Positive Organizational Scholarship American Behavioral Scientist special issue Cameron, K. et al....
-
date post
21-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of Positive Organizational Scholarship American Behavioral Scientist special issue Cameron, K. et al....
Positive Organizational Scholarship
American Behavioral Scientist special issue
Cameron, K. et al. (2004) Exploring relationships between organizational virtuousness and performance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47, 6, 766-790.
Organizational Virtuousness and Performance
Virtuousness = what individuals and organizations aspire to be.
Wall Street Journal = “win” (etc.) increased four fold (84-00)
During the same period “virtue” (etc.) was hardly used at all.
Negative occurrences have greater impact than positive episodes.
How come?
Also, via the history of research efforts we know a lot more about the problematic than the virtuous.
Virtue is a relative term.
In virtuous organizations:
• Moral goodness
• Individual flourishes
• Social betterment
Virtue crowns Athena and Apollo
Virtue needs to be instrumentally linked to performance.
How come?
In order to be seriously considered.
How can virtue-enhanced performance be measured?
• Measure the amplification of performance in conjunction with virtue (prosocial behavior, positive modeling).
• Measure the buffering effect of performance in the context of virtue (personal trauma, downsizing).
Effects of downsizing:
• Decreasing morale, commitment, loyalty
• Loss of trust (clients and workers)
• Less communication
• Less teamwork
• More reactive/less proactive
• Little innovation
Effects of downsizing (continued):
• Short term mentality
• Centralized decision making
• Resistance to change
• Political infighting
• More conflict
• Risk-aversion
The results of the study = virtue and performance are + related (in terms of)
• Innovation
• Customer retention
• Turnover
• Quality
• Profit
What might knowledge nomads be?
Loyalty has long been valued and viewed as inversely related to mobility.
Knowledge nomads are resources who are mobile . . .
And committed.
Compassion in organizational life = collectively noticing, feeling and responding to organizational pain.
Kanov, J.M. (2004) Compassion in organizational life. American Behavioral Scientist, 47,6, 808-827.
Sources of organizational pain:
• Individuals bring pain into org.• Arrogant leadership• Inadequate resources• Rivalry• Markets• Name some more
Collective noticing = shared acknowledging of organizational pain
Collective feeling = aligned and shared emotional responses.
Collective responding = unified and coordinated action to counter pain.
Positive deviance = intentional behavior that departs from the norms of a reference group in honorable ways.
Spreitzer, G. M. & Sonenshein (2004) Toward the construct definition of positive deviance, American Behavioral Scientist, 47,6, 828-847.
Individual characteristics that facilitate positive deviance.
• meaning • self-determination• other focus• self-efficacy• courage
Merck and river blindness.
End of Positive Organizational Scholarship
Session