TASK-RELEVANT CONTROL IN ORGANIZATIONS1

Studies of organizational power using questionnaire measures of perceived control have usually asked respondents, “How much influence do (various groups in the hierarchy) have on what goes on in your organization?” The present study measured such general control, plus control over specific task-relevant responsibilities. Data were obtained from 526 individuals at four hierarchical levels in 20 regional offices of an insurance company. Predicted relationships between total general control and task-relevant control and an independent measure of effectiveness were only partially supported. The general manager's control was more important than expected. However, measuring task-relevant control could be a useful management tool, and could help future research explicate relationships between control and effectiveness.     

HOW LEADER–MEMBER EXCHANGE INFLUENCES EFFECTIVE WORK BEHAVIORS: SOCIAL EXCHANGE AND INTERNAL–EXTERNAL EFFICACY PERSPECTIVES

In this article, we propose and test an integrative theory of leader–member exchange (LMX) that extends our understanding of the mechanisms affecting LMX and important organizational outcomes. We argue that LMX enhances job performance and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs) through 2 sets of processes. As a result of a social exchange process, high LMX managers encourage reciprocal obligations. These obligations are manifested as subordinate commitment to their supervisors. This commitment, in turn, prompts more OCBs and higher job performance. Through a second process, high LMX supervisors enhance their subordinates’ self‐efficacy and means efficacy, thereby improving job performance. Results of a field study support our predictions. Theoretical and practical implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

The Effects of a Parent Guidance Intervention on Communication among Adolescents Who Have Experienced the Sudden Death of a Sibling

Existing and new validity data on 3,880 cases from the Bricklin Perceptual Scales and Perception-of-Relationships Test address the assertion that custody data cannot be generated scientifically. Reliability (93 percent stability over 8 months) and validity data (90 percent agreement with multiple independent criteria) are presented, but without a fully explicated chain linking evidence to conclusions, one ends up with unresolvable, typically all-or-none, disputations about the adequacy of one's evidence. This chain includes, among others, the (confusing) role of values in science and how system complexities affect the choice of measurement units as well as measurement relevance. We also consider the value of information to a specific decision-maker. Psychometric indices, the usual source of such arguments, cannot alone address any of these areas.     

IS IT WORTH IT TO WIN THE TALENT WAR? EVALUATING THE UTILITY OF PERFORMANCE‐BASED PAY

Although the business press suggests that "winning the talent war," the attraction and retention of key talent, is increasingly pivotal to organization success, executives often report that their organizations do not fare well on this dimension. We demonstrate how, through integrating turnover and compensation research, the Boudreau and Berger (1985) staffing utility framework can be used by I-O psychologists and other HR professionals to address this issue. Employing a step-by-step process that combines organization-specific information about pay and performance with research on the pay-turnover linkage, we estimate the effects of incentive pay on employee separation patterns at various performance levels. We then use the utility framework to evaluate the financial consequences of incentive pay as an employee retention vehicle. The demonstration illustrates the limitations of standard accounting and behavioral cost-based approaches and the importance of considering both the costs and benefits associated with pay-for-performance plans. Our results suggest that traditional accounting or behavioral cost-based approaches, used alone, would have supported rejecting a potentially lucrative pay-for-performance investment. In addition, our approach should enable HR professionals to use research findings and their own data to estimate the retention patterns and subsequent financial consequences of their existing, and potential, company-specific performance-based pay policies.