Search results

This study seeks to introduce the role of resource and capability characteristics as drivers of a resource orientation (RO) and to examine empirically these relationships in different market conditions.

This study was conducted using a nation‐wide survey distributed to key informants of multiple business units. Multiple regression was used to assess the relationships. RO is used as a proxy for the implementation of the resource‐based view (RBV). The RO is also tested against performance outcomes to examine the robustness of the model that has been examined.

Findings showed significant relationships between resource and capability characteristics and RO. These relationships were shown to be robust across various market conditions. RO also depicted significant, positive relationships with all four performance indicators that were assessed. Industry conditions were found to strengthen some of these relationships.

The results are limited to cross‐sectional data that prevent the determination of causality. In addition, it is a nation‐specific study that may not be generalisable to alternative settings. This presents an opportunity for further research to replicate this study in other nations and/or industries. The research presents implications for further theory development and suggests that management can focus on developing unique resource bundles to improve company performance; however, they will need to be attentive to the competitive environment in which they compete.

This is the first study that empirically evaluates drivers of an RO and further tests the scale that was applied by Paladino. Additionally, this study illustrates that the RBV can be empirically tested through the use of an RO to have a demonstrable impact on financial and non‐financial elements of performance.

Purpose: We critically examine the idea of neurodiversity, or the uniqueness of all brains, as the foundation for the neurodiversity movement, which began as an autism rights movement. We explore the neurodiversity movement's potential to support cross-disability alliances that can transform cultures.

Methods/Approach: A neurodiverse team reviewed literature about the history of the neurodiversity movement and associated participatory research methodologies and drew from our experiences guiding programs led, to varying degrees, by neurodivergent people. We highlight two programs for autistic university students, one started by and for autistics and one developed in collaboration with autistic and nonautistic students. These programs are contrasted with a national self-help group started by and for stutterers that is inclusive of “neurotypicals.”

Findings: Neurodiversity-aligned practices have emerged in diverse communities. Similar benefits and challenges of alliance building within versus across neurotypes were apparent in communities that had not been in close contact. Neurodiversity provides a framework that people with diverse conditions can use to identify and work together to challenge shared forms of oppression. However, people interpret the neurodiversity movement in diverse ways. By honing in on core aspects of the neurodiversity paradigm, we can foster alliances across diverse perspectives.

Implications/ Values: Becoming aware of power imbalances and working to rectify them is essential for building effective alliances across neurotypes. Sufficient space and time are needed to create healthy alliances. Participatory approaches, and approaches solely led by neurodivergent people, can begin to address concerns about power and representation within the neurodiversity movement while shifting public understanding.

As COVID-19 cases rose in the US, so too did instances of discrimination against Asians. The current research seeks to understand and document discrimination toward Asians in the US specifically linked to the global pandemic (study 1). The authors test hypotheses based in social categorization and intergroup contact theories, demonstrating perceived pandemic blame is a mechanism for discrimination (study 2).

In study 1, the authors survey Asians living in the US regarding experiences and perceptions of COVID-19-related discrimination. In study 2, a two-time point survey examined whether participant perceptions of pandemic blame toward China predict discriminatory behavior toward Asians.

Study 1 demonstrated that 22.5% of US-residing Asians report personally encountering pandemic-related discrimination. Study 2 indicated that COVID-19 blame attributions toward China predicted anticipated hiring bias and increased physical distancing of Asians at work, associated with higher levels of US identification.

The findings have theoretical implications for research on blame and stigmatization, as well as practical implications regarding bias mitigation.

The present studies advance understanding of event-based blame as a driver of prejudice and discrimination at work and suggest organizations attend to bias mitigation in conjunction with uncertainty reduction communications in challenging times.