EMPLOYEES' CHALLENGING JOB EXPERIENCES AND SUPERVISORS' EVALUATIONS OF PROMOTABILITY

Promotability evaluations are important for individuals' career development and organizations' human resource management practices. Nevertheless, little empirical research has addressed predictors of promotability evaluations, and the studies that have, have often focused on current job performance and fixed, nonbehavioral predictors. This study takes a more behavioral approach, and investigates whether besides how one performs (i.e., job performance) what one performs also serves as an indicator of promotability. Specifically, we examine the relationship between employees' challenging job experiences and supervisors' evaluations of employees' promotability over and above employees' current job performance. Results from 3 field studies, sampling different types of employees via different measures, consistently showed that challenging job experiences explained incremental variance in supervisory and organizational evaluations of promotability over and above current job performance and job tenure.     

Relational Drawings in Couple Therapy

In couple therapy sessions, partners often get into long and drawn-out discussions, heavy with pain, resentment, and blame. It is vital for the therapist to avoid becoming entangled in these escalating interactions. In this article, as one way of avoiding these interactions, a protocol is proposed of using relational drawings in couple therapy for opening space for new stories. This approach is strongly rooted in extensive therapeutic experience, as well as in dialogical ideas. Not the content of the partners' imagery is central, but rather the dialogical exchange about the drawings. In particular, the focus of the therapist is on the partners' interactions, their hesitations and their surprises. Working in this way opens space for the partners to reflect on what they experience as crucial in their bond. The protocol is illustrated with two detailed case examples.     

PATTERNS OF INTERDEPENDENCE IN WORK TEAMS: A TWO-LEVEL INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONS WITH JOB AND TEAM SATISFACTION

A questionnaire study in 17 school and 24 engineering teams examined affective reactions to task and goal interdependence at the group and individual level of analysis. Group-level task interdependence was positively related to group members' job and team satisfaction. Within-group differences in the degree of task interdependence were unrelated to affective responses. Interactions revealed that within-group task interdependence is positively related to both job and team satisfaction only if the degree of goal interdependence in the work team is high.     

PERCEIVED INGROUP AND OUTGROUP PREFERENCE: A LONGITUDINAL CAUSAL INVESTIGATION

Although there has been substantial research on perceptions of preference in hiring, there is considerably less focus on perceptions of preference in organizational activities more generally. Researchers seldom assess perceptions of preference for both historically high- and low-status groups and for both one's own group and others. Using a three-wave longitudinal survey of 1,094 employees, the causal direction between perceived preference and satisfaction with management, moderators of that relationship, and whether responses to perceived preference differed by group were examined. On average, groups perceived more outgroup than ingroup preference. The satisfaction to perceived preference causal direction was significantly stronger than the reverse for outgroup preference, suggesting that increased satisfaction with management leads to decreased future perceptions of outgroup preference more so than vice versa. The relationship between satisfaction with management and perceived outgroup preference was moderated by perceived organizational tolerance of discrimination, suggesting that positive diversity climate can alleviate the negative effects of dissatisfaction with management on perceived outgroup preference.     

Can Virtuous People Emerge from Tragic Dilemmas Having Acted Well?

abstract   A tragic dilemma is thought to arise when an agent, through no fault of her own, finds herself in a situation where she must choose between two courses of action, both of which it would be wrong to undertake. I focus on tragic dilemmas that are resolvable, that is, where a reason can be given in favour of one course of action over another, and my aim is to examine whether Hursthouse's virtue-ethical account of right action succeeds in avoiding two problems presented by tragic dilemmas. The first of these is that they produce the seemingly contradictory conclusion that an agent, in doing what she ought to do, acts wrongly, making it appropriate for her to feel guilt. The second is the paradox of moral luck, which consists in the conflict between the intuition that an agent cannot be held responsible for actions that are not fully voluntary, and the fact that she may nevertheless believe that she has done something morally reprehensible. I argue that if we accept Hursthouse's separation of action guidance and action assessment, her account succeeds in solving the problem of contradiction. However, it does not completely avoid the problem of moral luck. I argue, against Hursthouse, that the virtuous agent can emerge from a tragic dilemma having acted well, and that this is the conclusion we must arrive at if we want to avoid the problem of contradiction and of moral luck.