Academy of Management Annals
ISSN / EISSN : 1941-6520 / 1941-6067
Published by: The Academy of Management (10.5465)
Total articles ≅ 416
Latest articles in this journal
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0143
Entrepreneurship is routinely promoted as a solution to our most pressing societal and environmental challenges, a means to address issues ranging from poverty to human-induced climate change. Two emerging literature streams have sought to examine how and when such solutions may emerge. In this review we examine the literature on social (SE) and environmental (EE) entrepreneurship to expose potential linkages, disconnects, and a path forward. We do so by combining bibliometric network analysis with a detailed qualitative review of the literature from 1994 to 2019. Through this process we: 1) identify a pattern of convergent evolution, whereby SE and EE share some common elements today, while originating in distinct scholarly communities with different epistemological roots, 2) offer a conceptual framework that identifies specific areas for collaboration and learning between SE and EE, and 3) propose how these streams can be integrated, to elevate the impact of the field of entrepreneurship. We argue that such an integration can enable entrepreneurship research to fulfill its promise of understanding how and when entrepreneurial action contributes to the public good.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0130
The division of firm surplus between labor and shareholders, and its impact on firms’ value creation, are central topics in strategy theory and practice. Early studies of value appropriation within firms devoted considerable attention to the dynamics of bargaining between labor— typically, organized labor—and the owners of capital. Since the 1960s, however, a decline in unionization across most of the major economies and a series of technological and economic changes have led to profound shifts in the bargaining process between labor and capital. This review synthesizes the findings of prior literature and argues for three increasingly important and often-overlooked consequences of these changes. First, individual bargaining has dramatically expanded the range of worker characteristics, values, and preferences that can now be accommodated in employment arrangements. Second, surplus division has become a strategic variable that organizations can differentiate on. Third, labor-market institutions have become more varied, and their role in setting the terms of negotiation has become more prominent.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0251
We review and synthesize research on the effects of incentives on ethical and unethical behavior. Our review of 361 conceptual and empirical articles, which are scattered across multiple disciplines (e.g., management, psychology, economics, education, healthcare delivery), reveals wide variation in how they conceptualize key concepts (i.e., incentives, ethics), how they theorize the effects, and what samples and research methods they use in empirical tests. We identify seven conceptual explanations that explain the link between incentives and unethicality, and synthesize them into three primary processes: cost-benefit comparison, motivated reasoning, and decreases in prosocial motivation. Our review of empirical evidence shows that some effects are relatively more established (e.g., goal-driven motivated reasoning) than others (e.g., prosocial motivation decline), but they all await more field (vs. laboratory experiments) evidence. In addition, giving substantial attention to the forms of unethicality in specific contexts, we show whether and how the effects of incentives on unethicality vary by professional domains, especially in education, healthcare delivery, and for-profit business. Building on the review, we present a multilevel, cyclical process model capturing how incentives and unethicality are related. We conclude by identifying opportunities for future research.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0242
I review and integrate a wide range of literature that has examined how geographic mobility of high-skilled workers creates value for organizations and individuals. Drawing on this interdisciplinary literature, I document that geographic mobility creates value by facilitating the transfer and recombination of knowledge, transfer of social capital, organizational norms, and financial capital, as well as by creating opportunities for individuals to develop skills, seek resources, and experience wage increases. I also review the literature around geographic immobility and synthesize this body of research under a framework of geographic mobility frictions that constrain and add costs to geographic mobility. I enumerate four key types of frictions: regulatory frictions, occupational/organizational frictions, personal frictions, and economic/environmental frictions, which act as impediments to geographic mobility. I then propose a research agenda around studying whether and how provisioning geographic flexibility through ‘work-from-anywhere’ (WFA) policies might help individuals and firms capture value from geographic mobility and mitigate adverse effects of geographic mobility frictions. I also outline future research questions related to how adoption of geographic flexibility might alter future patterns of geographic mobility, and the future geography of work.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0198
Organizational aesthetics comprises a way of understanding organizational life based on immediate sensory reactions (i.e., sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch) to the material components of organizing (e.g., artifacts, physical settings, and material practices). Despite the growing interest in the topic, however, research is fragmented across management areas. To advance scholarly knowledge in this field, we reviewed the empirical work examining aesthetics in organizations. Our review yields two major insights. First, we identify three perspectives on the role of aesthetics. Scholars have treated aesthetics as (1) a directed stimulus (that elicits product evaluation and work organization), (2) a knowledge tool (that is entwined with creative work and everyday tasks), or (3) an open-ended outcome (that serves as a personal experience). Second, we find that each perspective highlights emotional and cognitive mechanisms through which aesthetics is implicated in organizing. Building on these two insights, our review offers an integrative framework that provides a comprehensive picture of the state of the field, illuminating the work of aesthetics in and around organizations and providing avenues for future studies.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0203
This paper focuses on the emergent importance of curiosity at work for individuals and organizations by reviewing management research on curiosity at work. We start by leveraging prior reviews on early and contemporary foundations of the curiosity construct in the larger psychological literature, with a focus on definitional clarity, dimensionality, and differences with other constructs in its nomological network. Next, we review different streams of management research on curiosity at work (i.e., broad generative and nongenerative effects, curiosity as a catalyst for personal action, curiosity as a catalyst for interpersonal action, curiosity as a catalyst for leadership, curiosity as an organizational or professional norm, and curiosity as a catalyst for organizing). Interweaving these diverse literatures and research streams gives us the wherewithal to provide conceptual clarity in curiosity research and highlight how curiosity has not only generative effects at the individual level but acts also as a more dynamic, interpersonal, and organizational property. In addition, our review brings attention to the potential dark side of curiosity. We end by outlining how the more nuanced insights of the role of curiosity at work generated by our review provide an impetus for future research.
Academy of Management Annals; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0109
The diversity literature has long proposed that diversity benefits team performance because the broader range of information, knowledge, and perspectives that members with different attributes bring to their teams enhances the cognitive processes through which teams perform their tasks. This paper reviews the empirical research based in this argument to identify what we know about the effects of diversity on team cognitive processes and identify directions for future research. We first differentiate the effects of diversity that operate through differences in cognitive resources from those that operate through differences in cognitive structures, both of which may derive from diversity in the same attributes. Then, basing our analysis in the view of teams as information processors, we review the findings of research on how diversity affects cognitive processes associated with the two major aspects of information processing – information surfacing and information combination – through which teams perform their tasks. Based on the review, we point to consistent themes, areas in need of clarification, research gaps, and avenues for future research, particularly focusing on improving the specification of theoretical mechanisms, focusing examinations of contingency effects and attending to boundary conditions, and increasing research on how demographic diversity affects team cognitive processes.
Academy of Management Annals, Volume 15, pp 537-576; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0115
We review research on “organizational science and health care” (OSHC), defined broadly as research focusing on topics commonly studied in the organizational and management literatures, and conducted in health care settings. Using almost 700 articles published in leading organizational science (OS) and health care (HC) journals in the past decade, we first apply network methods to map this burgeoning field of research, highlighting topics that are more in the foreground (and background) of the field. We then conduct an in-depth review of recent and influential articles studying the five most prominent topics (organizational change, learning, coordination/cooperation, teams/structure, and performance). Next we synthesize this research, highlighting the patient-centered, dynamic, and specialized nature of health care work, and detailing disciplinary distinctions across studies published in OS and HC journals. Whereas research in OS journals tends to emphasize broad generalizability and organizing processes, research in HC journals tends to emphasize contextualized problems and the role of organizational structures and practices in solving them. We conclude by articulating the need for a broader orientation that integrates both of these disciplinary orientations, in ways that could allow scholars to advance OSHC with future research that is both rigorous and relevant.
Academy of Management Annals, Volume 15, pp 377-405; https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2019.0102
The diffusion of organizational practices remains a central concern for scholars from diverse disciplines and backgrounds. We assess the most recent 20 years of research on inter-organizational diffusion to establish findings that are now conclusive and identify important questions or areas of research that remain unaddressed. We identify five key issues with the literature, which are largely a consequence of viewing diffusion as a source of homogeneity across organizations. We further propose a point of view that calls for a more fundamental reorientation of diffusion research. Our main contention is that researchers have focused on diffusion processes as producing similarities among organizations but have overlooked theoretical and empirical indications that diffusion processes often create and sustain differences among organizations. We seek to draw attention to this omission, demonstrate its significance, and make a case for a reorientation of diffusion research. In doing so, we hope to advance a more realistic future research agenda that considers diffusion as a source of both homogeneity and heterogeneity across organizations.