Search results

While corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been gaining support for the role it plays in employee outcomes, such as organizational identification (OID), the view of CSR from a social identity perspective is underdeveloped. This conceptual chapter explores the role of social identity processes grounded in organizational justice to develop a model of CSR attributions and the moderating role these attributions play in organizational member outcomes. CSR is understood as the relational processes happening with stakeholders, and these relationships engage specific organizational identity orientations. The social identity process flows from there, resulting in CSR attributions including strategic, relational, and virtuous. Using social identity, organizational identity, and organizational justice, this chapter makes two specific contributions: a CSR attribution typology grounded in organizational justice and the moderating impact of these attributions between activated justice dimensions and resulting organizational member outcomes.

Self-leadership theory predicts that specific self-leadership practices will enable individuals to better accomplish their goals. However, little is known about the role that these practices play in conventional leadership (leading or influencing others). This study compares leaders to non-leaders (N = 318) in nonprofits and examines both the extent to which self-leadership practices are employed and the strength of beliefs concerning their importance.

Online survey of two groups: leaders and non-leaders of nonprofit organizations.

Leaders practiced self-goal setting (d = 0.47) and self-observation (d = 0.45) more than non-leaders. Non-leaders practiced more self-reward (d = 0.33) and self-punishment (d = 0.37) than leaders. The only differences in belief concerning the importance of the self-leadership practices were due to leaders believing self-goal setting (d = 0.46) and self-observation (d = 0.36) were more important than non-leaders did.

If self-leadership practices contribute to leadership effectiveness or emergence, this study indicates that goal setting and self-observation (monitoring progress toward goals) may contribute positively to the leadership of others, whereas self-reward and self-punishment may contribute negatively.

Self-leadership may not be as important to the leadership of others as is often claimed or implied.

This is the first study to look at how self-leadership practices differ between leaders and non-leaders.

This article aims to elucidate the effect of transformational leadership on commitment to change, assuming the existence of mediating variables (Leader–Member Exchange) influencing this relationship.

Data was collected through a survey based on a sample of 240 observations (Tunisian context with respondents from the healthcare sector). These findings were processed using SPSS and AMOS 23 software, employing exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling.

Research results affirm that leader–member exchange plays a mediating role between leadership styles and commitment to change.

Methodologically, the sample choice lacked diversity. Only hospitals were encompassed in this study. Hence, the generalizability of the results might be questioned. It is crucial to acknowledge that outcomes could vary based on culture and organizational type (Yu et al., 2002; Hechanova and Cementina-Olpoc, 2013). Moreover, our assessment of commitment to change relies on a unidimensional measurement scale focused on affective commitment. However, a multidimensional approach (Herscovitch and Meyer, 2002) could provide a more detailed understanding of the relationship between transformational leadership and different dimensions of commitment to change, including affective, normative and continuance commitment.

On a practical level, the outcomes of this study hold significance for the healthcare domain, especially concerning change management and leadership within healthcare institutions. Grasping how transformational leadership can positively influence commitment to change through leader–member exchange offers healthcare managers concrete strategies to foster employee adherence to change initiatives. This understanding can be particularly crucial in a constantly evolving environment, where practices and protocols need adaptation to meet new requirements and medical advancements.

This research clarifies how transformational leadership influences commitment to change through leader–member exchange. Furthermore, this study guides organizations toward cultivating transformational leaders. The strength of transformational leadership lies in its ability to channel and transform energies to evoke enthusiastic motivation for achieving anticipated goals (Bass, 1985). However, it's pivotal to recognize that transitioning from a manager-directed approach to an empowerment approach presents inherent challenges (Manz et al., 1990). Investing in leadership development, as underscored by this study, can yield tangible enhancements in commitment to change.

This paper aims to determine the gender composition of journal editorial boards in the field of library and information science and to identify trends in the gender composition of different editorial roles and the country of affiliation and occupation of people fulfilling these roles.

In an analysis of 13 selected Library Information Science journals published by the Emerald Publishing group, data relating to 549 editors and editorial board members were obtained from the Open Editors online database. Data were assessed by role, gender, country and continent of their affiliation, and occupation.

Women were found to be under-represented as editors and editorial board members in 10 of the 13 journals. This was most evident in the highest-ranking role of editor or editor-in-chief. The majority of editors and editorial board members were from English-speaking countries located in Europe and the Americas, followed by Asia. The vast majority of editorial personnel belonged to the teaching and learning profession, with relatively few support staff, or researchers taking on these roles.

The findings of this study highlight the gender inequality in prestigious and career-advancing academic roles across multiple research areas. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no such research has yet been conducted in the field of library and information science.