<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org">
<title>OnlineFirst articles</title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org</link>
<description>PAP RSS feed</description>
<prism:eIssn>1930-3807</prism:eIssn>
<prism:publicationName>Academy of Management Review</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0363-7425</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/22/amr.2015.0076.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0224.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0102.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/12/amr.2014.0537.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/18/amr.2014.0394.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/28/amr.2016.0165.2.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/12/amr.2014.0335.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/14/amr.2016.0368.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/01/20/amr.2015.0196.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/06/amr.2015.0186.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/09/amr.2015.0190.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/14/amr.2016.0002.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/24/amr.2017.0044.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/02/amr.2015.0189.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0168.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0035.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0046.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2017.0169.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/31/amr.2016.0527.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/07/amr.2015.0375.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0185.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0020.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/14/amr.2015.0322.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/03/amr.2014.0238.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/12/amr.2015.0303.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/02/amr.2015.0081.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/12/amr.2015.0411.1.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/16/amr.2015.0366.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0148.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0064.short?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/27/amr.2014.0301.short?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/22/amr.2015.0076.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Lay Theories of Networking: How Laypeople's Beliefs about Networks Affect Their Attitudes and Engagement toward Instrumental Networking]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/22/amr.2015.0076.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Who builds effective networks remains an elusive question, particularly given mounting evidence that many people actually feel conflicted or ambivalent about the idea of instrumental networking. Here, we turn to an important piece of the puzzle that has been under-theorized: lay beliefs and attitudes that inhibit networking. Borrowing from the literature on implicit theories in motivational psychology, our theoretical model examines people's beliefs about three basic aspects of networking: the fixed versus malleable nature of social intelligence, social relations, and social capital. We explain how each lay belief affects people's attitudes toward both the utility and morality of networking, with consequences for their engagement in different forms of networking (i.e. searching for new ties, maintaining existing ties, and leveraging social capital). We also consider their downstream effects for the size, diversity, and cohesiveness of networks people build. Overall, by examining the role of domain-specific beliefs and attitudes that undermine people's motivation to network, our model departs from existing views of networking based on rationality, personality, and perception to shed new light on the motivational psychology of networking. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ko Kuwabara, Claudius Hildebrand, Xi Zou]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-06-22T14:09:20-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0076</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0076</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Lay Theories of Networking: How Laypeople's Beliefs about Networks Affect Their Attitudes and Engagement toward Instrumental Networking]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-04-28</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0224.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[MASTER OF PUPPETS: HOW NARCISSISTIC CEOS CONSTRUCT THEIR PROFESSIONAL WORLDS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0224.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[We explore how narcissistic CEOs address two powerful and conflicting needs: the need for acclaim, and the need to dominate others. We argue that narcissistic CEOs address their need for acclaim by pursuing celebrity in the media and affiliating with high-status board members, and address their need to dominate others by employing lower-status, younger and less experienced TMT members who will be more deferential to and dependent on the narcissistic CEO. They manage each group differently through the use of different rewards, punishments and influence tactics. Our paper extends prior theory on CEO narcissism by exploring the mediating constructs that can link CEO narcissism and firm performance, offers a greater understanding of corporate governance by exploring how CEO personality traits influence governance structures, and demonstrates how a CEO's personality characteristics can affect the acquisition of social approval assets.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arijit Chatterjee, Timothy Pollock]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-06-24T07:09:31-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0224</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0224</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[MASTER OF PUPPETS: HOW NARCISSISTIC CEOS CONSTRUCT THEIR PROFESSIONAL WORLDS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-06-22</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0102.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Hitting Rock Bottom after Job Loss: Bouncing Back to Create a New Positive Work Identity]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/06/24/amr.2015.0102.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Although individuals often value work identities, sometimes events threaten these identities, creating a situation in which people struggle to overcome the identity threat. Building on the theories of identity and escape from self, we develop a "rock bottom" model of generating a new positive work identity. Specifically, individuals who eventually hit rock bottom come to the realization that the identity has been lost, which can lead to a path to recovery or a path to dysfunction. The path to recovery involves escape through identity play and the oscillation between disciplined identity play and identity refinement / validation. The path to dysfunction involves escape though cognitive deconstruction. Regulatory focus is important in distinguishing between those who engage in identity play to generate possible new positive identities (i.e., promotion focus) from those who engage in cognitive dysfunction (i.e., prevention focus). A deeper understanding of why some recover and others languish provides an opportunity to develop interventions that facilitate recovery from work-identity loss.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dean Shepherd, Trenton Williams]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-06-24T07:25:06-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0102</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0102</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Hitting Rock Bottom after Job Loss: Bouncing Back to Create a New Positive Work Identity]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-06-24</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/12/amr.2014.0537.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Respectful Inquiry: A motivational account of leading through asking open questions and listening]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/12/amr.2014.0537.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Practitioners repeatedly note that the everyday behavior of asking followers open questions and attentively listening to their responses is a powerful leadership technique. Yet, despite such popularity, these practices are currently under-theorized. Addressing this gap, we formally define the behavioral configuration of asking open questions combined with attentive listening as "Respectful Inquiry", and then draw on Self-Determination Theory to provide a motivational account of its antecedents, consequences, and moderators within a leader-follower relationship. Specifically, we argue that Respectful Inquiry principally satisfies followers' basic psychological needs for competence, relatedness, and autonomy. Against this background, we highlight ironic contexts where Respectful Inquiry is likely to be especially rare, but would also be especially valuable. These ironic contexts include situations where interpersonal power difference, time pressure, physical distance, cognitive load, follower dissatisfaction, or organizational control focus are high. We additionally outline how the effect of Respectful Inquiry behaviors critically hinges upon the interaction history a follower has with a leader. More generally, we make the suggestion that the leadership field would benefit from complementing its traditional focus on "gestalt" leadership styles with research on concrete and narrow communicative behaviors, such as Respectful Inquiry. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Niels Van Quaquebeke, Will Felps]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-07-12T12:15:19-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2014.0537</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2014.0537</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Respectful Inquiry: A motivational account of leading through asking open questions and listening]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-07-12</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/18/amr.2014.0394.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[CORPORATE GOVERNANCE DEVIANCE]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/18/amr.2014.0394.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[We develop the concept of corporate governance deviance and seek to understand why, when, and how a firm adopts governance practices that do not conform to the dominant governance logic. Drawing on institutional theory, coupled with the entrepreneurship and corporate governance literatures, we advance a middle range theory of the antecedents of corporate governance deviance that considers both the institutional context and firm-level agency. Specifically, we highlight the centrality of a firm's entrepreneurial identity as it interacts with the national governance logic to jointly create corporate governance discretion (i.e., the latitude of accessible governance practices) within the firm. We argue that as a firm's governance discretion increases, it will be more likely to adopt over- or under-conforming governance practices that deviate from established norms and practices. Moreover, we propose that adopting a deviant corporate governance practice is contingent on the governance regulatory environment and a firm's corporate governance capacity. We conclude by advancing a new typology of corporate governance deviance based on a firm's over- or under-conformity with the dominant national logic, as well as its entrepreneurial identity motives. This globally-relevant study refines and extends comparative corporate governance research and enriches our current understanding of the institutional logics perspective. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruth Aguilera, William Judge, Siri Terjesen]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-07-18T08:36:20-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2014.0394</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2014.0394</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[CORPORATE GOVERNANCE DEVIANCE]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-07-18</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/28/amr.2016.0165.2.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Pareyson's Estetica: Teoria della formativita and its implication for organization studies]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/07/28/amr.2016.0165.2.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Silvia Gherardi, Antonio Strati]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-07-28T09:30:22-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0165</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0165</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Pareyson's Estetica: Teoria della formativita and its implication for organization studies]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-06-22</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Review 
</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/12/amr.2014.0335.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[AN AFFECT-BASED MODEL OF RECIPIENTS' RESPONSES TO ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE EVENTS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/12/amr.2014.0335.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Following a long period during which attention has been paid predominantly to the role of change agents in organizational change, change recipients and their experiences have finally begun to take center stage. Yet the typical view of recipients has been as passive reactors to change. In this paper we take steps towards highlighting the central, active roles change recipients play in organizational change events. We discuss and distinguish between dimensions of valence and activation and introduce a circumplex of recipients' affective and behavioral responses to change events. We describe the primary and secondary appraisal processes through which each response type emerges and discuss outcomes of each response type. We use our model to explain how change context and process variables affect recipients' responses to change. Finally, we discuss implications of our model for theory, research and practice.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Shaul Oreg, Jean Bartunek, Gayoung Lee, Boram Do]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-10-12T06:55:26-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2014.0335</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2014.0335</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[AN AFFECT-BASED MODEL OF RECIPIENTS' RESPONSES TO ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE EVENTS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-06-22</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/14/amr.2016.0368.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Dusty Books?: the liability of oldness]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2016/10/14/amr.2016.0368.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[C.r. Hinings, Royston Greenwood, Renate Meyer]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2016-10-14T08:37:17-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0368</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0368</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Dusty Books?: the liability of oldness]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2016-09-19</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Review 
</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/01/20/amr.2015.0196.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[WHERE IS MY MIND? THEORIZING MIND WANDERING AND ITS PERFORMANCE-RELATED CONSEQUENCES IN ORGANIZATIONS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/01/20/amr.2015.0196.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Although it is widely recognized that the human mind is prone to wander, some lines of research suggest that this tendency is costly and unfortunate while others suggest that mind wandering is beneficial and adaptive. Accounting for these divergent perspectives and developing theory on mind wandering, I explore the nature and performance-related consequences of mind wandering in organizations. To this end, I argue that whether mind wandering contributes to or compromises task performance over time in work settings depends on its content - that is, the specific types of thoughts workers tend to generate as their minds wander. In making this case, I theorize relationships between various types of mind wandering content and task performance over time, specify mechanisms accounting for these relationships, and consider job-related boundary conditions. Together, the arguments presented here advance and reorient research on mind wandering and open new windows into cognition in organizations.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Erik Dane]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-01-20T07:57:27-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0196</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0196</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[WHERE IS MY MIND? THEORIZING MIND WANDERING AND ITS PERFORMANCE-RELATED CONSEQUENCES IN ORGANIZATIONS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-01-20</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/06/amr.2015.0186.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Leadership and the Logic of Absurdity]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/06/amr.2015.0186.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Leaders are often thought to be instrumental to the performance of the organizations they lead. However, considerable research suggests that their influence over organizational performance might actually be minimal. These claims of leader irrelevance pose a puzzle: If leaders are relatively insignificant, why would someone commit to leading? Applying decision-making theory, this paper first considers justifying the decision to lead according to the Logics of Consequence and Appropriateness—the two principal decision-making logics underlying previous work on the motivation to lead. The paper then presents the Logic of Absurdity, a decision-making logic in which decision-makers knowingly choose to dedicate themselves to an irrational course of action. In terms of the decision to lead, a decision-maker employing the Logic of Absurdity acknowledges the likely futility of leading but decides to commit to leading, nonetheless. The paper concludes by considering when leaders are most likely to decide to lead according to the Logic of Absurdity and why doing so may result in leadership of exceptional originality, foolishness, intelligence, and madness. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Newark]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-02-06T05:00:39-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0186</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0186</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Leadership and the Logic of Absurdity]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-02-02</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/09/amr.2015.0190.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Role of Executive Symbolism In Advancing New Strategic Themes in Organizations: A Social Influence Perspective]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/09/amr.2015.0190.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Contributing to the sensegiving and organizational change literatures, we set forth a theory for predicting the relative effectiveness, or ineffectiveness, of executive symbolism in advancing new strategic themes (specific new priorities) in organizations. Unpacking the concept of executive symbolism and describing why executive actions carry symbolic significance, we primarily assess the "theme-aligned symbolic action," an executive action undertaken with the intention of sending a message in support of some new theme. We draw from social influence theory to develop an integrated set of propositions for predicting members' reactions, or affective responses, to such actions. The predictive factors include: attributes of the action itself, the reputation of the executive, and predispositions of respective members to the theme. As an outgrowth of this analysis, we conclude that theme-aligned symbols, no matter how artful, will almost always be ineffective in eliciting positive reactions from members who are antagonistic toward the theme. In turn, we introduce the concept of the "theme-muting symbol," a symbolic action intended to minimize the prominence or apparent implications of a new theme, and we place this concept in the social influence framework as well. We discuss practical implications and present an agenda for future research.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Hambrick, Jeffrey Lovelace]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-02-09T13:27:22-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0190</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0190</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Role of Executive Symbolism In Advancing New Strategic Themes in Organizations: A Social Influence Perspective]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-02-09</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/14/amr.2016.0002.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Psychology of Middle Power: Vertical Code-Switching, Role Conflict, and Behavioral Inhibition]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/14/amr.2016.0002.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Decades of research have demonstrated that having or lacking power can influence how people think and behave in organizations. By contrasting the experiences associated with high and low-power states, however, this research has neglected the psychological and behavioral correlates of middle power, defined as the subjective sense that one's power is neither consistently higher nor lower than the power of one's interaction partners. In this paper, we propose that middle power positions and mindsets lead to frequent vertical code-switching, the act of alternating between behavioral patterns that are directed toward higher-power and lower-power interaction partners. We draw from identity and role transition theories to develop propositions specifying when frequent vertical code-switching will, in turn, result in heightened role conflict. We further situate our theoretical analysis by updating and extending the approach/inhibition theory of power on the basis of insights from revised reinforcement sensitivity theory to introduce an integrative framework called the Approach-Inhibition-Avoidance (AIA) theory of power. Overall, we highlight the promise of conceptualizing power in terms of the stability of one's vertical orientation, offering novel predictions about the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral effects of power.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Anicich, Jacob Hirsh]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-02-14T14:21:14-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0002</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0002</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Psychology of Middle Power: Vertical Code-Switching, Role Conflict, and Behavioral Inhibition]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-02-14</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/24/amr.2017.0044.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Incorporating Context in Organizational Research: Reflections on the 2016 AMR Decade Award]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/02/24/amr.2017.0044.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[This is a reflection on my 2006 article "The Essential Impact of Context on Organizational Behavior," which received the 2016 Academy of Management Review Decade Award. Some studies are reviewed supporting my earlier contention that the impact of context has been underappreciated in management research. Then, the genesis of the article is recounted, with particular emphasis on the capacity of context to explain anomalous and counterintuitive research findings. Some conjectures are offered as to why the article has been cited. Evidence is presented that contextual appreciation is increasing in management, and that this is part of a general trend in the social and behavioral sciences. Some newer theories and measures of context are discussed, and the desirable properties of theories that incorporate context are considered. Finally, it is argued that it is not easy to control away context, that context is about similarities as well as differences, that context is about change as well as stability, and that effects and relationships vary in their sensitivity to context. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gary Johns]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-02-24T07:06:22-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2017.0044</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2017.0044</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Incorporating Context in Organizational Research: Reflections on the 2016 AMR Decade Award]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-02-24</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/02/amr.2015.0189.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Towards a "sunlit path": Stigma identity management as a source of localized social change through interaction]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/02/amr.2015.0189.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[We articulate a process through which individuals with stigmatized identities can be agents of social change towards the acceptance and/or valuing of their identities in their work groups. We posit that whether and how individuals communicate to others about their stigmatized identity (i.e., stigma identity management) can enable them to overcome their power disadvantage by influencing the meanings that the stigmatized identity and comparative dominant identities take on in negotiations of identity meanings. Drawing on theories of negotiated order, identity threat, and stigma identity management we describe how changes in identity meanings emerge from an ongoing process of negotiations between stigma holders and their coworkers - negotiations that are influenced by and inform symbolic power relations and shared identity meanings in the group. We extend understandings of stigma identity management strategies by expanding beyond the current focus on outcomes for individual stigma holders towards how such strategies can change the local social context in which stigma holders and their coworkers interact.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brent Lyons, Simon Pek, Jennifer Wessel]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-02T08:24:26-08:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0189</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0189</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Towards a "sunlit path": Stigma identity management as a source of localized social change through interaction]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0168.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Opportunities, Time, and Mechanisms in Entrepreneurship: On the Practical Irrelevance of Propensities]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0168.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[ I understand dialogue pieces have no abstract.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Henrik Berglund, Steffen Korsgaard]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-13T09:12:13-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0168</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0168</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Opportunities, Time, and Mechanisms in Entrepreneurship: On the Practical Irrelevance of Propensities]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-03-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0035.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[On Opportunities: Philosophical and Empirical Implications]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0035.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Submission is a Dialougue]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sharon Alvarez, Jay Barney, Russell McBride, Robert Wuebker]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-13T09:15:31-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0035</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0035</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[On Opportunities: Philosophical and Empirical Implications]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-03-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0046.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Entrepreneurial Discovery or Creation? In Search of the Middle Ground]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2016.0046.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[[Dialogue submission, no abstract provided]]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nicolai Foss, Peter Klein]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-13T09:15:31-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0046</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0046</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Entrepreneurial Discovery or Creation? In Search of the Middle Ground]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-03-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2017.0169.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[IN DEFENSE OF COMMON SENSE IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP THEORY: BEYOND PHILOSOPHICAL EXTREMITIES AND LINGUISTIC ABUSES]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/13/amr.2017.0169.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stratos Ramoglou, Eric Tsang]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-13T11:09:15-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2017.0169</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2017.0169</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[IN DEFENSE OF COMMON SENSE IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP THEORY: BEYOND PHILOSOPHICAL EXTREMITIES AND LINGUISTIC ABUSES]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-03-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Commentary</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/31/amr.2016.0527.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES: REFLECTIONS ON THE ROLE OF CORPORATIONS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/03/31/amr.2016.0527.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anne Tsui, Georges Enderle, Kaifeng Jiang]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-03-31T14:00:21-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0527</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0527</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES: REFLECTIONS ON THE ROLE OF CORPORATIONS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-01-27</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Review 
</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/07/amr.2015.0375.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Authority or Community? A Relational Models Theory of Group-Level Leadership Emergence]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/07/amr.2015.0375.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[This article develops relational models leadership theory, which explains how shared cognition produces group-level leadership emergence effects. The theory proposes that contextual features present early in a group's life can cause members to quickly converge on one of two cognitive relational models for leadership. Some groups adopt an authority ranking model, in which leadership influence is consolidated in the hands of a few high-status members. Others adopt a communal sharing model, in which leadership is the collective responsibility of all members. A positive feedback loop develops between group members' relational model convergence and leadership emergence, such that members enact leadership in a manner consistent with their shared relational model and these interactions reinforce the model. The theory also identifies two types of "jolt" events that can radically shift group members' cognitions and actions related to leadership. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ned Wellman]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-04-07T11:30:39-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0375</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0375</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Authority or Community? A Relational Models Theory of Group-Level Leadership Emergence]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-04-07</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0185.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Chronotype diversity in teams: Toward a theory of team energetic asynchrony]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0185.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[We introduce the concept of chronotype diversity to the team diversity literature. Chronotype diversity is defined as the extent to which team members differ in their biological predispositions towards the optimal timing of daily periods of activity and rest. To explain the effects of chronotype diversity on team outcomes, we develop a theory of team energetic asynchrony. Team energetic asynchrony refers to temporal asymmetries among team members' daily peaks and troughs in physical and psychological energy. In our theoretical model we delineate how chronotype diversity affects team performance by specifying three specific team processes (coordination, information processing, and backing up behavior) that convey unique team diversity effects of energetic asynchrony. In doing so, we propose that chronotype diversity can have either positive or negative effects on team processes and outcomes, depending on whether teams recognize differences in members' chronotypes and structure team work accordingly. We also discuss the potential effects of chronotype subgroup formation and the benefits and pitfalls of low chronotype diversity.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefan Volk, Matthew Pearsall, Michael Christian, William Becker]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-04-13T04:12:20-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0185</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0185</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Chronotype diversity in teams: Toward a theory of team energetic asynchrony]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-04-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0020.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Beyond Constraining and Enabling: Towards New Microfoundations for Institutional Theory]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/13/amr.2015.0020.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[This paper argues that the quest to establish microfoundations for institutional theory is hindered by two assumptions on which it currently rests: that structure simply constrains and enables action, and that agency is mostly associated with reflexivity. The paper unpacks these two assumptions and proposes alternative microfoundations on which i) structure does more than merely constrain and enable, and also actively orients action toward some possibilities over others; and ii) the pre-reflective dimension of agency is explicitly theorized. It thus becomes possible to bridge long-standing divides within institutional theory, opening up avenues for further developing its microfoundations.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ivano Cardinale]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-04-13T05:06:18-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0020</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0020</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Beyond Constraining and Enabling: Towards New Microfoundations for Institutional Theory]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-04-13</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/14/amr.2015.0322.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[REASONING BY ANALOGY AND THE PROGRESS OF THEORY]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/04/14/amr.2015.0322.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Many influential theories of organization rest on an analogical foundation: we think of the organization as if it were a governance structure, a nexus of contracts, a social network, or an information processing system. We may invoke an analogy simply to express an idea, but analogy use may also constitute a key part of a theoretical explanation and an argument. In this latter, explanatory use, we not only think but also reason by analogy. But if analogy use constitutes reasoning, it must also be critically evaluated as such. In this paper, we first combine ideas from the literature on argumentation and cognitive science to examine how analogies are used in organization theory. We then construct a framework to guide the evaluation of reasoning by analogy. Finally, we show that by understanding how analogies are used and evaluated we can also gain an understanding of how theories progress.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mikko Ketokivi, Saku Mantere, Joep Cornelissen]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-04-14T12:06:28-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0322</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0322</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[REASONING BY ANALOGY AND THE PROGRESS OF THEORY]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-04-14</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/03/amr.2014.0238.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Hidden in Plain Sight: The Importance of Scale on Organizational Attention to Issues]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/03/amr.2014.0238.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[The organizational attention literature has an epistemological bias, in that it explains how and why organizations notice issues. The ontological or real attributes of the issues are largely ignored, subordinated or confounded with this epistemological orientation. In this paper, we argue that organizations sometimes miss issues, not only because of attentional failures, but also because of the temporal and spatial scale of the underlying processes related to the issue. Some issue processes are of such large or small scale that they escape organizational attention. We argue that large-scale processes, such as those related to climate change, require broad attentional extent, whereas small-scale processes, such as those related to local variations in poverty, require fine attentional grain. This work aims to shed light on the relatively underexplored question of why some issues are not noticed, with important implications for both theory and practice. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pratima Bansal, Anna Kim, Michael Wood]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-05-03T14:30:39-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2014.0238</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2014.0238</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Hidden in Plain Sight: The Importance of Scale on Organizational Attention to Issues]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-01-27</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/12/amr.2015.0303.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[PRACTICE, SUBSTANCE AND HISTORY: REFRAMING INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/05/12/amr.2015.0303.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[The characterization by Roger Friedland of institutional logics as a combination of substance and practices opens the door to a more complex reading of their influence on organizational life. His focus suggests attention to feelings and belief as much as cognition and choice. This article uses history to develop these ideas by paying attention to the perennial features of our embodied relations with the world and other persons. Historical work draws our attention to neglected domains of social life, such as play, which can have profound impacts on organizations. The study of history suggests that such institutions have a long run conditioning influence that calls into question accounts that stress individual agential choice and action in bringing about change. Analytical narratives of the emergence of practices can provide the means to combine the conceptual apparatus of organization theory with the attention to temporality of history. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alistair Mutch]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-05-12T07:50:44-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0303</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0303</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[PRACTICE, SUBSTANCE AND HISTORY: REFRAMING INSTITUTIONAL LOGICS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-05-12</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/02/amr.2015.0081.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A BEHAVIORAL THEORY OF SOCIAL PERFORMANCE: SOCIAL IDENTITY AND STAKEHOLDER EXPECTATIONS]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/02/amr.2015.0081.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Firms utilize reference points to evaluate financial performance, frame gain or loss positions, and guide strategic behavior. However, there is little theoretical underpinning to explain how social performance is evaluated and integrated into strategic decision-making. We fill this void with new theory built upon the premise that inherently ambiguous social performance is evaluated and interpreted differently than largely clear financial performance. We propose that firms seek to negotiate a shared social performance reference point with stakeholders who identify with the organization and care about social performance. While incentivized to align with the firm, firm-identified stakeholders provide intense feedback when there are major discrepancies between their expectations and the firm's actual social performance. Firms frame and respond to feedback differently depending on the feedback valence: negative feedback will be framed as a legitimacy threat, and firm responses are likely to be substantive; positive feedback will be framed as an efficiency threat, and firm responses are likely to be symbolic. However, social enterprises face a double standard in evaluations and calibrate responses to social performance feedback differently than non-social enterprises. Our behavioral theory of social performance advances knowledge of organizational evaluations and responses to stakeholder feedback. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Nason, Sophie Bacq, David Gras]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-02T13:45:11-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0081</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0081</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A BEHAVIORAL THEORY OF SOCIAL PERFORMANCE: SOCIAL IDENTITY AND STAKEHOLDER EXPECTATIONS]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-06-02</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/12/amr.2015.0411.1.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[IS MY FIRM-SPECIFIC INVESTMENT PROTECTED? OVERCOMING THE STAKEHOLDER INVESTMENT DILEMMA IN THE RESOURCE BASED VIEW]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/12/amr.2015.0411.1.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[The resource-based view posits that firms achieve competitive advantage from value creation through firm-specific investments held by key stakeholders—employees, suppliers, and customers. Shareholder-dominant (agency) theory holds that all residual income claimant rights belong to shareholders, circumscribing other key stakeholders' ability to appropriate value from their investment. However, recent enhancements to stakeholder theory grounded in property rights suggest that such stakeholders may need protection to receive implicit residual claims. A central purpose of this paper is to build a model of the protection devices used to ensure these implicit rights. Individual ex ante devices such as stakeholder ownership only partially incentivize stakeholders firm-specific investments because such devices are subject to two types of uncertainties, behavioral and environmental, and individual devices aimed at reducing one type of uncertainty may exacerbate the other. We therefore expand on efforts to establish a "stakeholder theory of strategic management" by proposing an integrated model of protection devices. The model seeks to overcome the incentive dilemma in reducing both uncertainties by reducing barriers to stakeholder firm-specific investment. Our model also explores the conflicts and complementarities associated with device implementation. Finally, we discuss theoretical and practical implications, as well as future research opportunities associated with our model.
]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Hoskisson, Eni Gambeta, Colby Green, Toby Li]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-12T08:57:00-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0411</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0411</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[IS MY FIRM-SPECIFIC INVESTMENT PROTECTED? OVERCOMING THE STAKEHOLDER INVESTMENT DILEMMA IN THE RESOURCE BASED VIEW]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-06-09</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/16/amr.2015.0366.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Shooting from the Hip: A Habit Perspective of Voice]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/16/amr.2015.0366.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[Research on voice has traditionally employed a deliberative perspective, whereby individuals engage in careful calculation of individual and situational factors to determine whether to speak up. In this article, we draw from psychological research on automaticity to propose an alternative, habit perspective, whereby individuals are relatively unaware of situational factors relevant for their voice decision, have difficulty controlling their impulse to voice, and are efficient in their voice decision-making process. We then propose a contingency framework identifying both functional and dysfunctional outcomes of voice habit, dependent on key boundary conditions, and address the unique consequences of strong situations that suppress habitual voicers from speaking up. We conclude with a discussion of theoretical implications and directions for future research. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chak Fu Lam, Laura Rees, Laurie Levesque, Suzyn Ornstein]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-16T07:27:07-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2015.0366</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2015.0366</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Shooting from the Hip: A Habit Perspective of Voice]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-05-17</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0148.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The "Make and/or Buy" Decisions of Corporate Political Lobbying: Integrating the Economic Efficiency and Legitimacy Perspectives]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0148.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[This paper examines political lobbying and investigates firms' decisions regarding whether to employ internal functionalities (i.e., to "make" or insource), to contract with external professionals (i.e., to "buy" or outsource), or to do both (i.e., to "make and buy" or plural source). I first develop an integrated framework based on the twin perspectives of economic efficiency and legitimacy. When the political audience faces little uncertainty about lobbying content, firms make sourcing decisions to maximize economic efficiency in producing such content in line with transaction cost economics and the capabilities view. However, when the political audience faces substantial uncertainty about lobbying content, it relies on the perceived legitimacy of the lobbying entity to draw inferences about the quality of the such content; therefore, the legitimacy of a potential lobbying entity matters to firms making sourcing decisions related to lobbying. Then, I connect firms' sourcing decisions with several concrete characteristics of lobbying entities that can affect political audiences' judgment regarding their legitimacy. Finally, I examine the tension that develops when legitimacy and economic efficiency considerations call for different forms of sourcing, and I examine how complementarities in plural sourcing help resolve this tension in certain situations.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nan Jia]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-23T07:39:06-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0148</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0148</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The "Make and/or Buy" Decisions of Corporate Political Lobbying: Integrating the Economic Efficiency and Legitimacy Perspectives]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-06-23</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0064.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Shackles of CEO Celebrity: Sociocognitive and Behavioral Role Constraints on "Star" Leaders]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/23/amr.2016.0064.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[We set forth a new theory for understanding the consequences of CEO celebrity. The fulcrum of our theory is the reality that CEOs attain celebrity because they are cast into specific archetypes, rather than for their general achievements. We present a typology of common CEO celebrity archetypes (Creator, Transformer, Rebel, Savior), and then detail a model that highlights the consequences associated with attaining celebrity of a given type. These consequences include an array of sociocognitive outcomes, which in turn constrain celebrity CEOs to those behaviors associated with their particular celebrity archetypes. The sociocognitive outcomes' main effects are moderated by the role intensity of the specific archetype, the CEO's degree of narcissism, and the temporal arc (rate of ascent and duration) of celebrity. Finally, we argue that the effects of CEO celebrity on firm performance are contingent on the continuity of external and internal contextual conditions. If conditions change appreciably, the celebrity CEO's rigidities become severe liabilities, explaining the documented tendency for CEO celebrity to bring about, on average, unfavorable firm outcomes. ]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeffrey Lovelace, Jonathan Bundy, Donald Hambrick, Timothy Pollock]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-23T12:15:07-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0064</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2016.0064</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Shackles of CEO Celebrity: Sociocognitive and Behavioral Role Constraints on "Star" Leaders]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-06-23</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/27/amr.2014.0301.short?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[THE ROLE OF VERBAL AND VISUAL TEXT IN THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONALIZATION]]></title>
<link>http://amr.aom.org/content/early/2017/06/27/amr.2014.0301.short?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[In this article, we develop novel theory on the differentiated impact of verbal and visual texts on the emergence, rise, establishment, and consolidation of institutions. Integrating key insights from social semiotics into a discursive model of institutionalization, we identify distinct affordances of verbal and visual text based on the constitutive features of the respective semiotic modes. In an effort to extend scholarly inquiry into the relationship of text and institutions, we develop a set of propositions on how and under which conditions verbal and visual text, respectively, facilitate the institutionalization of novel ideas in each stage of the process. Our theory development has implications for research on institutions as communicative accomplishments, contributes to the nascent line of multimodal research, and provides novel insights into institutional emergence.]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Renate Meyer, Dennis Jancsary, Markus Hollerer, Eva Boxenbaum]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2017-06-27T12:57:10-07:00</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.5465/amr.2014.0301</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>hwp:master-id:amr;amr.2014.0301</dc:identifier>
<dc:publisher>Academy of Management</dc:publisher>
<dc:title><![CDATA[THE ROLE OF VERBAL AND VISUAL TEXT IN THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONALIZATION]]></dc:title>
<prism:publicationDate>2017-06-27</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:section>Research</prism:section>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>