ABSTRACT In this study, we develop a multi-level theoretical framework linking antecedents and outcomes of peer control, defined as team members at the same hierarchical level noticing and responding to their peers’ behaviour or performance. Analysing multi-level data from 356 volunteers and 58 regional teams in a non-profit organization, we examine top-down managerial controls as antecedents of lateral peer control, both directly (i.e., monitoring and responding directly to peers) and indirectly (i.e., gossiping about and avoiding underperforming peers), and peer control’s effects on individual- and team-level outcomes. In line with our predictions, we find formal managerial control and clan control to be antecedents of peer control, albeit with differential effects on direct and indirect peer control. We also find a significant association between peer control and both individual-level job satisfaction and team-level performance, but again, with crucial differences between the two types of peer controls and the two outcomes. Our study contributes to the development of a better theoretical understanding of peer control, sheds light on inconsistent findings across prior studies, provides novel insights into how team leaders can influence team members’ individual satisfaction and team-level performance via peer control, and reveals important trade-offs with regards to peer control’s influence on individual- and team-level outcomes.
Keywords: formal and informal (clan) control, job satisfaction, multi-level analysis, non-profit organizations, organizational control, peer control, team performance, volunteers
Congratulations to my hometown team Bayern Munich for winning last night’s Champions League final! Max had his own soccer game at kickoff time, but we watched a replay later and were thrilled to see them win their sixth title!
Just came back from the Outer Banks with our little family pod enjoying jet skiing in the Currituck Sound, hiking the sand dunes of Jockey’s Ridge State Park, watching Dolphins passing by at sunrise and boogie boarding in Corolla, and visiting the wild horses on the Northern Shores.
Today, my term as Associate Editor at Journal of Management has ended. I am incredibly grateful to Editor David Allen & Senior Associate Editor Taco Reus for offering me this amazing opportunity, and I learned a lot from handling more than 100 unique manuscripts (many for multiple revisions) and close to 100 review issue proposals during my three years at JOM. And I won’t be leaving JOM as I have been invited to join the incoming JOM editorial board and will also remain the AE for any manuscripts assigned to me during my term which are still in the review process.
Happy to share that our symposium “The Role of Memory and Cognition (vs. Activity and Behavior) in Social Networks” co-organized and co-chaired by Daniel Z. Levin (Rutgers) and myself was selected as a “Showcase Symposium” and the Winner of the Organizational Behavior Division Best Symposium Award!
This year’s Academy of Management Annual Meeting is happening in Boston, MA. My co-authors and I are represented on the program with two presentations:
Levin, D. Z. & Walter, J. (2019). Is tie maintenance really necessary?
Ross, J. R., Mehra, A., Levin, D. Z., Walter, J. (2019). Dormant ties: A review and agenda for research.
Both presentations are part of a symposium Daniel and I organized:
“The Role of Memory and Cognition (vs. Activity and Behavior) in Social Networks.” Presenters: Jiyin Cao (Stony Brook), Edward Bishop Smith (Northwestern), You-Ta Chuang (York), Fu-Sheng Tsai (Cheng Shiu), Wenpin Tsai (Pennsylvania State), Martin J. Kilduff (University College London), Tiziana Casciaro (Toronto), Jason Rekus Ross (Kentucky), & Ajay Mehra (Kentucky). Discussant: Ronald S. Burt (Chicago).
I was also honored by receiving an “Outstanding Reviewer Award” by the Strategy Division.
By Greg Lukianoff & Jonathan Haidt (Penguin Press)
In this scathing indictment of recent trends in parenting, education, politics, and the media, a First Amendment expert and a social psychologist take on three “great untruths”–what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker; always trust your feelings; and life is a battle between good people and evil people–that contradict basic psychological principles about well-being and that result in a culture of safetyism which interferes with young people’s social, emotional, and intellectual development.
This excellent analysis of how “good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure” is a must-read for young parents, educators, and anyone else interested in the future of our democracy.