Mladen Adamovic, Peter Gahan, Jesse Olsen, Bill Harley, Joshua Healy and Max Theilacker
Migrant workers often suffer from social exclusion in the workplace and therefore identify less with their organization and engage less with their work. To address this issue, the…
Abstract
Purpose
Migrant workers often suffer from social exclusion in the workplace and therefore identify less with their organization and engage less with their work. To address this issue, the authors integrate research on migrant workers with research on the group engagement model to create a model for understanding and enhancing migrant worker engagement. This allows us to provide insight into how organizations can design their human resource management systems and practices to increase the work engagement of migrant workers.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors conducted a survey study with over 4,000 employees from more than 500 workplaces in Australia to test the model.
Findings
The results of the multilevel analysis indicate that a procedurally fair work environment increases organizational identification, which in turn is associated with higher work engagement. The results also indicate that procedural justice climate is more important for migrant workers and increases their organizational identification and engagement.
Originality/value
To increase work engagement of migrant workers, organizations can establish a procedurally fair work environment in which cultural minorities experience unbiased policies and procedures, are able to express their opinions and participate in decision-making.
Details
Keywords
Behavior has been a potent differentiator for such industry‐leading companies as Ritz‐Carlton, Marshall Field’s, Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, SAS, Xilinx, Volvo Cars, and Harley…
Abstract
Behavior has been a potent differentiator for such industry‐leading companies as Ritz‐Carlton, Marshall Field’s, Nordstrom, Southwest Airlines, SAS, Xilinx, Volvo Cars, and Harley‐Davidson. Beyond customer service, however, many companies fail to consider behavior an element of their business strategy. Behavioral differentiation (BD) is particularly important when a company’s competitors offer essentially the same products and services at similar prices. A company’s behaviors can differentiate both positively and negatively, but negative differentiators have about five times the impact of positive differentiators. Consequently, companies should manage their behavior toward customers at every point where customers interact with anyone in the company. Companies can behaviorally differentiate themselves in four ways. (1) Operational BD occurs when they make exceptional customer treatment part of the way they normally do business. Operationalizing the behaviors customers experience as significantly positive enables companies to create systematic and sustained competitive advantage. (2) Interpersonal BD cannot be systematized because it depends on each employee’s emotional intelligence and interpersonal skill. However, companies can hire for high emotional intelligence, can set expectations about how customers are greeted and treated, and can ensure that their most interpersonally adept employees are assigned to important, high‐frequency customer touchpoints. (3) Exceptional BD occurs when companies allow employees to “break the rules” and do exceptional things for customers in need of exceptional treatment. Beyond creating the conditions that permit exceptional BD, companies should make heroes of employees whose exceptional behavior has surprised and delighted customers. Finally, (4) symbolic BD occurs when companies walk the talk, when their behavior reflects their mission, mottos, and other messages. Few companies are as accomplished at this than Harley‐Davidson. You are on stage with your customers all the time, and they are constantly comparing you and your behavior to your competitors and their behaviors, and you are how you behave.
Details
Keywords
Bill Harley and Joep Cornelissen
In this chapter, the authors critique dominant technocratic conceptions of rigor in management research and elaborate an alternative account of rigor that is rooted in methodology…
Abstract
In this chapter, the authors critique dominant technocratic conceptions of rigor in management research and elaborate an alternative account of rigor that is rooted in methodology and involves a concern with the quality of scientific reasoning rather than a narrower focus on methods or measurement issues per se. Based on the proposed redefinition, the authors conceptualize how rigor, as an essential quality of reasoning, may be defined and the authors in turn qualify alternative methodological criteria for how they might assess the rigor of any particular piece of research. In short, with this chapter the authors’ overall aim is to shift the basis of rigor to an altogether more legitimate and commensurable notion that squarely puts the focus on reasoning and scientific inference for quantitative and qualitative research alike. The authors highlight some of the benefits that such an alternative and unified view of rigor may potentially provide toward fostering the quality and progress of management research.
Details
Keywords
Aims to subject to empirical scrutiny the claim that peripheralwork is characterized by a range of undesirable characteristics. Theanalysis of data from the Australian Workplace…
Abstract
Aims to subject to empirical scrutiny the claim that peripheral work is characterized by a range of undesirable characteristics. The analysis of data from the Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey (AWIRS) clearly shows that there is a link between peripheral forms of employment and undesirable working conditions in Australian workplaces. Further, the negative features of peripheral employment apply regardless of workplace size, sector or industry. In conjunction with the evidence of the growth of a peripheral workforce and the marked over‐representation of women in such jobs, supports the argument that peripheral work contributes to inequality in Australian workplaces.
Details
Keywords
Paula K. Mowbray, Adrian Wilkinson and Herman H.M. Tse
The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual model drawing together and integrating research from employment relations (ER), human resource management (HRM) and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual model drawing together and integrating research from employment relations (ER), human resource management (HRM) and organizational behaviour (OB) to identify how high-performance work systems (HPWS) encourage voice behaviour.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors identify shortcomings in research on the relationship between HPWS practices and employee voice behaviour, attributable to the disparate conceptualization of voice across management disciplines. The authors then present a conceptual model using the ability, motivation and opportunity (AMO) framework to theorize how the ER climate influences the design of the HPWS and subsequently how the HPWS encourages voice behaviour. Practical implications and recommendations for future studies are provided.
Findings
The mutual gains ER climate will influence the design of the HPWS; in turn the HPWS' practices will influence line manager AMO to manage voice and the employees' AMO to engage in voice behaviour, resulting in the encouragement of both employer and employee interest forms of voice.
Practical implications
The HPWS-voice behaviour interaction model sheds light on the types of HR practices organisations can implement to optimize employee voice behaviour.
Originality/value
The conceptual model demonstrates how ER, HRM and OB factors influence voice behaviour within a HPWS, which has not previously been considered by voice scholars. The integrated conceptual model encourages a multidisciplinary approach to studying employee voice in future research.