Suchergebnisse

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the relationship between welfare state configurations, family status, family responsibilities, job attribute preferences, employment, and weekly paid work hours.Design/methodology/approachInternational data for women and men were analyzed separately using regressions to determine if different welfare state configurations and individual family status and responsibilities predicted job attribute preferences. Additional regressions examined the effects of welfare state configurations, family status, family responsibilities, and job attribute preferences on women's and men's employment and weekly paid work hours.FindingsIn many cases, the variables were significant predictors of women's and men's job attribute preferences, employment and paid work hours.Practical implicationsWhile the attributes that people seek from their employment vary from individual to individual, it is also important to recognize that there are cultural patterns that can inform motivational efforts.Originality/valueThis multinational study is the first to examine the relationship between family status, conducting housework, providing family income, and job attribute preferences while considering labor market opportunities for women and societal support for the family. In addition, it examines the effects of these variables on employment and weekly paid work hours.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to explore the links from self‐focused emotional labor (surface acting) and other‐focused emotional labor (emotional enhancement) to job satisfaction, affective commitment, emotional exhaustion, and intentions to quit.Design/methodology/approachThe study employed a cross‐sectional survey of 363 nurses' aides and childcare workers.FindingsSurface acting, a type of self‐focused emotional labor, was related to negative work outcomes (lower job satisfaction and affective commitment as well as higher turnover intentions and emotional exhaustion). Emotional enhancement, a form of other‐focused emotional labor, was related to positive outcomes (lower turnover intentions and emotional exhaustion) when performed for clients' family members, but not for clients.Research limitations/implicationsThe cross sectional design of this study limits the ability to map the temporal ordering of these relationships, and thus to determine if emotional enhancement is a job resource or response to positive work experiences. In addition, two helping occupations – nurses' aides and child care workers – were sampled, and thus, the findings may not generalize to other types of occupations.Originality/valueThis study adds to the research about job‐related emotional labor because other‐focused emotional labor largely has been neglected in previous research. In addition, it is the first to differentiate workers' emotional labor with different groups of clients (patients/children; family members).

In this article, we demonstrate that an exercise using metaphors to overcome cognitive biases helped students to proactively imagine and prepare for an expanded set of potential crises. The exercise complements traditional textbook approaches to crisis management and incorporates creativity skill building in a realistic context. Learning outcomes included an enhanced appreciation of detrimental effects of cognitive biases, improved skill in using metaphor to overcome these biases, an understanding of the benefits of proactive crisis management, and experience in formulating a crisis management plan. We describe the exercise, suggest debriefing questions, and discuss benefits to students.

Meta-analysis of 31 studies examined whether women and men in management and business schools differ in their job attribute preferences. Findings indicated no significant sex differences for 9 of the 21 job attribute preferences studied. The 12 significant sex differences indicated that men considered earnings and responsibility to be more important than women did, whereas women considered prestige, challenge, task significance, variety, growth, job security, good coworkers, a good supervisor, and the physical work environment to be more important than men did. The significant sex differences were small, nine of them having a magnitude of .10 standard deviation units or less. Students showed larger sex differences than managers did, and changes over time showed that women increased their ratings of the importance of four job attributes relative to men. The findings imply that sex differences in job attribute preferences are not an important determinant of women's lower status in management.