July 29, 2014
What role does Virtual HRD play in a 24/7 work environment? Can VHRD help virtual teams overcome swift trust development barriers? How does an intranet provide opportunities for learning organizational culture? The answers to these questions and more can be found in Advances in Developing Human Resources‘ new Special Issue on New Perspectives on Virtual Human Resource Development.
Elisabeth E. Bennett of Northeastern University prefaced the issue with her article, “Introducing New Perspectives on Virtual Human Resource Development.”
New perspectives on VHRD have been advanced by this article, and the articles following this introduction offer their own insights into VHRD. One theme that crosses several of the articles is the need to balance the social and the technical in VHRD. Thomas (2014) and Bennett (2014) draw on theories of organizational culture for understanding organizational values for learning and performance, as well expectations for access through corporate information systems. Fagan (2014) recommends viewing technology as a combination of the social and material, which is a more holistic approach similar to the gestalt of VHRD described in this article.
Novel applications of VHRD are also addressed in this issue. McWhorter and Lynham (2014) present an initial conceptualization of how constructs in VHRD and the scenario planning process inform VSP. VSP is one way to build present and future learning capacity, helping to prepare leaders for potential future realities. Germain and McGuire (2014) model barriers and identify enablers of swift trust in virtual teams, including the role of prior cognition in developing trust when no close relationship exists among team members. Ausburn and Ausburn (2014) review theories and capabilities of screen-based virtual reality environments, which are 3D applications in which users control actions. Their article highlights the need for fidelity in virtual technologies to foster motivation to engage and experience VHRD. Fidelity, or similarity to the real world, helps people suspend disbelief in simulated and virtual settings (Bennett, 2011) and it is designed into technology during development. Each contribution in this issue addressed technology development in some form or fashion, and themes across the articles are analyzed by McWhorter (2014) in the culminating article. McWhorter (2014) found that each of the articles in this issue of Advances gave further support for VHRD and emerging themes therein suggested Technology Development is a valuable contribution to the field of HRD.
July 28, 2014
Did you miss your chance in March? Good news! SAGE is still looking to commission original business case studies. Please get in touch if you would like to write or submit a case!
- Can you write, or have you written a business case study?
- Would you like to produce a video case study?
- Can you write an academic article on your latest research on a topical business issue?
- Have you developed innovative datasets that need disseminating more widely?
- Have you produced video content such as interviews, presentations and business processes in action?
- Would you like to discuss your research on camera or take part in round table discussions?
If the answer to these is YES then SAGE is interested in hearing from you!
SAGE Business Cases is an exciting new collection containing specially repurposed and previously unpublished business cases. The collection will be hosted on the premier eBook platform SAGE Knowledge. The goal of SAGE Business Cases is to build a world-class case collection that is fully accessible to staff and students through their academic libraries. The cases will aid the teaching and understanding of business studies and come complete with full teaching notes.
What are the benefits of submitting a case?
The benefits to you as an author are significant. SAGE is pleased to offer our case authors:
- Discoverability of your existing work on our global SAGE Knowledge platform.
- The opportunity to have your case peer-reviewed.
- Access to SAGE Research Methods, the award-winning platform for academic research.
- Payment if we publish your case!
What is SAGE looking for?
We are looking for lively, interesting cases that bring business concepts and problems to life. They should engage the student with the scenario, be rich in context and detail; pose intriguing and unique business challenges for discussion and debate. We are looking for cases that discuss a range of organizations, large or small.
You may already have cases that you are using in your own teaching that, with only minor amendment, may make a wonderful addition to the SAGE Business Cases collection!
How can I get involved?
It is easy to get involved in SAGE Business Cases! If you are willing to contribute or provide guidance, then please arrange to meet with David Harrison who is looking to develop digital collections of leading global academic business commentary, reference and support. Simply email email@example.com!
July 24, 2014
One only has to do a quick internet search on job termination practices to find pages upon pages of advice ranging from legal tips to breaking the bad news. But is there a set procedure that employers follow when it comes to the documentation of a termination? That’s what authors Mike Duncan and Jillian Hill set out to explore in their article “Termination Documentation” from Business and Professional Communication Quarterly.
In this study, we examined 11 workplaces to determine how they handle termination documentation, an empirically unexplored area in technical communication and rhetoric. We found that the use of termination documentation is context dependent while following a basic pattern of infraction, investigation, intervention, and termination. Furthermore, the primary audience of the documentation is typically legal and regulatory bodies, not the employee. We also make observations about genre, collaboration, and authorship in these documents.
Click here to read “Termination Documentation” from Business and Professional Communication Quarterly for free. Like what you read? Click here to sign up for e-alerts and get notified of all the latest research from Business and Professional Communication Quarterly!
July 23, 2014
What factors influence undergraduate business students’ decision to pursue sales education? What’s the role of self-efficacy in sales education? Can an interactive computer simulation teach students sales ethics? Journal of Marketing Education‘s Special Issue on Sales Education and Training explores these topics and more!
James W. Peltier of the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater and Andrea L. Dixon of Baylor University collaborated on the issue’s Editor Corner:
Welcome to this Journal of Marketing Education (JME) Special Issue on Sales Education and Training. We proposed this Special Issue as demand for college graduates with a sales degree/major/minor/emphasis/interest continues to escalate. In addition to being the most common career entry point for marketing students, a 2010 Georgetown University study found that sales is a top-ranked career for a number of disciplines outside of marketing. Interestingly, sales
ranked second for students majoring in general business, economics, international business, and management. Sales ranked third for students majoring in finance, operations management, HR, and management information systems. Across campus, sales ranked second/third for students in the social, natural, and physical sciences and in liberal arts and communications.
While the demand for graduates to work in sales grows, there is a shortage of scholarly articles dealing specifically with sales curricula and sales pedagogy. In fact, the marketing education literature has been relatively slow in responding to changes in sales education and training. Of the over 800 articles published in JME’s history, only 27 papers deal with sales education (see Gray et al., 2012).
The absence of research in sales education is not due to a lack of activity or paucity of scholars in this area. According to DePaul’s Universities and Colleges Sales Education Landscape Survey, sales curricula grew from 44 U.S. programs in 2007 to 101 programs in 2011. As demand for sales-ready graduates grows, universities are trying to meet this demand by expanding curricular offerings, opening sales centers, and hiring sales faculty. We initiated this Special Issue with a goal of engaging scholars in this area and sparking additional research.
July 17, 2014
We are pleased to congratulate Indiana University’s Janet Hillier and Linda M. Dunn-Jensen, who have received the Fritz Roethlisberger Memorial Award for 2013. Their paper “Groups Meet…Teams Improve: Building Teams that Learn” appeared in the October 2013 issue of Journal of Management Education.
Jane Schmidt-Wilk, Chair of the OBTS 2014 Fritz Roethlisberger Memorial Award Committee, commented in the announcement that appeared in Journal of Management Education:
We also found clear linkages to Roethlisberger’s legacy. For example, Roethlisberger advocated the view, novel at his time, that the workplace is a complex social system, and this social system influences work behavior. This insight is central to our award-winning article’s contribution. Hillier and Dunn-Jensen point out that teaching teamwork commonly involves requiring students to provide individual-level feedback to team members. Unfortunately, this approach is often counterproductive: “Feedback at the individual level of analysis often consists of individual team members reviewing other members’ performance, which can have deleterious consequences and often lead to hurt feelings, anger, finger-pointing, and withdrawal” (p. 707).
Instead, Hillier and Dunn-Jensen focus attention on the group as a whole and emphasize consistent, structured team-level feedback as a mechanism to gauge team performance. They propose that the processes and procedures that facilitate organizational learning can be applied to facilitate team learning. They provide a learning team model that builds on a foundation of team feedback, which is integrated with a team charter and a formal team assessment process. Using the model takes students through repeated cycles of inquiry and learning, paralleling Roethlisberger’s own commitment to inquiry and learning.
This teaching innovation article also satisfied our human interest criterion. The authors provide all the necessary materials for implementing their approach, examples of its application in three different class settings at the graduate and undergraduate levels, and both quantitative and qualitative evidence of student learning. One committee member noted, “The feedback from students the authors provided in the article is testament to the real discoveries that students derive from taking part in this activity.”
The abstract of “Groups Meet…Teams Improve: Building Teams that Learn”:
Although most business students participate in team-based projects during undergraduate or graduate course work, the team experience does notalways teach team skills or capture the team members’ potential: Students complete the task at hand but the explicit process of becoming a team is often not learned. Drawing from organizational learning and group/team theory, this article presents a “learning team model” that emphasizes feedback at the team—not individual—level of analysis by establishing a team feedback tool that can be easily and regularly used to improve performance. In addition to the feedback tool, a structured process is presented in which students learn to become a team.
Click here to read “Groups Meet…Teams Improve: Building Teams that Learn” for free for the next 30 days from Journal of Management Education. Stay up to date on all the latest news and research from Journal of Management Education! Click here to sign up for e-alerts!
July 16, 2014
Many academics find themselves in an increasingly specialized area of research, which has benefits like creating an identity, increasing productivity and a feeling of belonging intellectually. Mats Alvesson and Jörgen Sandberg point out in their paper recently published in Organization Studies entitled “Habitat and Habitus: Boxed-in versus Box-Breaking Research,” that keeping within a particular research ‘box’ is a key mechanism for success within the Management and Organization Studies community. However, they argue for more ‘tolerance for box-breaking’, suggesting that by being skeptical and challenging of the field, by drawing on theories and conventions from other fields, and by deconstructing and negating dominant viewpoints in one’s own and others’ research, box changing, box jumping and box transcendence can lead to more dynamic and critical research.
This paper argues that scholarly work is increasingly situated in narrowly circumscribed areas of study, which are encouraging specialization, incremental adding-to-the-literature contributions and a blinkered mindset. Researchers invest considerable time and energy in these specialized areas in order to maximize their productivity and career prospects. We refer to this way of doing research and structuring careers as boxed-in research. While such research is normally portrayed as a template for good scholarship, it gives rise to significant problems in management and organization studies, as it tends to generate a shortage of novel and influential ideas. We propose box-breaking research as a strategy for how researchers and institutions can move away from the prevalence of boxed-in research and, thus, be able to generate more imaginative and influential research results. We suggest three versions: box changing, box jumping and, more ambitiously, box transcendence.
Click here to read “Habitat and Habitus: Boxed-in versus Box-Breaking Research” for free from Organization Studies. Don’t miss other research from Organization Studies! Click here to sign up for e-alerts!