Search results

This study examines how asking employees to self-assess their performance during the compensation setting process, when they are unaware of their marginal contribution to firm profit, affects employer welfare. Previous research suggests that giving employees a voice in the compensation setting process can positively affect employee performance and firm profit (Jenkins & Lawler, 1981; Roberts, 2003). However, the study proposes that asking employees to assess their own performance as part of the compensation setting process can have unintended consequences that ultimately lead to higher employee compensation demands. This is because asking employees to assess their performance increases their overconfidence in their own performance and their compensation demands. As a result, employers may face the dilemma of whether to meet these higher compensation demands or risk economic losses due to employee retaliation if their demands are not met. Through experimental evidence comparing a control condition without self-assessments and three self-assessment reporting conditions, the study provides evidence that supports the notion that eliciting employee self-assessments as part of the compensation process reduces employer welfare. Data on employee perceptions of performance further support the notion that asking employees to evaluate their performance leads to an inflated perception of their performance. These findings provide a theory-based explanation of why, in practice, many companies disentangle employee performance assessments from the compensation setting process and that companies are well advised in doing so.

Past research has shown there is a relationship between body image, sexual behavior, and pleasure. However, the majority of this research has centered on heterosexual participants. In this analysis, the author considers how this relationship between body image, sexual behavior, and pleasure may look within women and genderqueer individuals who are all AFAB (assigned female at birth) with 26 out of 30 participants identifying as LGBTQIA+. The author examines perceptions of body size, body hair, and genitals to consider how intersections of social structures – specifically internalized sexism, racism, and misogyny – influence the participants’ experience of sexual interactions. Both resistance and embodiment of traditional gender norms, even as queer women and genderqueer individuals, were examined in these narratives. The majority of the moments where traditional gender norms are examined describe situations when the participants were sexually interacting with cis-gendered men.

In response to observed changes in the evolving needs of our community, and a call for proactive, strategic planning from campus administration, library and key learning commons partners gathered for a retreat in June 2023 to focus on rightsizing to answer six key questions: What is the right mix of collections to support the teaching, research and learning goals of the Seattle University community? What is the right variety of spaces to support the teaching, research and learning goals of the Seattle University community? What are the right mix of on ground and virtual services to support the teaching, research and learning goals of the Seattle University community? What technologies are needed to support the teaching, research and learning goals of the Seattle University community? What is the right staffing (model, levels+) to support the teaching, research and learning goals of the Seattle University community? What type of library and learning commons do we want to be in five years?

The article discusses and provides review of literature on concepts like rightsizing and appreciative inquiry/ strengths, opportunities, aspirations and results (SOAR) analysis. It will describe how note-taking, and qualitative analysis of feedback gathered during an in-person exercise can be used to identify actionable goals and activities as a follow-up to an in-person retreat.

To focus this conversation, an appreciative inquiry approach using a SOAR analysis was used, instead of a traditional strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis, to utilize a constructivist approach to future thinking. This case study will explore rightsizing as it pertains to academic libraries, and the use of SOAR as a framework for capturing feedback and discussion.

As the article is a case study, it represents feedback collected specifically from one university library and learning commons. However, the questions asked, and the consolidated feedback are broad enough to be applicable to similar library systems.

The authors aim to demonstrate how appreciative inquiry and strength-based discussions using SOAR can lead to meaningful future-thinking conversations that might otherwise feel threatening. As rightsizing is often connected to downsizing, or conversations about reductions, using techniques like SWOT analysis which focus on weaknesses and threats can lead to anxiety and fear for participants. It can limit conversation, when members of a focus group or retreat feel unwilling to participate. By using constructivist approaches, it invites introspection and participation in a positive way, and focuses on forward thinking – and not just thinking of the present.

Rightsizing discussions are not particularly new or unique to libraries but are most seen in articles discussing collections. The scope of this project was to assess not only collections, but services, technology, staffing and spaces – in addition to our collections. Similarly, SOAR analyses are not the most common form of strategic analysis, and an appreciative inquiry approach to a rightsizing conversation in academic libraries is a relatively timely and new topic.