No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This research is based on the premise that employees respond to dissatisfaction in general and organizational injustice in particular in two primary ways: by speaking up and/or by staying silent. This qualitative, theory-generating study examines the phenomenon of organizational injustice (including its antecedents and consequences) and employees' responses toward three research goals: 1) greater understanding of organizational injustice; 2) greater conceptual consensus through concept development of voice and silence; 3) a process model of organizational injustice, voice and silence. Also, new knowledge about voice and silence is linked to organizational practice by examining the availability of various voice systems and perceptions of their efficacy. The research design is influenced by several organizational research streams, as well as grounded theory and clinical methods. Thirty-two employees, each representing different organizations and occupying both managerial/professional positions and clerical/line positions participated in semi-structured, open-ended interviews in which they described 33 cases of workplace injustice. The interview design includes two methods: 1) a retrospective critical incident technique to discuss a workplace experience which participants defined as unjust; and 2) a projective exercise in which participants were asked to imagine that they could speak with impunity to the person(s) involved or responsible for their perceived injustice. Interview cases were supplemented by 30 archival cases of employees' voicing of discontent through a government-sponsored voice system. Significant results concerning the phenomenon of organizational injustice included the introduction of a four-category typology which departs from traditional classifications with its inclusion of interactional injustice (interpersonal mistreatment by a boss) as a distinct category, the systematic delineation and description of interactional injustice according to eight emergent behavioural dimensions, the identification of organizational antecedents to workplace injustice according to four emergent groupings (i.e., structural, procedural, cultural and global) and the identification of individual- and organizational-level consequences. In addition, the concepts of voice and silence emerged as forms of resistance to organizational injustice. Voice was found to encompass two distinct but related constructs: formal and informal voice. Specific strategies by which participants resisted injustice were identified for voice (formal and informal) and silence. A process model of voice and silence in organizational injustice was also introduced.

This research is based on the premise that employees respond to dissatisfaction in general and organizational injustice in particular in two primary ways: by speaking up and/or by staying silent. This qualitative, theory-generating study examines the phenomenon of organizational injustice (including its antecedents and consequences) and employees' responses toward three research goals: 1) greater understanding of organizational injustice; 2) greater conceptual consensus through concept development of voice and silence; 3) a process model of organizational injustice, voice and silence. Also, new knowledge about voice and silence is linked to organizational practice by examining the availability of various voice systems and perceptions of their efficacy. The research design is influenced by several organizational research streams, as well as grounded theory and clinical methods. Thirty-two employees, each representing different organizations and occupying both managerial/professional positions and clerical/line positions participated in semi-structured, open-ended interviews in which they described 33 cases of workplace injustice. The interview design includes two methods: 1) a retrospective critical incident technique to discuss a workplace experience which participants defined as unjust; and 2) a projective exercise in which participants were asked to imagine that they could speak with impunity to the person(s) involved or responsible for their perceived injustice. Interview cases were supplemented by 30 archival cases of employees' voicing of discontent through a government-sponsored voice system. Significant results concerning the phenomenon of organizational injustice included the introduction of a four-category typology which departs from traditional classifications with its inclusion of interactional injustice (interpersonal mistreatment by a boss) as a distinct category, the systematic delineation and description of interactional injustice according to eight emergent behavioural dimensions, the identification of organizational antecedents to workplace injustice according to four emergent groupings (i.e., structural, procedural, cultural and global) and the identification of individual- and organizational-level consequences. In addition, the concepts of voice and silence emerged as forms of resistance to organizational injustice. Voice was found to encompass two distinct but related constructs: formal and informal voice. Specific strategies by which participants resisted injustice were identified for voice (formal and informal) and silence. A process model of voice and silence in organizational injustice was also introduced. / Business, Sauder School of / Graduate

The present research proposes a general model of Transnational Teams (TNTs) to investigate how value placed on cultural diversity, cultural adaptation, communication quality, and trust affect the performance of TNTs and their interaction to each other. TNTs contribute to decisions about a firm's total portfolio of transnational interests, global brands and products, organizational configuration, and global sourcing strategy. Qualitative and quantitative methods are applied in this study of thirty members of TNTs from diverse teams. Based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis, relationships between theory and practice are examined. The analysis shows that there is a strong relationship between trust and performance of TNTs.

Doctorat en sciences sociales, politiques et économiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

In der Familiensoziologie wird davon ausgegangen, dass sich Vaterschaft dann konstituiert, wenn Männer dauerhaft und generationsübergreifend Sorgearbeit für Kinder leisten. Begrifflich kann unterschieden werden zwischen den Einstellungen zur Institution Vaterschaft (fatherhood) und der sozialen Praxis von Vätern im Familienalltag (fathering). Beide Dimensionen von Vaterschaft unterliegen einem gesellschaftlichen Wandel, der sich im Kontext von Veränderungen der Geschlechterverhältnisse vollzieht.