Knowledge that Transforms

-concurrently performing more than one job-and spend time enacting their professional identities each day. In accordance with self-consistency theory, scholars have emphasized that having to act out more than one professional identity promotes a fragmented sense of self for multiple jobholders, which impedes the meaningfulness of their work. However, we assert that this prevailing view about self-inconsistency is incomplete and problematic because it overlooks consideration for how enacting multiple professional identities may be a self-expanding and stimulating experience that satisfies basic needs for growth and exploration. By jointly applying self-expansion theory and self-consistency theory to the day-to-day experience of wearing multiple hats, we unpack how and why enacting multiple professional identities has countervailing implications for work meaningfulness through its effects on stimulation and self-alienation. We also consider the moderating role of identity contrast on these pathways to meaningfulness. We investigate our assertions in a series of preregistered studies-a comprehensive test of our model in a 15-day experience sampling study (Study 1) as well as constructive replications of each stage of our model (Study 2). Overall, we offer novel insights about the day-to-day tension between stimulation and self-alienation for people who act out multiple professional identities and the impact on the meaningfulness of their work. (PsycInfo Database Record

Machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used for personnel assessment and selection (e.g., resume screeners, automatically scored interviews). However, concerns have been raised throughout society that ML assessments may be biased and perpetuate or exacerbate inequality. Although organizational researchers have begun investigating ML assessments from traditional psychometric and legal perspectives, there is a need to understand, clarify, and integrate fairness operationalizations and algorithmic bias mitigation methods from the computer science, data science, and organizational research literature. We present a four-stage model of developing ML assessments and applying bias mitigation methods, including (a) generating the training data, (b) training the model, (c) testing the model, and (d) deploying the model. When introducing the four-stage model, we describe potential sources of bias and unfairness at each stage. Then, we systematically review definitions and operationalizations of algorithmic bias, legal requirements governing personnel selection from the United States and Europe, and research on algorithmic bias mitigation across multiple domains and integrate these findings into our framework. Our review provides insights for both research and practice by elucidating possible mechanisms of algorithmic bias while identifying which bias mitigation methods are legal and effective. This integrative framework also reveals gaps in the knowledge of algorithmic bias mitigation that should be addressed by future collaborative research between organizational researchers, computer scientists, and data scientists. We provide recommendations for developing and deploying ML assessments, as well as recommendations for future research into algorithmic bias and fairness. (PsycInfo Database Record

= 26,133) with varying lags (1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year) and found it to fail in all cases. Employing the random-intercept crossed-lagged panel, a new approach in WFC research, our results indicate that the effects between WFC and strain (exhaustion, perceived stress, and affective rumination) depend primarily on longer term WFC (or strain) levels. In contrast, short-term deviations from these levels (within-person effects) play a minor role. These findings suggest that the effects between WFC and strain may be more persistent than previously assumed, opening avenues for further theoretical and empirical development. (PsycInfo Database Record

Although subordinate-to-supervisor relational identification (RI) has gained significant scholarly attention in organizational research, an understanding of its nomological network is incomplete. There have also been recurring discussions about its distinctions with another more extensively researched relational construct-leader-member exchange (LMX). In this meta-analysis, we expand Sluss and Ashforth's (2007) typology, going beyond the influence of the supervisor, to systematically study the antecedents and consequences of RI and its comparison with LMX. Meta-analytic results based on 157 independent samples demonstrate that positive leader behaviors that span role-based and person-based identities (e.g., transformational leadership, supervisor humility) are important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI, with effects contingent on subordinates' national culture (i.e., collectivism and power distance). Although less hypothesized, relational and organizational contexts as well as subordinate characteristics are also important antecedents of subordinate-to-supervisor RI. The results further show that RI relates to important subordinate behaviors and attitudes. Finally, we test how RI and LMX have differing effects across these important subordinate attitudes and behaviors. We conclude with suggestions to enhance our understanding of RI. (PsycInfo Database Record

Expressions of gratitude by leaders tend to yield positive effects in the workplace. Leaders, however, are not solely bestowers of gratitude but also recipients of it. Although leaders are often studied for their influence on others in the workplace, it is crucial to acknowledge that they are also complete individuals with personal lives outside of work that can spill over and affect their feelings and leadership behaviors at work. To advance research on leadership and gratitude, we take a whole-person view of leaders to understand the interpersonal crossover and intrapersonal spillover of gratitude. By integrating the moral affect theory of gratitude and savoring interventions research, we investigate how an intervention involving reflecting on gratitude received from family members at home motivates leaders to be more helpful and empowering toward their followers at work. We studied these ideas across three daily field experiments with 103 full-time managers from high schools, 116 leader-follower dyads from a variety of industries, and 109 leaders across various industries. Our findings demonstrate that when leaders reflected on receiving gratitude from family members at home, they felt higher prosocial impact at home, which in turn fulfilled their basic daily needs, consequently motivating them to engage in more helping and empowering behavior toward their followers at work. We also found some evidence that leaders higher in trait negative affect benefited the least from reflecting on receiving gratitude at home. We discuss how our findings provide extensions to literatures on gratitude, leadership, and work-family issues. (PsycInfo Database Record

Research on managerial voice endorsement has primarily focused on the processes and conditions through which voicers receive their managers' endorsement. We shift this focus away from the voicers, focusing instead on the dual reactions that endorsement generates for observing employees. Drawing from an approach-avoidance framework, we propose that managerial endorsement of coworker voice could be perceived as a positive and negative stimulus for observers, prompting them to approach opportunities and avoid threats, respectively. Results from a preregistered experiment and a multiwave, multisource field study revealed that managerial endorsement of coworker voice was positively related to observers' voice instrumentality, thus prompting them to engage in approach behaviors (i.e., voice). We also found that managerial endorsement of coworker voice was positively related to observers' voice threat, triggering avoidant behaviors (i.e., avoidance-oriented counterproductive work behaviors). Further, we found that the avoidant reactions more pronounced for observers with higher (vs. lower) neuroticism. Overall, our research extends theory by demonstrating the rippling effects that voice endorsement can ignite throughout the workgroup. (PsycInfo Database Record

The prevailing viewpoint has long depicted employee time theft as inherently detrimental. However, this perspective may stem from a limited understanding of the underlying motives that drive such behavior. Time theft can paradoxically be motivated by neutral and even laudable intentions, such as promoting work efficiency, thus rendering it potentially beneficial and constructive. Across three mixed-methods studies, we explore the motives behind employee time theft, develop and validate an instrument to assess these motives, and examine how they differentially predict time theft behavior. Specifically, in Study 1, we use a qualitative method and identify 11 types of time theft motives. Study 2 embarks on the development of measures of these motives, subsequently validating their factor structure. Study 3 examines their incremental variance in predicting time theft behavior by controlling for personality and demographic variables. Overall, these studies reveal that employees' engagement in time theft can be driven not solely by self-oriented motives but also by others- and work-oriented motives. Further, each of these motives provides incremental value in understanding time theft behavior. Implications for both research and practice emanating from these findings are also discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record

. Furthermore, using time-lagged data from Study 3, we provide initial insights into relevant person and situation predictors of profile membership and show how employees across profiles differ on work-related outcomes that can be functional or dysfunctional for their organization. Taken together, we aim to initiate a conversation on the complex nature of responses to diversity initiatives within the diversity management literature and call for more research, specifically on ambivalent responses. (PsycInfo Database Record

Research and the media demonstrate the profound impact hostile work environments have on organizations and their members. Often, the term "toxic work climate" is used to describe patterns of aggressive behaviors that harm individuals and manifest in the broader workplace. However, despite these common references, scholars still know relatively little about what a toxic work climate actually entails, the processes by which they emerge, and their influence on organizational outcomes. The research domain is complex. Within the organizational literature alone, toxic work climates have been described as those that harbor abusive bosses, aggressive employees, and those that show signs of bullying or incivility. Our aim in this integrative conceptual review is to add precision and focus to this multidisciplinary and fragmented literature. Grounding our efforts in multilevel theories, we first introduce an overarching definition of the toxic work climate construct and review research on existing hostile climate types that can appropriately be consolidated under this new heading. We then develop a new theoretical model that outlines the dominant causes and mechanisms by which toxic work climates form, and the main pathways by which they influence employees, teams, and organizations. Finally, we provide a unified path forward for advancing theory, research, and practice, including advice on how toxic climates might be combated in years to come. (PsycInfo Database Record

in the workplace, assuming that simply overhearing such discussions-without being a participant in them-may have unintended consequences for employees. Across three studies, our findings indicated that employees experience negative affect after overhearing political conversations at work, with these effects being attenuated (amplified) in contexts where employees perceive that their coworkers are more (less) similar to them. In addition to unpacking the mechanisms through which ambient workplace political conversations might impact employee outcomes, our findings from Studies 3A-B provide evidence that under certain circumstances (i.e., when employees agree with the content of ambient workplace political conversations), employees may experience a boost in positive affect after overhearing such conversations at work. Altogether, our findings provide insight into the costs and potential benefits associated with overhearing coworkers discussing politics in the workplace, particularly for those employees who perceive themselves to be dissimilar from their coworkers. (PsycInfo Database Record