Search results

Research on perceptions of organizational politics has mostly explored the negative aspects and detrimental outcomes for organizations and employees. Responding to recent calls in the literature for a more balanced treatment, we expand on how positive and negative organizational politics perceptions are perceived as stressors and affect employee outcomes through their influence on the social environment. We propose that employees appraise positive and negative organization politics perceptions as either challenge or hindrance stressors, to which they respond with engagement and disengagement as problem-focused and emotion-focused coping strategies. Specifically, employees who appraise the negative politics perceptions as a hindrance, use both problem- and emotion-focused coping, which entails one of three strategies: (1) decreasing their engagement, (2) narrowing the focus of their engagement, or (3) disengaging. Although these strategies result in negative outcomes for the organization, employees’ coping leads to their positive well-being. In contrast, employees appraising positive politics perceptions as a challenge stressor use problem-focused coping, which involves increasing their engagement to reap the perceived benefits of a positive political environment. Yet, positive politics perceptions may also be appraised as a hindrance stressor in certain situations, and, therefore lead employees to apply emotion-focused coping wherein they use a disengagement strategy. By disengaging, they deal with the negative effects of politics perceptions, resulting in positive well-being. Thus, our framework suggests an unexpected twist to the stress process of politics perceptions as a strain-provoking component of employee work environments.

The complexities and challenges inherent in research often require collaborative rather than solitary or team‐based forms of working. This paper seeks to open new perspectives onto the nature of collaborative research and onto strategies for developing the capacity of researchers to engage in it.

The paper outlines a speculative model of collaborative working in higher education that is rooted in critical realist perspectives, using it to ground a conceptual analysis of a stage model of expertise for collaborative working taken from the researcher development framework (RDF) developed in the UK by the organisation Vitae.

The paper highlights the contribution that theory can make to the practice of researcher development, drawing out the relevance of personal engagement, professional dialogue and collaborative vehicles to support shared practice in pursuit of mutual goals. In this way, it identifies gaps within the stage model that pertain to relational, disciplinary, situational and other elements. The paper articulates insights for the development of the capacity of researchers for collaborative working that prioritise dialogue that is situated within given contexts for research. The analysis draws out implications for the development of collaborative capacity of such notions as corporate agency and collaborative reach.

This paper articulates a novel approach to conceptualising capacity for collaborative research and offers a theoretical critique of a given descriptor taken from Vitae's RDF. As such it assists in developing the scholarly basis for the field of researcher development.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a reflective analysis of a recent renovation project and a disaster recovery effort affecting multiple collections in a mid‐sized university library.

This paper provides a case study.

This paper examines planning for a re‐carpeting project, particularly the unexpected challenges associated with renovation activities.

The paper contributes to the discussion of collection disposition during renovation and disaster recovery projects.

This chapter describes the special advantages of globally networked learning experiences (GNLE) for engendering cognitive complexity as a means for developing mindful global citizenship among undergraduate students. Practitioners discover pedagogical approaches that take advantage of the possibility of direct communication with the cultural “other” afforded by recent advances in cost-free, user-friendly, robust, and reliable technologies. Examples of effective pedagogical practices, ideas for building successful faculty-to-faculty partnerships, suggestions for preparing participants, guidelines for selecting and implementing appropriate technologies, and resources for further exploration are provided.

Reviews the Baldrige Award as a modern document and views CompuAdd as a post‐modern organization. Traces the steps of CompuAdd′s application for the Baldrige Award and shows CompuAdd′s culture to be excellent local practices, that are different from the Baldrige Award criteria, and that, despite their local excellence, would be difficult to transfer to another setting.

Institutions of higher education (IHE) should be leaders for demonstrating sustainable building, landscaping, and operational practices. IHEs intensely use resources and are nearly microcosms of the larger world. Yet, relatively few IHEs have assumed a strong leadership role by pursuing sustainability in a comprehensive manner. In particular, few examples exist where top administrators have made sustainability a high‐profile, campus‐wide priority. In the absence of strong administrative leadership, proponents of sustainability need to develop strategies that do not assume a top‐down approach.

This article examines the institutional structures and demands at many IHEs that make it unlikely that top administrators will make sustainability a priority. It also examines why supporters of sustainability will have to contend with faculty, staff, and students who may not see sustainability as an important issue or who must engage in sustainability efforts within the constraints of other institutional demands.

The authors present two overarching strategies for supporters of sustainability. First, they look for ways to push sustainability on to the IHE's “action agenda”. Second, they work to implement sustainability incrementally through discrete projects.

The authors offer specific recommendations for overcoming barriers to participation, pushing sustainability on to an IHE's action agenda, and keeping the process of incremental implementation moving forward.