As globalization has become a defining issue for business and society, an increasing amount of research has examined how multicultural experiences affect a variety of psychological and organizational outcomes. We define “multicultural experiences” as exposure to or interactions with elements or members of a different culture(s). We then provide a comprehensive review of the literature and detail how multicultural experiences impact intrapersonal, interpersonal, and organizational outcomes, including creativity, psychological adjustment, intergroup bias, trust, morality, leadership effectiveness, and individual or firm performance, exploring key mechanisms and boundary conditions that have also emerged. We then present a new theoretical framework—the “Structure–Appraisal Model of Multicultural Experiences”—that organizes the overall pattern of findings and provides a roadmap for future research. The structure part of our model proposes that deeper multicultural experiences produce integrative processes that transform intrapersonal cognition, whereas broader multicultural experiences activate comparative processes that influence interpersonal attitudes and behaviors. The appraisal part of our model suggests that these intrapersonal and interpersonal effects are only likely to occur when appraisals of one’s multicultural experiences are positive rather than negative. We conclude by discussing practical implications for individuals and organizations, as well as future directions for researchers to consider exploring.
The diffusion of organizational practices remains a central concern for scholars from diverse disciplines and backgrounds. We assess the most recent 20 years of research on interorganizational diffusion to establish findings that are now conclusive and identify important questions or areas of research that remain unaddressed. We identify five key issues with the literature, which are largely a consequence of viewing diffusion as a source of homogeneity across organizations. We further propose a point of view that calls for a more fundamental reorientation of diffusion research. Our main contention is that researchers have focused on diffusion processes as producing similarities among organizations but have overlooked theoretical and empirical indications that diffusion processes often create and sustain differences among organizations. We seek to draw attention to this omission, demonstrate its significance, and make a case for a reorientation of diffusion research. In doing so, we hope to advance a more realistic future research agenda that considers diffusion as a source of both homogeneity and heterogeneity across organizations.
Understanding whether and how work design affects human cognition is important because: (a) cognition is necessary for job performance, (b) digital technologies increase the need for cognition, and (c) it is vital to maintain cognitive functioning in the mature workforce. We synthesize research from work design, human factors, learning, occupational health, and lifespan perspectives. Defining cognition in terms of both knowledge and cognitive processes or fluid abilities, we show that five types of work characteristics (job complexity, job autonomy, relational work design, job feedback, and psychosocial demands) affect employees’ cognition via multiple pathways. In the short-to-medium term, we identify three cognitively enriching pathways (opportunity for use of cognition, accelerated knowledge acquisition, motivated exploratory learning) and two cognitively harmful pathways (strain-impaired cognition, depleted cognitive capacity). We also identify three longer-term pathways (cognitive preservation, accumulated knowledge, and ill-health impairment). Based on the emerging evidence for the role of work design in promoting cognition, we propose an integrative model suggesting that the short-to-medium term processes between work design and cognition accumulate to affect longer-term cognitive outcomes, such as the prevention of cognitive decline as one ages. We also identify further directions for research and methodological improvements.
A surprising and ironic lack of shared cognition currently exists about team cognition, including how to define the construct, organize the research, and integrate across multiple disjointed constructs. In response to team cognition at a critical crossroad, we provide a comprehensive and cross-disciplinary review, highlighting similarities and differences between constructs and integrating across constructs. Specifically, we synthesize 10 disjointed team cognition constructs into three overarching dimensions. By establishing a common vocabulary to describe team cognition, the three-dimensional framework enhances our ability to evaluate accumulated research, recognize points of intersection, and identify key research gaps. Whereas the three-dimensional framework unites the team cognition literature conceptually, we see networks as a powerful tool to unite the team cognition literature methodologically. Networks neatly merge the structure and content of team cognition, multiple knowledge domains, the interrelationship between cognitive processes and cognitive representations, and the measurement capability to answer new and sophisticated research questions. By providing conceptual integration within a network configuration, we offer theoretical and measurement redirection to hasten the next frontier of team cognition research.
The concept of craft has long lived in the margins of organizational research and has typically been equated with a primitive form of manufacturing. Craft, however, seems to have had a resurgence, and is now increasingly associated with alternative approaches to work and organization in contemporary society. Yet, despite growing research on the phenomenon, insights have remained fragmented due to a lack of common theoretical infrastructure. In an effort to synthesize the disparate threads of research on craft, we conducted an interpretive review of the concept’s use in management and organizational literature over the past century. Based on this we propose a reconceptualization of craft as a timeless approach to work that prioritizes human engagement over machine control. We identify the distinct work skills and attitudes that are typically associated with craft, and illustrate how these appear across two conventional configurations (traditional and industrialized craft) and three contemporaneous configurations (technical, pure, and creative craft) that are visible in the literature. Finally, we suggest how our framework could be used as a general theory for understanding alternative approaches to work against the backdrop of growing affordances of machine technology, and sketch future research avenues for exploring specific craft-related tensions and evolutionary processes.
Our article reviews research on “organizational science and health care,” defined broadly as research focusing on topics commonly studied in the organizational and management literatures and conducted in health care settings. Using almost 700 articles published in leading organizational science (OS) and health care (HC) journals over the past decade, we first apply network methods to map this burgeoning field of research, highlighting topics that appear more in the foreground (and background) of the field. We then conduct an in-depth review of recent and influential articles, studying the five most prominent topics: organizational change, learning, coordination/cooperation, teams/structure, and performance. Next, we synthesize this research, highlighting the patient-centered, dynamic, and specialized nature of health care work, and detailing disciplinary distinctions across studies published in OS and HC journals. Whereas research in OS journals tends to emphasize broad generalizability and organizing processes, research in HC journals tends to emphasize contextualized problems and the role of organizational structures and practices in solving them. We conclude by articulating the need for a broader coordination that integrates both of these disciplinary orientations in ways that could allow scholars to advance organizational science and health care with future research that is both rigorous and relevant.
Membership change—adding, replacing, and losing members—is a common phenomenon in work teams and charts a different theoretical space from prior team research that has assumed stable team membership and shared team properties. Based on a comprehensive review of 133 empirical studies on team membership change since 1948, we propose a temporal framework pertaining to the causes and consequences of membership change. Three key theoretical insights emerge from our evidence-based integration: (a) Membership change first disrupts team cognitive, behavioral, and interpersonal processes and states (e.g., transactive memory systems, coordination) but can benefit team performance after teams adapt to form new processes and states; (b) whether and to what extent team performance benefits from membership change is contingent on the magnitude of membership change, requirements of team communication, member adaptation-related attributes, change in team knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (KSAOs), and team knowledge work; and (c) poor team experiences motivate member departure and may make it challenging for newcomers to join and teams to adapt to membership change. Our review moves team research into new avenues that do not presume stable team membership and shared team properties in understanding team functioning and performance, and outlines key directions to advance integrative theory.
Are self-aware leaders more effective? Are self-aware workers more productive and satisfied? Studies of self-awareness, which have been undertaken in a range of fields, have implications for a wide variety of topics in organizational behavior. Yet, this research has been scattered, resulting in gaps, siloed insights, a lack of clear and consistent conceptualization, and the confounding of causes and effects with self-awareness itself. We review the organizational behavior and psychology literatures to distinguish, summarize, and assess research on self-awareness as both process and content. Our synthesis of past work on the content of self-awareness is organized around three distinct targets: internal, external, and social. Our paper concludes with an evaluation of the implications of our findings for future research.