International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to test whether self-verification striving serves as an individual difference antecedent of emotional labor and explore whether various emotional labor tactics acted as mediatingmechanisms through which self-verification striving relates to employee outcomes. Design/methodology/approach - The sample used in this paper consisted of supervisor-subordinate dyads working in six hotels in South Korea and used multi-level analyses and the Monte Carlo method to test the research hypotheses presented in this paper. Findings - Self-verification striving was positively and directly related to job performance as well as two out of three forms of emotional labor (i.e. the expression of naturally felt emotions and deep acting). Selfverification striving also indirectly related to job satisfaction through the expression of naturally felt emotions and indirectly related to job performance through deep acting. Practical implications - The findings of this paper suggest that organizations should consider selfverification striving as an employment selection criterion and provide training programs to help their customer service employees engage in appropriate types of emotional labor. Originality/value - This paper is the first to explore the underlying mechanisms through which selfverification striving relates to employee outcomes. It also empirically bolsters the notion that expressing naturally felt emotions is an important means of authentic self-expression that positively contributes to job satisfaction. Further, the authors found that self-verification striving positively relates to job performance partially through deep acting. Moreover, they have shown that self-verification striving, as an individual differences variable, is an antecedent of different types of emotional labor.
In recent years, executives at numerous companies have learned tough lessons through high-profile scandals that swiftly damaged their reputations. Credibility, the authors argue, is based on two key elements: perceived competence (people's faith in the leader's knowledge, skills, and ability to do the job) and trustworthiness (their belief in his or her values and dependability).
In field studies, the authors explored the specific behaviors that affect how people assess their leaders' competence and trustworthiness and, in turn, their credibility. The authors identified a number of behaviors that can cause leaders to lose credibility, including displaying a lack of relevant job knowledge, struggling to handle key tasks that are part of their job, and making decisions that don't align with their organization or its broader environment.
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which supervisor behavior is associated with employees' job neglect.Design/methodology/approach - The paper investigates the extent to which supervisor behavior is associated with employees' job neglect.Findings - Results from hierarchical regression analyses support the hypothesis that both positive and negative supervisor behaviors have significant effects on job neglect. Negative supervisor behavior was more strongly associated with job neglect than positive supervisor behavior.Research limitations/implications - Changing the style of supervision might help to reduce job neglect of employees, benefitting the organization by reducing the associated costs of job neglect and counterproductive behavior.Originality/value - The findings provide additional evidence for the important effects supervisors can have on employees. They also indicate that - in addition to studying abusive supervision - there is a need to consider the effects of a broad spectrum of supervisor behavior.
Research in Higher Education
The amount of time, effort, and money expended in pursuit of a college degree makes it important that students choose a university that is a good fit for them. Unfortunately students often determine whether a university is a fit for them through trial and error. This research investigated student-university fit and its relationship with satisfaction and well-being. We assessed student-university fit by developing 18 fit factors and measuring needs for, and supplies of, those factors. We tested our hypotheses using polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. Data from 228 students suggest that student-university fit is predictive of students' satisfaction with their university and psychological well-being.