Call for Papers: Special Issue on Addressing the Wage & Wealth Gap

Compensation and Benefits Review is planning a special issue on “Addressing the Wage and Wealth Gap”. Articles should focus on, but are not limited to, whether capitalist institutions produce growing income inequality, fiscal policies that could address the wage gap, and CEO responsibility in mitigating wealth gaps.

Compensation & Benefits Review (CBR) is the leading journal for senior executives and professionals who design, implement, evaluate and communicate compensation and benefits policies and programs. The journal supports human resources and compensation and benefits specialists with up-to-date analyses on salary and wage trends, labor markets, pay plans, incentive compensation, retirement programs, and health care benefits.

For more details click here.

Manuscripts should be submitted electronically to

You will need to create an account in order to submit your manuscript. The system will notify you once we receive the manuscript and have sent it out for review.

Don’t forget to sign up for email alerts through the journal homepage so you never miss the latest research.

Creative Leadership Within the Cyber asset Market: An Interview With Dame Inga Beale

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Amit Mitra and Nicholas O’Regan of the University of the West of England. They recently published an article in the Journal of Management Inquiry entitled “Creative Leadership Within the Cyber asset Market: An Interview With Dame Inga Beale” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, they reflect on the motivations and challenges of their research:]


What motivated you to pursue this research?

As the world is becoming more reliant on digital technologies, the nature of risk is changing. Traditional insurers need new metrics and new ways to assess risk as organisations today are gradually converting their physical assets into their digital equivalents. So, within such a changing scenario, I was encouraged by Inga Beale’s conscious attempt at developing a novel approach to estimating risk. In an industry where technology is pervasive, preserving the social purpose in a technology led organisation like Lloyds of London seemed hitherto unknown. While issues like climate change, urbanisation, and online vulnerabilities seem unconnected yet if leaders like Inga are able to visualise a bigger picture, that factors in some of the abiding anxieties of groups in society that are looking for insurance cover, then Lloyds would be better at catering to these client expectations. My interest has been motivated by this ‘social purpose’ of technology articulated by Inga Beale. Second, an inclusive inter-connected visualisation of contributing factors of risk and its global ramifications is also another facet that has encouraged my interest in this research.

Were there any specific external events – political, social, or economic – that influenced your decision to pursue this research?

Frequency of cyber-attacks and how such attacks impact on populations that are reliant on digital assets is a key driver that encouraged my overall curiosity to pursue this research. Inga Beale mentioned the consequences of severe attacks such that 12.4million people could lose their jobs in the United States alone if cloud assets were attacked. So, the cost of risk that is embedded in loss of digital assets far exceeds physical assets like building infrastructure. Given the frequency of cyber-attacks on digital assets held by organisations that has led to the compromise of customer confidence and damaging financial losses, I was not sure that traditional ways of using technology to deal with technology risk could lead to an abiding solution.

What has been the most challenging aspect of conducting your research? Were there any surprising findings?

The focus of the research being creative leadership in the cyber asset market it was difficult to find parallels of similar leadership styles within extant literature. In many ways the type of leadership of Dame Inga Beale was unique in context, process and content. Contextually the insurance market is different from traditional businesses being fraught with risk and a surfeit of different kinds of estimation. Processes are also unique as the asset structure of companies have been changing significantly from physical to knowledge or digital assets. Content of this leadership style was punctuated by an inclusive paradigm of locating risk as enunciated in society’s existential anxieties. So, evaluating this peerless nature of the leadership style was a challenging undertaking.

Creative and innovative leadership has traditionally focused on man management, financial nous, implementation of new technology, and the like. Finding a social purpose of implementing technology as propounded by Dame Inga Beale was indeed a surprising finding. h

As part of a larger project in which we have been examining a range of issues around age and work, we were keen to explore a particular label (the Weary) that we observed in our data (online media texts). Weary was an acronym standing for ‘Working Entrepreneurial and Active Retirees’. It appeared in an insurance company report and was said to refer to those too old to get paid jobs, too poor to retire and therefore needing to earn money through entrepreneurial activity.

The label was immediately intriguing to us because of the inherent tensions it represented. The acronym has negative connotations in a way that the full title arguably does not. Also the title juxtaposes two traditionally mutually exclusive identities: working and retired, and introduces a third, the potentially problematic neoliberal identity of entrepreneur.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research from Journal of Management Inquiry and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Communication Activities in the 21st Century Business Environment

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Dale Cyphert, Corrine Holke-Farnam, Elena N. Dodge, W. Eric Lee, Sarah Rosol of the University of Northern Iowa. They recently published an article in the Business and Professional Communication Quarterly entitled “Communication Activities in the 21st Century Business Environment,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, they briefly describe the motivations and innovations of this research.


What motivated you to pursue this research?

Most faculty view assessment as a chore to be accomplished with the least amount of effort or involvement. The business faculty at the University of Northern Iowa approach things a little differently, so when I say this research was motivated by the assessment process, I mean that in all the right ways. The authors were selected for the team because our courses included writing or communication instruction, so right off the bat we were interested in doing research that would enhance our own classroom experience. Besides that, conducting research that has an impact in the classroom is valuable in the College’s AACSB accreditation process, so we knew that our work would be recognized and rewarded. Finally, with our integrated assessment and curriculum process, we knew that our results couldn’t just be tossed aside. Our shared governance model ensures that when faculty discover a need for curriculum change, instructional resources, or professional development, administration will address the challenges constructively. With good processes in place, we were motivated to conduct rigorous, cutting edge research on our communication learning goals.

In what ways is your research innovative, and how do you think it will impact the field?

Our innovation was avoiding the traditional, academic mindset and embracing the employer’s perspective with a customer-oriented methodology for evaluating quality in service industries. We’ve used the model several times, but this was the first time with communication skills. So, our first step was to review the previous research on business students’ communication skills. The glaring issue was the on-going nature of employer complaints about lack of student preparation, which struck us as precisely the sort of problem that service companies face when they lack a good understanding of customers’ expectations. So, our real contribution was that we took the crucial step of finding out what communication behaviors our graduates are really expected to perform. We didn’t just define the perfect communication education from our academic mindset—which is rather like a professional chef defining the perfect dining experience based on his or her own whims and preferences. Some elite chefs can afford to run tiny exclusive restaurants, but as a public university, we can’t afford to provide education that serves only employers who just happen to need the skill set that we envision as perfect preparation. Instead, we asked a range of business employers what educational service they actually expect us to provide. The menu turned out to be quite different from what we’d been serving!

What advice would you give to new scholars and incoming researchers in this particular field of study?

This is no different from any other field of study: be sure you find out what’s already been done and build on that! Business professionals regularly call for educators to do a “better” job of educating students in communication, but this doesn’t mean that educators haven’t been working on the problem! In fact, the first attempts to design a professionally relevant curriculum date back to the 1840’s. It’s a complex problem with a long history of research. There’s no sense in repeating work that’s already been done, and plenty of important research questions that still need to be answered.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research through the homepage!

Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Behavioral Norms

LGBTQ_Symbols[Dr. Marina Gorsuch, Professor of St. Catherine University, recently wrote an article in the ILR Review entitled “Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Behavioral Norms in the Labor Market.” We are pleased to feature it and it will be free to read for a limited time. Below, Dr. Gorsuch discusses how she became inspired to conduct this type of research and provides advice for future researchers.]

What motivated you to pursue this research?

There are striking, persistent differences in earnings based on sex and sexual orientation. I first started this project after wondering if insight from psychology could help economists understand these earnings differences. In particular, I was intrigued by the research from social psychology testing more subtle forms of prejudice and stereotypes based on sex and sexual orientation. I drew on this interdisciplinary inspiration to develop an innovative laboratory experiment that tested how different types of prejudice and stereotypes impact labor market decisions.

Were there any surprising findings?

In this study, I asked participants to evaluate resumes that were manipulated on sex, perceived LGBT status, and whether the resume used traditionally masculine or feminine adjectives. My first set of results is not surprising – I find that male participants penalized resumes with an LGBT activity, and the LGBT penalty was slightly stronger effect for male resumes.

When testing more subtle forms of prejudice, I found some surprising results. Male participants evaluated non-LGBT women who used feminine adjectives more positively than when they used masculine adjectives. However, the resumes of women with the LGBT activity were immune to this effect. This suggests that perceived-heterosexual women are discouraged from masculine behavior that would be rewarded in the labor market, while perceived-LGBT women are not.

Additionally, the same men who had the strongest reaction to perceived-heterosexual women using masculine adjectives also had the strongest negative reaction to resumes with an LGBT activity. I used two different methods to estimate how many men in the study engaged in this form of discrimination. Both methods show that the majority of male participants were biased. This pattern of findings suggests that male decision makers are biased in ways that harm LGBT men, LGBT women, and heterosexual women in the labor market.

What advice would you give to new scholars and incoming researchers in this particular field of study?

I am a new scholar myself, so will simply repeat good advice I was given: be persistent. Papers and grants will be rejected – it doesn’t mean the paper or the project is bad. Don’t let a rejected paper sit in a drawer. Submit it somewhere else! Most papers you see published were rejected from multiple other journals.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research and sign up for email alerts today through the homepage!

Gender Photo attributed to Free-Photos  (CC)

Call For Editor: Group & Organization Management

Group & Organization Management invites applications for the Editorship of the Journal.

Group & Organization Management (GOM), peer-reviewed and published bi-monthly, publishes the work of scholars and professionals who extend management and organization theory and address the implications for practitioners. Time to first decision is 39 days.

For more details click here.

Don’t forget to sign up for email alerts through the journal homepage so you never miss the latest research.

Undergraduate Student-Run Business Development Services Firms

[We’re pleased to welcome authors Peter G. Delaney of Washington University in St. Louis, Ken Harrington of the Bayberry Group, Emre Toker of Arizona State University. They recently published an article in Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy entitled “Undergraduate Student-Run Business Development Services Firms: A New Educational Opportunity and Growth Alternative for Small and Medium Enterprises,” which is currently free to read for a limited time. Below, they discuss the inspirations and findings of this research.]

Growth of alternative work arrangements comprised 94% of jobs created in the US since 2005, indicating an unprecedented shift in workforce composition away from traditional work arrangements. This shift is characteristic of the expansion of the gig economy and requires innovative teaching models to prepare undergraduate students for the changing scope of work to come, as young people face the prospect of “portfolio” careers, including periods of paid employment, non-work, and self-employment.

In an attempt to catch up to changes in the workforce, colleges and universities are expanding entrepreneurial education programs across the country focused on innovation and entrepreneurship (I&E) but are hamstrung by doing so in extremely structured environments. Colleges and universities are not grooming students for uncertainty while relying on a “causation model” that teaches goal-driven, deliberate models of decision-making.

But who can fault them? Students paying tuition expect to be guaranteed learning experiences and therefore do not have to face the uncertainty of entrepreneurial experiences when they are presented with well-coordinated, faculty-directed programs. Authentic exposure to the market is limited, student expectations are misguided, and an ability to tolerate risk is underdeveloped, suggesting classroom environments may not be the best place to learn entrepreneurship. A “causation model” of decision-making stands in contradiction to the hard reality students face after graduation.

Principles based in “effectuation theory,” first introduced by Saras Sarasvathy in 2001, are more appropriate in settings characterized by greater levels of uncertainty, like job markets for recent graduates. Importantly, effectuation teaches students to begin with general aspirations and subsequently satisfy them using resources at their immediate disposal, like their knowledge and connections. Without clearly envisioned steps toward a solution, students remain flexible and can take advantage of “environmental contingencies” as they arise, a particularly useful skillset for students beginning careers.

This paper integrates effectuation-driven educational opportunities to propose how students can gain valuable work experience prior to graduation, not through university skills courses, but as participants in the new workforce through the Bear Studios model working with small and medium enterprises, supporting the development of a new pedagogy of entrepreneurship education. As a learning innovation, this paper describes how to structure the firm in the space between students, the university, and the regional community.

Bear Studios, an undergraduate-run firm, is exclusively student-directed and has been able to provide talented undergraduates with opportunities to freelance and provide startups and small and medium enterprises business, design, technology, and accounting services and solutions. Clients have included major universities and national healthcare systems, regional software and biomedical companies and nonprofits, as well as small and medium enterprises. Students must manage business relationships, without university administrative coordination, leveraging students’ innovative mindsets and diverse skillsets to give clients a cost-effective alternative to the traditional consultancy, design, development, or accounting firm. In turn, students experience and adapt to a wide variety of diverse businesses at different stages in their life cycles, and through this exposure learn flexibility. These immersive, authentic experiences prepare undergraduate students for the future, preparing them for post-graduate life in a rapidly changing workforce and world.

Stay up-to-date with the latest research through the homepage!

Listen to the latest podcast from the ASQ Blog!

The ASQ Blog recently feature a fascinating interview with author Hila Lifshitz-Assaf of NYU Stern School of Business about her most recent article, “Dismantling Knowledge Boundaries at NASA: The Critical Role of Professional Identity in Open Innovation.” In the interview Dr. Lifshitz-Assaf her research and research method. To listen to the latest podcast click here! Below is the abstract of the article.

Using a longitudinal in-depth field study at NASA, I investigate how the open, or peer-production, innovation model affects R&D professionals, their work, and the locus of innovation. R&D professionals are known for keeping their knowledge work within clearly defined boundaries, protecting it from individuals outside those boundaries, and rejecting meritorious innovation that is created outside disciplinary boundaries. The open innovation model challenges these boundaries and opens the knowledge work to be conducted by anyone who chooses to contribute. At NASA, the open model led to a scientific breakthrough at unprecedented speed using unusually limited resources; yet it challenged not only the knowledge-work boundaries but also the professional identity of the R&D professionals. This led to divergent reactions from R&D professionals, as adopting the open model required them to go through a multifaceted transformation. Only R&D professionals who underwent identity refocusing work dismantled their boundaries, truly adopting the knowledge from outside and sharing their internal knowledge. Others who did not go through that identity work failed to incorporate the solutions the open model produced. Adopting open innovation without a change in R&D professionals’ identity resulted in no real change in the R&D process. This paper reveals how such processes unfold and illustrates the critical role of professional identity work in changing knowledge-work boundaries and shifting the locus of innovation.

The ASQ Blog is a student-run community of scholars who enjoy reading articles from the Administrative Science Quarterly. The blog is approved and supported by ASQ’s editorial board.

Most posts on the blog are interviews with authors of recent and forthcoming ASQ articles. Two Ph.D. students ask five questions, and article authors answer. We will also be curating special content such as interviews with managing editors, paper prize winners, and other behind-the-scenes topics. If you have ideas for other interesting content, please reach out!

We hope you enjoy reading the interviews, and that you’ll join in the discussion! If you’re interested in writing for the ASQ Blog, please contact us at

For more from the journal click here!