MSC Samenvatting

InhoudsopgaveLecture 1: Introduction................................................................................................................................2

Strategy, human resource management and performance: Sharpening line of sight.............................2

Lecture 2: Social Capital Theory..................................................................................................................5

Organizational social capital and employment practices.........................................................................5

The essence of strategic leadership: Managing human and social capital...............................................5

Lecture 3: Talent Management...................................................................................................................6

Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage.....................................................6

The role of the corporate HR function in global talent management......................................................6

The psychology of talent management: A review and research agenda.................................................6

Lecture 4: Employability and Workability....................................................................................................6

Review article: Enhancing employability: Human, cultural, and social capital in an era of turbulent unpredictability.......................................................................................................................................6

Moving European research on work and ageing forward: Overview and agenda...................................7

Lecture 5: Social Exchange and Teams.......................................................................................................7

Bonds and boundaries: Network structure, organizational boundaries, and job performance...............7

The effects of individual motivations and social capital on employees’ tacit and explicit knowledge sharing intentions....................................................................................................................................7

Lecture 6: Leadership and Social Capital.....................................................................................................9

Developing organizational capital or prima donna’s in MNE’s? The role of global leadership development programs...........................................................................................................................9

Does the Ethical Leadership of Supervisors Generate Internal Social Capital?......................................11

Building Social Capital through Leadership Development.....................................................................13

The Development of Entrepreneurial Leadership: The Role of Human, Social and Institutional Capital................................................................................................................................................................13

Lecture 7: Organizational change and dynamics.......................................................................................13

Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract......................................................................13

The relationship between fulfilment of the psychological contract and resistance to change during organizational transformations.............................................................................................................14

Topic 1: Social Capital and Performance...................................................................................................14

1

Understanding the antecedents, the outcomes and the mediating role of social capital: An employee perspective............................................................................................................................................14

Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations...............................................14

Topic 2: HRM and Social Capital................................................................................................................14

Human resource management practices and organizational social capital: The role of industrial characteristics........................................................................................................................................14

On becoming (un)committed: A taxonomy and test of newcomer onboarding scenarios....................14

Topic 3: Social Capital and Health..............................................................................................................14

Exploring the relationship between employment-based social capital, job stress, burnout, and intent to leave among child protection workers: An age-based path analysis model......................................14

Does low workplace social capital have detrimental effect on workers’ health?..................................15

Topic 4: Social Networks............................................................................................................................15

Where do intra-organizational advice relations come from? The role of informal status and social capital in social exchange......................................................................................................................15

Understanding why team members won’t share: An examination of factors related to employee receptivity to team-based rewards........................................................................................................15

Topic 5: Leadership and Social Capital.......................................................................................................15

Leadership, power and the use of surveillance: Implications of shared social identity for leaders' capacity to influence..............................................................................................................................15

The respected manager … the organisational capital developer...........................................................15

Lecture 1: Introduction

Strategy, human resource management and performance: Sharpening line of sight. Buller, P.F. & McEvoy, G.M. (2012). Human Resource Management Review, 22, 43 – 56.

IntroductionThis paper identifies important linkages between the firm’s strategy, it’s human resources, and performance outcomes on organizational levels of analysis to present a framework for creating a clear line of sight (LOS), which is the employee’s understanding of the firm’s strategic goals and the necessary actions. The Resource Based View (RBV) provides the theoretical foundation, which states HRM practices create human capital and/or social capital that lead to superior performance. The primary argument in this paper is that organizational performance will be enhanced to the extend that organizational capabilities and culture, group competencies

2

and norms, and employee skills, motivation and opportunity are aligned with the firm’s strategic goals (i.e. there is a clear line of sight).

Strategy & HRMStrategy is conceptualized at three levels. Strategy at the corporate level is concerned with the (range of) business(es) the corporation wishes to compete in. At the business level with how to compete for the customer, and at the functional level with controlling and coordinating the various functional areas so they support the strategies.The RBV says a firm is defined by the resources it controls, competitors differ on the resources they posses, and these differences explain performance. A firm has a sustainable competitive advantage if the resources are valuable, rare, non-imitable, non-transferable, and the firm has the capability to exploit these resources. An organization can also have firm-specific intangible sources of advantage such as history and culture. HRM practices are valuable strategic resources if they create and maintain other resources.Firm-specific capabilities as knowledge, skills, abilities (KSA’s of human capital), behaviors, social processes, practices and systems (social capital) also give sustainable competitive advantages.

Line of sight revisited

Figure 1 Line of Sight. General relationships

Boswell (2006) created an LOS framework which builds on several related concepts. Person-organization (P-O) perspective focuses on the alignment of employee values with organization culture. Goal congruence on the alignment of the goals of employees and the goals of their immediate supervisor. Thus, LOS posits employees must have accurate understanding of the firm’s strategic goals and know how to contribute to those goals, and the benefits are that employees will experience greater role clarity and sense of task significance. This LOS framework has individual focus.The framework AMO (ability-motivation-opportunity) says employees with opportunities to work in high performance work systems, and have requisite skills and incentives will perform better than those who have not. The opportunity to participate in hpws contributes to increased trust and intrinsic motivation. AMO has an individual focus.

3

Model for sharpening LOSDefinition of LOS on organizational level is: the alignment of organizational capabilities and culture, group competencies and norms, and individual KSA’s, motivation and opportunity with one another and with the organization’s strategy.In figure 2. the model is shown. The driving force is the strategy, including vision, mission, goals, strategic plans, and resulting action plans. At the core are organizational, group, and individual level of analysis which are interrelated. They are like building blocks with organization as the foundation, on which the other to rest. Capabilities, competencies, and KSA’s are primarily related to human capital and culture, norms, and motivation and opportunity to social capital. The four HRM practices are central to generating, reinforcing and sustaining the three levels and its components. We must note that the strategy is linked to the firm’s general and industry environments and continually adjusting its strategy to maintain a competitive position. Performance has his impact on strategy.

Figure 2 LOS proposed by authors

Organizational capabilities (to learn and to change)are system-level resources that exist only in relationship- in the interaction between things and are the foundation for building strategically relevant HRM practices. Culture is also an important determinant of performance.Organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) are voluntary, extra-role behaviours that contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of social en psychological context that supports task performance. OCB is consistent with the paper’s model, it has the three levels.

On the group level, the role of job analysis as foundation for an integrated HRM system has been pointed out. It identifies the specific tasks and requisite skills or competencies necessary for a particular job or position. Competencies should include KSA’s and also non-technical skills like communication, teamwork, and flexibility. Group norms are the socially defined rules of behaviour. They effect performance individual as well as on group basis.

4

About the individual level a lot of research has been done, the AMO theory is the most relevant. Action alignment and interest alignment are two interrelated challenges in linking employees’ behaviour with strategic objectives. The first is a function of the KSA’s and the opportunity to use those capabilities effectively. It can be enhanced through organizational mechanisms such as clear communication of the strategy, fostering employee participation in job-related decisions, defining jobs broadly, and giving employees discretion in how they work toward company goals. HRM practices can facilitate these actions. The latter is the alignment of the interests of employees with the organization, its strategy, and goals, which is a function of extrinsic as well as intrinsic benefits. Extrinsic benefits have its limitations. Job design theory argues employees can derive intrinsic value from the meaningfulness and significance of their work.

Proposition 4. HRM practices that generate, reinforce and sustain organizational capabilities/ culture, job-specific group competencies/ norms, and individual KSA’s/ motivation/ opportunity, all aligned with strategy and with one another, lead to increased organizational performance.

Lecture 2: Social Capital Theory

Organizational social capital and employment practices. Leana, C.R. & Van Buren III, H.J. (1999). Academy of Management Review, 24, 538 – 555.

The essence of strategic leadership: Managing human and social capital. Hitt, M.A. & Ireland, R.D. (2002). Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 9, 1, 3 ev.The strategic leadership needed in 21th century firms implies building company resources and capabilities with an emphasis on intangible human capital and social capital in order to gain and retain competitive advantage.

5

The resource based view highlights the link between resources and competitive success and firms with the most valuable, unique, non-imitable, and non-substitutable resources gain (sustained) competitive advantage.Strategic leadership is a person’s ability to anticipate, envision, maintain flexibility, think strategically, and work with others to initiate changes that will create a viable future for the organization. Human capital and social capital are two of the most important resources available to strategic leader. Human capital is the firm’s repository of valuable knowledge and skills, and is often the most unique resource which is likely to be socially complex. Most knowledge is tacit, which is unique and difficult to imitate and valuable. It may be a determinant of economic growth. Along with structural capital, it denotes the total intellectual capital. Human capital is often enhanced through social capita. Social capital provides access to critical resources and involves relationships between individuals and organizations that facilitate action and create value.

Internal social capital consists of the relationships between strategic leaders and the employees as well as others across the work units. It enables members to collaborate to create and use competitive advantages. Strategic leaders must build effective relationships with those in the group and create a culture of trust among all and they must gain commitment to the firm’s vision and goals. External social capital is concerned with the relationships between strategic leaders and those outside the organization. Companies often need resources they do not possess. Again, trust is crucial, especially for tacit resources to be transferred. Sensitivity to the partner’s needs and legitimate expectation of benefiting from participation in the alliance is required.

Critique on RBV for oversimplifying a complex process. The missing element is leadership in the management of the team’s resources. Four stages strategic leaders can use to manage the firm’s resources.

1. Evaluating resource stocksPerformance appraisal systems usually focus on past performance. To evaluate human capital, leaders need information on individual’s capabilities. Intangible (tacit) capabilities is a challenging task. This knowledge is useful for evaluating the firm’s intangible capabilities. Leaders must also evaluate the absorptive capacity of the individual (ability to learn and develop new capabilities).To evaluate the social capital, leaders must first evaluate their partner’s resource stocks and their access to critical resources. This is a difficult task, due to lack of knowledge, unless he has full knowledge of the partner’s stocks. The next step is to evaluate the quality of the relationship and assess the probability of continuing access to the partner’s resources.

2. Changing Resource StocksThis involves adding and deleting resources. With regard to human capital: Decide what new of different capabilities are needed and take action to obtain them. While acquiring and developing new capabilities can require significant effort, more challenging is the decision to

6

eliminate some human capital. This process is called shedding resources, it may include layoffs or downsizing. Changing social capital is more complex and time-consuming than major downsizing, because it involves trust-based relationships.

3. Configuring ResourcesEffective leader know well their people’s strengths and weaknesses. They can match the task requirements to each employee’s skills an capabilities. This entails integrating human capital and social capital to complete the jobs assigned.

4. Leveraging ResourcesAfter the task assignments are made, the leveraging of capital begins. Effective leaders influence directions by challenging group members to think and act independently and creatively and empower them to do so. The most critical dimension of successful strategic leadership is providing the direction, influence, facilitation and empowerment such that group members realize their potential. One means of leveraging social capital is through learning new knowledge, absorbing it into the firm’s human capital, diffusing it through the organization and applying it to create value. Strong social capital reduces the need for and costs of monitoring, due to a collaborative mind-set based on trust. Cooperative behaviour is integrative and facilitates solving problems in the alliance and in the partner firms by sharing resources.

ConclusionsDue to the dynamic and complex competitive landscape which creates uncertainties, leaders must continuously evaluate, change, configure and leverage human capital and social capital.

Lecture 3: Talent Management

Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Nahapiet, J. & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Academy of Management Review, 23, 242 – 266.

The central proposition of social capital theory is that networks of relationships constitute a valuable resource for the conduct of social affairs, providing their members with the collectivity-owned capital, a credential which entitles them to credit. Social capital here is defined as the sum of the actual and potential resources embedded within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit.Structural, cognitive, and relational dimensions are highly interrelated.Structural embeddedness concerns the properties of the social system and of the network of relations as a whole, it describes impersonal configuration of linkages between people or units. Structural dimension is the overall pattern of connections between actors, it concerns the presence or absence of network ties, network configuration (density, connectivity, hierarchy), and appropriable organization. The relational dimension refers to the assets created and leveraged through relationships, with key facets as trust, norms, obligations, and identity. The cognitive dimension refers to those resources providing shared representations,

7

interpretations, and systems of meaning among parties. It includes shared codes and language and shared narratives.

Intellectual capital is the knowledge and knowing capability of a social collectivity, such as an organization, intellectual community, or professional practice. Tacit (knowing how) and explicit (knowing what) and Individual versus social knowledge in a matrix. These four elements collectively constitute its intellectual capital.Knowledge Tacit ExplicitIndividual Automatic knowledge Conscious knowledgeSocial Collective knowledge Objectified knowledge

Knowledge can be created through combination and exchange. Combination includes incremental change and development from existing knowledge, and innovation and revolution. Exchange is a prerequisite for resource combination.

Conditions for exchange and combination. First, the opportunity exists. Second, value expectancy theorists suggest parties must expect such deployment to create value, they must anticipate that interaction, exchange and combination will prove worthwhile. Third, motivation must be present. Fourth, combination capability.

The role of the corporate HR function in global talent management. Farndale, E., Scullion, H. & Sparrow, P. (2010). Journal of World Business, 45, 161–168.

The psychology of talent management: A review and research agendaDries, N. (2013). Human Resource Management Review.

War of Talent. In a knowledge economy traditional sources of competitive advantage are losing their edge whereas human talent is a renewable resource not easily copied or stolen by competitors. Also, attracting and retaining talented people is becoming difficult as a result of specific demographic and psychological contract trends. Demographic risk: retirement of baby boomers and loss of accumulated knowledge and expertise. Productivity risk: risk of negative effects of increasing number of older workers on the payroll.

Lecture 4: Employability and Workability

Review article: Enhancing employability: Human, cultural, and social capital in an era of turbulent unpredictability.Smith, V. (2010). Human Relations, 63, 279 – 303.

8

Moving European research on work and ageing forward: Overview and agenda.Schalk, R. & Veldhoven, M.J.P.M. van (2010). European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 76-101.

Lecture 5: Social Exchange and Teams

Bonds and boundaries: Network structure, organizational boundaries, and job performanceZou, X. & Ingram, P. (2013). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 98 – 109.

The effects of individual motivations and social capital on employees’ tacit and explicit knowledge sharing intentions.Hau, Y.S., Kim, B., Lee, H. & Kim,Y-G. (2013). International Journal of Information Management

Due to the importance of knowledge in today’s competitive world, understanding of employee knowledge sharing is critical. There are two kinds of knowledge. Tacit knowledge is hard to codify or articulate because it is embedded in an individual´s brain or experience. Explicit knowledge is easily expressed and communicated. Tacit knowledge therefore is ‘stickier’, harder to share, and carries a higher value since it is concerned with direct contact and the observation of behaviours and related to more complex ways of acquiring knowledge from others. The tacit knowledge sharing intention refers to the degree to which one believes that one will engage in a tacit knowledge sharing act, while explicit knowledge sharing intention is defined as the degree to which one believes one will engage in an explicit knowledge sharing act.

The inquiry has two categories: individual and social. The former implies the extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, whereas the latter focuses on social capital. Extrinsic motivation is gained through organizational rewards and reciprocity, and intrinsic motivation will be accomplished through enjoyment.

Rational action theory assumes that the more benefits a person perceives from a behaviour, the more intentions the person has to participate in the behaviour. Therefore, employees’ intentions to share their tacit and explicit knowledge can depend on such individual motivations. Social capital is defined as the sum of the actual and potential resources embedded within, available through, and derived from the network of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit. According to social capital theory, employee willingness to share knowledge is influenced by social capital, because they tend to share in-depth knowledge

9

when social interactions are close. The three dimensions are illustrated as follows: social ties represent the structural dimension, social trust represents the relational dimension, and shared goals represent the cognitive dimension.From all this, the following hypotheses are constructed:

Rational action theoryH1. Employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions positively influence their explicit knowledge sharing intentions.

Extrinsic motivation: Organizational rewardsH2a. Organizational rewards positively influence employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions.H2b. Organizational rewards positively influence employees’ explicit knowledge sharing intentions.H2c. Organizational rewards have a more positive effect on employees’ explicit knowledge sharing intentions than on their tacit knowledge sharing intentions

Extrinsic motivation: ReciprocityH3a. Reciprocity positively influences employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions.H3b. Reciprocity positively influences employees’ explicit knowledge sharing intentions.H3c. Reciprocity has a more positive effect on employees’ tacit knowledge than on their explicit sharing intentions

Intrinsic motivation: EnjoymentH4a. Enjoyment positively influences employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions.H4b. Enjoyment positively influences employees’ explicit knowledge sharing intentions.H4c. Enjoyment has a more positive effect on employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions than on their explicit knowledge sharing intentions.

Social capital theoryH5a. Social capital positively influences employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions. H5b. Social capital positively influences employees’ explicit knowledge sharing intentions.H5c. Social capital has a more positive effect on employees’ tacit knowledge sharing intentions.

Findings

10

Organizational rewards, reciprocity, enjoyment, and social capital all had a lager effect on tacit knowledge than on explicit knowledge. Organizational rewards only had a negative effect on tacit knowledge.

Lecture 6: Leadership and Social Capital

Developing organizational capital or prima donna’s in MNE’s? The role of global leadership development programs.Espedal, B., Gooderham, P.N. & Stensaker, I. (2013). Human Resource Management, 52, 4.

IntroductionThe aim of this article is to identify those aspects of global leadership development (GLD), which is a program designed to develop social networks across the multinational enterprises (MNE), in order to enhance the knowledge-sharing capacity. They are about individuals extending their own personal social networks, and business units extending their inter-unit social relationships and it contains social interactions and collaborating. An advantage of MNEs lies in the superior ability to create conditions for knowledge sharing between cross-border units.The authors argue that MNEs aiming to use GLD programs for developing social capital across their operations must be highly sensitive to the issue of congruence with the established corporate culture. Among two Scandinavian MNEs the researchers found a difference in outcomes of almost the same GLD program.

11

Social capital theoryThe underlying theory is the social capital theory, which emphasizes the qualitative aspects to structural ties among employees, and the significance of these ties for knowledge sharing. In addition to structural ties, it specifies the cognitive and relational features of social networks as critical for enhancing knowledge sharing. Shortly, it positively influences knowledge sharing. A similarity in many definitions of social capital is that networks of social ties that are infused with trust and common understandings constitute organizational capabilities that promote knowledge sharing. Regarding GLD, is distinguishes two social networks. The first are networks developing between participants, and the second develop between the participants and their business unit.A distinction can be made between bonding and bridging social capital. Bonding social capital refers to the degree to which the ties in a group have shared cognitive representations of the world and shared discourse. Bridging social capital refers to the existence and quality of ties across business units.If bonding social capital is developed among participants during a GLD program, they can potentially act as bridges for inter-unit knowledge sharing.

The two companiesThe two organizations, Norfert and Entreprenord, are both Norwegian, and have a Scandinavian culture, which includes a management with a relatively high degree of equality orientation, meaning a non-hierarchical structure. The organizational cultures differ, though. The fundamental issue is whether a GLD program is congruent with the established corporate culture of the MNE. The programs’ goals were for both the same, yet the outcomes were different.The program of Entreprenord, called Scandinavion Leadership Program SLP, created bridging social capital. The research indicated the following:

- SLP participants retained their ties within the business unit. There was pride in facilitating knowledge sharing .

- The CEO played a significant role in the program, which resulted in a shared mind-set.- The group was designed to enhance collaboration.

The program of Norfert, Lead, resulted in the idea of employees that the program was an individualized career development opportunity for the few (the ‘prima donna’s’), rather than enhancing social networks and knowledge sharing across the organization. The pre-LEAD ties within the units of origin had largely evaporated, it was a process of individualization, rather than a process of socialization.In the article table 2 presents differences of the GLD design and implementation effects between the two organizations.

Conclusions: checklistThe authors came up with a checklist, which can help the organization develop a useful GLD program. The descriptions can be found in table 3 of the article.

1. Carefully consider the selection process

12

2. Secure collaboration on group work3. Use consultants as group facilitators4. The CEO plays a significant role5. Assess overall fit with corporate culture6. Monitor the consequences for social capital in the organization

According to the authors, point 5 is the most important one.

Does the Ethical Leadership of Supervisors Generate Internal Social Capital?Pastoriza, D. & Arino, M.A. (2013). Journal of Business Ethics

Social capitalSocial capital is a resource that reflects the character of social relations within an organization, realized through members’ levels of information sharing, shared trust and collective goal orientation. The level of analysis in this study is the social capital of the firm. In this level of analysis, social capital can be defined either as external social capital, a network tying an individual, firm, or community to other external actors, or internal social capital, a character of relationships among the members of a firm or community. This study focuses on the internal, which has three dimensions: structural, cognitive, and relational. The structural dimension reflects the extent to which people in an organization are interconnected and have access to the intellectual capital of others. The relational dimension refers to the nature and quality of connections among employees, and to what extend the relationships are characterized by trust, reciprocity and emotional intensity. The cognitive dimension concerns the extent to which employees share a common perspective about the firm’s goals. Social learning theory states employees can learn behaviours by observing the role models. It recognizes the social nature of people and their capacity for acquiring virtues that perfect them and allow them to grow as human beings.

Three findings in the research1. Structural dimension. The ethical leadership of supervisors is associated with a higher

willingness on the part of employees to share information and resources, not only in his personal dyadic relationships with supervisor, but also with the rest of the organization.

2. Relational dimension. When supervisors show ethical leadership, they increase employee trust in the long-run fairness of his relationship with the organization.

3. Cognitive dimension. When a supervisor demonstrates concern for the wellbeing of employees, he increases their identification with the firm, as they perceive that the organization values and respects them.

Ethical leadership of supervisorsLiterature says managers play a crucial role in the development of employees’ altruistic motives, by displaying ethical behaviour. Ethical leadership is the demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and

13

decision-making. This leads to two dimensions: The moral person is perceived as honest, trustworthy, fair, and is a principled decision maker showing concern for people and behaves ethically in personal and professional life. The moral manager represents the proactive efforts of the manager to influence ethical behaviour on the part of employees.A difference between ethical leadership and transformational leadership is that ethical leaders, unlike transformational leaders, emphasize morality, and it does not refer to visionary or intellectually stimulating leadership.

Ethical leadership and the dimensions Strong ties among individuals are likely to increase the transfer of information and knowledge they exchange, so supervisors should create good bonds with their employees. An ethical supervisor not only induces employees to share information through his exemplary behaviour, but also uses the reward system to hold employees accountable for appropriate conduct.Fair and honest treatment by supervisors has a symbolic meaning, in that individuals perceive that they are being treated as an end, rather than a mean, which increases trust in the long-run. Identification is defined as the process through which an individual takes a group’s values as a frame of reference. Employees’ identification with the firm emerges out of identification with their closest manager. Respectively: Hypothesis 1, 2 & 3: The ethical leadership of supervisors is positively associated with the structural, relational and cognitive dimension of internal social capital.

ResultsSupervisor’s ethical leadership has positive impact on the structural, relational, and cognitive dimension of internal social capital. On the structural basis, the use of rewards to ensure appropriate behaviour rises the probability of information sharing, because the employees feel a sense of obligation to comply with a reward system that favours information sharing and they are not afraid their supervisor will misuse the information. When looking at the relational dimension, the results point out that when supervisors behave honestly, they create trust with employees and employee trust with the organization. At last, the cognitive dimension is

14

positively influenced through enlarged employee identification, due to integrity and concern of supervisors.

Building Social Capital through Leadership Development.Roberts, C. (2013). Journal of Leadership Education, 12, 1.

Social capital is defined as the connections among individuals – social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. According to Putnam, there are two types of social capital. Bonding provides social and psychological support for its members, it creates solidarity and facilitates reciprocity. Bridging social capital can facilitate information dissemination and linkage to external resources.Leadership development may serve as an effective strategy for building social capital.In order to build effective leadership capacity, the members of the organization need to develop individual human capital and collective social capital.Action learning is suited for facilitating leadership development, due to its collaborative nature. It is a model of experiential learning in which participants learn using real issues and exploring potential solutions through reflection.The Leadership Education and Development program (LEAD) uses action learning. The program contains workgroup sessions, lunchtime inquiry groups, periodic meetings with administrative personnel, one-on-one dialogues with participants, and personal observations and reflections. You can find the program outcomes in table 1 in the article.

DiscussionThe process of leadership development has emerged in this organization in a manner that includes the growth of individual leaders as well as the development of collective leadership capacity and social capital. Action learning and inquiry can facilitate this process.

The Development of Entrepreneurial Leadership: The Role of Human, Social and Institutional Capital.Leitch, C.M., McMullan, C. & Harrison, R.T. (2013). British Journal of Management, 24, 347–366

Towards a social capital theory of leadership developmentIn the field of leadership studies, there have been two key shifts in focus. First, there has been a shift of interest, from personal characteristics of the leader (as individualistic and heroic) the role of leadership (as a role defined by the interaction of a leader with the social and organizational context). Second, a shift from leadership as a set of traits, behaviours and actions to leadership as a social process engaging everyone has occurred. This implies a shift from the individual to group, and from human to social. The contextual element of leadership is important. The development of leadership relies on the availability of human capital and social capital.

15

Human & Social capitalThe Classical Theory of Marx has a structural level of analysis. The neoclassical theories, which include human, cultural, symbolic, and social capital, have an individual level of analysis.

Human capital theory consists of knowledge, skills, talents and intelligence. Human capital is a significant resource and creates competitive advantages when in is intangible, unique, and difficult to imitate and replicate.

Social capital theory focuses on resources individuals can access through interaction with others. There are two perspectives in this theory: The external individual resources view, in which the social capital is seen as a resource facilitating action by a focal actor, a resource that inheres in the social network tying that focal actor to others. The resources bring personal connections, enhanced knowledge and inside information. The internal, collective characteristics view sees social capital as a signal of group or community cohesion, and as the internal linkages that characterise the social structures of the actor, and give cohesiveness and associated benefits.

Social capital shares some of, but also differs from economic types of capital. In all forms, it is the individual who is central to the theory and who accesses, controls and increases social capital theory. But, it does not depreciate with use, it is not a collective good in that it is not the private property of the users, and it is not located in individual actors but in their inter-relationships.

Human Capital Social CapitalFocus Individual RelationshipsMeasures Duration Membership/ participationOutcomes Qualifications

Direct: income, productivityIndirect: health, civic activity

Trust levelsSocial cohesionEconomic achievementMore social capital

Model Linear Interactive/ circularPolicy Skilling, accessibility and rates

of returnCitizenship, capacity-building and empowerment

The strength of social capital lies in the group cooperation. It is developed and built slowly and incrementally. For organizational development to occur, an effective interaction must take place in an interpersonal or social context.

Conclusions Findings suggest that the enhancement of leaders’ human capita only occurred through their development of social capital.

16

From the analysis, we conclude that, in the situational context of the entrepreneurial firm, at least, the social capital theory of leadership development, while valuable in understanding the process, is limiting.

Lecture 7: Organizational change and dynamics

Towards a dynamic model of the psychological contract.Schalk, R., & Roe, R.A. (2007). Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 37, 167-182.

The relationship between fulfilment of the psychological contract and resistance to change during organizational transformations.Heuvel, S.R.H. van den, & Schalk, R. (2009). Social Science Information, 48, 283-313.

Literature workgroup meetings

Topic 1: Social Capital and Performance

Understanding the antecedents, the outcomes and the mediating role of social capital: An employee perspective.Parzefall, M-R. & Kuppelwieser, V.G. (2012). Human Relations, 65, 447 – 472.

Artikel 2: Understanding the antecedents, the outcomes and the mediating role of social capital: An employee perspective

In organizations with high levels of SC, it is to be argued goals are defined and enacted collectively and he level of trust high, allowing for an environment conducive to cooperation, learning and information exchange. In order to develop SC and to materialize the benefits, it is employees who have to perceive, believe and reciprocate SC -> importance of stability and continuity in the workplace, supported by HR, for development and maintenance of SC. Also the role of resources, such as time needed for relationship maintenance, is important. The eradication of the traditional employment relationship built on the assumption of life-long continuity undermines stability and continuity in organizations, thereby potentially influencing the level of SC. Social capital outcomes have been examined mainly as relatively tangible good or financial gains that benefit either the organization or the individual, often drawing on the RBV. Furthermore, SC, with its demonstrated benefits to employees, can be assumed to contribute to employees’ sense of obligation to pay back the cooperative and collaborative working atmosphere. This article examines the role of job security, expected organizational change and workload influencing employees’ perceptions of SC, and the potential of SC to induce affective commitment independently

17

and as a mediator (zie Figure 1). As it is employees whose actions ultimately determine the level of SC in an organization and through whom organizations can benefit from SC, complementing the current understanding with the ‘contributor and consumer’ perspective is important for both theory development and management practice. This study further confirms that SC induces employee reciprocity and creates benefits beyond the tangible and largely financial gains demonstrated by the existing empirical studies. Moreover, it demonstrates the value and influence of the overall social relationships on employee’s reciprocal attitude towards the organization

Theoretical background and hypothesis developmentThis article refrains inter-organizational SC. The concept of SC is typically used synonymously with a person’s structural network position, with a specific focus on the number of ties and individual has, with whom those ties are formed and how strong they are. A key unresolved debate concerns the question of whether a dense network with strong ties between the connected individuals or a large network with weak ties and structural holes is more advantageous.

Inter-organizational SC emphasizes SC role in the overarching organizational philosophy, norms, trust and goodwill. It thus highlights not only the structural, but also the cognitive and relational ties between individuals and how these ties enable collective action and help to align the members of the organization. SC can be promoted by HRM and employment practices, in particular in such areas as compensation, layoffs, downsizing, promotions and role descriptions in ways that promote stability and continuity at the workplace. Employers who provide job security in times of uncertainty appear to preserve the relationships and networks that SC requires. SC has positive effects in areas as product innovation, employee turnover rates and better utilization of human capital. The underlying assumption is that SC affects the social unit primarily, and the individual only secondarily and indirectly. But SC is a good that is available to all members of the organizations, regardless of whether a given member played any role in developing or maintaining that SC. The cycle of reciprocity in giving and receiving thus generalizes beyond dyadic transactions, thereby allowing the benefits of SC to be shared with individuals who were initially not a part of any network, eventually leading to benefits available for all.

Theorizing on SC suggest that stability in the relationships between the members of a given unit plays a key role in the creation and maintenance of SC. Social exchange theory states that relationship quality gradually increases when successful exchange experiences accumulate and exchange partners come to anticipate each other’s behaviors. Exchange partners learn to trust each other. In the context of organizations, such stability in relationships mainly derives from job security and continuity in the employment relationships.

Empirical research on the development of trust has demonstrated repeatedly that employees’ perceptions of trustworthiness and trusting behaviors are dependent largely on cumulative interactions, which are made possible by continuity and willingness to invest in the employment relationship. High employee turnover and layoffs have negative effects on SC. The departure of some employees often entails a disruption of existing relationships, routines and tacit knowledge, thereby lowering productivity and performance. Hypothesis 1: Job security is positively associated with employee evaluations of SC.

18

SC is sensitive to uncertainty. Increasing attention is paid to the detrimental effects that organizational change can have on existing SC within the organization. Any form of uncertainty and instability can be argued to undermine the development of meaningful relationships. Organizational change typically implies restructuring and even layoffs, leading to changes in employees’ colleagues and work routines. Employees may fear that the organization is incapable of managing change effectively or that their interests are not being taken care of, and become wary (behoedzaam) of their investments in that particular organization and its members. Also employees’ willingness to invest in collective action will be likely to diminish when there is uncertainty regarding the continuity of existing relationships.Hypothesis 2: The likelihood of organizational change is negatively associated with employee evaluations of SC.

SC also requires resources and willingness on the part of employees to spend time with other, to collaborate, to network and to share knowledge. From the structural perspective, weaker ties have been argued to be more effective than close and strong ties because they are less costly to maintain – fewer resources in terms of time and effort are needed for caring for weak ties. While the article acknowledge that SC may at times help employees to cope with heavy workloads because they, for example, know who to ask for help, SC necessitates resources from employees also. An employee’s willingness to engage in organizational citizenship behavior and to go an extra mile beyond specific job duties plays a central role in the development of SC. Employees need thus the time and energy to both participate in, and benefit from, networking and maintaining social relationships with their colleagues. Hypothesis 3: High workload is negatively associated with employee evaluations of SC.

Affective commitment is one of the primary ways through which SC has been argued to lead to beneficial outcomes to organizations. Affective commitment has value from both the individuals and the organizations perspective. Employees with high levels of affective commitment are more valuable than those with weak commitment. Above all, affective commitment, which signifies the degree of emotional investment and identification with the organization and its goals, can be seen as an employee’s input into his employment relationship, and thus as an act of reciprocity. Individuals do not only reciprocate directly the source of the benefits received, but also other parties implicated in the social exchange process. Employees may also recognize organization efforts to build and maintain SC. Hypothesis 4: Employee evaluations of SC are positively associated with affective commitment.

Perceived SC partially mediates the relationships between its three antecedents (job security, the likelihood of organizational change and workload) and its outcome (affective commitment). The article propose partial mediating effects because the extent to which employees perceive organizational SC depends on the security, stability and resources in the employment relationship, and because employees ultimately reciprocate through increased levels of affective commitment, not only owing to these favorable working conditions but also because of the overall relationship quality described by SC. Hypothesis 5a: SC partially mediates the positive relationship between job security and affective commitment.Hypothesis 5b: SC partially mediates the negative relationship between the perceived likelihood of new organizational change and affective commitment.

19

Hypothesis 5c: SC partially mediates the negative relationship between workload and affective commitment.

DiscussionThe findings indicated that perceptions of likelihood of organizational change, level of job security and high workload influenced the extent to which employees perceive SC in their organization. It further demonstrated that employees’ perceptions of SC were positively associated with affective commitment and that SC played a partially mediating role in the relationships between job security, anticipated organizational change, workload and affective commitment.

The study supports the theoretical assertions in the SC literature regarding the importance of stability, continuity and resources. Indirectly, it also supports the existing limited evidence, which gives a reason to assume that HRM practices promoting stability and security can play an important role in enhancing and maintaining SC. Perhaps SC is one explanatory factor through which HRM exerts its influence.

The literature has remained inconclusive regarding whether closed an tight networks are more beneficial than open and weak networks, essentially leaving the question on the importance of stability and quality of relationships open for debate. The findings give a reason to argue that SC is of a bonding nature, necessitating closed and tight networks between members. Without stability, security and sufficient resources, SC is unlikely to characterize social relations in organizations. Individual structural SC (a large and loose network from an individual) does not automatically transform into organizational SC. Organizations can, for example, through stability enhancing practices and resource allocations, contribute to such conditions in which SC flourishes.

This study confirms that SC induces employee reciprocity in the form of affective commitment and thus creates benefits beyond the multiple tangible (often financial) gains such as promotions and better compensation demonstrated by the existing empirical studies. SC mediates the relationships between the independent variables of employment practices and organizational citizenship behavior and the dependent variables of organizational costs and benefits and organizational performance.

In addition,, this study contributes to the social exchange theory-based organizational behavior literature. It indicates that the principle of reciprocity appears to have a social usage, whereby an individual feels obligated to reciprocate another’s action, not only by directly rewarding the specific exchange partner from whom the initial benefits were received, but also by reciprocating and benefiting other parties implicated in the social exchange process. Such indirect and generalized reciprocal acts appear to result from SC perceptions, highlighting the importance not only of high-quality-employer-employee relationships, but also high quality relations among employees.

The development of a meta-psychological contract that suggest what kind of reciprocity is desirable and encouraged is important, particularly in times of organizational change when the alignment of employee interests and goals often presents a challenge. Employer behavior and contributions that demonstrate commitment to engage in high quality relationships both enhance SC and signal the type of reciprocity that is desired.

Practical implicationsFirms that provide stability and allow for a certain amount of slack (speling; used for example for

20

socialization and unofficial information exchange) are in a better position to protect their SC, which lies within the complex networks of people in organization and the difficult-to-imitate knowledge of its employees. The article also highlight the importance of nurturing not only the employee-employer exchange relationship (f.e. through HRM practices) but also the exchange relationships between employees. Employment practices that ease employees’ workloads and facilitate stability in their relationships and networks can help in protecting SC.

Perceptions of continuity and stability can at least be partially maintained through other means, such as stable roles, structures and organizational routines(f.e. regular meetings). Transparency and communication also contribute to justice perceptions, which in turn can make a difference, for example, to employee reactions to layoffs, even when the final outcome remains unchanged.

Concluding remarksThis study has advanced understanding of the antecedents and reciprocal outcomes of organizational SC. It points to the importance of nurturing relationships in organizations, in particular during turbulent times characterized by instability and uncertainty.

Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations.Bolino, M.C., Turnley, W.H. & Bloodgood, J.M. (2002). Academy of Management Review, 27, 505 – 522.

Artikel 1 – 1: Citizenship behavior and the creation of SC in organizations

Organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs): employee behaviors that go beyond role requirements, that are not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that facilitate organizational functioning and is critical for it. Org rely on employee contributions that go beyond the call of duty in order to function effectively. Studies concluded that citizenship behaviors typically stem from positive job attitudes, task characteristics and leadership behaviors. Individuals are most likely to go beyond their formal job requirements when they are satisfied with their jobs or committed to their organizations, when they are given intrinsically satisfying tasks to complete, and when they have supportive or inspirational leaders.

Social capital is defined by Lin as “resources embedded in a social structure that are accessed and/or mobilized in purposive actions.” It is a resource derived from the relationships among individuals, organizations, communities, or societies -> valuable asset. It is reflected by the existence of close interpersonal relationships among individuals. Three specific dimensions: 1. Structural: overall pattern of relationships found in organizations. The extent to which people are connected in an organization.2. Relational: the nature of the connections between individuals. Focuses on the quality or nature of the connections. 3. Cognitive dimensions: The extent to which employees within a social network share a common

21

perspective or understanding. Focuses on whether these connections have a cognitive component to them as well.

SC is seen as important because it solves problems of coordination, reduces transaction costs, and facilitates the flow of information between and among individuals. Facilitates economic and community development, which contributes to the organizational advantage. Individuals work together more effectively and efficiently when they know each other, understand each other and trust and identify with one another. *RBV of the firm: explains how SC is likely to enhance organizational level performance. Portrays organizations as bundles of resources that are the source of various capabilities. Resources are valuable, rare, inimitable and nonsubstitutable -> increase competitive advantage. High quality relationships are valuable, not easily formed and difficult to imitate, so SC may give organizations a competitive advantage over others. Moreover, Social capital is positively related to an organizations ability to elicit the commitment of its employees, to be flexible, to manage collective action, and to develop high levels of intellectual capital.

Individual behavior is critical for the creation of social capital within communities and neighbourhoods. Good organizational citizens are likely to be important for the creation of SC within their organizations. SC may result from the willingness of employees to exceed their formal job requirements in order to help each other, to subordinate their individual interests for the good of the organization, and to take a genuine interest in the organization’s activities and overall mission. So, OCBs ultimately may be tied to organizational performance through their relationship with social capital. OCBs help create and maintain social capital within firms, which, in turn, produces higher levels of organizational performance. -> purpose of this article is to explore the role of OCBs in facilitating the creation of SC.

Citizenship behavior and organizational performance

There are three forms of organizational citizenship. Obedience describes employees' willingness to accept and abide by the organization's rules, regulations, and procedures. Loyalty describes the willingness of employees to subordinate their personal interests for the benefit of the organization and to promote and defend the organization. Finally, participation describes the willingness of employees to be actively involved in all aspects of organizational life.Van Dyne, Gra-ham, and Dienesch (1994) indicated that par-ticipation actually takes three forms. Social participation describes employees' active in-volvement in company affairs (e.g., keeping up with organizational issues or attending non-mandatory meetings) and participation in social activities within the organization. Advocacy (verdediging) participation describes the willingness of em-ployees to be controversial (omstreden) in order to improve the organization by making suggestions, inno-vating, and encouraging other employees to speak up. Functional participation describes employee contributions that exceed required work standards (e.g., volunteering to take on extra assignments, working late to finish impor-tant projects, or pursuing additional training and staying abreast of new developments).Researchers have discussed some more specific ways in which OCBs might positively influence organizational performance: (1) OCBs may enhance coworker or managerial productivity, (2) OCBs may

22

free up resources for more productive purposes, (3) OCBs may reduce the need to devote scarce resources to purely maintenance functions, (4) OCBs may facilitate the coordination of ac-tivities between team members and across workgroups, (5) OCBs may enable organizations to attract and retain high-quality employees by making the work environment a more pleasant place to work, (6) OCBs may enhance the stabil-ity of organizational performance by reducing the variability in a work unit's performance, and (7) OCBs may enhance an organization's ability to adapt to environmental change.

Social capital and competitive advantage

RBV: According to the resource-based perspec-tive, successful organizations have unique ca-pabilities or resources that give them an advan-tage over their competitors. Such resources are particularly valuable when they are rare, inim-itable, and nonsubstitutable. Networks of strong interpersonal relationships within an organization ultimately facilitate its success. Structural social capital Encompassing network ties, network configuration and network appropriability. - Network ties are connections between members of an organi-zation. Previous research using network analy-sis indicates that these connections can have a significant influence on information transfer (Krackhardt & Hanson, 1993), organizational learning (Fisher & White, 2000), and the execu-tion of organizational activities.- While individual connections between organ-izational members are important, the overall configuration of ties within an organization is important as well. Although formal and informal networks can both play a significant role in the overall configuration of interpersonal linkages (Ibarra, 1992), the important factors to consider in understanding a network configuration re-volve around such characteristics as structural holes (i.e., the absence of connections between employees), centralization (i.e, the degree to which connections are concentrated among few employees), and density (i.e., the extent to which all employees are interconnected relative to the total number of potential connections among all employees).- Network appropriability relates to the ease with which different types of relationships can be transferred within a network. Thus, networks created for one purpose may often be useful for other purposes.

Overall, the structural aspect of SC involves examination of the extent to which individuals in an organization are connected, description of the patterns of connections among employees and examination of the usefulness of such connections across contexts. OCBs have the capacity to bring people together in ways that are likely to increase the number of ties, to alter the configuration of connections and contacts within an organization and to facilitate the development of contacts between individuals in some settings that may ultimately prove useful in other contexts.

Relation social capitalThis dimension is characterized by high levels of trust, shared norms and perceived obligations, and a sense of mutual identification. It concerns the affective relationships between employees in which coworkers like one another, trust one another and identify with one another. Interpersonal attraction is

23

related to the aspects of group performance and group cohesiveness. Workgroups in which members like one another may be more flexible, better able to adapt to the changing environment and higher performing. High levels of trust result in a willingness to be vulnerable to the actions of the other party. It facilitates social and resource exchange, increases communication and enhances cooperation -> leads to increased innovation, enhanced teamwork and improved organizational functioning.Individuals with strong ties often identify with one another or themselves in terms of their group membership. It is likely to contribute to the effective collaboration of employees within organizations. OBCs play an important role in infusing the connections among employees with an affective component. When individuals go beyond their role requirements, they likely help produce a workforce of employees who like, trust and identify with one another.

Cognitive social capitalMutual understanding is achieved through the existence of a shared language and from the exchange of shared narratives. Where both shared language and narratives exist, employees can more easily discuss problems, transfer ideas, share knowledge and offer more effective assistance to one another. Moreover, high levels of cognitive SC give employees a common perspective that enables them to perceive and interpret events in similar ways. These assets also increase the ability to anticipate and predict the actions of coworkers, thereby facilitating the utilization of various members’ inputs, successful coordination of activities and adaption to changing conditions. Efficiencies are often gained through mutual awareness and a reduction in the number of unexpected behaviors exhibited by organizational members. Through OCBs, the ability of individuals in organizations to understand one another is enhanced. OCBs increase the likelihood that a common language will develop and that organizational members will share myths, stories and metaphors.

Organizational citizenship and the creation of social capital

Figure 1: zie blz 512. Model that illustrates the relationship between OCBs, the three dimensions of SC and organizational performance. According to the model, social participation facilitates the development of the structural aspect of SC through the formation of network ties, an improvement in the overall configuration of ties and greater network appropriability. Loyalty, obedience, functional participation and social participation enhance the relational dimension of social capital through the development of liking, trust and identification among employees. Last, social and advocacy participation contribute to the cognitive dimension through shared language and narratives.In this article, the principal argument is that SC is a consequence, rather than an antecedent of OCB. However, the model suggest a reciprocal relationship in which high levels of SC also feed back to increase the occurrence of OCBs. Finally, SC mediates the relationship between individual-level OCBs and organizational level performance.

Citizenship and structural social capitalCitizenship behaviors that encourage the creation of contacts among employees should contribute to

24

the development of the structural aspect of SC -> social participation: describes employee participation that is interpersonal or involves social contact, e.g. nonmandatory meetings or luncheon. It facilitates the formation of relationships between organization members who are not already acquainted. In addition, such behavior is likely to favorably alter the overall configuration of ties among employees. By participating in group activities employees increase the likelihood of their meeting colleagues working in other departments. When new relationships are initiated, the structure of the social network within the organization is altered (e.g. a structural hole will be filled). This connection might enable information and assistance to be transferred between the departments. Proposition 1: Social participation will enhance structural SC through the formation of network ties, the configuration of these ties and the appropriability of the network.

Citizenship and relational social capitalCitizenship behaviors are likely to foster the development of liking, trust and identification among employees. 1. Loyalty: Willing to sacrifice your own interests for the good of the company. It is likely that such behavior will convey to managers and peers that individuals are not looking out simply for themselves and that they value the well-being of their colleagues and the organization. Individuals that are loyal are not only likable by their colleagues, but also trustworthy -> lead to strong relational ties between employees2. Obedience: Willingness to respect and comply with the rules, regulations and procedures of the organization. Rules make organizational behavior more predictable, serve to reduce uncertainty. When employees are able to anticipate each other’s actions, they are more likely to trust one another. More obedient = more trustworthy. When employees can be counted on to play by the rules, they are more likely to be trusted and liked by their managers and colleagues. 3. Social participation: Employee social participation is likely to help build relational capital. It tends to lead to interpersonal attraction, the degree of liking is higher when there is interaction. Also determinant for group cohesion. Individuals tent to like and identify with individuals with whom they interact. Social activities are explicitly designed to encourage the development of relationships and identification. Proposition 2: Loyalty, obedience, functional participation and social participation will enhance relational social capital by increasing liking, trust and identification among employees.

Citizenship and cognitive social capital1. Social participation: facilitate the emergence of shared narratives. By taking part in activities and being involved in various events, employees develop a shared understanding of their organizational context. They learn to speak the language of their company and gain a better appreciation of its values and mission. Organizational myts, stories and metaphors are often shared during nonrequired functions and social events. -> also enhance interdepartmental connection, enable disparate areas of the organization to share stories. 2. Advocacy participation: Employees are willing to speak up with constructive suggestions and to encourage their colleagues to do as well. When employees present their ideas and openly share their true opinions, such actions are likely to facilitate the creation of shared language/narratives and an

25

environment in which employees feel comfortable to share their ideas and knowledgeProposition 3: Social participation and advocacy participation will enhance cognitive SC through the development of shared language and shared narratives among employees.

Social capital as an antecedent of citizenship behaviorOCBs facilitate the development of structural, relational and cognitive connections among employees. The causal relationship between OCBs and other variables is still unclear -> are variables antecedents or consequences of OCBs? One the one hand, it seems likely that individuals that are satisfied and committed are most likely to perform citizenship behavior. On the other hand, it seems also plausible that an individual’s satisfaction and commitment might increase when he is surrounded by coworkers that are loyal, obedient, involved etcetera. OCBs lead to the development of connections among employees that are characterized by affect and shared understanding. But is seems also likely that OCBs will be an outcome of strong interpersonal connections. So, it is suggested that the relationship is reciprocal. Proposition 4: Social capital will be positively related to the performance of citizenship behavior.

The mediating role of social capitalBoth OCBs and SC facilitate organizational effectiveness. But the relationship between OCBs and organizational functioning is indirect. SC, in turn, enhances organizational performance. Proposition 5: Social capital will mediate the relationship between citizenship behavior and organizational performance

ImplicationsOCBs play a critical role in facilitating the effective functioning of organizations. They build social capital, which, in turn, contributes to the effective functioning of organizations. SC is the lubricant (hulpmiddel) that makes organizations function and OCBs contribute to the development of SC.Individual level behaviors are also critical for the development of social capital. This article looks at multiple levels of analysis (individual, group, organizational). Moreover, it concerns the consequences, rather than antecedents, of OCB (-> independent variable). Article demonstrates how specific types of citizenship behaviors might be differentially related to various forms of SC. However, there may also be cases where OCBs have a negative impact on the creation of SC. It is possible that the motive attributed to employee citizenship behavior may moderate the relationship between OCB and the creation of SC. When employees e.g. are seen as performing additional work activities in order to enhance their own image, it might actually foster animosity (vijandigheid) among employees instead of trust, liking and identification.

Topic 5: Leadership and Social Capital

Leadership, power and the use of surveillance: Implications of shared social identity for leaders' capacity to influence.Subašić, E., Reynolds, K.J., Turner, J.C., Veenstra, K.E. & Haslam, S.A. (2011). Leadership Quarterly, 22, 170-181.

26

IntroductionThis paper is about maximising leader’s capacity to influence. Results show the appropriate tools depend on whether the leader is considered to be an ingroup or outgroup member. Where there is a sense of shared social identity between leaders and followers, leaders are considered as ingroup leaders, and intrinsic motivation will result in better performance. When using a relatively coercive power tool, the leader’s influence may be reduced. While the use of rewards or punishments and surveillance may be expected of leaders who do not share ‘our’ goals, values and beliefs, the same approach could be seen as unnevessary and detrimental to ingroup leader influence.

Rewards/ punishments and surveillance as strategies of influenceA distinction can be made between reward and coercive power on the one hand, and legitimate, expert, referent and informational power on the other. The leaders whose power is based on the latter in a particular referent group, are likely to influence the subordinates, even when it’s not possible to monitor their actions (i.e. in the absence of surveillance). In contrast, the formerdoes rely on the capacity to closely monitor subordinate’s behaviours. Systems of effective surveillance are seen as instrumental in identifying and sanctioning undesirable behaviours. People tend to hide undesirable behaviours from authorities in order to avoid punishment. There is evidence that surveillance decreases task performance, productivity, wellbeing, perceptions of personal control, performance, satisfaction and it increases stress. Related to perceptions of procedural injustice, surveillance is likely to be perceived as a violation of trust.

Rewards/ punishments, surveillance and leaders’ capacity to influence – the role of shared social identityWhether surveillance is detrimental to leader’s influence, depends on the presence or absence of shared norms, goals and values between leaders and followers and if the leaders are seen to act in ways that violate this sense of connection with followers. From the perspective of self-categorization theory the presence or absence of shared social identity underpins one’s capacity to influence. When a shared social identity is missing, the leader is considered an outgroup member, and the use of harsh, coercive forms of power is more consistent with follower’s expectations and seen as more acceptable and likely to elicit (at least public) compliance than when the leader is considered an ingroup member. Ingroup leaders are more trusted, are more likely to be forgiven for underperformance and less likely to need to prove themselves through self-sacrifice and ingroup-favouring actions. However, precisely because of the ingroup-status, they have more ‘to lose’.

ResultsTwo types of experiments were conducted.

Experiment 1. In the context of a high capacity to reward/punish, when surveillance was not used, those leaders who shared followers’ group membership also had a greater capacity to influence. However, when ingroup leaders resorted to surveillance, their influence decreased. Therefore, for ingroup leaders, strategies such as surveillance and rewards/punishments have the potential to jeopardise, rather than enhance, influence and seem to increase disagreement with the leader’s position.

27

Experiment 2. Rather than the combination of high capacity to reward/punish and surveillance leading to increased motivation and influence, these effects depend on identification with the leader. Increased motivation and influence were reported when participants believed an outgroup leader would have access to their responses compared to when they believed they were private. For ingroup leaders, the use of surveillance reduced influence and motivation.

General discussion

The respected manager … the organisational capital developer. Brien, A. & Smallman, C. (2011). International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 639 – 647.

IntroductionThis research sets out to identify who, in a hotel context, manages the organisation’s contingent labour, their managerial style and associated challenges.

Results suggest that (1) it is middle managers who, in the main, manage contingent labour, (2) continual employee turnover is the biggest challenge, and (3) hotel structures and systems encourage middle managers to manage rationalistically.

Contingent labour.An organisation needs (labour) flexibility and cost optimisation in order to remain competitive. Due to these needs, the use of contingent labour, which consists of temporary contract workers, has grown over the past 30 years. Hotels make use of this contingent labour to manage operational, economic and seasonal trends. Changes in the way employees are engaged provides opportunities for changing management styles.

Rationalistic & humanistic approachThe rationalistic type of management style stems from Taylor’s Scientific Management movement, with a basis on efficiency and main benefits gained by the employer. It is argued that, although it worked in the early 20th century, this type of management is no longer appropriate, and should make way for humanistic (‘commons sense’) approaches. This is due to the trend of knowledge- and service-based industries and an organisational social capital society, which requests a high level of trust and autonomy. Rationalism depletes social capital. The humanistic management focuses on the welfare of employees. A rationalism approach is not good for the psychological contract (the variables of loyalty and trust). Contingent workers and full-time employees have different psychological contracts, due to different expectations.The respected manager combines a humanistic and rationalistic management style.

Dialectic or dilemma?There is a dilemma between the two approaches, they are not mutually exclusive. The rationalistic approach may indeed manage costs, but it may also reduce potential increased revenue and social

28

capital, it brings high social costs. The humanistic approach, where organisational social capital is developed, enables employees to build relationships, which in turn results in employees building relationships with customers, thus reducing customer dissatisfaction, improves the service-based quality and increasing the competitive advantage. Thus, there is a dilemma, a balance has to be found between the efficiency of rationalism and effectiveness of humanism. It’s about the organisational capital.

Organisational social capitalThere is too little information about how managers can make use of organisational social capital, and for this article in particular, in the hospitality and tourism industry. Literature suggests social-networks aid the diffusion of information and knowledge, which itself constitutes an organisational asset. Social capital is context-dependent, so it might be different for this specific industry. Hotels are inherently multi-cultural organisations, and the fact that sub-groups do exist creates differences, resulting in social capital not being built of being difficult to build.

Findings(1) Contingent workers are really important because they are flexible and it gives relative financial benefits. (2) Along with these benefits, challenges arise, which lead for many managers to burn-outs and resignation. This also affects the rest of the department en fellow managers. A departure of a manager significantly disrupts the organisational memory and remaining employee relations. (3) This contingent labour brings an increasing workload for managers. They have to continually re-train new contingent employees. Although managers state that they love their job, even when making horrendous hours, after six months one third of the middle managers had resigned from their hotel. The dynamics may have been too much to bear. (4) Systems are used as a means of maintaining standards. Middle managers accepted the need for maintaining standards, but system inflexibility can reduce a manager’s ability to build staff relations (OSC). This system thinking/management appears to be the favoured approach of rationalistic managers who generally consider this approach economic. Humanistic managers are not averse to using systems, and this blended style possibly adds value by enhancing human relations. While a focus on the successful use of systems generally achieves immediate results, social capital, takes time to build. Humanistic managers challenge systems in order to achieve organisational as well as people goals. Social capital cannot be systemised. (5) The rationalistic approach, as described in table 1, seems to be at complete odds with best practice, and humanism seems to provide the perfect manager. Rationalism’s efficiency is useful, though.

Respected managers, the geniuses of the ANDA respected manager find a balance between rationalistic (system focused) and humanistic (developing social capital) management models and wants to achieve the organisational objectives. Of all the variables in table 2, trust is probably the most important one, as it has significant economic value.

ImplicationsFrom this can be learnt that because hotels require a high level of internal and external customer contact, the productivity and profitability can be enhanced through a blended managerial approach. All managers need time to develop and enhance their managerial capability and personal standards, which then lead to enhanced organisational goals.

29

Four steps hotels can take: 1. Use systems which support human capital; 2. Middle managers need mentoring and space to develop a managerial style that suites them and the organisation; 3. Assist managers to identify and achieve a balance in managing (contingent) employees; 4. Acknowledge managing contingent labour is stressful.

30