Skip to main content
×
Home

Authoritarian Leadership and Extra-Role Behaviors: A Role-Perception Perspective

  • Yan Zhang (a1) (a2) and Yun-Hui Xie (a3) (a4)
Abstract
ABSTRACT

Authoritarian leaders make unilateral decisions and prevail over subordinates. Such leadership, as a style of exercising formal authority and position power, may inhibit employees’ extra-role behaviors in the hierarchical role structure. We explore employees’ role perceptions to better understand how supervisors’ authoritarian leadership decreases extra-role behaviors (OCBs). Authoritarian behavior is expected to generate subordinate perceptions of role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload, with consequent negative effects on OCB. Hypotheses are tested using data from 613 subordinate – supervisor dyads. Empirical results indicate that authoritarian leadership increases subordinate role conflict and overload which then decreases OCB. Authoritarian behavior also increases role ambiguity, but role ambiguity is not associated with OCB. The article concludes with research suggestions and practical implications.

摘要:

专制型领导人作单方面的决定并优先于下属。这样的领导力, 作为一种行使正式权威及权力地位的风格, 可能会抑制员工在等级角色结构中的角色外行为。我们探讨员工的角色感知, 以更好地认识监管者的专制领导力如何减小角色外行为 (OCBs) 。专制行为预计将产生下属对角色冲突、角色模糊和角色超载的看法, 随之带来对OCB的负面影响。使用613个下属–监管者对偶数据对假设进行了测试。实证结果表明专制型领导力增加下属的角色冲突和超载从而减少OCB。专制行为也增加角色模糊, 但角色模糊与OCB不相关。文章最后提出研究建议及实际启示。

अधिकारवादी नेता एकपक्षीय निर्णय लेते हैं और अपने अधीनस्थ कर्मचारियों पर हावी होते हैं. औपचारिक प्राधिकार व पदस्थ शक्ति के सन्दर्भ में ऐसी नेतृत्व शैली कर्मचारियों के भूमिका से इतर व्यवहारों को बाधित करती है. हमने कर्मचारियों की भूमिका अनुभूति पर अनुसंधान यह समझने के लिए किया है कि किस प्रकार परिवेक्षक का अधिकारवादी व्यवहार मातहतों के भूमिका-इतर व्यवहार को काम करता है. अधिकारवादी व्यवहार से अधीन कर्मचारियों में भूमिका संघर्ष, भूमिका द्वंद्व तथा भूमिका अतिभार होने का अनुमान है जिस से भूमिका इतर व्यवहार पर नकारात्मक प्रभाव होता है. इन अवधारणाओं को 613 परिवेक्षक-मातहत युग्म से प्राप्त आंकड़ों पर परखा गया है. परिणामों के अनुसार अधिकारवादी नेतृत्व मातहतों में भूमिका संघर्ष व अतिभार बढ़ाता है जिससे भूमिका इतर व्यवहार में ह्रास होता है. अधिकारवादी नेतृत्व से भूमिका दुविधा भी बढ़ती है लेकिन इस दुविधा का भूमिका इतर व्यवहार से सम्बन्ध नहीं है. शोध पत्र के अंत में शोध सुझाव व व्यावहारिक आशयों पर चर्चा कि गयी है.

Sumário:

Líderes autoritários tomam decisões unilaterais e prevalecem sobre os subordinados. Tal liderança, como um estilo de exercer autoridade formal e poder de posição, pode inibir os comportamentos extra-papéis dos empregados na estrutura hierárquica de papéis. Exploramos as percepções do papel dos funcionários para entender melhor como a liderança autoritária de supervisores diminui os comportamentos extra-papéis (OCBs). Espera-se que o comportamento autoritário gere percepções secundárias sobre o conflito de papéis, a ambiguidade de papéis e sobrecarga de papéis, com consequentes efeitos negativos sobre o OCB. As hipóteses são testadas usando dados de 613 díades subordinado-supervisor. Os resultados empíricos indicam que a liderança autoritária aumenta o conflito de papéis dos subordinados e a sobrecarrega, que por sua vez diminui a OCB. O comportamento autoritário também aumenta a ambiguidade do papel, mas a ambiguidade do papel não está associada ao OCB. O artigo conclui com sugestões de pesquisa e implicações práticas.

АННОТАЦИЯ:

Авторитарные лидеры принимают односторонние решения и доминируют над подчиненными. Такой тип руководства, который заключается в исполнении формальных полномочий и использовании должностной власти, может препятствовать моделям поведения, которые выходят за пределы роли сотрудников в иерархической структуре. Мы исследуем восприятие роли сотрудниками, чтобы лучше понять, как авторитарное руководство со стороны начальников сокращает вне-ролевые модели поведения. Авторитарное поведение, как предполагается, создает у сотрудников восприятие роли как полной конфликта, неоднозначности и перегрузки с последующим негативным воздействием на вне-ролевые модели поведения. Гипотезы были протестированы на основании данных, которые содержат примеры 613 взаимоотношений между подчиненными и начальниками. Эмпирические результаты указывают на то, что авторитарное руководство увеличивает ролевые конфликты и перегрузки у подчиненных, что впоследствии сокращает вне-ролевые модели поведения. Авторитарное поведение также повышает ролевую неоднозначность, которая, однако, не связана с вне-ролевыми моделями поведения. В заключение, делаются некоторые теоретические выводы, а также обсуждаются практические результаты.

RESUMEN:

Los líderes autoritarios toman decisiones unilaterales y prevalecen sobre sus subordinados. Este liderazgo, como un estilo de ejercer autoridad formal y posición de poder, puede inhibir los comportamientos de roles extra de los empleados en la jerarquía de estructura de roles. Exploramos las percepciones de los roles de los empleados para entender mejor como le liderazgo autoritario de los supervisores disminuye los comportamientos de roles extra (OCBs). Se espera que el comportamiento autoritario genere percepciones subordinadas del conflicto de roles, la ambigüedad de roles, y la sobrecarga de roles, con los consecuentes efectos negativos sobre los OCB. Las hipótesis se prueban usando datos de 613 diadas de subordinados-supervisores. Los resultados empíricos indican que el liderazgo autoritario aumenta el conflicto de roles y la sobrecarga que luego disminuye los OCB. El comportamiento autoritario también aumenta la ambigüedad de roles, pero la ambigüedad no se asociada con los OCB. Este artículo concluye con sugerencias para investigación e implicaciones prácticas.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Authoritarian Leadership and Extra-Role Behaviors: A Role-Perception Perspective
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Authoritarian Leadership and Extra-Role Behaviors: A Role-Perception Perspective
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Authoritarian Leadership and Extra-Role Behaviors: A Role-Perception Perspective
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
Corresponding author: Yan Zhang (annyan.zhang@pku.edu.cn)
References
Hide All
Allen T. D., & Rush M. C. 1998. The effects of organizational citizenship behavior on performance judgments: A field study and laboratory experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (2): 247260.
Aryee S., Chen Z. X., Sun L. Y., & Debrah Y. A. 2007. Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (1): 191201.
Bass B. M., & Avolio B. J. 1990. The implications of transactional and transformational leadership for individual, team and organizational development. In Woodman R. W. & Pasmore W. A. (Eds.), Research in organizational change and development, (4): 231272. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Beehr T. A., Jex S. M., Stacy B. A., & Murray M. A. 2000. Work stressors and coworker support as predictors of individual strain and job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21 (4): 391405.
Beehr T. A., Walsh J. T., & Taber T. D. 1976. Relationship of stress to individually and organizationally valued states: Higher order needs as a moderator. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61 (7): 4147.
Bergeron D. M. 2007. The potential paradox of organizational citizenship behavior: Good citizens at what cost? Academy of Management Review, 32 (4): 10781095.
Biddle B. J. 1979. Role theory: Expectations, identities, and behaviors. New York: Academic.
Biddle B. J. 1986. Recent development in role theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 12 (1): 6792.
Bliese P. D. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein K. J. & Kozlowski S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions: 349381. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bolino M. C., & Turnley W. H. 2005. The personal costs of citizenship behavior: The relationship between individual initiative and role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90 (4): 740748.
Bolino M. C., Turnley W. H., & Bloodgood J. M. 2002. Citizenship behavior and the creation of social capital in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 27 (4): 505522.
Bollen K. A. 1989. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
Bond M. H., & Hwang K. 1993. The social psychology of the Chinese people. In Bond M. H. (Ed.), The Psychology of the Chinese People: 213264. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brislin R.W. 1980. Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In Triandis H. C. & Lambert W. W. (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: 349444. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Chan S. C. H. 2013. Paternalistic leadership and employee voice: Does information sharing matter? Human Relations, 67: 667693.
Chan S. C. H., Huang X., Snape E., & Lam C. K. 2013. The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34 (1): 108128.
Chen X-P., Eberly M. B., Chiang T-J., Farh J-L., & Cheng B-S. 2014. Affective trust in Chinese leaders: Linking paternalistic leadership to employee performance. Journal of Management, 40, 797819.
Cheng B. S., Chou L. F., Wu T. Y., Huang M. P., & Farh J. L. 2004. Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7 (1): 89117.
Cheng M-Y., & Wang L. 2015. The mediating effect of ethical climate on the relationship between paternalistic leadership and team identification: A team-level analysis in the Chinese context. Journal of Business Ethics, 129 (3): 639654.
Chou W-J., Sibley C. G., Liu J. H., Lin T-T., Cheng B-S. 2015. Paternalistic leadership profiles: A person-centered approach. Group and Organization Management, 40: 685710.
Dale K., & Fox M. L. 2008. Leadership style and organizational commitment: Mediating effect of role stress. Journal of Management Issues, 20 (1): 109130.
De Cremer D. 2006. Affective and motivational consequences of leader self-sacrifice: The moderating effect of autocratic leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 17 (1): 7993.
Eatough E. E., Chang C. H., Miloslavic S. A., & Johnson R. E. 2011. Relationships of role stressors with organizational citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (3): 619632.
Ertureten A., Cemalcilar Z., & Aycan Z. 2013. The relationship downward mobbing with leadership style and organizational attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 116 (1): 205216.
Farh J. L., & Cheng B. S. 2000. A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations. In Li J. T., Tsui A. S., & Weldon E. (Eds.), Management and organizations in the Chinese context: 84127. London: Macmillan.
Flood P. C., Hannan E., Smith K. G., Turner T., West M. A., & Dawson J. 2000. Chief executive leadership style, consensus decision making, and top management team effectiveness. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 9 (3): 401420.
Foels R., Driskell J. E., Mullen B., & Salas E. 2000. The effects of democratic leadership in group member satisfaction: An integration. Small Group Research, 31 (6): 676701.
Gong Y-P., Huang J-C., Farh J-L. 2009. Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (4): 765778.
Griffin R. W. 1983. Objective and social sources of information in task redesign: A field experiment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28 (2): 184200.
Hau K. T., & Marsh H. W. 2004. The use of item parcels in structural equation modeling: Non-normal data and small sample sizes. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 57 (2): 327351.
Hoel H., & Salin D. (2003). Organizational antecedents of workplace bullying. In Einarsen S., Hoel H., Zapf D., & Cooper C. L. (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in research and practice: 203218. London: Taylor and Francis.
Hofstede G. 1980. Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hunter S. T., Bedell-Avers K. E., & Mumford M. D. 2007. The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies. The Leadership Quarterly, 18 (5): 435466.
Jackson S. E., & Schuler R. S. 1985. A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36 (1): 1678.
Jex S. M. 1998. Stress and job performance: Theory, research, and implications for managerial practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Jex S. M., & Beehr T. A. 1991. Emerging theoretical and methodological issues in the study of work-related stress. In Ferris G. R., & Rowland K. M. (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management Vol. 9: 311365. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.
Johnston M. W., Parasuraman A., & Futrell C. M. 1989. Extending a model of salesperson role perceptions and work-related attitudes: Impact of job tenure. Journal of Business Research, 18 (4): 269290.
Kahn R. L., Wolfe D., Quinn R., & Snoek J. D. 1964. Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Karambayya R., Brett J. M., & Lytle A. 1992. Effects of formal authority and experience on third-party roles, outcomes, and perceptions of fairness. Academy of Management Journal, 35 (2): 426438.
Katz D., & Kahn R. L. 1978. The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Kelloway E. K. 1998. Using LISREL for structural equation modeling: A researcher's guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lankau M. J., Carlson D. S., & Nielson T. R. 2006. The mediating influence of role stressors in the relationship between mentoring and job attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68 (2): 308322.
LePine J. A., Podsakoff N. P., & LePine M. A. 2005. A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor-hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (5): 764775.
Lewin K., Lippitt R., & White R. K. 1939. Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10: 271301.
Li Y., & Sun J-M. 2015. Traditional Chinese leadership and employee voice behavior: A cross-level examination. Leadership Quarterly, 26 (2): 172189.
Liang S. K., Ling H. C., & Hsieh S. Y. 2007. The mediating effects of leader-member exchange quality to influence the relationships between paternalistic leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of American Academy of Business, 10 (2): 127137.
Little T. D., Cunningham W. A., Shahar G., & Widaman K. F. 2002. To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9 (2): 151173.
Lyons T. F. 1971. Role clarity, need for clarity, satisfaction, tension and withdrawal. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6 (1): 99110.
Mackenzie S. B., Podsakoff P. M., & Rich G. A. 2001. Transformational and transactional leadership and salesperson performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29 (2): 115134.
Moorman R. H. 1991. Relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76 (6): 845855.
Muthén B. 2011. Applications of causally defined direct and indirect effects in mediation analysis using SEM in Mplus. Submitted for publication.
Niehoff B. P., & Moorman R. H. 1993. Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36 (3): 527556.
Organ D. W. 1997. Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10 (2): 8597.
Organ D. W., Podsakoff P. M., & MacKenzie S. B. 2006. Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Örtqvist D., & Wincent J. 2006. Prominent consequences of role stress: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Stress Management, 13 (4): 399422.
Pareek U. 1976. Designing network for entrepreneurship development. Monograph, National Institute of Motivational and Institutional Development, Bombay.
Pearl J. 2001. Direct and indirect effects. In proceedings of the seventeenth conference on uncertainty and artificial intelligence 411420. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Pelligrini E. K., & Scandura T. A. 2008. Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 34 (3): 566593.
Pelligrini E. K., Scandura T. A., & Jayaraman V. 2010. Cross-cultural generalizability of paternalistic leadership: An expansion of leader-member exchange theory. Group & Organization Management, 35 (4): 391420.
Peterson M. F., Smith P. B., Akande A., Ayestaran S., Bochner S., Callan V., Cho N. G., Jesuino J. C., D'Amorim M., Francois P. H., Hofmann K., Koopman P. L., Leung K., Lim T. K., Mortazavi S., Munene J., Radford M., Ropo A., Savage G., Setiadi B., Sinha T. N., Sorenson R., & Viedge C. 1995. Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: A 21-nation study. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (2): 429452.
Piccolo R. F., & Colquitt J. A. 2006. Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (2): 327340.
Podsakoff P. M., Ahearne M., & MacKenzie S. B. 1997. Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (2): 262270.
Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., & Bachrach D. G. 2000. Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26 (3): 513563.
Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J-Y., & Podsakoff N. P. 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5): 879903.
Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Moorman R. H., & Fetter R. 1990. Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers trust in leader satisfaction and OCB. Leadership Quarterly, 1 (2): 107142.
Pye L. W., & Pye M. W. 2009. Asian power and politics: The cultural dimensions of authority. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rast III D. E., Hogg M. A., & Giessner S. R. 2013. Self-uncertainty and support for autocratic leadership. Self and Identity, 12 (6): 635649.
Rizzo J. R., House R. J., & Lirtzman S. I. 1970. Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15 (2): 150163.
Robert C., Probst T. M., Martocchio J. J., Drasgow F., & Lawler J. J. 2000. Empowerment and continuous improvement in the United States, Mexico, Poland, and India: Predicting fit on the basis of the dimensions of power distance and individualism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (5): 643658.
Robins J. M., & Greenland S. 1992. Identifiability and exchangeability of direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology, 3 (2): 143155.
Robins J. M. 2003. Semantics of causal DAG models and the identification of direct and indirect effects. In Green P., Hjort N. L., & Richardson S. (Eds.), Highly structured stochastic systems: 7081. New York: Oxford University Press.
Saufi R. A., Wafa S. A., & Hamzah Y. Z. 2002. Leadership style preference of Malaysian managers. Malaysian Management Review, 37: 110.
Scandura T. A., & Graen G. B. 1984. Moderating effects of initial leader-member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69 (3): 428436.
Schuh S. C., Zhang X-A., & Tian P. 2013. For the good or the bad? Interactive effects of transformational leadership with moral and authoritarian leadership behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics, 116 (3): 629640.
Shenkar O., & Zeira Y. 1992. Role conflict and role ambiguity of chief executive officers in international joint ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 23 (1): 5575.
Singh J. 2000. Performance productivity and quality of frontline employees in service organizations. Journal of Marketing, 64 (2): 1534.
Smircich L., & Morgan G. 1982. Leadership: The management of meaning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18 (3): 257273.
Smither R. D. 1993. Authoritarianism, dominance, and social behavior: A perspective from evolutionary personality psychology. Human Relations, 46 (1): 2343.
Song L. J., Tsui A. S., & Law K. S. 2009. Unpacking employee responses to organizational exchange mechanisms: The role of social and economic exchange perceptions. Journal of Management, 35 (1): 5693.
Tepper B. J., & Taylor E. C. 2003. Relationships among supervisors’ and subordinates’ procedural justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors. Academy of Management Journal, 46 (1): 97105.
Thompson H. B., & Werner J. M. 1997. The impact of role conflict/facilitation on core and discretionary behaviors: Testing a mediated model. Journal of Management, 23 (4): 583601.
Tsui A., Wang H., Xin K., Zhang L., & Fu P. P. 2004. Let a thousand flowers bloom: Variation of leadership styles among Chinese CEOs. Organizational Dynamics, 33 (1): 520.
Tubre T. C., & Collins J. M. 2000. Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of Management, 26 (1): 155169.
Uhl-Bien M., & Maslyn M. 2005. August. Paternalism as a form of leadership: Differentiating paternalism from leader-member exchange. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Honolulu, HI.
Van Sell M., Brief A. P., & Schuler R. S. 1981. Role conflict and role ambiguity: Integration of the literature and directions for future research. Human Relations, 34 (1): 4371.
Vroom V. H., & Yetton P. W. 1973. Leadership and decision making. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Wang A-H., Chiang J. G-J., Tsai C-Y., Lin T-T., & Cheng B-S. 2013. Gender makes the difference: The moderating role of leader gender on the relationship between leadership styles and subordinate performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 122 (2): 101113.
Wu M., Huang X., Li C-W., & Liu W. 2012. Perceived interactional justice and trust-in-supervisor as mediators for paternalistic leadership. Management and Organization Review, 8 (1): 97121.
Yukl G. 2011. Contingency theories of effective leadership. In Bryman A., Collinson D., Grint K., Jackson B., & Uhl-Bien M. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of leadership: 286298. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Inc.
Zhang Y., Tsui A., & Wang D. X. 2011. Leadership behaviors and group creativity in Chinese organizations: The role of group processes. The Leadership Quarterly, 22 (5): 851862.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Management and Organization Review
  • ISSN: 1740-8776
  • EISSN: 1740-8784
  • URL: /core/journals/management-and-organization-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 63
Total number of PDF views: 432 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 759 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 4th April 2017 - 23rd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.