动机是人类行为活动的源泉和动力,但现有研究并不能很好地解释动机是如何产生以及通过何种方式和路径实现的。调节焦点理论的提出弥补了这一理论空白。在此,对调节焦点理论的提出和内涵进行了简要介绍,区分了特质调节焦点和情境调节焦点,整理了两种调节焦点的测量工具。然后,通过聚焦调节焦点理论在组织管理中的应用,在综合归纳两种调节焦点的影响因素和作用结果的基础上,深入分析了调节焦点对工作结果的影响机制。最后,对未来有关研究的发展趋势进行了展望。

谦卑型领导是领导风格领域最近兴起的研究热点，其相关研究正处于起步阶段。基于领导理论和创造力理论，尝试发现谦卑型领导行为与员工创造力之间的关系，并从心理认知和人格特质视角出发，探讨心理安全和自我效能的中介效应以及调节焦点所起到的调节作用。采用问卷法配对调查326对直接领导及其对应员工，运用结构方程模型和层次回归方法对样本数据进行统计分析。研究结果表明，谦卑型领导行为对员工的创造力有显著的正向影响，心理安全和自我效能在两者间起完全中介作用；员工的防御型调节倾向越突出，谦卑型领导行为对员工心理安全的影响越强；员工的促进型调节倾向越突出，谦卑型领导行为对员工自我效能的影响越强。研究结论为领导者打破传统的自上而下的领导方式、转而应用谦卑型领导行为提升员工创造力提供了新的思路。

本研究从心理学的调节焦点理论切入,构建了基于调节焦点理论的领导对下属创造力影响机理模型.具体探讨领导的“行为示范”、“语言框架”及“反馈”,通过对个体调节焦点与群体共享调节焦点两个层面的共同引导,进而影响下属创造力的作用过程.本研究将丰富并厘清人们对领导提升下属创造力的影响路径与作用规律的认识,并为领导通过日常管理来激发下属创造力提供借鉴与指导.

根据调节焦点理论,人们在实现目标的过程中存在两种调节焦点:促进焦点驱动人们关注理想,防御焦点驱动人们避免失误.虽然调节焦点理论源自社会心理学,但近年来却越来越多地被用于解释组织现象,对管理研究产生了重要影响.在回顾调节焦点内涵的基础上,归纳了常见的操作化方法,梳理了调节焦点理论在组织管理研究中的应用,并提出未来研究的发展方向.

构建并验证了一个解释创造力的被中介的调节模型,通过对中国5家企业340位员工及其直接领导的考察,研究得出以下结论:(1)员工工作调节焦点中介了领导行为示范与员工创造力间的关系;(2)工作复杂性调节了领导行为示范与员工创造力间的关系;(3)员工工作调节焦点中介了工作复杂性在领导行为示范与员工创造力关系间的调节作用。

文章以256名企业员工的问卷调查，探讨中国文化情境下辱虐管理对员工创新行为（包括创新想法的产生和执行两个维度）的影响，并且研究了心理授权在二者之间的中介作用。研究表明：辱虐管理负向显著地影响员工创新行为，心理授权正向显著地影响员工创新行为，心理授权在辱虐管理与创新想法的产生之间起到完全中介作用。

道德型领导和员工越轨行为的关系是组织管理领域新近兴起的课题,但目前学术界对二者关系作用机制的考察相对较少。基于调节焦点理论和道德认同理论,本文旨在揭示二者关系的"黑箱":首先,引入促进型和规避型道德调节焦点,考察它们在道德型领导和员工越轨行为之间的中介作用;其次,引入道德认同,对道德型领导和员工道德调节焦点关系的边界条件进行探讨。以203名企业员工为样本,结果发现:(1)道德型领导对员工越轨行为有显著负向影响;(2)道德型领导对员工越轨行为的负向影响是通过提升员工促进型道德调节焦点和规避型道德调节焦点实现的;(3)员工道德认同在道德型领导和两种道德调节焦点之间有负向调节作用,对低道德认同员工来说,道德型领导对道德调节焦点的影响相对较强。研究丰富了道德型领导与员工越轨行为的作用机制和边界条件,对企业管理实践也有一定的启示意义。

追随行为是组织员工以组织目标为导向,能动地与领导力和组织情境交互作用的多态行为。经对国内外学界相关研究现状的梳理分析,目前对这类多形态员工行为的研究还很薄弱。为此,从调节焦点理论视角,展开员工追随选择分化的前因及对后果差异影响机制的研究,首先是基于两种不同调节焦点的员工追随行为的内涵结构与测量研究;然后,揭示影响员工追随选择分化的三层面前因机制,即领导特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及领导-成员交换关系在其中的调节作用,组织特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及员工组织公平感知在其中的调节作用,个体特征对员工追随选择分化的影响及领导反馈在其中的调节作用;最后检验员工不同调节焦点追随行为对工作绩效的差异作用效应。以期推动追随理论更加契合组织实务。

本研究结合调节聚焦理论探讨了如何道歉更有效。两个实验通过启动不同调节聚焦,创设冒犯情境并呈现不同框架的道歉信息,考察调节聚焦与道歉框架对道歉效果的影响。结果表明,向促进聚焦的受害者呈现积极框架的道歉信息、向防御聚焦的受害者呈现消极框架的道歉信息能改善受害者对冒犯者的评价,降低交往回避倾向,获得较好的道歉效果,且正确感是此种影响发生的内在机制。

This article seeks to reconceptualize the relationship between flexibility and efficiency. Much organization theory argues that efficiency requires bureaucracy, that bureaucracy impedes flexibility, and that organizations therefore confront a tradeoff between efficiency and flexibility. Some researchers have challenged this line of reasoning, arguing that organizations can shift the efficiency/flexibility tradeoff to attain both superior efficiency and superior flexibility. Others have pointed out numerous obstacles to successfully shifting the tradeoff. Seeking to advance our understanding of these obstacles and how they might be overcome, we analyze an auto assembly plant that appears to be far above average industry performance in both efficiency and flexibility. NUMMI, a Toyota subsidiary located in Fremont, California, relied on a highly bureaucratic organization to achieve its high efficiency. Analyzing two recent major model changes, we find that NUMMI used four mechanisms to support its exceptional flexibility/efficiency combination. First, metaroutines (routines for changing other routines) facilitated the efficient performance of nonroutine tasks. Second, both workers and suppliers contributed to nonroutine tasks while they worked in routine production. Third, routine and nonroutine tasks were separated temporally, and workers switched sequentially between them. Finally, novel forms of organizational partitioning enabled differentiated subunits to work in parallel on routine and nonroutine tasks. NUMMI's success with these four mechanisms depended on several features of the broader organizational context, most notably training, trust, and leadership.

The international business literature has mainly focused on the impact of top managers' psychological attributes on firms' strategic decisions. However, the potential moderating influence of industry conditions such as competition, has not been well explored. Deriving insights from the regulatory focus and upper echelons theories, this paper extends the international business and regulatory focus literature by investigating how the impact influence of CEOs' regulatory foci on firms' degree of internationalization depends on the intensity of competitive market conditions. Using primary data gathered from 289 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Ghana, the findings of the study revealed when competition is intense in the domestic market, the potency of a CEO's promotion focus as a driver of internationalization is amplified. In addition, the research shows that intense domestic market competition weakens the negative influence of a CEO's prevention focus on a firm's degree of internationalization. These findings have important research and managerial implications for international business.

We develop a psychological perspective on managers’ exploration orientation. Our study suggests that the regulatory focus of managers may in different way

We proposed and tested a model of the relationship between regulatory focus, safety behaviors, and safety outcomes. Specifically, we hypothesized regulatory foci (promotion and prevention) to relate to the safety outcomes (safety-related events and injuries) through safety behaviors (unsafe behavior and safety initiative). Data were obtained at two time points 6months apart from frontline firefighters and their supervisors drawn from New Taipei City Government. The results of multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) revealed that promotion focus related to safety-related events and injuries through safety initiative while prevention focus related to safety-related events (but not injuries) through unsafe behavior. Our findings reinforce the utility of distinguishing between safety behaviors and outcomes as well as the role of a motivational framework in understanding workplace safety.

Drawing on Miles and Snow's classification of strategy type, this paper addresses the contingency role that competitive intensity plays in explaining the relationship between exploration/exploitation and firm performance. We further refine our firm performance measure into separate measures of effective and efficient firm performance. Our conceptual argument posits that for defenders, exploration will be positively related to effective firm performance while exploitation will be negatively related to efficient firm performance as competitive intensity increases. Conversely, for prospectors, we assert that exploration will be negatively related to effective firm performance, whereas exploitation will be positively associated with efficient firm performance as competition intensifies. Empirical results provide general support for our predictions. The implications for business theory and practice are discussed.

This paper's argument is that founding team composition—in particular, members' prior company affiliations—shapes new firm behaviors. Firms with founding teams whose members have worked at the same company engage in exploitation because they have shared understandings and can act quickly. Conversely, founding teams whose members have worked at many different companies have unique ideas and contacts that encourage exploration. In addition, firms whose founding teams have both common and diverse prior company affiliations have advantages that allow them to grow. The results suggest team composition is an important antecedent of exploitative and explorative behavior and firm ambidexterity.

During the last 20 years, the field of strategic leadership has undergone both a rejuvenation and a metamorphosis. We argue that the essence of strategic leadership involves the capacity to learn, the capacity to change, and managerial wisdom. Against this backdrop, we first review issues related to under what conditions, when, and how strategic leadership matters. Next, we selectively review three streams of theory and research. The first is strategic leadership theory and its antecedent, Upper Echelon theory. The second stream of theory and research focuses on what Bryman has labeled the “new” leadership theories. These include charismatic, transformational, and visionary theories of leadership. The last stream of research we classify as the “emergent” theories of leadership. Among these are theories that explore behavioral and cognitive complexity as well as social intelligence. Finally, we attempt to suggest how the “new” and “emergent” theories can be integrated within what we claim is the essence of strategic leadership.

Research on regulatory focus so far has been dominated by the perspective of ‘variable-centered’ that seeks to understand how each foci of regulatory focus (e.g., promotion focus and prevention focus) in isolation relates to other variables. We extend this work by adopting a ‘person-centered’ approach to reveal the distinct profiles of regulatory focus existing in the Chinese context, and further examine how these profiles relate to certain antecedents and outcomes. Our results showed three different profiles, namely high regulatory focus profile, moderate regulatory focus profile and prevention dominated profile, that varied in the level and shape of the profile indicators. With respect to antecedents, high conscientiousness can increase the odds that a subordinate belongs to the high regulatory focus profile, and high anxiety can result in a higher probability that a subordinate belongs to the prevention dominated profile. Furthermore, the high regulatory focus profile had the most favorable levels of outcomes (e.g., higher task performance and more organizational citizenship behaviors). Finally, theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

The present study was designed to produce novel theoretical insight regarding how leader humility and team member characteristics foster the conditions that promote shared leadership and when shared leadership relates to team effectiveness. Drawing on social information processing theory and adaptive leadership theory, we propose that leader humility facilitates shared leadership by promoting leadership-claiming and leadership-granting interactions among team members. We also apply dominance complementary theory to propose that team proactive personality strengthens the impact of leader humility on shared leadership. Finally, we predict that shared leadership will be most strongly related to team performance when team members have high levels of task-related competence. Using a sample composed of 62 Taiwanese professional work teams, we find support for our proposed hypothesized model. The theoretical and practical implications of these results for team leadership, humility, team composition, and shared leadership are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

Abstract A promotion focus is concerned with advancement, growth, and accomplishment, whereas a prevention focus is concerned with security, safety, and responsibility. We hypothesized that the promotion focus inclination is to insure hits and insure against errors of omission, whereas the prevention focus inclination is to insure correct rejections and insure against errors of commission. This hypothesis yielded three predictions: (a) when individuals work on a difficult task or have just experienced failure, those in a promotion focus should perform better, and those in a prevention focus should quit more readily; (b) when individuals work on a task where generating any number of alternatives is correct, those in a promotion focus should generate more distinct alternatives, and those in a prevention focus should be more repetitive; and (c) when individuals work on a signal detection task that requires them to decide whether they did or did not detect a signal, those in a promotion focus should have a "risky" response bias, and those in a prevention focus should have a "conservative" response bias and take more time to respond. These predictions were supported in two framing studies in which regulatory focus was experimentally manipulated independent of valence.

Objective:Despite research on its effectiveness, many therapists still have negative attitudes toward using outcome monitoring feedback. The current study aims to investigate how the perceived match between values of an individual and those of the organization (Person–Organization fit; PO fit), and motivation to prevent failure or to achieve success (regulatory focus) are related to therapists’ attitude, attitude changes over time, and outcomes.Method:Therapists (n=6520) filled out a feedback attitude questionnaire at two points in time: before the start of outcome monitoring, and after six months. In addition, they completed measures on PO fit and regulatory focus.Results:PO fit was predictive of outcomes, when feedback was provided, but did not predict therapists’ attitude. Therapists with a strong prevention focus (prevent failures), had a more positive attitude toward feedback, but achieved slower symptom reduction in their at risk cases. A strong promotion focus (achieve success) was not predictive of attitude, but did result in faster symptom reduction in at risk patients when feedback was provided.Conclusion:Therapists motivational approach to work and the perceived match with the organization they work for, can influence both their attitude toward outcome monitoring and their outcomes.

(2017). A focus on commitment: the roles of transformational and transactional leadership and self-regulatory focus in fostering organizational and safety commitment. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology: Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 724-740. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2017.1345884

Starting a new business is easy. Leading a start-up and transitioning from founder to CEO is hard. As a result, less than 1 in 25 new companies will grow to have 50 or more employees. This article examines three important challenges faced by entrepreneurial leaders at start-up: developing a vision, achieving optimal persistence, and executing through chaos. The article also considers three capabilities needed by founders who seek to continue to lead their companies during the growth stage of the entrepreneurial process: strategic thinking, coaching, and self-evaluation. The Siegfried Group, LLP, a leading national CPA firm that provides Leadership Advisory and Talent Delivery services to Fortune 1000 organizations, is used as a brief case study to illustrate key challenges and capabilities associated with entrepreneurial leadership.

Abstract The authors propose that a prevention focus fosters preferences to initiate action earlier than does a promotion focus. Data from four studies either measuring or manipulating regulatory focus support this proposal. Participants in a prevention focus pre-ferred initiating academic (Studies 1 and 2) and nonacademic (Study 3) actions sooner than did participants in a promotion focus. Participants working through a set of anagrams solved those that were prevention framed before those that were promo-tion framed (Study 4). Moreover, regulatory focus and perceived task valence each accounted for unique variance in partici-

We examine paradoxes in organizations and the organizations’ ability to deal with the resulting paradoxical tensions. Paradoxes constitute contradictory yet interrelated organizational demands that exist simultaneously, with the resulting tensions persisting over time. Irrespective of the prevailing evidence that engaging paradoxes leads to peak performance in the short-term, which reinforces long-term success, the question of how this might be done remains perplexing. Thus, based on pragmatic philosophy, this paper aims to increase our understanding of what constitutes a paradox and suggests a conceptual framework from which organizations and their members can frame and cope with tensions that result from paradoxes. Specifically, we conceptually map a way to achieve a synthesis of paradoxical tensions that is informed by design thinking. This synthesis is said to occur when competing demands are simultaneously fulfilled to their full potential. In this paper, design thinking – as a management concept – is used to refer to the interplay between perspective, structure, process, and mindset. It provides an alternative framing of how organizations approach paradoxes and deal with the resulting tensions.

We develop a framework that provides a general theoretical rationale for the claim made by several authors that combining opposing action strategies fosters team innovation. We distinguish between open and closed strategies and posit that these are opposing but complementary in that each fosters one of two processes necessary for team innovation: open action strategies (e.g., delegative leadership) promote knowledge generation, and closed action strategies (e.g., directive leadership) enhance knowledge integration. We argue that each pole of a pair of opposing action strategies both energizes and detracts from elements of innovation. Thus, it could be expected that combining opposing action strategies leads to an impasse, as the negative effects of each strategy might offset the positive effects of the opposite strategy. There is currently no viable explanation in the literature for why this mutual neutralization may not occur. We aim to fill this gap by explicating why and how opposing action strategies, when implemented simultaneously, do not countervail each other's positive effects, but rather yield positive synergies that fuel team innovation.

78 Conducted a meta-analysis of 77 empirical studies of regulatory focus. 78 Promotion and prevention were found to be orthogonal constructs. 78 Promotion and prevention foci were uniquely related to work-related constructs. 78 Regulatory foci accounted for unique variance in job satisfaction and performance.

Abstract This study seeks to advance previous research by linking top management team (TMT) processes to organizational ambidexterity, and highlights the importance of environmental dynamism as a boundary condition on the effectiveness of TMTs in promoting balance between exploratory and exploitative learning. The findings from multiple respondents (245 TMT members, including the CEO of the SBUs, and 883 employees) in 101 small-sized strategic business units (SBUs) with a defined product line indicate that TMT behavioral integration helps build ambidexterity, but that the influence of TMT behavioral integration on ambidexterity is stronger when the task environment is characterized by a high level of dynamism. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the conditions under which behaviorally integrated TMTs are able to pursue an ambidextrous orientation in relatively small-sized units. 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

61Leader regulatory focus leads to transformational versus transactional behavior.61Fit between leader and follower regulatory focus leads to followers feeling valued.61Transformationaltransactional behavior elicited leader–follower regulatory fit.

The present research sought to examine when and why transformational and transactional leadership are perceived by followers to be effective. A series of five studies revealed that perceived effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership is influenced by the fit between leadership style-driven encouraged strategies and followers' preferred strategies. Specifically, we found that transformational leadership primarily encourages promotion-focused strategies and, accordingly, creates a regulatory fit for promotion-focused followers. In contrast, transactional leadership primarily encourages prevention-focused strategies, creating a regulatory fit for prevention-focused followers. As a consequence of this regulatory fit, leadership is perceived as more effective and predictive of enhanced effort. By integrating literature on self-regulation with insights from leadership research, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of the leadership process and of interpersonal influences on self-regulatory experiences.

The thesis I explore in this essay is that organizational members use humorous remarks to discursively construct and organize their cognitive and emotional experiences in and of their organizations. My assumptions are that: (1) organizations are socially constructed through discourse about them (especially managerial discourse), (2) humorous discourse provides a contradiction-centered construction of organizations that operates in the domains of both cognition and emotion, and (3) interpretation of the text of ironic remarks will suggest the processes by which contradictions and their cultural and emotional contexts are socially constructed through discourse. In this essay I use a form of analysis that I developed in relation to humor theory (Mulkay 1988), theories of irony (Brown 1977, Weick and Browning 1986) and Rorty's (1989) concept of the ironic disposition to interpret spontaneous humorous exchanges observed during the regular meetings of a group of middle managers. My interpretations of ironically humorous remarks indicate that the managers in my study constructed at least some of their cognitive and emotional experiences in contradictory ways including: possible/impossible, great/horrible, comic/serious, and up-to-date/unprepared. The interpretations also suggest how, in constructing contradiction, the managers reflexively constructed themselves in relation to their organization. The analysis points to a paradoxical understanding of organizational stability and change and informs a contradiction-centered view of organizations.

Abstract There appears to be a universal desire to understand individual differences. This common desire exhibits both universal and culturally specific features. Motivations to view oneself positively differ substantially across cultural contexts, as do a number of other variables that covary with this motivation (i.e., approach-avoidance motivations, internal-external frames of reference, independent-interdependent views of self, incremental-entity theories of abilities, dialectical self-views, and relational mobility). The structure of personality traits, particularly the five-factor model of personality, emerges quite consistently across cultures, with some key variations noted when the structure is drawn from indigenous traits in other languages. The extent to which each of the Big 5 traits is endorsed in each culture varies considerably, although we note some methodological challenges with comparing personality traits across cultures. Finally, although people everywhere can conceive of each other in terms of personality traits, people in collectivistic cultures appear to rely on traits to a lesser degree when understanding themselves and others, compared with those from individualistic cultures.

Abstract A new task goal elicits a feeling of pride in individuals with a subjective history of success, and this achievment pride produces anticipatory goal reactions that energize and direct behavior to approach the task goal. By distinguishing between promotion pride and prevention pride, the present paper extends this classic model of achievement motivation. Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997 ) distinguishes between a promotion focus on hopes and accomplishments (gains) and a prevention focus on safety and responsibilities (non-losses). We propose that a subjective history of success with promotion-related eagerness (promotion pride) orients individuals toward using eagerness means to approach a new task goal, whereas a subjective history of success with prevention-related vigilance (prevention pride) orients individuals toward using vigilance means to approach a new task goal. Studies 1–3 tested this proposal by examining the relations between a new measure of participants' subjective histories of promotion success and prevention success (the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ)) and their achievement strategies in different tasks. Study 4 examined the relation between participants' RFQ responses and their reported frequency of feeling eager or vigilant in past task engagements. Study 5 used an experimental priming technique to make participants temporarily experience either a subjective history of promotion success or a subjective history of prevention success. For both chronic and situationally induced achievement pride, these studies found that when approaching task goals individuals with promotion pride use eagerness means whereas individuals with prevention pride use vigilance means. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Two studies using different paradigms activated either ideal self-guides (a person's hopes or wishes) or ought self-guides (a person's sense of duty and responsibility) and measured Ss' concern with different forms of self-regulation: approaching matches to desired end states or mismatches to undesired end states and avoiding mismatches to desired end states or matches to undesired end states. A 3rd study asked ideal versus ought discrepant Ss to select among alternative strategies for friendship. The results suggest that a concern with approach is greater for ideal than ought self-regulation, whereas a concern with avoidance is greater for ought than ideal self-regulation.

61Independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than is interdependent self-construal.61Promotion focus is more beneficial to creativity than is prevention focus.61Regulatory focus has a moderator effect between self-construal and creativity.61Creativity may be enhanced by a match between self-construal and regulatory focus.

Abstract In 1994, R. G. Lord and P. E. Levy proposed a variant of control theory that incorporated human information processing principles. The current article evaluates the empirical evidence for their propositions and updates the theory by considering contemporary research on information processing. Considerable support drawing from diverse literatures was found for propositions concerning the activation of goal-relevant information, the inhibition of goal-irrelevant information, and the consequences of goal completion. These effects were verified by meta-analytic analyses, which also supported the meaningfulness of such effects on the basis of their unstandardized magnitudes. The authors conclude by proposing new directions for this version of control theory by invoking recent theorizing on goal emergence and the importance of velocity and acceleration information for goal striving and by reviewing research in cognitive neuroscience. Copyright 2006 APA, all rights reserved.

In our set of studies, we extended research on approach and avoidance motivations by investigating (i) motives in a work setting, (ii) interactions among approach and avoidance motives, and (iii) motives at implicit levels. Results of Studies 1 through 3 provided support for the construct validity of our work motives measure by demonstrating that approach and avoidance work motives are markers of more general approach and avoidance temperaments, they are distinct from other individual difference variables commonly studied by organisational psychologists (e.g. conscientiousness, regulatory focus and cognitive ability) and they are stable over time. In Studies 4 through 7, we confirmed our predictions that approach and avoidance motives predict employees' goal orientations, job appraisals and attitudes (e.g. job satisfaction and perceived support) and supervisor-rated job behaviours (e.g. task performance and citizenship behaviour). Importantly, we provide the first empirical evidence that approach and avoidance motives interact to predict task performance and that the motives operate at implicit levels. Copyright 漏 2012 European Association of Personality Psychology

Regulatory focus is critical at work and is shaped by cues in the environment. We examine how supervisor regulatory foci can activate analogous foci in subordinates. We test this idea across five studies. In Study 1 we find that supervisor regulatory focus predicted change in new hires’ regulatory focus in the first three months after organizational entry. In Studies 2 and 3 we find that leaders’ regulatory foci had unique effects on leadership behaviors, and that these behaviors primed subordinates’ regulatory foci. Specifically, transformational behavior is linked to promotion focus, management by exception behavior to prevention focus, and contingent reward behavior to both foci. In Study 4 we find that leader regulatory focus relates to follower regulatory focus via the mediating effects of the aforementioned leader behaviors. Finally, in Study 5 we additionally find that contingent punishment mediates the relationship between leader and follower prevention focus and that weak regulatory foci increase the likelihood of laissez-faire leadership. Taken together, these results reveal how leader regulatory focus and behavior can be leveraged to shape the motivation of followers.

Abstract A central tenet of regulatory focus theory is that people hold more positive appraisals and exhibit greater dedication when their regulatory focus is congruent with the orientation of the immediate context, a phenomenon known as regulatory fit. Unfortunately, scant attention has been paid to regulatory fit in interpersonal contexts and the consequences of relationship partners having congruent promotion and prevention foci. Integrating regulatory fit theory with theories of relational leadership, we predicted that regulatory fit would enhance relationship quality and commitment within leader–follower dyads. These predictions were examined across three samples, using data collected from multiple sources and at multiple times. Our results indicated that promotion fit, prevention fit, and the interaction between them predicted relationship quality and commitment to the leader, which in turn predicted leader-targeted citizenship behavior and withdrawal cognition. These relationships remained after controlling for demographic fit and followers’ and leader’s individual regulatory foci.

61CEO's chronic regulatory focus affects entrepreneurship in established SMEs.61Promotion focus is positively associated with exploration and exploitation.61Prevention focus is negatively associated with exploration.61Competitive intensity interacts with promotion focus.

In this paper we integrate recent theories of motivation and leadership. Drawing on the self-regulatory focus theory and on self-concept based theories of leadership, we develop a conceptual framework proposing that leaders' chronic self-regulatory focus (promotion versus prevention), in conjunction with their values, influences their motivation to lead and, subsequently, their leadership behavior. We further suggest that leaders may influence the motivational self-regulatory foci of their followers, which will mediate different follower outcomes at the individual and group level.

In this chapter we integrate recent theories of motivation and leadership that are focused on the self. We draw on self-regulatory focus theory and on self concept based theories of leadership in order to develop a conceptual framework for understanding the quality of the leader–member exchange (LMX) relationship that are formed between leaders and their followers. We propose that leaders and... [Show full abstract]

Two studies examined the impact of chronic and situational self-regulatory mechanisms on cognitive test performance. In both studies, test performance was enhanced when situationally induced regulatory mechanisms matched the chronic self-regulatory focus of the test taker. These results support the regulatory fit hypothesis put forward in regulatory focus theory and point to the importance of compatibility between chronic and situationally induced self-regulatory states when it comes to cognitive test performance. Copyright 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

For managers, innovation is vital, but paradoxical, requiring flexibility and empowerment, as well as control and efficiency. Increasingly, studies stress organizational culture as a key to managing innovation. Yet innovation-supportive culture remains an intricate and amorphous phenomenon. In response, we explore how organizational values – a foundational building block of culture – impact a particular process innovation, the implementation of advanced manufacturing technology (AMT). To unpack this scarcely studied construct, we examine three-dimensions of organizational values: value profiles, value congruence and value–practice interactions.

This study examines how different rhythms of change relate to firm performance. An explorative analysis of 67 European insurance companies between 1995 and 2004 reveals that corporate strategic changes occur in four distinct rhythms, which are classified as either regular or irregular (focused, punctuated, and temporarily switching). Subsequent quantitative analysis shows that companies that change regularly outperform those that change irregularly. This finding prevails under different internal and external contingencies, under different change characteristics, and over time periods. We also find that the rhythm and frequency of change have distinct performance effects. Our findings contribute to research on the change-stability paradox by showing that a regular and sequential balance between change and stability is associated with long-term success.

Regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997) has received growing attention in organizational psychology, necessitating a quantitative review that synthesizes its effects on important criteria. In addition, there is need for theoretical integration of regulatory focus theory with personality research. Theoretical integration is particularly relevant, since personality traits and dispositions are distal factors that are unlikely to have direct effects on work behaviors, yet they may have indirect effects via regulatory focus. The current meta-analysis introduces an integrative framework in which the effects of personality on work behaviors are best understood when considered in conjunction with more proximal motivational processes such as regulatory focus. Using a distal proximal approach, we identify personality antecedents and work-related consequences of regulatory foci in a framework that considers both general and work-specific regulatory foci as proximal motivational processes. We present meta-analytic results for relations of regulatory focus with its antecedents (approach and avoid temperaments, conscientiousness, openness to experience, agreeableness, self-esteem, and self-efficacy) and its consequences (work behaviors and attitudes). In addition to estimates of bivariate relationships, we support a meta-analytic path model in which distal personality traits relate to work behaviors via the mediating effects of general and work-specific regulatory focus. Results from tests of incremental and relative validity indicated that regulatory foci predict unique variance in work behaviors after controlling for established personality, motivation, and attitudinal predictors. Consistent with regulatory focus theory and our integrative theoretical framework, regulatory focus has meaningful relations with work outcomes and is not redundant with other individual difference variables.

Do firms balance exploration and exploitation in their alliance formation decisions and, if so, why and how? We argue that absorptive capacity and organizational inertia impose conflicting pressures for exploration and exploitation with respect to the value chain function of alliances, the attributes of partners, and partners' network positions. Although path dependencies reinforce either exploration or exploitation within each of these domains, we find that firms balance their tendencies to explore and exploit over time and across domains.

"Paradox" appears increasingly in organization studies, often to describe conflicting demands, opposing perspectives, or seemingly illogical findings. This article helps researchers move beyond labeling-to explore paradoxes and contribute insights more in tune with organizational complexity and ambiguity. I first develop a framework that clarifies the nature of paradoxical tensions, reinforcing cycles, and their management. Using this framework, I then review studies in which paradoxes spurred by change and plurality are investigated. I conclude by outlining strategies for identifying and representing paradox, addressing implications for research.

Abstract In 3 studies, the authors demonstrated that individuals are motivated by role models who encourage strategies that fit their regulatory concerns: Promotion-focused individuals, who favor a strategy of pursuing desirable outcomes, are most inspired by positive role models, who highlight strategies for achieving success; prevention-focused individuals, who favor a strategy of avoiding undesirable outcomes, are most motivated by negative role models, who highlight strategies for avoiding failure. In Studies 1 and 2, the authors primed promotion and prevention goals and then examined the impact of role models on motivation. Participants' academic motivation was increased by goal-congruent role models but decreased by goal-incongruent role models. In Study 3, participants were more likely to generate real-life role models that matched their chronic goals.

As change becomes a constant in organizational life, middle managers charged with interpreting, communicating, and implementing change often struggle for meaning. To explore change and managerial sensemaking, we conducted action research at the Danish Lego Company. Although largely absent from mainstream journals, action research offers exceptional access to and support of organizational sensemaking. Through collaborative intervention and reflection, we sought to help managers make sense of issues surfaced by a major restructuring. Results transform paradox from a label to a lens, contributing a process for working through paradox and explicating three organizational change aspects--paradoxes of performing, belonging, and organizing.

People experience “regulatory fit” when they pursue a goal in a manner that suits their chronic regulatory orientation. This regulatory fit impacts performance positively. The present research extends performance gains due to fit from individuals to dyadic team performance. Study 1 manipulated team fit of 32 table football participants (i.e., promotion vs. prevention orientation and offense vs. defense positions). Team fit significantly predicted team success in an experimental tournament beyond team skill level. Study 2 replicated this result with data from a real‐life tournament including 66 highly experienced competitors. These findings broaden the concept of regulatory fit from individual to dyadic teams, and suggest collective fit as a possible important predictor for team success.

In a study of 11 organizations among 120 manufacturing, planning and sales employees, support was found for the hypothesis that a prosocial value orientation-as a personality trait-increases the likelihood that employees show a high concern for the goals of other departments. This concern, combined with a high concern for own goals, furthermore appeared to increase the likelihood of problem-solving behavior during interdepartmental negotiations. Measures of goal concerns were attained, firstly, by asking employees how important they found six specific organizational goals and, secondly, by assessing which goals were found most important by members of which department. The results of this study suggest that problem solving can be induced by selecting or developing prosocial employees, because a prosocial value orientation increases the likelihood of having broad role orientations, in which employees not only care for goals characteristic of their own department, but also for goals of other departments.

In this research, the authors test a model in which the regulatory focus of employees at work mediates the influence of leadership on employee behavior. In a nationally representative sample of 250 workers who responded over 2 time periods, prevention focus mediated the relationship of initiating structure to in-role performance and deviant behavior, whereas promotion focus mediated the relationship of servant leadership to helping and creative behavior. The results indicate that even though initiating structure and servant leadership share some variance in explaining other variables, each leadership style incrementally predicts disparate outcomes after controlling for the other style and dispositional tendencies. A new regulatory focus scale, the Work Regulatory Focus (WRF) Scale, also was developed and initially validated for this study. Implications for the results and the WRF Scale are discussed.

The authors propose that the debate on the fairness of large pay dispersion can be advanced by considering people’s regulatory focus. While some argue that pay dispersion is fair only when it reflects individual contribution differences, others argue that large pay dispersion is fair as employees perceive others’ high pay as a signal of their own future pay. Invoking the view of regulatory focus theory, the authors suggest that pay dispersion increases pay fairness perception when employees have a strong promotion focus, whereas pay dispersion decreases fairness perception when employees have a strong prevention focus. Using two multilevel field studies—Study 1 with 827 employees in 137 teams at 42 organizations in South Korea and Study 2 with 186 employees in 46 teams at 5 high-technology organizations in Taiwan—the authors present supportive evidence of the promotion focus moderation effect. Evidence of the prevention focus moderation effect is not found.

Chinese ways of dealing with seeming contradictions result in a dialectical or compromise approach—retaining basic elements of opposing perspectives by seeking a “middle way.” On the other hand, European–American ways, deriving from a lay version of Aristotelian logic, result in a differentiation model that polarizes contradictory perspectives in an effort to determine which fact or position is correct. Five empirical studies showed that dialectical thinking is a form of folk wisdom in Chinese culture: Chinese participants preferred dialectical proverbs containing seeming contradictions more than did American participants. Chinese participants also preferred dialectical resolutions to social conflicts and preferred dialectical arguments over classical Western logical arguments. Furthermore, when 2 apparently contradictory propositions were presented, American participants polarized their views, and Chinese participants were moderately accepting of both propositions. Origins of these cultural differences and their implications for human reasoning in general are discussed.

Most contemporary theory construction methodologies attempt to build internally consistent theories of limited scope. Relatively little attention has been paid to the opportunities offered by tensions, oppositions, and contradictions among explanations of the same phenomenon. This essay attempts to spell out a set of theory-building strategies to help researchers take advantage of theoretical tensions. Such tensions can be regarded as paradoxes of social theory, and four different modes of working with paradoxes can be distinguished: (1) accept the paradox and use it constructively; (2) clarify levels of analysis; (3) temporally separate the two levels; and (4) introduce new terms to resolve the paradox. These four modes of paradox resolution are illustrated by application to the action::structure paradox in organizational theory.

ABSTRACT According to Thomas Kuhn, most scientists conduct their research within the existing paradigm, rarely overthrowing it in a paradigm revolution. Similarly, we argue the merits of persisting with existing paradigms for organizational studies, through paradigm continuity, paradigm elaboration, and paradigm extension. In paradigm continuity, the existing paradigm is prosecuted fruitfully. We discuss two of the possible ways: refinement of the protective belt and synthesis of existing models. In paradigm elaboration, the existing paradigm becomes more complex and may give rise to a new variant, which can substantially change it. To illustrate the fruitfulness of the concepts of paradigm continuity and paradigm elaboration, we use new research findings from an old organizational theory research paradigm: structural contingency theory. In paradigm extension, ideas from the core of a paradigm-in this case, the research methodology paradigm-are projected out to form the core of a new theory, here the recently created statistico-organizational theory. Finally, we call for a dialogue between proponents of paradigm persistence and those of paradigm revolution.

Previous research has produced contradictory findings about the impact of challenge stressors on individual and team creativity. Based on the challenge hindrance stressors framework (LePine, Podsakoff, & LePine, 2005) and on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997), we argue that the effect of challenge stressors on creativity is moderated by regulatory focus. We hypothesize that while promotion focus strengthens a positive relationship between challenge stressors and creativity, prevention focus reinforces a negative relationship. Experimental data showed that high demands led to better results in a creative insight task for individuals with a strong trait promotion focus, and that high demands combined with an induced promotion focus led to better results across both creative generation and insight tasks. These results were replicated in a field R&D sample. Furthermore, we found that team promotion focus moderated the effect of challenge stressors on team creativity. The results offer both theoretical insights and suggest practical implications. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

(2016). Paradox Research in Management Science: Looking Back to Move Forward. The Academy of Management Annals: Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 5-64. doi: 10.1080/19416520.2016.1162422

Corporate turnaround research has described retrenchment and recovery as contradictory forces that should be addressed separately. While a few scholars have argued that retrenchment and recovery are interrelated and may have to be integrated, others have contended that such arguments are flawed since they downplay the contradictions between the two activities. In this paper, we clarify the nature of the retrenchment鈥搑ecovery interrelations, as well as their importance for turnaround performance. Drawing on the paradox literature, we argue that retrenchment and recovery form a duality: they are both contradictory and complementary. Integrating the two activities allows turnaround firms to create benefits that exceed the costs of their integration, which affects turnaround performance positively. We test our arguments through an empirical study of 107 Central European turnaround initiatives and find evidence for the assumed duality between retrenchment and recovery. Our main contribution is integrating the hitherto disparate theory perspectives of corporate turnaround into an overarching framework.

Abstract The question why some entrepreneurs self-select out of entrepreneurial careers following exits from successful and failed businesses is of growing interest to entrepreneurship scholars.Using two studies and Regulatory Fit Theory as the theoretical lens, we address this question. Study 1 uses the experimental vignette methodology to test whether business exits under harvest and distress conditions diminished or intensified the serial entrepreneurship intentions of 74 experienced entrepreneurs. Study 2 examines the relationship between the serial entrepreneurship intentions of 196 entrepreneurs who exited businesses and their recall of prior experiences with business success or failure. In both studies, we find evidence of a negative relationship between prevention focused cognition and serial entrepreneurship intentions that intensifies from the regulatory fit of distress business exits. The results of both studies suggest that the cognitive lenses used by entrepreneurs to process their business exits play important roles in their intentions to pursue serial entrepreneurship.

The organizational ambidexterity literature conceptualizes exploration and exploitation as conflicting activities, and proposes separation-oriented approaches to accomplish ambidexterity; namely, structural and temporal separation. We argue that viewing ambidexterity from the lens of paradox theory enables us to move beyond separation-oriented prescriptions towards synthesis or... [Show full abstract]

As organizational environments become more global, dynamic, and competitive, contradictory demands intensify. To understand and explain such tensions, academics and practitioners are increasingly adopting a paradox lens. We review the paradox literature, categorizing types and highlighting fundamental debates. We then present a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing, which depicts how cyclical responses to paradoxical tensions enable sustainability--peak performance in the present that enables success in the future. This review and the model provide the foundation of a theory of paradox.

Sustained organizational performance depends on top management teams effectively exploring and exploiting. These strategic agendas are, however, associated with contradictory organizational architectures. Using the literature on paradox, contradictions, and conflict, we develop a model of managing strategic contradictions that is associated with paradoxical cognition—senior leaders and/or their teams (a) articulating a paradoxical frame, (b) differentiating between the strategy and architecture for the existing product and those for innovation, and (c) integrating between those strategies and architectures. We further argue that the locus of paradox in top management teams resides either with the senior leader or with the entire team. We identify a set of top management team conditions that facilitates a team’s ability to engage in paradoxical cognitive processes.

A well-documented finding in the literature is that members of many East Asian cultures report lower self-esteem and psychological well-being than do members of Western cultures. The authors present the results of four studies that examined cultural differences in reasoning about psychological contradiction and the effects of naive dialecticism on self-evaluations and psychological adjustment. Mainland Chinese and Asian Americans exhibited greater "ambivalence" or evaluative contradiction in their self-attitudes than did Western synthesis-oriented cultures on a traditional self-report measure of self-esteem (Study 1) and in their spontaneous self-descriptions (Study 2). Naive dialecticism, as assessed with the Dialectical Self Scale, mediated the observed cultural differences in self-esteem and well-being (Study 3). In Study 4, the authors primed naive dialecticism and found that increased dialecticism was related to decreased psychological adjustment. Implications for the conceptualization and measurement of self-esteem and psychological well-being across cultures are discussed.

This research investigates the effects of regulatory focus on alternative search and consideration set formation in consumer decision making. Results from three experiments yield two primary findings. First, promotion‐focused consumers tend to search for alternatives at a more global level, whereas prevention‐focused consumers tend to search for alternatives at a more local level. Second, promotion‐focused consumers tend to have larger consideration sets than do prevention‐focused consumers. Building on these two primary findings, it is additionally shown that whereas promotion‐focused consumers attach relatively greater value to options chosen from hierarchically structured sets, prevention‐focused consumers attach relatively greater value to options chosen from nonhierarchically structured item lists. Finally, whereas promotion‐focused consumers attach significantly greater value to options chosen from larger sets than to options chosen from smaller sets, prevention‐focused consumers do not attach significantly less value to options chosen from larger sets than to options chosen from smaller sets.

In recent years, there has been strong interest in leaders' exploration and exploitation activities, especially because of their positive effects on performance. Most prior research in this area has focused on the organizational antecedents of leaders' exploration and exploitation activities, with less consideration given to the psychological precursors. This paper draws upon insights from the behavioral strategy literature to inform our theoretical perspective on leaders' exploration–exploitation activities. In particular, by conceptually linking leaders' regulatory focus and exploration–exploitation, we provide a theoretical framework to explain these activities from a psychological viewpoint. Moreover, we employ two moderator variables to better understand the different properties and boundaries of this framework. All in all, this paper has a number of implications for strategic leadership theory and practice.

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate transformational, ambidextrous, and transactional leadership and their relationship to employee creativity and the extent to which psychological empowerment and promotion focus are consistent with previous studies that identify their significant impact on employee creativity. In addition, employee psychological empowerment and promotion focus are used as mediators in the research model to ascertain whether or not there is a significant mediating effect between transformational leadership, ambidextrous leadership, transactional leadership and employee creativity. Design/methodology/approach - In the study, 500 questionnaires were mailed to 50 electronics companies in China; 427 valid questionnaires were eventually collected. A structural equation model was then used for data analysis to study the causalities between all the parameters. Findings - The research findings indicate that transformational and ambidextrous leadership styles have a significant effect on employee creativity. In addition, the study found that employee psychological empowerment and promotion focus has a significant mediating effect for transformational leadership, ambidextrous leadership, transactional leadership and employee creativity. Originality/value - Executives who adopt a transformational or ambidextrous leadership style tend to have employees with greater psychological empowerment, while transformational or ambidextrous leaders tend to have employees with a stronger promotion focus. Further, the study discovered that when executives adopt a transformational or ambidextrous leadership style, they can use their employees psychological empowerment and promotion focus to improve employee creativity.

As professional schools, business schools aspire to couple research rigor with managerial relevance. There has been, however, a concern that business schools are increasingly uncoupled from practice and that business school research lacks real-world relevance. This relevance-rigor gap affects the quality of our teaching as well as the institutional legitimacy of our business schools. We argue that executive education is an underutilized context that can enhance the quality of faculty research as well as our impact on managerial practice. Using evaluation data from variations of a single executive education program, we find that action-learning programs significantly enhance both individual and organizational outcomes compared to traditional executive education formats. Action-learning programs also enhance our teaching and research efforts. Building on these results and experiences, we suggest that executive education in general, and action learning in particular, are fertile contexts where business schools can bridge the relevance-rigor gap.

The purpose of this multilevel study was to test whether regulatory focus mechanisms (promotion focus and prevention focus; Higgins, 1997 , American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300; Higgins, 2000 , American Psychologist, 55 , 1217–1230) can help explain how group safety climate and individual differences in Conscientiousness relate to individual productivity and safety performance. Results, based on a sample of 254 employees from 50 work groups, showed that safety climate and conscientiousness predicted promotion and prevention regulatory focus, which in turn mediated the relationships of safety climate and Conscientiousness with supervisor ratings of productivity and safety performance. Implications for theory and research on climate, motivation, and performance and avenues for future research are discussed.

This research proposes and tests that regulatory foci of small business chief executive officers (promotion focus and prevention focus) relate to firm performance differentially when levels of environmental uncertainty vary. Results suggest that a promotion focus is positively related to firm performance, whereas a prevention focus is negatively related to firm performance. Further, these relationships are moderated by the degree of environmental dynamism such that in more dynamic environments, the relationship between promotion focus and firm performance is strengthened, whereas the relationship between prevention focus and firm performance is negatively affected. The reverse was found for less dynamic environments. Theoretical and practical implications as well as future research avenues are offered.

Two studies investigated the effect of expected evaluation and regulatory focus on individuals creative performance. In both studies, first, the type of evaluation (informational versus controlling) was manipulated, and then regulatory focus was measured as an individual difference (in Study 1) or induced as a state using a pencil-and-paper maze task (in Study 2). Results provided evidence that participants who expect an informational evaluation were more likely to adopt an eager strategy; whereas participants who expected a controlling evaluation were more likely to adopt a vigilant strategy. Furthermore, participants in promotion-informational and prevention-controlling groups (regulatory fit conditions) performed more creatively than those in promotion-controlling and prevention-informational groups (regulatory non-fit conditions). In sum, the present findings contribute to a better understanding of how external evaluations and basic motivational orientations influence creative performance.

As organizational environments become increasingly dynamic, complex, and competitive, leaders are likely to face intensified contradictory, or seemingly paradoxical, demands. We develop the construct of "paradoxical leader behavior" in people management, which refers to seemingly competing, yet interrelated, behaviors to meet structural and follower demands simultaneously and over time. In Study 1, we develop a measure of paradoxical leader behavior in people management using five samples from China. Confirmatory factor analyses support a multidimensional measure of paradoxical leader behavior with five dimensions: (1) combining self-centeredness with other-centeredness; (2) maintaining both distance and closeness; (3) treating subordinates uniformly, while allowing individualization; (4) enforcing work requirements, while allowing flexibility; and (5) maintaining decision control, while allowing autonomy. In Study 2, we examine the antecedents and consequences of paradoxical leader behavior in people management with a field sample of 76 supervisors and 516 subordinates from 6 firms. We find that the extent to which supervisors engage in holistic thinking and have integrative complexity is positively related to their paradoxical behavior in managing people, which, in turn, is associated with increased proficiency, adaptivity, and proactivity among subordinates.