F.J. (2008). Personality and organizational
culture as determinants of influence. JAP, 93, 702-710.
Salgado, J.F. et al. (2003). A meta-analytic study of general mental ability validity
for different occupations in the European community. JAP, 88, 10681081.
Mayer, J.D., Roberts, R.D. & Barsade, S.G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional
intelligence. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 507-36.
Cote, S. & Miners, C.T.H. (2006). Emotional intelligence, cognitive intelligence,
and job performance, ASQ, 51, 1-28.
Sept. 17
Individuals - Personality and Affect:
(Discussion Leader:
)
Personality
* Hurtz, G.M. & Donovan, J.J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The big
five revisited. JAP, 85, 869-879.
* Day, D.V. et al. (2002). Self-monitoring personality at work: a meta-analytic
investigation of construct validity. JAP, 87, 390-401.
Raja, U., Johns, G. & Ntalianis, F. (2004). The impact of personality on
psychological contracts. AMJ, 47, 350-367. (
)
Colbert, A.E. et al. (2004). Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of
the work situation on workplace deviance. JAP, 89, 599-609.
(
)
* Barrick, M.R., Parks, L. & Mount, M.K. (2005). Self-monitoring as a moderator
of the relationships between personality traits and performance. PPsych,
58, 745-767.
* Thompson, J.A. (2005). Proactive personality and job performance: A social
capital perspective. JAP, 90, 1011-1017.
Zhao, H. & Seibert, S.E. (2006). The Big Five personality dimensions and
Entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytic review. JAP, 91, 259-271. (
)
Chan, D. (2006). Interactive effects of situational judgment effectiveness and
proactive personality on work perceptions and work outcomes. JAP, 91,
475-481. (
)
* Judge, T.A. et al. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: The
integral role of individual differences. JAP, 92, 107-127.
Affect
* Brief, A.P. & Weiss, H.M. (2002). Affect in the workplace. Annu. Rev.
Psychol., 53, 279-307.
* Cropanzano, R., Weiss, H.M., Hale, J.M.S. & Reb, J. (2003). The structure of
affect: reconsidering the relationship between negative and positive
affectivity. JOM, 29, 831-857.
* Judge, T.A. & Ilies, R. (2004). Affect and job satisfaction: A study of their
relationship at work and at home. JAP, 89, 661-673.
Wong, K.F.E., Yik, M. & Kwong, J.Y.Y. (2006). Understanding the emotional
aspects of escalation of commitment: The role of negative affect. JAP, 91,
282-297. (
)
Tett, R.P. & Christiansen, N.D. (2007). Personality tests at the crossroads: A
response to Morgeson, Campion, Dipboye, Hollenbeck, Murphy, and
Schmitt. PPsych, 60, 967-993. (
)
George, J.M. & Zhou, J. (2007). Dual running in a supportive context: Joint
contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors
to employee creativity. AMJ, 50, 605-622. (
)
Morgeson, F.P. et al. (2007). Are we getting fooled again? Coming to terms with
limitations in the use of personality tests for personnel selection. PPsych,
60, 1029-1049. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Weiss, H.M. & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior.
Res in OB, 6, 1-50.
Barrick, M.R. & Mount, M.K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and
job performance: A meta-analysis. PPsych, 44, 1-26.
George, J.M. (1992). The role of personality in organizational life: Issues and
evidence. JOM, 18, 185-213.
Ones, D.S. et al. (2007). In support of personality assessment in organizational
settings. PPsych, 60, 995-1027.
Rafaeli, A. & Sutton, R.I. (1989). The expression of emotion in organizational
life. Res in OB, 11, 1-42.
George, J.M. (1991). State or trait: Effects of positive mood on prosocial
behaviors at work. JAP, 76, 299-307.
Staw, B.M., Sutton, R.I. & Pelled, L.H. (1994). Employee positive emotion and
favorable outcomes at the workplace. OrgSci, 5, 51-71.
Luthans, F. & Youssef, C.M. (2007). Emerging positive organizational
behavior. JOM, 33, 321-349.
Elfenbein, H.A. (2007). Emotion in organizations. Academy of Management
Annals, 1, 315-386.
Sept. 24
Individuals - Attitudes and Performance
(Discussion Leader:
)
Attitudes Overview
* Zalesny, M.D. & Ford, J.K. (1990). Extending the social information processing
perspective: New links to attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions.
OBHDP, 47, 205-246.
* Steel, R.P. & Rentsch, J.R. (1997). The dispositional model of job attitudes
revisited: Findings of a 10-year study. JAP, 82, 873-879.
* Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 52,
279-307.
Thoresen, C.J. et al. (2003). The affective underpinnings of job perceptions and
attitudes: A meta-analytic review and integration. Psych Bull, 129, 91445. (
)
* Harrison, D.A., Newman, D.A. & Roth, P.L. (2006). How important are job
attitudes? Meta-analytic comparisons of integrative behavioral outcomes
and time sequences. AMJ, 49, 305-325.
Job Satisfaction
* Judge, T.A. et al. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A
qualitative and quantitative review. Psych Bull, 127, 376-407.
Staw, B.M., Bell, N.E. & Clausen, J.A. (1986). The dispositional approach to job
attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. ASQ, 31, 56-78. (
)
Ostroff, C. (1992). The relationship between satisfaction, attitudes, and
performance: An organizational level analysis. JAP, 77, 963-974.
(
)
Judge, T.A., Heller, D. & Mount, M.K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality
and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. JAP, 87, 530-541. (
)
Schleicher, D.J., Watt, J.D. & Greguras, G.J. (2004). Reexamining the job
satisfaction-performance relationship: The complexity of attitudes. JAP,
89, 165-177. (
)
Organizational Commitment
* Mathieu, J.E. & Zajac, D.M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the
antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment.
Psych Bull, 108, 171-194.
Keller, R.T. (1997). Job involvement and organizational commitment as
longitudinal predictors of job performance: A study of scientists and
engineers. JAP, 82, 539-545. (
)
Sinclair, R.R. et al. (2005). Performance differences among four organizational
commitment profiles. JAP, 90, 1280-1287. (
)
Solinger, O.N., van Olffen, W. & Roe, R.A. (2008). Beyond the three-component
model of organizational commitment. JAP, 93, 70-83. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Salancik, G.R. & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach
to job attitudes and task design. ASQ, 23, 224-253.
Iaffalano, M.T. & Mucinsky, P.M (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance:
A meta-analysis. Psych Bull, 97, 251-273.
Oct. 1
Individuals - Workplace Behaviors:
(Discussion Leader:
)
Absenteeism and Turnover
* Griffeth, R.W., Hom, P.W. & Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of
antecedents and correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests,
and research implications for the next millennium. JOM, 26, 463-488.
Mitra, A., Jenkins, G.D., & Gupta, N. (1992). A meta-analytic review of the
relationship between absence and turnover. JAP, 77, 879-889.(
)
Lee, T.W. et al. (2004). The effects of job embeddedness on organizational
citizenship, job performance, volitional absences, and voluntary turnover.
AMJ, 47, 711-722. (
)
* Maertz, C.P. & Campion, M.A. (2004). Profiles in quitting: Integrating process
and content turnover theory. AMJ, 47, 566-582.
Allen, D.G., Weeks, K.P. & Moffitt, K.R. (2005). Turnover intentions and
voluntary turnover: The moderating roles of self-monitoring, locus of
control, proactive personality, and risk aversion. JAP, 90, 980-990.
(
)
Organizational Citizenship Behaviors
* Hoffman et al. (2007). Expanding the criterion domain: A quantitative review of
the OCB literature. JAP, 92, 555-566.
Bommer, W.H., Dierdorff, E.C. & Rubin, R.S. (2007). Does prevalence mitigate
relevance? The moderating effect of group-level OCB on employee
performance. AMJ, 50, 1481-1494. (
)
Yun, S., Takeuchi, R. & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and
job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of
employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee
commitment. JAP, 92, 745-756. (
)
Deviant Behaviors
* Lee, K. & Allen, N.J. (2002). Organizational citizenship behavior and
workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. JAP, 87, 131-142.
* Colbert, A.E. et al. (2004). Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of
the work situation on workplace deviance. JAP, 89, 599-609.
* Marcus, B. & Schuler, H. (2004). Antecedents of counterproductive behavior
at work: A general perspective. JAP, 89, 647-660.
* Dalal, R.S. (2005). A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational
citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. JAP, 90,
1241-1255.
Judge, T.A., Scott, B.A. & Ilies, R. (2006). Hostility, job attitudes, and workplace
deviance: Test of a multilevel model. JAP, 91, 126-138. (
)
Mount, M., Ilies, R. & Johnson, E. (2006). Relationship of personality traits and
counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating effects of job
satisfaction. PPsych, 59, 591-622. (
)
* Hershcovis, M.S. et al. (2007). Predicting workplace aggression: A metaanalysis. JAP, 92, 228-238.
Lawrence, T.B. & Robinson, S.L. (2007). Ain’t misbehaving: Workplace
deviance as organizational resistance. JOM, 33, 378-394. (
)
* Berry, C.M., Ones, D.S. & Sackett, P.R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance,
organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and metaanalysis. JAP, 92, 410-424.
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Blau, G.J. & Boal, K.B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement and
organizational commitment affect turnover and absenteeism. AMR, 12,
288-300.
Robinson, S.L. & Bennett, R.J. (1990). A typology of deviant workplace
behaviors: A multidimensional scaling method. AMJ, 36, 555-572.
Zimmerman, R.D. (2008). Understanding the impact of personality traits on
individuals’ turnover decisions: A meta-analytic path model. PPsych, 61,
309-348.
Organ, D.W. & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and
dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. PPsych, 48,
775-802.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Paine, J.B. & Bacharach, D.G. (2000).
Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical
and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. JOM, 26, 513563.
Oct. 8
Exam 1
Oct. 15
Organizational Justice
(Discussion Leader:
)
In Greenberg, J. & Colquitt, J.A. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of Organizational
Justice. Mahwah, NJ: Ehrlbaum.
* Colquitt, J.A., Greenberg, J. & Zapata-Phelan, C.P. What is
organizational justice? A historical overview, (pp. 3-56).
* Bobocel, D.R. & Zdaniuk, A. How can explanations be used to foster
organizational justice? (pp. 469-498).
* Blader, S.L. & Tyler, T.R. How can theories of organizational justice
explain the effects of fairness? (pp. 329-354).
* Conlon, D.E., Meyer, C.J. & Nowakowski, J.M. How does
organizational justice affect performance, withdrawal behavior,
and counterproductive behavior? (pp. 301-328).
* Moorman, R.H. & Byrne, Z.S. How does organizational justice affect
organizational citizenship behavior? (pp. 355-382).
Masterson, S.S. et al. (2000). Integrating justice and social exchange: The
differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work
relationships. AMJ, 43, 738-748. (
)
Elkins, T.J. & Phillips, J.S. (2000). Job context, selection decision outcome and the
perceived fairness of selection tests: Biodata as an illustrative case.
JAP, 85, 479-484. (
)
Ambrose, M.L. & Cropanzano, R. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of
organizational fairness: An examination of reactions to tenure and
promotion decisions. JAP, 88, 266-275. (
)
Liao, H. & Rupp, D.E. (2005). The impact of justice climate and justice
orientation on work outcomes: A cross-level multifocal framework. JAP,
90, 242-256. (
)
Kamdar, D., McAlister, D.J. & Turban, D.B. (2006). “All in a day’s work”: How
follower individual differences and justice perception predict OCB role
definitions and behavior. JAP, 91, 841-855. (
)
Ambrose, M., Hess, R.L. & Ganesan, S. (2007). The relationship between justice
and attitudes: An examination of justice effects on event and systemrelated attitudes. OBHP, 103, 21-36. (
)
Barsky, A. & Kaplan, S.A. (2007). If you feel bad, it’s unfair: A quantitative
synthesis of affect and organizational justice perceptions. JAP, 92, 286295. (
)
Cohen-Charash, Y. & Mueller, J.S. (2007). Does perceived unfairness exacerbate
or mitigate interpersonal counterproductive workplace behaviors related to
envy? JAP, 92, 666-680. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. AMR, 12,
9-22.
Bies, R.J. & Shapiro, D.L. (1988). Voice and justification: their influence on
procedural fairness judgments. AMJ, 31, 676-685.
Gilliland, S.W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An
organizational justice perspective. AMR, 18, 694-734.
Gilliland, S.W. (1994). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions
to a selection system. JAP, 79, 691-701.
Bobocel, D.R. & Farrell, A.C. (1996). Sex-based promotion decisions and
interactional fairness: Investigating the influence of managerial accounts.
JAP, 81, 22-35.
Colquitt, J.A. et al. (2006). Justice and personality: Using integrative theories to
derive moderators of justice effects. OBHDP, 100, 110-127.
Wiesenfeld, B.M. et al. (2007). Is more fairness always preferred? Self-esteem
moderates reactions to procedural justice. AMJ, 50, 1235-1253.
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. JOM, 33, 841-866.
Oct. 22
Motivation
(Discussion Leader:
)
Discussions of Classic Theories of Motivation
In Steers, R.M. & Porter, L.P. (Eds.) (1991). Motivation and work behavior (5th
Edition). NY: McGraw-Hill.
* Cherrington, D., Need theories of motivation (pp.31-43).
* Komaki, J., Coombs, T., & Schepman, S., Motivational implications of
reinforcement theory (pp. 44-58).
* Pinder, C., Valence-instrumentality-expectancy theory (pp. 144-163).
* Latham, G. & Locke, E., Goal setting: A motivational technique that
works (pp. 357-370).
The Future of Motivation Theory and Research
* Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. & Shapiro, D.L. (2004). The future of work
motivation theory. AMR, 29, 379-387.
* Locke, E.A. & Latham, G.P. (2004). What should we do about motivation
theory? Six recommendations for the twenty-first century. AMR, 29, 388403.
* Latham, G.P. & Pinder, C.C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at
the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 56, 485-516.
* Deci, E.L., Koestner, R. & Ryan, R.M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of
experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic
motivation. Psych Bull, 125, 627-668.
Current Research
Bagozzi, R.P., Bergami, M. & Leone, L. (2003). Hierarchical representation of
motives in goal setting. JAP, 88, 915-943. (
)
Van Yperen, N.W. & Hagedoorn, M. (2003). Do high job demands increase
intrinsic motivation or fatigue or both? The role of job control and job
social support. AMJ, 46, 339-348. (
)
Meyer, J.P., Becker, T.E. & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee commitment
and motivation: A conceptual analysis and integrative model. JAP, 89,
991-1007. (
)
Schweitzer, M.E., Ordonez, L. & Douma, B. (2004). Goal setting as a motivator
of unethical behavior. AMJ, 47, 422-432. (
)
Klehe, U. & Anderson, N. (2007). Working hard and working smart: Motivation
and ability during typical and maximum performance. JAP, 92, 978-992.
(
)
Diefendorff, J.M. & Mehta, K. (2007). The relations of motivational traits with
workplace deviance. JAP, 92, 967-977. (
)
Lount, R.B. & Phillips, K.W. (2007). Working harder with the out-group: The
impact of social category diversity on motivation gains. OBHDP, 103,
214-224. (
)
Grant, A.M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire?
Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and
productivity. JAP, 93, 48-58. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Van Eerde, W. & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s expectancy models and workrelated criteria: A meta-analysis. JAP, 81, 575-586.
Seijts,G.H., Latham, G.P., Tasa, K. & Latham, B.W. (2004). Goal setting and goal
orientation: An integration of two different yet related literatures. AMJ,
47, 227-239.
Kozlowski, S.W.J. & Bell, B.S. (2006). Disentangling achievement orientation
and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. JAP, 91, 900-916.
Oct. 29
Groups and Teams
(Discussion Leader:
)
* Guzzo, R.A. & Dickson, M.W. (1996). Teams in organizations: recent research
on performance and effectiveness. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 47, 307-338.
* Kerr, N.L. & Tindale, R.S. (2004). Group performance and decision making.
Annu. Rev. Psychol., 55, 623-655.
* Martins, L.L., Gilson, L.L. & Maynard, M.T. (2004). Virtual teams: What do
we know and where do we go from here? JOM, 30, 808-835.
* Van Knippenberg, D. & Schippers, M.C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annu.
Rev. Psychol., 58, 515-541.
De Dreu, C.K.W. & Weingart, L.R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict,
team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. JAP,
88, 741-749. (
)
LePine, J.A. (2003). Team adaptation and postchange performance: Effects of
team composition in terms of members’ cognitive ability and personality.
JAP, 88, 27-39. (
)
Chen, G. & Klimoski, R.J. (2003). The impact of expectations on newcomer
performance in teams as mediated by work characteristics, social
exchanges, and empowerment. AMJ, 46, 591-607. (
)
Bachrach, D.G. et al. (2006). Effects of task interdependence on the relationship
between helping behavior and group performance. JAP, 91, 1396-1405.
(
)
Van Der Vegt, G.S., Bunderson, J.S. & Oosterhof, A. (2006). Expertness
diversity and interpersonal helping in teams: why those who need the most
help end up getting the least. AMJ, 49, 877-893. (
)
Lewis, K. et al. (2007). Group cognition, membership change, and performance:
Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge.
OBHDP, 103, 159-178. (
)
* Cronin, M.A. & Weingart, L.R. (2007). Representational gaps, information
processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. AMR, 32, 761-773.
* Brodbeck, F.C. et al. (2007). Group decision making under conditions of
distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. AMR, 32,
459-479.
Barrick, M.R. et al. (2007). The moderating role of top management team
interdependence: Implications for real teams and working groups. AMJ,
50, 544-557. (
)
Hambley, L.A., O’Neill, T.A. & Kline, T.J.B. (2007). Virtual team leadership:
The effects of leadership style and communication medium on team
interaction styles. OBHDP, 103, 1-20. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Gist, M.E., Locke, E.A. & Taylor, M.S. (1987). Organizational behavior: group
structure, process, and effectiveness. JOM, 13, 237-257.
Gersick, C.J.G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model
of group development. AMJ, 31, 9-41.
Barry, B. & Stewart, G.L. (1997). Composition, process, and performance in selfmanaged groups: the role of personality. JAP, 82, 62-78.
Gibson, C.B. (1999). Do they do what they believe they can? Group efficacy and
group effectiveness across tasks and cultures. AMJ, 42, 138-152.
Kirkman, B.L. et al. (2004). The impact of team empowerment on virtual team
performance: The moderating role of face-to-face interaction. AMJ, 47,
175-192.
Ehrhart, M.G. & Naumann, S.E. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in
work group: A group norms approach. JAP, 89, 960-974.
Langfred, C.W. (2004). Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust
and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. AMJ, 47, 385-399.
Van Knippenberg, D., DeDreu, C.K.W. & Homan, A.C. (2004). Work group
diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research
agenda. JAP, 89, 1008-1022.
Vera, D. & Crossan, M. (2005). Improvisation and innovative performance in
teams. OrgSci, 16, 203-224.
Roberson, Q.M. (2006). Justice in teams: The activation and role of sensemaking
in the emergence of justice climates. OBHDP, 100, 177-192.
Price, K.H., Harrison, D.A. & Gavin, J.H. (2006). Withholding inputs in team
contexts: Member composition, interaction processes, evaluation structure,
and social loafing. JAP, 91, 1375-1384.
Dineen, B.R. et al. (2007). Level and dispersion of satisfaction in teams: Using
foci and social context to explain the satisfaction-absenteeism relationship.
AMJ, 50, 623-643.
Gibson, C.B. & Earley, P.C. (2007). Collective cognition in action:
Accumulation, interaction, examination, and accommodation in the
development and operation of group efficacy beliefs in the workplace.
AMR, 32, 438-458.
LePine, J.A. et al. (2008). A meta-analysis of teamwork processes : Tests of a
multidimensional model and relationships with team effectiveness criteria.
PPsych, 61, 273-307.
Nov. 5
Leadership I
(Discussion Leader:
)
* House, R.J.& Aditya, R.N. (1997). The social scientific study of leadership:
Quo vadis? JOM, 23, 409-473.
* Sternberg, R.J. & Vroom, V. (2002). The person versus the situation in
leadership. LQ, 13, 301-323.
Hunter, S.T., Bedell-Avers, K.E. & Mumford, M.D. (2007). The typical
leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. LQ,
18, 435-446. (
)
Leadership and Ethics
* Brown, M.E., Trevino, L.K. & Harrison, D.A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A
social learning perspective for construct development and testing.
OBHDP, 97, 117-134.
Schminke, M., Ambrose, M.L. & Neubaum, D.O. (2005). The effects of leader
moral development on ethical climate and employee attitudes. OBHDP,
97, 135-151. (
)
Brown, M.E. & Trevino, L.K. (2006). Socialized charismatic leadership, values
congruence, and deviance in work groups. JAP, 91, 954-962.
(
)
Trait and Behavioral Approaches
Judge, T.A., Colbert, A.E. & Ilies, R. (2004). Intelligence and leadership: A
quantitative review and test of theoretical propositions. JAP, 89, 542-552.
(
)
Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F. & Ilies, R. (2004). The forgotten ones? The validity of
consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. JAP, 89, 3651. (
)
Fiedler’s Contingency Model
Schriesheim, C.A., Tepper, B.J. & Tetrault, L.A. (1994). Least preferred coworker score, situational control, and leadership effectiveness: A metaanalysis of contingency model performance predictions. JAP, 79, 561-573.
(
)
Path-Goal Theory
Wofford, J.C. & Liska, L.Z. (1993). Path-goal theories of leadership: A metaanalysis. JOM, 19, 857-876. (
)
* House, R.J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a
reformulated theory. LQ, 7, 323-352.
Schriesheim, C.A., Castro, S.L., Zhou, X. & DeChurch, L.A. (2006). An
investigation of path-goal and transformational leadership theory
predictions at the individual level of analysis. LQ, 17, 21-38.
(
)
Substitutes for Leadership
* Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. & Bommer, W.H. (1996). Meta-analysis of
the relationships between Kerr and Jermier’s substitutes for leadership and
employee job attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. JAP, 81, 380399.
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Thomas, A.B. (1988). Does leadership make a difference to organizational
performance? ASQ, 33, 388-400.
Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research.
JOM, 89, 251-289.
Peters, L.H., Hartke, D.D. & Pohlman, J.T. (1985). Fielder’s contingency theory
of leadership: An application of meta-analytic procedures of Schmidt and
Hunter. Psych Bull, 97, 274-285.
House, R.J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leadership effectiveness. ASQ, 16,
321-339.
Kerr, S. & Jermier, J.M. (1978). Substitutes for leadership: Their meaning and
measurement. OBHP, 22, 375-403.
Avolio, B.J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theorybuilding. American Psychologist, 62, 25-33.
Nov. 12
Leadership II (cont.):
(Discussion Leader:
)
Empowerment
* Seibert, S.E., Silver, S.R. & Randolph, W.A. (2004). Taking empowerment to
the next level: A multiple-level model of empowerment, performance, and
satisfaction. AMR, 47, 332-349.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K.M. & Locke, E.A. (2006). Empowering leadership in
management teams: Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and
performance. AMJ, 49, 1239-1251. (
)
Transformational and Transactional Leadership
* Waldman, D.A., Ramirez, G.G., House, R.J. & Puranam, P. (2001). Does
leadership matter? CEO leadership attributes and profitability under
conditions of environmental uncertainty. AMJ, 44, 134-143.
* Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B.J. & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact of
transformational leadership on follower development and performance: A
field experiment. AMJ, 45, 735-744.
Kark, R., Shamir, B. & Chen, G. (2003). The two faces of transformational
leadership: Empowerment and dependency. JAP, 88, 246-255.
(
)
Bono, J.E. & Judge, T.A. (2004). Personality and transformational and
transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. JAP, 89, 901-910.
(
)
Piccolo, R.F. & Colquitt, J.A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job
behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. AMJ, 49, 327340. (
)
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S.S.K. & Cha, S.E. (2007). Embracing transformational
leadership: Team values and the impact of leader behavior on teams. JAP,
92, 1020-1030. (
)
* Kark, R. & Van Dijk, D. (2007). Motivation to lead, motivation to follow: The
role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership processes. AMR, 32, 500528.
Leader-Member Exchange
* Gerstner, C.R. & Day, D.V. (1997). Meta-analytic review of leader member
exchange theory: Correlates and construct issues. JAP, 82, 827-844.
* Janssen, O. & Van Yperen, N.W. (2004). Employees’ goal orientations, the
quality of leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance
and job satisfaction. AMJ, 47, 368-384.
Erdogan, B. & Enders, J. (2007). Support from the top: Supervisors’ perceived
organizational support as a moderator of leader-member exchange to
satisfaction and performance relationships. JAP, 92, 321-330.
(
)
Wang, H. et al. (2005). Leader- member exchange as a mediator of the
relationship between transformational leadership and followers’
performance and organizational citizenship behavior. AMJ, 48, 420-432.
(
)
Tangirala, S., Green, S.G. & Ramanujam, R. (2007). In the shadow of the boss’s
boss: Effects of supervisors’ upward exchange relationships on
employees. JAP, 92, 309-320. (
)
Classics and supplementary readings (not required):
Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating
theory and practice. AMR, 13, 471-482.
Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness
correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: A metaanalytic review of the MLQ literature. LQ, 7, 385-425.
Bono, J.E. & Judge, T.A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward
understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. AMJ,
46, 554-571.
Hofmann, D.A. & Jones, L.M. (2005). Leadership, collective personality, and
performance. JAP, 90, 509-522.
Keller, R.T. (2006). Transformational leadership, initiating structure, and
substitutes for leadership: A longitudinal study of R&D project team
performance. JAP, 91, 202-210.
Dansereau, F., Graen, G. & Haga, W.J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach
to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of
the role making process. OBHP, 13, 46-78.
Dienesch, R.M. & Liden, R.C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of
leadership: A critique and further development. AMR, 11, 618-634.
Graen, G.B. & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership:
Development of leader-member-exchange (LMX) theory of leadership
over 25 years—Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective.
LQ, 6, 219-247.
Erdogan, B., Liden, R.C. & Kraimer, M.L. (2006). Justice and leader-member
exchange: The moderating role of organizational culture. AMJ, 49, 395406.
Sparrowe, R.T., Soetjipto, B.W. & Kraimer, M.L. (2006). Do leaders’ influence
tactics relate to members’ helping behavior? It depends on the quality of
the relationship. AMJ, 49, 1194-1208.
Ilies, R., Nahrgang, J.D. & Morgenson, F.P. (2007). Leader-member exchange
and citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. JAP, 92, 269-277.
Erez, A. et al. (2008). Stirring the hearts of followers: Charismatic leadership as
the transferal of affect. JAP, 93, 602-615.
Hooper, D.T. & Martin, R. (2008). Beyond personal leader-member exchange
(LMX) quality: The effects of perceived LMX variability on employee
reactions. LQ, 19, 20-30.
Huang, X. et al. (2008). Relational schemas as sources of evaluation and
misevaluation of leader-member exchanges: Some initial evidence. LQ,
19, 266-282.
Nov. 19
Exam 2
Dec. 3
Research Proposal Presentations