Το Φεβρουάριο φιλοξενήσαμε στο χώρο μας τη σειρά σεμιναρίων “Empowering job candidates” σε συνεργασία με το Εργαστήριο Οργανωσιακής Συμπεριφοράς και Ηγεσίας του ΟΠΑ. Οι εισηγητές μοιράστηκαν μαζί μας τις συμβουλές τους μέσα από την εμπειρία τους, τις έρευνες που έχουν διεξάγει, την επικοινωνία που έχουν με την αγορά εργασίας και τις προσωπικές τους παρατηρήσεις μέσα στον καιρό που ασχολούνται με το ανθρώπινο δυναμικό στην Ελλάδα.
Volunteering is prevalent and on the rise in the United States, but little research has examined the connection between individuals' volunteering and their jobs. In the absence of that research, it remains unclear whether employees volunteer to build on meaningful work experiences or to compensate for the lack of them. Similarly, it remains unclear whether volunteering is beneficial to the job in some way or if it is a distraction, akin to "moonlighting." In this manuscript, several theoretical perspectives from the multiple domain literature - particularly, compensation, enhancement, and resource drain - are employed across two studies to examine the intersection between volunteering and work domains. Results suggested that volunteering was associated with both volunteer and job meaningfulness, and that the pull of meaningful volunteer work was even stronger when employees had less meaning in their jobs. The results further revealed benefits of volunteering for employers. Volunteering was related to job absorption but not job interference, and was therefore associated with better performance on the job. Implications of these findings for future theorizing on volunteering are discussed.
Developing leaders is what business schools aspire to contribute to society. The pledge to do so features prominently in mission statements, web pages and course brochures—and it is as appealing as it is controversial. While large numbers of students flock to undergraduate, MBA and executive programs that promise to transform them into “leaders,” the last decade has seen a mounting wave of criticism of what happens in those programs. Questions have been raised from outside and within management academia not only about whether and how business schools truly fulfill their promise to develop leaders, but also about what kind of leaders their graduates become and on whose behalf—with whose interests at heart—they lead.
For all the fascination and controversy that surrounds leadership, there is broad consensus on two key points. First, becoming a leader is not just a matter of acquiring a body of knowledge and practicing a requisite set of skills. It entails deeper personal work. That is, it requires acquiring a clear sense of oneself—an identity—as a leader, and aligning it with one’s personal values, history and purpose. The second point of consensus is that becoming a leader—and staying one—is a social endeavor. It requires understanding, connecting and giving voice to, the social context that ultimately grants or denies one’s permission to lead. Learning to lead, in short, is not an abstract matter. The only way to do it is through experiences—of leading as well as of following—and ongoing reflection on those experiences to distil lessons that may in turn inform future practice.
HR professionals say that the three biggest challenges facing HR executives over the next 10 years are retaining and rewarding the best employees (59%), developing the next generation of corporate leaders (52%), and creating a corporate culture that attracts the best employees to organizations (36%). This research also explores investment challenges, talent management tactics, evolvement of the workforce, and critical HR competencies and knowledge.
Being an effective manager requires that you behave authentically. "Why?" you might ask. "Maybe the 'real me' isn't the most effective boss, but if I can just act the way an effective boss should act and get good results, what's wrong with that?
Organizations in the United States alone spend billions on training each year. These training and development activities allow organizations to adapt, compete, excel, innovate, produce, be safe, improve service, and reach goals. Training has successfully been used to reduce errors in such high-risk settings as emergency rooms, aviation, and the military. However, training is also important in more conventional organizations. These organizations understand that training helps them to remain competitive by continually educating their workforce. They understand that investing in their employees yields greater results. However, training is not as intuitive as it may seem. There is a science of training that shows that there is a right way and a wrong way to design, deliver, and implement a training program.
The research on training clearly shows two things: (a) training works, and (b) the way training is designed, delivered, and implemented matters. This article aims to explain why training is important and how to use training appropriately. Using the training literature as a guide, we explain what training is, why it is important, and provide recommendations for implementing a training program in an organization. In particular, we argue that training is a systematic process, and we explain what matters before, during, and after training. Steps to take at each of these three time periods are listed and described and are summarized in a checklist for ease of use.
We conclude with a discussion of implications for both leaders and policymakers and an exploration of issues that may come up when deciding to implement a training program. Furthermore, we include key questions that executives and policymakers should ask about the design, delivery, or implementation of a training program. Finally, we consider future research that is important in this area, including some still unanswered questions and room for development in this evolving field.
Few disciplines of behavioral science, if any, have gathered more attention in recent years than positive psychology. The volume of happiness research that’s poured from the labs of scientists such as APS Fellow Ed Diener and APS James McKeen Cattell and William James Fellow Martin Seligman has sparked enormous public interest and inspired countless popular books. Some of the appeal is no doubt the power of the work. Researchers have linked positive emotions with all sorts of social, cognitive, and physical health benefits. But some of it may just be that given a choice between feeling happy or not, most of us prefer the former.
What the positive psychology movement often fails to describe, however, are the boundaries of these benefits. It’s great to feel good; it’s less great to feel manic or to feel good when you’re supposed to feel fear or anger or to make the pursuit of happiness your only goal in life. In a 2011 issue of Perspectives on Psychological Science, a group of researchers led by June Gruber of Yale University surveyed what they call the “dark side” of happiness: a grey line of literature that exposed the times, ways, and degrees to which the emotion stops being useful and starts being harmful.
Research on employee recruitment has shown that an organization's corporate social performance (CSP) affects its attractiveness as an employer, but the underlying mechanisms and processes through which this occurs are poorly understood. We propose that job seekers receive signals from CSP that inform three signal-based mechanisms that ultimately affect organizational attractiveness: job seekers' anticipated pride from being affiliated with the organization, their perceived value fit with the organization, and their expectations about how the organization treats its employees. We hypothesized that these signal-based mechanisms mediate the relationships between CSP and organizational attractiveness, focusing on two aspects of CSP: an organization's community involvement and pro-environmental practices. In an experiment (N = 180) we manipulated CSP via a company's web pages. In a field study (N = 171) we measured CSP content in the recruitment materials used by organizations at a job fair and job seekers' perceptions of the organizations' CSP. Results provided support for the signal-based mechanisms and we discuss the implications for theory, future research, and practice.
When former General Electric CEO Jack Welch told the Financial Times four years ago that "on the face of it shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world," and cited workers as among a company's main constituencies, the irony was obvious. Here was the man whose ruthless approach to employee relations had earned him the nickname Neutron Jack (after a nuclear weapon designed to kill people without destroying property) but who now seemed to be suggesting that employees were worthier of top management's concern than company investors were.
How important is worker satisfaction to corporate financial performance? Notwithstanding Mr. Welch's apparent change of heart, demonstrating such an effect has proved elusive. "There is still much debate on whether these variables are actually related in practice," begins a paper in the current issue of the scholarly journal Academy of Management Perspectives.
The study then proceeds to provide what its author, Wharton professor Alex Edmans, claims to be the strongest demonstration to date not only that the two are related but that worker satisfaction is a significant driver of firm value rather than just a happy byproduct of it. Focusing on the yearly listing in Fortune magazine of the 100 Best Companies to Work For In America, the University of Pennsylvania professor finds that those firms generate considerably higher annual stock returns over the long term than the broad market does -- as much as nearly four percentage points higher per year.
Equally important, Wall Street seems largely impervious to this impressive impact. Noting the intangible nature of employee satisfaction, the study asserts that "the stock market uses traditional valuation methodologies, devised for the 20th century firm and based on physical assets, which cannot accommodate intangibles easily."
Moreover, the market is proving a slow learner: stock analysts' under-appreciation of the effect has been even more pronounced since 1998 than it was before, even though the visibility of the Best Companies list greatly increased with its first appearance in Fortune that year.
Ο οργανισμός είναι οι άνθρωποί του. Πόσο καλά όμως γνωρίζουν οι εταιρείες αυτό το πολύτιμο asset; Η γνωριμία μπορεί να ξεκινήσει από τα πρώτα κιόλας στάδια της επαφής, από τη διαδικασία του recruitment και να συνεχιστεί κατά τη διάρκεια της παραμονής του ανθρώπινου δυναμικού στους κόλπους του οργανισμού. Τα Assessment Centers είναι ίσως ένας από τους καταλληλότερους τρόπους να «χτιστεί» αυτή η σχέση.
Job applicants with experience in voluntary roles may be tempted to report this to their prospective employers. But how favourably do recruiters regard these sorts of experience? Christa Wilkin and Catherine Connelly investigated this in a group of professional recruiters, providing them with CVs (resumes) constructed to differ systematically in the types of experience reported. They suspected that other things being equal, work experience may be favoured more when it comes with a wage, as duration in a paid role implies you have met performance and behavioural standards, whereas voluntary positions tend to lack appraisals and focus more on participation (hours of involvement) than evaluating outcomes. Wilkin and Connelly also predicted that voluntary work would be subject to the same 'relevance' criteria as paid: if it didn't obviously supply skills, knowledge and experience that were pertinent to the targeted job, it wouldn't make them more attractive to the recruiter.
In the competition for true talent, I often picture companies as robots donned in red or blue plastic, battling in a yellow ring to conquer and win the best of the best candidates. But my retro devotion to Rock’em Sock’em robots always reminds me that someone is controlling the levers. The moves of the Blue Bomber and the Red Rocker are really being choreographed by each company’s recruiters. Recruiters launch the battle, and candidates’ perceptions of the organization and its corresponding brand image must be considered throughout the process. If recruiters and organizations know what will keep applicants interested and continuing through the process, they have a better chance at getting the best talent on board. But what sorts of things matter to candidates? And do these things change as a function of the stage of the process?
Think you're a great leader? Make sure you aren't guilty of one of these three reality-distorting traits.
Every great leader possesses a degree of what Walter Isaacson (in his biography of Steve Jobs) describes as "an ability to distort reality."
What Isaacson meant is that Jobs forced his will on Apple, often pushing people to create things they never thought possible--a powerful asset in any leader.
But that reality distortion effect works both ways. It also means that every leader, to a greater or lesser degree, distorts the reality around themselves, leading to tensions, inconsistency, and bad decisions.
There are two reasons why leaders who live in a bubble become so dangerous to themselves and those they lead.
Who Gets Headhunted--and Who Gets Ahead? The Impact of Search Firms on Executive Careers.
Employing 44 in-depth interviews and examining a large multinational search firm's detailed records for 2,000 executives working for more than 800 corporations, this research finds that the executive search firm targets large, reputable, high-performing companies to recruit from, and identifies individual target executives on the basis of their job title rather than their accomplishments. Moreover, executives who agree to be considered for a search tend to come from less successful firms and have shorter tenures than those who are targeted but decline to be considered for a search. The search firm studied tends to help individuals move between industries but not across job functions or to new roles. This evidence-based research guides attention to a type of labor market intermediary that plays an increasingly important role in labor markets today, but has remained underexplored by academics.
What fires you to get through today's pile of work? Does it intrinsically attract you, tugging your curiosity? Or do you feel a weight of obligation to do as you're supposed to? These two motivation sources, enjoying work versus being driven to work, have been well examined in the workaholism literature, with obligation leading to personal outcomes such as anxiety and rising guilt. However, despite popular accounts such as Daniel Pink's Drive, there is limited research contrasting how these approaches translate to workplace outcomes.
Sharing your scoops to your social media accounts is a must to distribute your curated content. Not only will it drive traffic and leads through your content, but it will help show your expertise with your followers.
How to integrate my topics' content to my website?
Integrating your curated content to your website or blog will allow you to increase your website visitors’ engagement, boost SEO and acquire new visitors. By redirecting your social media traffic to your website, Scoop.it will also help you generate more qualified traffic and leads from your curation work.
Distributing your curated content through a newsletter is a great way to nurture and engage your email subscribers will developing your traffic and visibility.
Creating engaging newsletters with your curated content is really easy.