Knowledge that Transforms

Persistent talent shortages require employers to pursue novel approaches for recruiting and retaining workers. In this paper, we investigate one such approach, that is, offering educational benefits to low‐skilled workers, a segment of the workforce that less frequently accesses such benefits. In Study 1, we examine an operational educational benefits program targeted at employees occupying low‐skilled jobs, demonstrating that program participation is associated with reduced turnover. Building upon this insight, we draw from exchange perspectives on the employee‐organization relationship to investigate how different benefit structures shape low‐skilled worker retention and why. Across two vignette‐style between‐person experiments, we compare types of educational benefit programs and find that educational benefits with little to no upfront costs—termed tuition assistance programs—are more strongly associated with reduced turnover intentions, a relationship that is partially explained by perceived organizational support for development; importantly, this type of educational benefit more clearly contributes to a social exchange relationship with the employer. This indirect relationship is stronger when potential employees perceive internal career opportunities, and this pattern of results persists across social classes (and low and high‐skilled workers). We offer practical insights for how employers may structure educational benefit programs to retain (low‐skilled) workers.

As organizations increasingly embed artificial intelligence (AI) into human resource management (HRM), research has largely examined whether and when AI is used in HRM and how such use affects internal stakeholders. Much less is known about how the allocation of final HR decision authority between AI and human shapes external stakeholders' evaluations of the focal organization. Drawing on signaling theory, this research proposes that when information about AI‐enabled HR decision authority becomes available or knowable to external stakeholders, it can function as an organizational signal that shapes organizational reputation. Across three studies, we show that when AI rather than human HR specialists holds final decision authority over consequential HR decisions, external stakeholders infer greater employee objectification, which, in turn, damages organizational reputation. This process further depends on receiver‐side heterogeneity: the effect is attenuated when perceived AI humanlikeness is higher and amplified when HR issue relevance is higher. These findings contribute to the literature on AI‐enabled HRM, organizational reputation, and signaling theory, and provide implications for how organizations integrate, govern, and communicate AI use in HRM practices.

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in job recruitment has transformed recruitment practices. Little is known, however, about how applicants react to AI‐based rejection. Drawing on appraisal theory, we propose that applicants rejected by AI tend to appraise the rejection as others' responsibility, leading to negative emotions and adverse reactions against the organization. Using a person‐centered approach and mixed‐methods design in two studies, we identify four distinct profiles based on the combination of outward‐focused negative emotions (OFNE) and inward‐focused negative emotions (IFNE). Specifically, we argue and test that introducing a human manager to review AI‐based rejection can soothe rejected applicants. Our findings show that involving human touch can shift applicants' profiles, leading to better reactions toward the organization. Theoretical and practical implications for rejected applicant reactions in the context of AI‐based recruitment processes are discussed.

Women's earnings have risen, yet work–family conflict (WFC) remains persistent, raising questions about how income differences within couples shape these experiences. We examine the partner pay gap—the difference in earnings between partners—as a household financial structure that conditions work‐family experiences and introduce a gendered relative resources framework to theorize why relative earnings carry different meanings for women and men. Analyzing longitudinal dyadic data from over 4000 German couples, we use a polynomial regression approach embedded within a longitudinal actor‐partner interdependence model. Results show that larger partner pay gaps are associated with higher WFC for women, but not for men. These gendered effects are stronger in more traditional normative contexts, including when women hold traditional gender role beliefs, are parents, or receive lower partner support. We further show that WFC operates as a chronic, accumulating stressor that mediates the relationship between the partner pay gap and women's long‐term well‐being. Post hoc analyses suggest a front‐loaded pattern, with women's WFC increasing most sharply at modest deviations from traditional earning arrangements and leveling off as pay gaps widen. We replicate our findings in a U.S. sample, supporting cross‐national generalizability. Together, these results highlight household earning arrangements as structural conditions that shape whether HRM systems can be effectively translated into reduced WFC, underscoring the importance of integrating household financial dynamics into HRM theory and practice.

Organizations use compensation to attract, retain, and motivate employees to achieve their strategic goals. This research shifts the focus of pay differences from individuals to groups by focusing on pay differences among employees in the same functional work teams (i.e., within‐group pay dispersion) and between employees across functional work teams (i.e., between‐group pay dispersion). Drawing on identity theories, we propose that between‐group pay dispersion strengthens employee collective identity orientation, which in turn increases employee task performance and in‐group helping. This relationship is less salient when within‐group pay dispersion is larger and more salient when within‐group pay dispersion is smaller. The results of two multi‐wave field survey studies (Studies 1 and 4) support our predictions. Two controlled experiments (Studies 2 and 3) strengthen the causal explanations and enhance result robustness. Our findings suggest that between‐group pay dispersion may lead to desirable employee performance behaviors and provide insights into pay strategies.

Electronic performance monitoring (EPM) has been widely used in organizations in the expectation of promoting performance. However, its effectiveness sometimes falls short of these expectations. Most previous studies have examined EPM's side effects from the perspective of psychological reactance, treating it simply as a monitoring stressor. To extend this literature, we draw on workplace objectification theory and propose that EPM fosters employees' perceived objectification by signaling objectifying cues, which in turn undermines employee job performance. Moreover, supervisor monitoring styles (observational and interactional) can either strengthen or weaken the relationship between EPM and perceived objectification. We tested our model using an online experiment with 199 US participants and a multi‐wave field survey with 294 Chinese employees, and all hypotheses were supported. Theoretically, this research complements the psychological reactance perspective in EPM research by introducing perceived objectification as a humanity‐related mechanism through which EPM may shape employee performance. We also advance workplace objectification theory by extending its scope from human–human interactions to human–technology interactions. Practically, we offer guidance on preserving employees' humanity while adopting technological and human monitoring to maintain performance.

This study integrates organizational theory and strategic human resource management research to examine how corporate standards for managing frontline employees shape human resource (HR) implementation at the unit level. While prior research has recognized the role of line managers, less is known about how HR investments directed at line managers influence their implementation of HR practices. We argue that more extensive HR‐related corporate standards, embedded in chain training and technology systems, lead franchisees to invest in line manager training and compensation. These investments enhance line managers' ability and motivation to implement HR practices for frontline employees in line with corporate standards. We further propose that corporate enforcement mechanisms, in the form of contract terminations, strengthen these relationships. Using a nationally stratified random sample of 908 franchisee‐owned units across 143 U.S. fast food chains, we combine survey data on unit‐level HR practices with independent measures of corporate standards from franchise disclosure documents. Results reveal that corporate standards do not simply flow through to frontline employee HR practices but are instead transmitted through line manager HR investments, with stronger effects under greater enforcement. These findings identify line managers as key conduits through which corporate standards are enacted in unit‐level practices and highlight the importance of aligning standards, managerial investments, and enforcement in decentralized organizations.

The COVID‐19 pandemic catalyzed a global shift toward working from home (WFH), potentially reshaping workplace norms and employee expectations. As organizations began scaling back previously available WFH arrangements in the post‐pandemic period, questions emerged about how such changes affect employee satisfaction. Drawing on psychological contract theory, this study examines how reductions in WFH availability influence employee job satisfaction and tests psychological contract violation as the key causal mechanism underlying this relationship. Using two complementary studies, we provide evidence that scaling back WFH availability leads to declines in employee job satisfaction after the pandemic. The first study leverages longitudinal organizational data from U.S. federal agencies spanning 2016 to 2023 and a quasi‐experimental research design to examine how sharper reductions in WFH availability affect employee job satisfaction. The second study uses a scenario‐based experimental design to demonstrate that reductions in WFH availability increase perceptions of psychological contract violation, which in turn reduce job satisfaction. Together, these findings highlight that post‐pandemic reductions in previously available flexibility are not merely logistical adjustments, but meaningful relational changes with important implications for employee attitudes.

The proliferation of electronic performance monitoring (EPM) has made digital surveillance ubiquitous in modern workplaces. Meta‐analytic evidence indicates that, on average, EPM leaves performance unchanged while consistently increasing employee stress. We propose that this null overall effect reflects two counterbalancing pathways triggered by the same monitoring stimulus. Drawing on cognitive appraisal theory of stress, we posit that EPM is positively associated with employees' perception of objectification, which in turn triggers two divergent coping pathways: (a) an emotion‐focused path in which hostile affect positively predicts workplace incivility and negatively predicts job performance, and (b) a problem‐focused path in which problem‐focused reactance positively predicts job performance. Three complementary studies, an online experiment (Study 1, with two sub‐studies; N = 240), a multisource, multiwave field survey (Study 2; N = 224), and a 10‐day experience sampling study (Study 3; N = 96, yielding 612 daily observations), support this dual‐pathway model. Crucially, we identify development idiosyncratic deals (i‐deals) as a pivotal moderator: employees who secure personalized growth resources amplify problem‐focused behaviors while mitigating the interpersonal and performance costs of emotion‐focused responses. This research offers a nuanced understanding of EPM, providing organizations with insights into how to balance monitoring efficiency with employee initiative through human‐centric i‐deals.

Cross‐border acquisitions involving developed and emerging economies serve as an important source of organizational learning and performance renewal. Yet, how these cross‐border learning opportunities are internalized through human capital investment and how such investments influence post‐acquisition outcomes remain a theoretically rich but empirically underexplored question. Based on the resource‐based view of the firm and, in conjunction, the absorptive capacity literature, we propose that acquisitions between firms from different economic categories (developed vs. emerging economies) have a positive effect on the training investments, which, in turn, positively mediates the effect of cross‐border acquisitions on post‐acquisition firm performance. We further propose firm‐specific contingencies that bound the relationships between cross‐border acquisitions, training investments, and firm performance. Specifically, we argue that acquirers with prior experience are less reliant on training investments, and R&D of the acquired firm plays a complementary role to training investments in generating higher returns from the acquisition. We test these propositions using data on 1759 acquisition deals during the period 2004–2023. Our results provide support for our theoretical arguments. The findings advance the human resource management literature by highlighting the capability‐building role of training in leveraging human capital to enhance firm performance in cross‐border acquisitions. The study also has practical implications for multinational acquirers aiming to strengthen organizational capabilities and build post‐acquisition resilience through targeted training investments.