Organization and management researchers praise the value of care in the workplace. However, they overlook the conflict between caring for work and for coworkers, which resonates with the dilemma of care allocation highlighted by ethicists of care. Through an in-depth qualitative study of two organizations, we examine how this dilemma is confronted in everyday organizational life. We draw on the concept of boundary work to explain how employees negotiate the boundary of their caring responsibilities in ways that grants or denies care to coworkers. We argue that the possibility of an ethics of care for coworkers requires boundary work that suspends the separation of personal and professional selves and constitutes the worker as a whole person. We contribute to research on care in organizations by showing how care for coworkers may be enabled or undermined by maintaining or suppressing the care allocation dilemma.

We find that corporate innovation is positively related to board diversity as measured by a multidimensional index. The benefit of board diversity is more pronounced for firms with more complex operations, more experienced boards, and stronger external governance, suggesting that diverse boards have superior advising capacity. We find evidence to suggest that firms with diverse boards engage in more exploratory innovations and develop new technology in unfamiliar areas. As a result, they create a larger number of both most-cited and uncited patents. Finally, of the six different aspects of board diversity, professional diversity matters the most for corporate innovation.

We analyze the economic costs and benefits of “community-led total sanitation” (CLTS), a sanitation intervention that relies on community-level behavioral change, in a hypothetical rural region in sub-Saharan Africa with 200 villages and 100,000 people. The analysis incorporates data on the effectiveness of CLTS from recent randomized controlled trials and other evaluations. The net benefits of this intervention are estimated both with and without the inclusion of a positive health externality, that is, the additional reduction in diarrhea for an individual when a sufficient proportion of other individuals in the community construct and use latrines and thereby decrease the overall load of waterborne pathogens and fecal bacteria in the environment. We find that CLTS interventions would pass a benefit–cost test in many situations, but that outcomes are not as favorable as some previous studies suggest. The model results are sensitive to baseline conditions, including the value of time, income level used to calculate the value of a statistical life, discount rate, case fatality rate, diarrhea incidence, and time spent traveling to defecation sites. We conclude that many communities likely have economic investment opportunities that are more attractive than CLTS, and recommend careful economic analysis of CLTS in specific locations.

Viewing production-line workers from a historical standpoint, the attention on manufacturing in the 19th and into the 20th centuries was on production (Fifelski, 2014) and production-oriented leadership style, in contrast to employee-oriented leadership style (Likert, 1961; see also Kosicek, Soni, Sandbothe, & Slack, 2012). Around the turn of the 20th century, changes took place, and it appears as if two different approaches were taken in manufacturing environments: research–practitioner-based leadership approaches and management-based leadership approaches; the latter approach is less a leadership style and more a social management philosophy em+phasizing business operation (Vitolla, Rubino, & Garzoni, 2017). This review should bring awareness that industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists once took on the lead to major successes that arose from work in manufacturing companies; however, today there is hardly any contribution by I-O psychologists to the manufacturing sector.