Search results

Questions the existence of traditionally‐structured organizations. Discusses important factors in successful organizations in a turbulent environment. Covers topics such as new challenges, new skills and virtual organizations.

Argues that empowerment programmes aim at inducing “entrepreneurial” behaviours and attitudes in employees, and that this aim ignores a fundamental internal inconsistency. Further, the traditional structure of formal organizations excludes a number of the conditions necessary to sustain such behaviour. Poor or diminished job security, the absence of real ownership stakes for employees, the continued power of formal authority, all militate against the objectives of true empowerment. In addition, the lack of adequate “reality‐testing” mechanisms for internal communications puts organizations seeking to reap the benefits of an empowered culture in a difficult and possibly dangerous position. Uses evidence from senior HR/OD executives in organizations which have introduced empowerment to substantiate the claims made.

Much of the literature on career management in the 1990s has been based on the assumption that a significant consequence of company restructuring has been the diminution of management career opportunities. Many human resource commentators are suggesting that the responsibility for managing and developing careers has become much more a personal quest and much less of an organisational one. This article examines the issues involved in managing careers from both perspectives and it uses primary research to illustrate and evaluate the range of activities currently being undertaken.

The purpose of this paper is to extend discussions in the CEO compensation research domain. Specifically, this paper provides a critical analysis of the power law conceptualization and pay injustice contribution by Aguinis, Martin, Gomez-Mejia, O’Boyle and Joo.

This commentary addresses statistical and theoretical issues of the power law distribution with respect to prior compensation research and offers additional perspectives on the issue of CEO pay deservingness.

The power law is worth investigating further, but more attention should be paid to outliers and fit to the distribution. Stronger theory is needed for using the power law to explain CEO compensation phenomena, especially regarding standard firm performance measures and anomalies in the compensation process. Finally, “injustice” and “deservingness” in discussions of CEO pay exist in the eye of the beholder.

This paper offers additional considerations for scholars to explore when applying the power law distribution to compensation research.

El objetivo de este artículo es extender la discusión en el ámbito de la investigación sobre la retribución del CEO. En concreto, este artículo ofrece un análisis crítico de la conceptualización de ley de poder y la contribución sobre injusticia en la retribución de Aguinis, Martin, Gomez-Mejia, O’Boyle, and Joo.

Este comentario analzia las implicaciones estadísticas y teóricas del uso de la ley de poder en relación a la investigación previa sobre retribución y ofrece perspectivas adicionales acerca del merecimiento de la retribución del CEO.

Merece investigar más la distribución de ley de poder, pero debe prestarse más atención a los outliers y al ajuste de la distribución. Es necesaria una teoría más desarrollada para poder utilizar la distribución de ley de poder en la investigación sobre la retribución de los CEO, en particular en lo relativo a medidas estándar de resultados empresariales y a las anomalías en el proceso de retribución. Finalmente, las percepciones sobre “injusticia” y “merecimiento” en la discusión sobre la retribución del CEO dependen de la perspectiva de quien juzga.

El artículo proporciona consideraciones adicionales a los académicos que están considerando aplicar la distribución de ley de poder a la investigación sobre la retribución.

O objetivo deste artigo é ampliar as discussões na literatura acerca das remunerações dos CEOs. Especificamente, este artigo apresenta uma análise crítica da conceitualização da lei do poder e da injustiça na remuneração dos CEOs apresentados por Aguinis, Martin, Gomez-Mejia, O’Boyle, e Joo.

Este comentário analisa questões estatísticas e teóricas da distribuição da lei do poder em relação às pesquisas prévias em remunerações, e oferece novas perspectivas sobre o merecimento da remuneração do CEO.

A lei do poder merece mais investigação, entretanto mais atenção deve ser dada aos valores atípicos e aos ajustes da distribuição. É necessária uma teoria mais desenvolvida para utilizar a lei do poder para explicar o fenômeno de remuneração do CEO, especialmente relacionado às medidas padrões de desempenho empresarial e anomalias no processo de remuneração. Finalmente, nas discussões sobre pagamento do CEO, existem “injustiça” e “merecimento” na perspectiva de quem observa.

Este artigo apresenta novas considerações para serem exploradas por pesquisadores quando utilizarem a distribuição da lei do poder em pesquisas relacionadas à remuneração.

This study aims to understand the role of digital literacies as a moderator between employee engagement and its antecedents, namely, workplace digitalisation and innovative culture.

A total of 256 valid samples were used in the analysis. The respondents were individuals used as management-level executives in companies located in Selangor/Kuala Lumpur. The model was tested using structural equation modelling.

The findings reveal that there exists a significant association between employee engagement and its antecedents, namely, workplace digitalisation and innovative culture. Digital literacies are found to moderate the relationships between workplace digitalisation-employee engagement and innovative culture-employee engagement.

This paper provides new insight to the practitioners about the role of digital literacies in raising employee engagement in the digital workplace.

These findings enrich the literature on employee engagement, whereby, improving employee digital literacies strengthens employee acceptance to workplace digitalisation and benefit from the innovative culture to stay engaged.

This article explores the processes and practices of doing participatory research with children. It explores how this process can be represented in writing. The article comes out of a project funded by Creative Partnerships UK, in which a creative agent, three artists and a researcher all worked within an elementary school in South Yorkshire, UK, for two years, to focus on the children’s Reasons to Write. It considers whether it is truly possible for children to enter the academic domain. Using a number of different voices, the article interrogates this. It particularly focuses on children’s role in analysing and selecting important bits of data. It engages with the lived realities of children as researchers. It considers ways in which children’s voices can be represented, and also acknowledges the limitations of this approach for adults who want to write academic peer reviewed articles. Ideas the adults thought were clever were found to be redundant in relation to children’s epistemologies. The article considers the process that is involved in taking children’s epistemologies seriously.