Using organizational science research to address U.S. federal agencies’ management & labor needs Herman Aguinis, Gerald F. Davis, James R. Detert, Mary Ann Glynn, Susan E. Jackson, Tom Kochan, Ellen Ernst Kossek, Carrie Leana, Thomas W. Lee, Elizabeth Morrison, Jone Pearce, Jeffrey Pfeffer, Denise Rousseau, & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe

abstract 5 Employee performance often moves in lockstep with job satisfaction. Using the 2015 Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, we have identified important and common management and labor needs across more than 80 federal agencies. Drawing on the vast trove of organizational science research that examines the effects of organizational designs and processes on employees’ and organizations’ behaviors and outcomes, we offer specific evidence-based interventions for addressing employee dissatisfaction or uncertainty that breeds lackluster performance, managerial shortcomings, and needed supports. Our intervention and policy recommendations have the synergistic goals of improving employee well-being, employee productivity, agency performance, and agency innovation, all resulting in increased efficiency and effectiveness, which benefit the taxpayer. Our top recommendations directly target the goals of improving employee motivation through engagement, empowerment, and embeddedness; enhancing the employees’ voice; and fostering both internal and across-agency cooperation, communication, and collaboration. These recommendations are general enough to apply across diverse government agencies yet specific enough to yield results in discrete agency units.

Aguinis, H., Davis, G. F., Detert, J. R., Glynn, M. A., Jackson, S. E., Kochan, T., Kossek, E. E., Leana, C., Lee, T. W., Morrison, E., Pearce, J., Pfeffer, J., Rousseau, D., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2016). Using Organizational Science Research to Address U.S. Federal Agencies’ Management & Labor Needs. Behavioral Science & Policy, 2(2), pp. 67–76.

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 67 rganizational science is a long-estab- employee productivity, agency performance, lished multidisciplinary field of study and agency innovation, with a result of increased Othat seeks to understand and improve efficiency and effectiveness, which benefit the the well-being and performance of employees taxpayer. Although in some cases we’ve drawn and the effectiveness of organizations. Research on research conducted in the private sector, in this field, conducted over the past 100 years, our suggested interventions are likely to be has involved millions of people across industries effective for federal workers and agencies also. and occupations, resulted in studies published Thus, we offer suggestions for future research w in hundreds of scientific journals, and yielded that can be readily conducted within the context a mother lode of empirical evidence that is of U.S. federal agencies. Such future research Core Findings now widely accepted. The findings show, might best be directed at occupations that the among other things, that employees experi- 2015 FEVS has designated “mission critical” to What is the issue? ence greater levels of well-being and produce agency success.5 Analysis of the 2015 better outcomes when they are happy with and Federal Employee knowledgeable about their jobs, when they trust Viewpoint Survey reveals The Three Es for Motivating that efforts to increase job their leaders, and when they are respected and satisfaction among federal empowered to participate in decisions involving Workers: Engagement, employees are likely to their jobs.1–3 Empowerment, Embeddedness yield improvements in productivity, agency During the past three decades, empirical performance and Cognizant of these and other findings on the research on employee motivation has yielded innovation, and efficiency, importance of employees to agency success, the valuable insights concerning three motiva- benefiting the taxpayer. Office of Personnel Management has, for over a tional forces: engagement, empowerment, and How can you act? decade, conducted the annual Federal Employee embeddedness. For each of these concepts, Selected interventions Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), which provides govern- robust empirical evidence is available to include: ment employees with the opportunity to candidly guide organizational interventions to improve 1) Rapid response share perceptions of their work experiences, employee motivation and reap its benefits. teams with 100-day 4 project mandates agencies, and leaders. The latest (2015) edition 2) Training managers of the FEVS summarizes the responses of over Engagement is strong when employees respond to actively solicit 420,000 employees in more than 80 large and positively to work: when the job makes them employee input and reduce the fear of reprisal small departments and agencies on three major feel physically energetic and resilient, emotion- for disagreement indices: employee engagement, overall job satis- ally attached and dedicated, and cognitively 3) Reversing the faction, and workplace inclusion. Accordingly, focused and absorbed. Engaged employees are “continued decline in FEVS results offer the most up-to-date evidence more fully invested in their work and believe it cooperation” by examining union-management regarding employees’ perceptions of manage- is meaningful. Numerous studies have demon- partnership experiments ment and labor needs.5 strated that employee engagement results in better job performance and enhanced organiza- Who should take Using the 2015 FEVS,5 we have identified tional citizenship, which are behaviors beneficial the lead? important management and labor needs across to the organization but not directly included in Policymakers who want to maximize the value agencies and suggest interventions aimed at job descriptions.6,7 delivered to taxpayers, and managers within • increasing employee motivation through engage- Empirical studies of empowerment focus on federal agencies. ment, empowerment, and embeddedness; feelings of meaningfulness, self-­determination, competence, and impact.8,9 Management • giving employees a greater voice; and practices promoting these feelings reap many benefits, including improved individual and team • enhancing cooperation, communication, and performance, greater innovation, more frequent collaboration within and across groups. acts of helping among colleagues, reduced feel- ings of strain, and lower likelihood of employee Overall, our recommendations have the syner- turnover. Empowerment is particularly moti- gistic goals of improving employee well-being, vating in the service sector.10

68 behavioral science & policy | volume 2 issue 2 2016 Embedded employees feel enmeshed or pulled into their workplace and harbor a strong sense “Numerous studies have of psychological attachment. Such workers perform better, are more likely to exhibit organi- demonstrated that zational citizenship behaviors, and are less likely to leave their employers.11,12 The importance of employee engagement embeddedness was demonstrated by the indi- viduals responding to the FEVS, who often did results in better job not answer affirmatively to questions such as “I feel encouraged to come up with new and performance and better ways of doing things,” “My work gives me a feeling of personal accomplishment,” or “My enhanced organizational talents are used well in the workplace.”5

The findings point to a number of evidence- citizenship, which are based strategies for enhancing employee motivation. On the basis of FEVS responses that behaviors beneficial to showed some federal agencies could work to improve employee motivation and available the organization but not scientific evidence, we make the following recommendations. directly included in job Interventions for Enhancing descriptions.” Employee Motivation effective, and competent. In a word, these • Redesign Jobs. Well-designed jobs share a employees are empowered.10 Furthermore, number of features, such as they allow the the empowerment of employees with diverse worker to use a variety of valued skills, the perspectives and knowledge bases results in worker understands how his or her work enhanced creativity and innovation. Sophisti- contributes to larger organizational objec- cated employee suggestion systems have been tives, and the worker has sufficient autonomy used in a wide range of companies as well as to determine how to perform the work. The in several federal agencies. These programs act of job redesign leverages these features to often allow employees to organize them- sculpt jobs that improve employee motivation selves into teams charged with developing by creating feelings of engagement, which, in ideas for new products and services during turn, promote improved work performance. In normal work hours. Such programs involve a one technique, called the rapid results method, formal system for evaluating proposed ideas, a leaders work with staff members to identify commitment to dedicate resources to worth- problems, develop solutions, and set goals for while ideas, and recognition and rewards making changes over the course of about 100 (often nonmonetary) for the employees who days.13 Used successfully by many organiza- offer the best suggestions. For example, tions worldwide, the rapid results method can across two studies involving almost 1,500 empower employees to make changes that employees organized into hundreds of teams address obstacles to their own motivation. in the metalworking and banking sectors, units that supported employee empowerment had • Institute a Formal System for Employee employees who were more passionate (as Suggestions. Organizational science find- reported by the employees themselves) and ings show that employees enfranchised to creative (as reported by the leaders) in doing participate in decisions and initiatives affecting their work than were employees in nonpartic- an entire work unit or agency feel trusted, ipating units.14

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 69 • Use Digital Performance Dashboards. derailment of the Silver Line train outside East Falls Performing well in one’s job is motivating, Church that caused $150,000 in damages, but whereas performing poorly is demotivating they feared retaliation for reporting problems.22 and contributes to a downward spiral of poor performance. It is important to note that Moreover, whistleblowers often suffer negative motivation is influenced by the competence consequences for speaking up.23 For example, of one’s managers and coworkers as well as results of a survey of more than 13,000 federal by one’s own competence. Allowing poor-­ employees revealed that about 25% of whistle­ performing individuals to remain in their jobs blowers had personally experienced some type of for too long may seem kind, but it is demo- reprisal—or threat of reprisal—by management for tivating for other employees. An effective having reported misconduct.24 Employee silence management system ensures that employees has led to disasters that have made headlines, as are placed in jobs they are competent to well as to smaller and much more frequent losses perform doing work that contrib- in the form of reduced efficiency, missed utes to an organization’s bottom-line “In healthy, high- opportunities, worker disengagement, financial health.3,15 If employees and worker turnover.25,26 have the required skills but are not performing performing well, their managers may Empirical evidence18 reveals employees need assistance in setting meaningful organizations, stay silent at all hierarchical levels within performance goals and providing not just private sector organizations frequent performance feedback.16 employees are but also major federal agencies. Close Performance dashboards that display to half of federal employees surveyed a few key performance metrics for an comfortable expressed uncertainty about the wisdom individual (including people in lead- and safety of speaking up about organi- ership positions), a team, or an entire identifying challenges zational improvement or ethics-related organization are increasingly used to issues. The 2015 FEVS reported tepid provide the feedback so important for and problems and responses to such questions as “I feel sustaining employee motivation and encouraged to come up with new and performance and making decisions feel empowered to better ways of doing things” and “I can about issues such as who requires disclose a suspected violation of any training and who needs to be termi- suggest ideas for law, rule or regulation without fear of nated. Indeed, digital performance reprisal.”5 These results are consistent dashboards are increasingly being improvement, which with a number of more specific investiga- used for a diverse range of jobs, from tions in recent years that have identified salespeople and nurses to delivery is what is labeled cultural impediments to the expression drivers and chief executive officers.17 of employee voice in places like the employee voice.” Veterans Health Administration,27 the New York Federal Reserve Bank,28 and Giving Employees a Voice some parts of the U.S. intelligence29 and military In healthy, high-performing organizations, communities.30 Reported problems range from employees are comfortable identifying challenges self-censoring based on fear of consequences to and problems and feel empowered to suggest reports of actual retaliation for speaking up. ideas for improvement, which is what is labeled employee voice.18,19 However, empirical evidence Fortunately, organizational science researchers suggests that employees often withhold such have made significant strides in understanding information and that they do so for three primary the key drivers of employee voice. For instance, reasons: they fear retribution, they think providing immediate supervisors who actually solicit input feedback is futile, or they lack the motivation to (for instance, by walking around the workplace speak up.20,21 An example of this phenomenon during working hours) rather than merely saying is that DC Metro employees were aware of they are open to employee voice (by announcing dangerous track conditions prior to the July 2016 an open door policy) receive more input.31 Also,

70 behavioral science & policy | volume 2 issue 2 2016 managers who act on ideas received and report • Learn to Understand & Encourage Employee back to employees on those actions encourage Voice Within the Federal Government. To employee voice.32 examine the relative effectiveness of various types of interventions, within a given agency, The evidence gives us a number of potent tools future research could involve training some for improving employee voice. We describe some leaders to actively engage in voice solicita- of the most promising of these tools below. tion31 and others to act on the input received,32 while having still other units serve as control Interventions for Enhancing groups. Alternatively, such research could Employee Voice compare the strategy of voice accountability (evaluating employees for their input and • Train Leaders to Encourage Dialogue. Indi- managers for creating healthy voice climates) vidual leaders strongly influence employees’ with upside sharing (those who suggest or self-expression. Thus, it is essential to train enact solutions share what has been gained). managers in the art of encouraging employees’ voice.31,33 Such training is most effective when, • Improve the Understanding of Union– as a result of their efforts, leaders establish Management Partnerships. Employee voice a trusting and supportive relationship with can also be delivered through collective followers.34 Training leaders is a very effective processes. Where unions exist, joint spon- intervention because it is more efficient and sorship with management of employee 420,000 employees engagement and problem-solving teams across 80 agencies were scalable than those solely focused on a unit’s surveyed in FEVS 2015 individual members. However, in the absence could serve to enhance job satisfaction, of additional interventions, such as those union satisfaction, and possibly organiza- described next, training alone is unlikely to be tional performance. This is evidenced by the successful in the long run. encouraging positive effects of Executive Order 12871, signed in 1993 by then pres- 25% • Reduce Barriers to the Flow of Information. ident Bill Clinton, mandating that federal Percentage of agencies and departments establish formal Centralized decisionmaking and separated whistleblowers divisions tend to decrease information flow.35,36 labor–management partnerships to reinvent who personally Therefore, it follows that reducing these struc- government.39 A study that examined the experience reprisal tural barriers could encourage employee operations and outcomes of 60 partner- participation and expression of employee ships that covered several hundred thousand voice.25,37 For example, consider instituting federal employees revealed encouraging skillfully conducted, unscripted skip-level meet- effects in the form of more harmonious labor 1.16M ings, in which upper management skips middle relations climates and a reduced number Number of federal of workplace disputes.40 In terms of orga- management to meet directly with nonman- employees who are agerial workers two or more levels down nizational performance, cost savings were represented by unions the chain of command;18 casual coffees or achieved because of the smaller number of lunches can work here as well. Also, consider disputes, but other benefits were not easily using a facilitated strategic input process, in discernible. This is an ideal area for experi- which trusted employees are empowered and mentation and evaluation in the future. trained to collect and deliver information about barriers to accomplishing strategic objectives and then work with senior management to Creating a Collaborative Spirit develop a response.38 Skip-level meetings and Classic models of organizations depict them facilitated strategic input processes can be as systems of cooperation and coordination:41 implemented to increase transparent commu- ideally, members collaborate effectively within nication and organizational learning. Both of teams and across divisions or groups for mutual these methodologies have been found to facil- benefit.42 Collaboration has had a central place itate information flow and reduce employee in organizational science research because it silence around key strategic issues. enhances knowledge acquisition and creation,

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 71 “People tend to engage and collaboration across an entire unit or between units, when appropriate, rather than announcing more general or vague “do your in behaviors for which best” kinds of goals.44 For both specific proj- ects and agencywide work culture, a widely they are rewarded rather used shorthand for these kinds of clear goals is SMART, which stands for specific, measur- than do what their formal able, achievable, realistic, and time-bound.3 Encouraging employees to identify with roles prescribe or superiors commonly shared goals will reduce conflict and competition over subgroup goals,45 presume they should do.” especially when this friction arises at the boundaries between different organizational organizational learning, resource sharing, the groups.46 Setting and meeting those goals quality of work relationships, the quality of labor– is likely to result in enhanced social capital, management relations, innovation, managerial where resources can be found embedded in success, goal attainment, and performance.42,43 relationships between individuals and across work units.47 It should come as no surprise Yet cooperation in the workplace, at least within that social capital improves performance and the federal government, appears to be at risk. The retention in settings ranging from for-profit 2015 FEVS report noted a “continued decline” in enterprises to public schools.48 cooperation and found that leaders themselves may be at the root. Indeed, many respon- • Enable Interdependent, Cross-Work-Unit dents answered negatively to such questions Teams. These teams, comprising individuals as “Managers promote communication among with different specialties, would have specific different work units” and “Managers support goals and be equipped with the information, collaboration across work units to accomplish resources, and support they need to execute work objectives.” More generally, respondents a creative or innovative project. Such teams seem satisfied with their immediate supervisors would be given adequate time for cross- but less so with higher levels of management. unit communication and collaboration and Of note, some agencies did much better than would be empowered to work together to others: a very large department had one of the find creative solutions to problems, such as lowest cooperative scores (37%), whereas the is done by the innovation teams at IDEO.49,50 score for another large one was nearly twice as high (72%).5 • Reinforce Collaboration Through Incentive & Performance Measurement & Manage- A high level of cooperation in some departments ment Systems. People tend to engage in suggests the potential for considerable improve- behaviors for which they are rewarded rather ment among less cooperative counterparts. than do what their formal roles prescribe or We’ve identified some of the most useful strate- superiors presume they should do. Asking gies for enhanced cooperation, communication, employees to work as a team but rewarding and collaboration below. individual performance is what Steve Kerr described as a managerial folly: “rewarding Interventions for Enhancing A, while hoping for B.”51 If there is an interest Workplace Cooperation, in improving cross-unit collaboration, there Communication, & Collaboration must be formal and informal ways to reward it.52 Leader follow-through in aligning goals • Set Clear & Achievable Goals. Managers, with reward systems is key. especially senior leadership, need to clearly articulate, explain, and set realistic, specific, • Improve the Understanding of Collaboration and attainable goals for communication Through Union–Management Partnerships.

72 behavioral science & policy | volume 2 issue 2 2016 Approximately 880,000 federal employees the many published studies cited in this article (that is, 27% of the total federal workforce) and actions by many agencies such as the are unionized. Approximately 1,160,000 indi- Veterans Health Administration.56 But more data viduals (that is, about 32% of the total federal are still needed, and we recommend continuing workforce) are represented by unions.53 to monitor trends from the FEVS within agen- Although union–management partnerships cies and occupational groups to identify future have been encouraged at various points in the needs. For example, performance should be past,39 it is unclear how much effort is under gauged in the context of varying work and way to build and support them today. And job demands. Research is needed to explore to our knowledge, no labor–­management how to improve job conditions (for example, partnerships have ever been evaluated using workload and time constraints) and also how randomized controlled experiments. The best to increase individual and team resilience, decentralized structure of federal agen- especially for mission-critical jobs. Given the cies and units provides an ideal setting for size and decentralized structure of federal designing such experiments.54,55 Specifically, agencies and work units, as mentioned above, experiments could be conducted in which we suggest designing randomized controlled interventions are randomly assigned to some experiments that can identify what would work agencies but not others to learn about their best where. effect. This type of empirical effort would result in valuable knowledge about what Finally, a common denominator of all of our works and why, and results could be used for recommendations is that they involve some future evidence-based wide implementation. type of change, and research indicates the need for a systematic process that builds motivation and the chance to improve the workplace and Conclusion its products in positive ways.57,58 A coherent In summary, responses to the federal survey vision of the change needs to be communi- of employees reveal both good news and cated, understood, and acted on across all bad news: on the one hand, overall, federal levels of the hierarchy. Leaders must be trained employees are generally satisfied with their jobs, and their actions reinforced through additional but on the other hand, employee attitudes vary training and development of those reporting to widely across agencies and aspects of the work them.59 Leaders should be held accountable for environment could be improved to achieve the degree of employee motivation, engage- better levels of performance. When examining ment, performance, and innovation in their the results of the recent FEVS study in light of units. They should experiment and encourage research in the organizational sciences, it’s clear innovation to achieve successful change. that federal agencies can improve well-being Across the organization, employees must and performance by enhancing employee moti- learn to adapt to the change as they connect vation through engagement, empowerment, and collaborate with colleagues to solve the and embeddedness; by cultivating employee problems they face.60 Leaders who systemati- voice; and by encouraging cooperation, cally evaluate and implement evidence-based communication, and collaboration both within management practices will inspire employee and across departments. Interventions and inno- trust and confidence and greater organiza- vations should be designed and governed by the tional effectiveness overall. We look forward full range of stakeholders, from nonmanagerial to collaborating with federal agencies to federal employees to top-level managers. design and implement interventions as well as research with the synergistic goals of improving employee well-being, employee productivity, Top Policy Implications Gleaned agency performance, and agency innova- From a Review of the 2015 FEVS tion. These will be win-win results, leading to Organizational science interventions have increased agency efficiency and effectiveness already been used to great effect, as shown in and thus benefiting the taxpayer.

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 73 author affiliation

Aguinis, Department of Management, School of Business, George Washington University; Davis, Management & Organizations, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan; Detert, Lead- ership and Organizational Behavior, Darden School of Business, University of Virginia; Glynn, Management and Organization, Carroll School of Management, Boston College; Jackson, Human Resource Management, School of Manage- ment and Labor Relations, Rutgers University; Kochan, Work and Organization Studies, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Kossek, Organizational Behavior & HR Management, Krannert School of Manage- ment, Purdue University; Leana, Organizations and Entrepreneurship, Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh; Lee, Manage- ment & Organization, Foster School of Business, University of Washington; Morrison, Manage- ment and Organizations Department, Stern School of Business, New York University; Pearce, Organization and Management, Paul Merage School of Business, University of California, Irvine; Pfeffer, Organizational Behavior, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University; Rous- seau, Organizational Behavior and Theory, Heinz College and Tepper School of Business, Carn- egie Mellon University; Sutcliffe, Management & Organization, Carey Business School, Johns Hopkins University. Corresponding author’s e-mail address: [email protected] author note

Authorship order is alphabetical. We thank Sara Rynes-Weller, Sim Sitkin, and Dave Nussbaum for highly constructive and useful comments on drafts of the article.

74 behavioral science & policy | volume 2 issue 2 2016 references

1. Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2011). 13. Schaffer, R. H., & Ashkenas, R. (2011). 24. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. Applied psychology in human resource Rapid results! How 100-day projects (1993). Whistleblowing in the federal management (7th ed.). Upper Saddle build the capacity for large-scale government: An update. Report to the River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. change. New York, NY: Wiley. President and Congress by the U.S. Merit 2. Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Werner, S. 14. Liu, D., Chen, X.-P., & Yao, X. (2011). From Systems Protection Board. Washington, (2012). Managing human resources (11th autonomy to creativity: A multilevel DC: Government Printing Office. ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage. investigation of the mediating role of 25. Detert, J. R., Burris, E. R., Harrison, D., 3. Aguinis, H. (2013). Performance harmonious passion. Journal of Applied & Martin, S. (2013). Voice flows to and management (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle Psychology, 96, 294–309. around leaders: Is more always better River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. 15. Jackson, S. E., Schuler, R. S., & Jiang, for unit performance? Administrative Science Quarterly, 58, 624–668. 4. Cobert, B. (2015, October 6). OPM K. (2014). An aspirational framework for Releases Full FEVS Report for 2015 [Blog strategic human resource management. 26. McClean, E., Burris, E. R., & Detert, J. R. post]. Retrieved from https://www. Academy of Management Annals, 8, (2013). When does voice lead to exit? opm.gov/blogs/Director/2015/10/6/ 1–56. It depends on leadership. Academy of OPM-Releases-Full-FEVS- 16. Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Management Journal, 56, 525–548. Report-for-2015/ Joo, H. (2012). Delivering effective 27. McKinsey & Company. (2015). 5. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. performance feedback: The strengths- Assessment L (leadership). Retrieved (2015). Federal Employee Viewpoint based approach. Business Horizons, 55, from http://www.va.gov/opa/ Survey results: Employees influencing 105–111. choiceact/documents/assessments/ change. Retrieved from https://www. 17. Morrow, C. (2015, October). A CEO Assessment_L_Leadership.pdf fedview.opm.gov/2015FILES/2015_ performance dashboard: Obtaining 28. Da Costa, P. N. (2014, September FEVS_Gwide_Final_Report.PDF better CEO evaluations. HayGroup 26). N.Y. Fed staff afraid to speak 6. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz- Executive Edition, 4–6. up, secret review found [Blog post]. Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and 18. Detert, J. R., & Trevino, L. K. (2010). Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/ work engagement. Annual Review Speaking up to higher ups: How economics/2014/09/26/n-y-fed-staff- of Organizational Psychology and supervisors and skip-level leaders afraid-to-speak-up-secret-review-found/ Organizational Behavior, 1, 389–411. influence employee voice. Organization 29. Harris, S., & Youssef, N. A. (2015, 7. Christian, M., Garza, A., & Slaughter, J. Science, 21, 249–270. September 9). Exclusive: 50 spies say (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative 19. Edmondson, A. C. (2002). The local ISIS intelligence was cooked. The Daily review and test of its relations with task and variegated nature of learning in Beast. Retrieved from http://www. and contextual performance. Personnel organizations: A group-level perspective. thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/ Psychology, 64, 89–136. Organization Science, 13, 128–146. exclusive-50-spies-say-isis-intelligence- was-cooked.html 8. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological 20. Milliken, F. J., Morrison, E. W., & Hewlin, empowerment in the workplace: P. F. (2003). An exploratory study of 30. Losey, S. (2015, May 26). Lt. col. says Dimensions, measurement, and employee silence: Issues that employees speaking up about assault hurt her validation. Academy of Management don’t communicate upward and why. career. Air Force Times. Retrieved from Journal, 38, 1442–1465. Journal of Management Studies, 40, http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/ 1453–1476. military/2015/05/26/she-came-forward- 9. Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). then-another-ordeal/27639681/ Cognitive elements of empowerment: 21. Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task voice and silence. Annual Review 31. Tangirala, S., & Ramanujam, R. (2012). motivation. Academy of Management of Organizational Psychology and Ask and you shall hear (but not always): Review, 15, 666–681. Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197. Examining the relationship between manager consultation and employee 10. Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, 22. Powers, M., & Siddiqui, F. (2016, voice. Personnel Psychology, 65, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and December 1). NTSB: Metro knew of 251–282. consequences of psychological and potentially dangerous track conditions team empowerment in organizations: A more than a year before July derailment. 32. Burris, E. R., Detert, J. R., & Harrison, meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied The Washington Post. Retrieved from D. (2010). Employee voice and Psychology, 96, 981–1003. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ opportunities for learning in credit local/trafficandcommuting/ntsb-metro- unions (White Paper No. 209). Madison, 11. Holtom, B. C., Mitchell, T. R., Lee, T. W., WI: Filene Research Institute. & Eberly, M. B. (2008). Turnover and knew-of-potentially-dangerous-track- retention research: A glance at the past, conditions-more-than-a-year-before- 33. Morrison, E. W., Wheeler-Smith, S. L., a closer review of the present, and a july-derailment/2016/12/01/5d57c13a- & Kamdar, D. (2011). Speaking up in venture into the future. Academy of b7ff-11e6-b8df-600bd9d38a02_story. groups: A cross-level study of group Management Annals, 2, 231–274. html?utm_term=.27773ab1d369 voice climate and voice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 183–191. 12. Jiang, K., Lui, D., McKay, P. F., Lee, T. 23. Rothschild, J., & Miethe, T. D. (1999). W., & Mitchell, T. R. (2012). When and Whistle-blower disclosures and 34. Gottfredson, R. K., & Aguinis, H. (2016). how is job embeddedness predictive of management retaliation: The battle to Leadership behaviors and follower turnover? A meta-analytic investigation. control information about organization performance: Deductive and inductive Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, corruption. Work and Occupations, 26, examination of theoretical rationales and 1077–1096. 107–128. underlying mechanisms. Advance online publication. Journal of Organizational Behavior. doi:10.1002/job.2152

a publication of the behavioral science & policy association 75 35. Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural holes 47. Adler, P., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social 59. Kirkpatrick, S. A. (2009). Lead through and good ideas. American Journal of capital: Prospects for a new concept. vision and values. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Sociology, 110, 349–399. Academy of Management Review, 27, Handbook of principles of organizational 36. Detert, J. R., & Edmondson, A. C. (2011). 17–40. behavior: Indispensable knowledge for Implicit voice theories: Taken-for- 48. Pil, F. K., & Leana, C. (2009). Applying evidence-based management (2nd ed., granted rules of self-censorship at work. organizational research to public pp. 367–387). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Academy of Management Journal, 54, school reform: The effects of teacher 60. Goodman, P. S., & Rousseau, D. M. 461–468. human and social capital on student (2004, October). Organizational change 37. Dutton, J. E., Ashford, S. J., Lawrence, performance. Academy of Management that produces results: The linkage K. A., & Miner-Rubino, K. (2002). Red Journal, 52, 1101–1124. approach. Academy of Management light, green light: Making sense of the 49. Hargadon, A. B., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Executive, 18, 7–21. organizational context for issue selling. Technology brokering and innovation Organization Science, 13, 355–369. in a product development firm. 38. Beer, M. (2013). The strategic fitness Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, process: A collaborative action 716–749. research method for developing and 50. Sutton, R. I., & Hargadon, A. B. (1996). understanding organizational prototypes Brainstorming groups in context: and dynamic capabilities. Journal of Effectiveness in a product design firm. Organization Design, 2, 28–34. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 39. White House. (1993, October 1). 685–718. Presidential Executive Order No. 12871: 51. Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding Labor management partnerships. A, while hoping for B. Academy of Retrieved from http://govinfo.library.unt. Management Journal, 18, 769–783. edu/npr/library/direct/orders/24ea.html 52. Aguinis, H., Joo, H., & Gottfredson, R. K. 40. Masters, M. F., Albright, R. R., & Eplion, (2013). What monetary rewards can and D. (2006). What did partnerships do: cannot do: How to show employees the Evidence from the federal sector. ILR money. Business Horizons, 56, 241–249. Review, 59, 367–382. 53. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of 41. Barnard, G. (1938). The functions of Labor Statistics. (2016, January 28). the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Union members—2015 [Press release]. University Press. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ 42. Smith, K. G., Carroll, S. J., & Ashford, S. news.release/pdf/union2.pdf J. (1995). Intra- and interorganizational 54. Aguinis, H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2014). cooperation: A research agenda. An ounce of prevention is worth a Academy of Management Journal, 38, pound of cure: Improving research 7–23. quality before data collection. Annual 43. Chen, C. C., Chen, X.-P., & Meindl, Review of Organizational Psychology J. R. (1998). How can cooperation and Organizational Behavior, 1, 569–595. be fostered? The cultural effects of 55. Aguinis, H., & Edwards, J. R. (2014). individualism-collectivism. Academy of Methodological wishes for the next Management Review, 23, 285–304. decade and how to make wishes come 44. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). true. Journal of Management Studies, Building a practically useful theory 51, 143–174. of goal setting and task motivation: A 56. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, Health Administration. (2014). Blueprint 57, 705–717. for excellence. Retrieved from https:// 45. Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & www.va.gov/HEALTH/docs/VHA_ Joo, H. (2013). Avoiding a “me” versus Blueprint_for_Excellence.pdf “we” dilemma: Using performance 57. Beer, M. (2009). Sustain organizational management to turn teams into a source performance through continuous of competitive advantage. Business learning, change and realignment. In E. Horizons, 56, 503–512. A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles 46. Glynn, M. A., Kazanjian, R., & Drazin, R. of organizational behavior (2nd ed., pp. (2010). Fostering innovation in complex 537–555). Malden, MA: Blackwell. product development settings: The role 58. Fernandez, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2006). of team member identity and interteam Managing successful organizational interdependence. Journal of Product change in the public sector. Public Innovation Management, 27, 1082–1095. Administration Review, 66, 168–176.

76 behavioral science & policy | volume 2 issue 2 2016