Trends in Organizational Behavior A Systematic Review and Research Directions
Trends in Organizational Behavior A Systematic Review and Research Directions
Trends in Organizational Behavior A Systematic Review and Research Directions
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a step-by-step guide to facilitate understanding of emerging
trends in the discipline of Organizational Behavior using the technique of Systematic Literature Review.
Method – Literature review is done by systematically collecting the existing literature over the period of 1990-
2019. The literature is categorized according to the Journal Name and Ranking, Database, and Geographical
Distribution (country wise). Literature is also categorized on the basis of type of study (empirical/conceptual),
variables used, scales used, sample studies and sub area of study (Leadership/Motivation etc). This classification
can serve as a base for researchers who wish to conduct meta-analysis on emerging trends in Organizational
Behavior.
Findings – A disciplined screening process resulted in 81 relevant research papers appropriate for the study.
These papers explain the emerging trends in the discipline since 1990.
Limitations – Due to the vast areas and sub-areas covered under Organizational Behavior, it is not possible to
study the entire discipline since 1990 in a single study. Hence the study only focuses on relevant and emerging
trends in Organizational Behavior.
Implications – The study aims to fill the gap of unavailability of a structured systematic literature review in
the discipline of Organizational Behaviour. This may serve as an important source of information for
Academicians, Practitioners. The study postulates new avenues for future research.
Originality – The study contributes to the methodology for conducting Systematic Literature Reviews in the
field of management, specifically in Organizational Behaviour. It highlights an effective method for mapping
out thematically, and viewing holistically, emerging research trends.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Kalwani, S., Mahesh, J. (2020). Trends in
organizational behavior: A systematic review and research directions. Journal of Business and
Management, 26(1), March, 40-78. DOI: 10.6347/JBM.202003_26(1).0003.
40
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Introduction
The period before 1890 is known as the Pre-Scientific Management era. In the
period after 1890, Management Theories started gaining importance. Scientific
Management was developed during this period. Scientific Management is also a theory
of management, which focuses on improving economic efficiency, especially labor
productivity. The period between 1920 and 1930 characterizes the growth of literature
on human relations (Warner, 1994). This inter-war period paved way for work groups
emerging as an important component of human relations. In 1920’s, Hawthorne Effect
studied the socio-psychological impact of human behavior in organizations. This study
focused on relationship between productivity and variables such as lighting in the
workplace, clean workstation, allowing employees to build and work in teams, and
having regular breaks. (Mayo et al., 1939). The growing importance of people factor as
the core of human relations became a concern for many active organizations in that inter-
war period (Follet 1941; Child 1969). During the Word War I, considerable efforts were
made to boost up worker’s motivation due to war crisis. Similar practices were observed
after 1918 in the peace time after World War II. Organizational behavior started to
establish post World War II, specifically after 1945, as an academic discipline.
41
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
In the forthcoming sections, the paper explains the various dimensions and sub-elements of
Organizational Behavior. The evolution and establishment of the domain is defined in detail with the
help of the technique of Systematic Literature Review. A step-by-step objective approach and the
literature can serve as a basis for future research by scholars, as well as for implementation by
practitioners.
The first step in the review was identifying the relevant literature on organizational
behavior. A total of 81 research papers spread across the time-period of 1990-2019 were
considered for the study. The growing significance of understanding Organizational
Behavior as a discipline and Systematic Literature Review as a review technique is the
primary reason behind selection of the period of 1990-2019 for the study.
• Keyword: Using the database of ISI Web of Knowledge and the keyword “Organizational
Behaviour” 26,418 papers were identified.
• Discipline: Using the inclusion criteria of “Management” as a discipline, the number of
papers was reduced to 10,535.
• Language: Selection of “English” as a language reduced the number to 10,454
• Review Papers: Using “Review Papers” as the inclusion criteria, the number reduced down
to 774 papers
• Research Areas: Using “Management Science”, “Psychology”, “Behavior Science”, “Social
Science”, “Education Research”, “Operation and Management Science”, “Communication”,
“Sociology” as the inclusion category for allied research areas, 416 research papers were
retrieved. Out of which 81 relevant research papers concerning performing Systematic
Literature Review on emerging trends in Organizational Behavior were studied.
42
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Analysis of Results
Inference: The country wise segregation shows that there has been manifold increase
in the literature availability concerning Organizational Behavior after 1990 (see Table 1). And
hence the period of 1990- 2019 has been chosen for the study. The table also shows the growth
and prominence of Organizational Behavior as a discipline in developed countries like USA
& UK. Hawthorne Studies which was a major development in the discipline was carried out
in Western Electric, USA. Due to the majority of developments in the discipline being
associated with USA, availability of literary studies is maximum for USA here. In the Indian
context, the availability of prominent literature is scarce, and is mainly observed after the
period of 2011. Hence there is a dearth of research literature in Organizational Behavior in
Indian Context.
43
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
44
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
‘Emotions at Workplace’ has seen a literary growth in studies from 16.66% in 2001-2005 to
66.66% in 2011-2019. Also with changing patterns of Leadership, a tremendous growth in the
sub-domain can be observed. Literary studies in ‘Leadership’ have moved from 8.33% in
1996-2000 to 83.33% in 2011-2019.
45
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
46
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Inference: Table 3 represents study of top journals for the review. 30.76% Journals
considered for the analysis have A* ranking in ABDC. And 26.92% of Journals considered
here for analysis have A ranking in ABDC (ABDC here is a Journal Quality Ranking given
by Australian Business Deans Council). Apart from top journals in Organizational Behavior,
A* Journals such as Psychological Bulletin, European Journal of Marketing, Journal of
Applied Psychology and others from different disciplines have been considered to provide
an interdisciplinary approach to the study.
Individual Level
Personality Traits
The aim of organizational behavior and work psychology has been to understand and
uncover reasons behind why individuals vary in their motivation to work. A personality trait
provides a person with an inclination to behave in a certain way (Eysenck, 1985). The relationship
47
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
between motivation and individual personality traits as well as situational factors is of prime
importance to understand sub-elements of organizational behavior (Furnham 2009). The study
of personality traits in the formative years was marked by factor-analytic approach developed by
Cattell and Eysenck. The Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) is a self-
report personality test developed by Raymond B. Cattell, Maurice Tatsuoka and Herbert Eber
Cattell in 1949. Cattell developed the 16 personality factor (16PF) questionnaire with empirical
justifications and identified 16 key personality dimensions. He explained that these 16 personality
types accounted for the variance in individual differences between people. Eysenck’s approach
towards the study of personality types was at more basic level. He identified initially two
(extraversion and neuroticism) and later three or four underlying personality factors.
Chronologically the next big development was the “big five” model by J.M Digman in 1990. It
identified five major factors underlying human individual differences in personality. The big five
factors are described as conscientiousness, neuroticism, extraversion, agreeableness, and
openness. There are also some competing frameworks such as the “big three” (neuroticism,
extraversion, and psychoticism) and the more pragmatic “big nine” (Hough, 1992). Trait factor-
analytic theory clearly implies that personality characteristics lead towards a particular behavior
across a variety of different situations. Behavior is a summation of consistent individual
differences in one’s personality and function of the situations. A more recent development is the
concept of reciprocal determinism developed by Bandura (1986). The concept focuses on the
three key sets of variables, behavior, personal qualities, and situations, which interact in a
mutually reciprocating way. It provides clarity on the context regarding the understanding of
personality variables. To understand individual behavior as a part of work psychology and
organizational behavior, study of personality trait is an important exercise. Future research on
the various possible combinations of personality traits with respect to the work environment can
work wonders for practitioners ahead. Such study will help the organization understand
employee behavior holistically.
Motivation
Out of all the subject themes in the disciplines of Organizational Behavior and
Industrial Organizational Psychology, motivation has consistently been one of the most
confusing (Locke and Henne 1986, Shamir 1991). There have been a lot of motivational
theories that have developed over years. Need theories (Maslow 1954, Mc. 1985), equity or
social comparison theory (Adams 1965), expectancy theory (Vroom 1964), reinforcement
theory (Hamner 1975), goal setting theory (Locke and Latham 1990), intrinsic motivation
theory (Hackman and Oldham 1990).The problem is not with the development or addition
of new theories but with universal applicability of the same. (Shamir 1991). So the need is not
to add more motivational theories but to reconceptualise the existing ones. It is difficult to
say what may motivate an employee as it may differ on the basis of individual characteristics.
The overall aim should be to have employees identify their own welfare and wellbeing with
that of the organization. (Bruce and Pepitone 1999, Milne 2007).
The basis of employee motivation has always been to hoard knowledge because of the
competitive advantage that this would give to an organization. The new organizational
culture shaping up however defies the older norms. It believes in sharing of knowledge and
hence is progressing towards Knowledge Management. The restructuring of motivational
48
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
theories in the light of knowledge management will help understand employee motivation
and help organizations match individual goals with organizational goals (Milne, 2007).
Future direction of research in this area can help the researchers and practitioners understand
the dynamics of factors that keep employees motivated at work. This may then help
organizations solve the issue of attrition rate to some extent.
Whereas it also states the negative aspect that when attachment needs are not fulfilled,
consequences follow. There is increased stress (Schirmer and Lopez, 2001, Yip 2015), higher
reports of burnout (Littman‐Ovadia, Lavy et al., 2013, Yip 2015), and increased turnover
(Tziner, Oren et al., Yip 2015) among other undesired outcomes. The influence of attachment
theory on organizational behavior has grown manifold.
The number of literature available for the last 5 years is much more than the preceding
25 years combined. The implementation of learnings from the theory can serve as an
important tool for managing emotions at workplace and promoting healthy work
relationships (Yip 2015).
Managing emotions at workplace is an emerging and challenging issue for most of the
organizations. Further research on understanding the dynamics of work relationships, and
its impact on employee morale and productivity, can help organizations boost employee
engagement to considerable extent.
Group Level
There has been a significant amount of research in the past decade trying to
understand the factors affecting commitment of the employees to their organization.
Research has also stated the importance of individual as well as organizational influence on
organizational commitment (Angle & Perry, 1983). One of the most important reasons for
lack of commitment is the disengagement of employee in important organizational decisions.
The importance of communication and member’s satisfaction with communication
relationships cannot be overlooked (Putti1990).
49
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Scholars have had contrary views on the established leadership theories. Some of them
argue that these theories fail to capture some of the construct space around how leadership
is conceptualized (Dickson, Castano, Magomaeva and Den Hartog 2012; Dorfman et al 1997;
Liden 2012; Psui 2007; Hiller,Sin, et al., 2019). There has been a considerable and parallel shift
in the scholarly view of leadership dimensions. Earlier the simplistic one-dimension
approach to leadership wherein ‘‘concern withpeople’’ versus ‘‘concern with production’’
were seen as mutually exclusive leader options (Vecchio 2002). Fieldler’s (1967) construct of
the Least Preferred Co-worker went through a lot of criticism for being one of its kind bi-
polar views. It was said that there is an ideal combination displayed in these constructs.
(Vecchio2002).Later, the leadership style defined by Kurt Lewin gained popularity. His
classification of leadership includes Autocratic, Democratic, and Laissez Faire leadership
(Kurt Lewis, 1974). Post 1974, there have evolved multiple takes on leadership from
Charismatic Leadership, Contingency Theory of Leadership, Participative Leadership,
Leader- Member Exchange Theory, to Situational Leadership.
Organization Level
50
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
(Ashton and Mael 1989; Shen 2014). The concept stems from social identity theory which
suggests that people categorize themselves and others into social groups in order to develop
a positive self-esteem (Shen 2014). An organization’s conformity to social norms may help
the employees relate and belong to the organization as well as build a positive self-esteem.
(Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Dutton et al., 1994; Mathieu and Zajac, 1990; Shen 2014). Under
various components of the institutional theory, the regulative and normative structures and
activities forces organizations to adhere to social norms (Scott 1995, Shen 2014). Adhering to
social norms and taking up Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) helps employees identify
with the organization and is considered a positive influence on various employee behaviors
(Rupp et al., 2006, Shen 2014). Practitioners as well as researchers can study the correlation
between Organizational Identification, Corporate Social Responsibility and employee
engagement. The positive correlation can be enhanced if the factors involved in the equation
are studied carefully.
The term Organizational Citizenship Behavior was coined by Bateman and Oregan
(1983). Though there were studies prior to coining of the term that observed employee’s
willingness to cooperate in the workplace (Katz and Kahn 1966, Lanndon, Venus et al., 2018).
Organizational Citizenship Behavior is the work-related cooperation offered by an employee
beyond his work obligations. Organizational Citizenship Behavior has been explored in
various disciplines and contexts lately. Research in the domain has shown a strong
relationship between individual level outcomes (e.g. managerial ratings of employee
performance, reward allocation decisions, and a variety of withdrawal-related criteria) as
well as organizational-level outcomes (e.g. productivity, efficiency, reduced costs, customer
satisfaction, and unit-level turnover) with Organizational Citizenship Behavior (Podsakoffet
al. 2009; Lanndon,Venus et al., 2018).
Further research in this area can help researchers, practitioners and policy makers
understand the individual as well as group level outcomes associated with the concept. Thus
understanding of Organizational Citizenship Behavior in its entirety can help resolve
important issues of workplace deviance and employee commitment.
There seems to be no doubt that the future of workplaces will uphold major
challenges pertaining behavior at individual, group and organizational level. The study
delves into research of such patterns at workplaces. The period from 1990- 2019 has been
selected for study because of the significant growth rate associated with the discipline during
this time. The period has observed major growth in research literature and emerging
concepts such as Communication Relationship Satisfaction (CRS), Organization Citizenship
Behavior (OCB), Attachment Theory and others. The vast array of topics covered under
Organizational Behavior does not make it possible to study the entire discipline since 1990
in a single study. Hence the study limits to understanding and analyzing trends in
Organizational Behavior since 1990. This Systematic Literature Review did not place any
51
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
limitation on the publication year of journal articles; however, evolution of some significant
trends (Such as Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Organizational Identification,
Attachment Theory etc) in Organizational Behavior took place post 1990. There are a large
number of research papers and materials available for study under the well-establish
discipline of Organizational Behavior. Due to the inclusion and exclusion criteria used for
the screening of the papers, there is a possibility of missing out on some important
research work or papers.
This acts as one of the major limitations of the study. Researchers or practitioners
can identify the papers that have not been covered under the study to further conduct a
research on them. The sub-area wise (motivation, leadership etc) segregation of literature is
on the basis of availability of papers used for the study. This makes it difficult to observe
trends such as growth in a particular sub-area over the last decade. The limitations
mentioned above can serve as a base for future research.
52
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
References
Aguinis, H., Simonsen, M. M., & Pierce, C. A. (1998). Effects of nonverbal behavior on
perceptions of power bases. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138(4), 455-469.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Härtel, C. E. J., & Daus, C. S. (2002). Diversity and emotion: The new
frontiers in Organizational Behavior research. Journal of Management; 28(3), 307–338.
Ashkanasy, N. M., Humphrey, R. H., & Huy, Q. N. (2017). Integrating emotions and affect in
theories of management. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 175–189.
Banks, G. C., Gooty, J., Ross, R. L., Williams, C. E., & Harrington, N. T. (2018). Construct
redundancy in leader behaviors: A review and agenda for the future. The Leadership
Quarterly, 29(1), 236-251.
Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of
impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1080–
1109.
Bonaccio, S., O’Reilly, J., O’Sullivan, S. L., and Chiocchio, F. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and
communication in the workplace. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1044–1074.
Brown, A. D., & Starkey, K. (1994). The effect of organizational culture on communication
and information. Journal of Management Studies, 31(6), 807–828.
Bruce J. Avolio; William L. Gardner (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the
root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16 (3), 315-338
Carnes, C. M., Xu, K., Sirmon, D. G., & Karadag, R. (2019). How competitive action mediates
the resource slack–performance relationship: A meta-analytic approach. Journal of
Management Studies, 56(1), 57-90.
Carnes, C. M., Xu, K., Sirmon, D. G., & Karadag, R. (2018). How competitive action mediates
the resource slack-performance relationship: A meta-analytic approach. Journal of
Management Studies, 56(1), 57-90.
Cascio, W. F., and Montealegre, R. (2016). How technology is changing work and
organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior,
3(1), 349–375.
Chiaburu, D. S., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Do peers make the place? Conceptual synthesis
and meta-analysis of coworker effects on perceptions, attitudes, OCBs, and
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(5), 1082–1103.
53
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Clark, M. A., Robertson, M. M., & Young, S. (2018). “I feel your pain”: A critical review of
organizational research on empathy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(2), 166-192
Donia, M. B. L., Johns, G., Raja, U., & Khalil Ben Ayed, A. (2017). Getting credit for OCBs:
potential costs of being a good actor vs. a good soldier. European Journal of Work and
Organizational Psychology, 27(2), 188–203.
Eldor, L. (2016). Work engagement. Human Resource Development Review, 15(3), 317–339.
Ferris, G. R., Ellen, B. P., McAllister, C. P., & Maher, L. P. (2019). Reorganizing Organizational
Politics research: A review of the literature and identification of future research
directions. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6(1),
299–323.
Furnham, A., Eracleous, A., & Chamorro‐Premuzic, T. (2009). Personality, motivation and
job satisfaction: Hertzberg meets the Big Five. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24 (8),
765-779
Götz, M., Bollmann, G., and O’Boyle, E. H. (2018). Contextual undertow of workplace
deviance by and within units: A systematic review. Small Group Research, 50(1), 188-
203
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (1997). Relations between organizational culture, identity and
image. European Journal of Marketing, 31(5-6), 356-365.
Hiller, N. J., Sin, H. P., Ponnapalli, A. R., & Ozgen, S. (2019). Benevolence and authority as
weirdly unfamiliar: A multi-language meta-analysis of paternalistic leadership
behaviors from 152 studies. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 165-184.
Hjerto, K. B. (2017). Burning hearts in conflict: new perspectives on the intragroup conflict
and team effectiveness relationship. International Journal of Conflict Management, 28(4),
536-536.
Knight, C., Patterson, M., & Dawson, J. (2016). Building work engagement: A systematic
review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement
interventions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(6), 792–812.
Kudret, S., Erdogan, B., & Bauer, T. N. (2019). Self‐monitoring personality trait at work: An
integrative narrative review and future research directions. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 40(2), 193-208.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting & Task Performance. Prentice-Hall,
Inc.
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2007). Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of
Management, 33(3), 321–349.
54
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A
review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management,
34(3), 410–476.
Putti, J. M., Aryee, S., and Phua, J. (1990). Communication relationship satisfaction and
organizational commitment. Group & Organization Studies, 15(1), 44–52.
Rhoades, L., and Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the
literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714.
Shen, J., & Benson, J. (2016). When CSR is a social norm. Journal of Management, 42(6), 1723–
1746.
Smith, M. B., Hill, A. D., Wallace, J. C., Recendes, T., & Judge, T. A. (2018). Upsides to dark
and downsides to bright personality: A multidomain review and future research
agenda. Journal of Management, 44(1), 191-217.
Swab, R. G., & Johnson, P. D. (2019). Steel sharpens steel: A review of multilevel competition
and competitiveness in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(2), 147-165
Upasna A. Agarwal, Vishal Gupta, (2018). Relationships between job characteristics, work
engagement, conscientiousness and managers’ turnover intentions: A moderated-
mediation analysis. Personnel Review, 47(2), 353-377
Weikamp, J. G., and Göritz, A.S. (2016). Organizational citizenship behavior and job
satisfaction: The impact of occupational future time perspective. Human Relations,
69(11), 2091–2115.
Youssef, C. M., and Luthans, F. (2007). Positive organizational behavior in the workplace.
Journal of Management, 33(5), 774–800.
Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. (2004). Emotional intelligence in the workplace: A
critical review. Applied Psychology, 33(3), 371-399.
55
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Appendix
2) The language of
the publication
(English vs. non-
English), and 3)
Source (cross-
sectional vs.
longitudinal).
Convergence Leadership Empirical 1. Paternalistic 1. Paternalistic 1272 employees
and Leadership Leadership: Aycan’s
divergence of 2. Transformational (2006) 21-item
paternalistic Leadership paternalistic
leadership: A 3. Nurturant task leadership
cross-cultural Leadership questionnaire (PLQ)
investigation 4. Participative 2. The
of prototypes Leadership Transformational
5. Authoritarian Leadership measure of
Leadership Bass and Avolio (1994)
6. Vertical was used
Collectivism in this study.
3. Nurturant-task
Leadership: Sinha’s
(1995) ten-item scale
3. Participative
Leadership: Seven
items of the
Leadership Style Scale
56
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
(Sinha 1995)
4. Authoritarian
Leadership: ten items
of the Leadership
Style Scale (Sinha,
1995) 5.
Vertical Collectivism :
The four-item measure
(Singelis et al., 1995)
Benevolent Leadership Empirical Variables: 1. Benevolent Sample of 223
leadership and Benevolent Leadership: Cheng et leader–member
follower Leadership; Leader- al.’s (2000) scale dyads in a non-
performance: member exchange; 2. Leader-member profit
The mediating Follower task exchange: 7-item LMX organization
role of leader- performance; scale
member Organizational from Liden, Wayne,
exchange Citizenship and Stillwell (1993)
(LMX) Behaviour towards 3. Follower task
the Organization performance : 5-item
Control Variable: scale from Williams
Gender, Education and Anderson (1991)
level, 4. Organizational
Age, Organization Citizenship Behaviour
tenure, and Leader– towards the
follower dyad tenure Organization: 8-item
to follower task scale developed by Lee
performance and and Allen (2002)
Organizational
Citizenship
Behaviour towards
the Organization
57
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
the Demographic
Characteristics
58
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
59
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
What Motivation Empirical 1. Full appreciation “Factors that motivate 460 employees
motivates of work done me” Survey (1992)
employees 2. Feeling of being in
according to on things
over 40 years 3. Sympathetic help
of motivation with personal
surveys problems 4. Job
security
5. Good wages
6. Interesting work
7. Promotion and
growth in the
organization 8.
Personal or company
loyalty to employees
9. Good working
conditions
How Competition Empirical 1. Slack - 139 article
Competitive 2. Competitive
Action Aggressiveness
Mediates the 3. Performance
Resource 4. Competitive
Slack- Complexity
Performance
Relationship:
A Meta-
Analytic
Approach
Something(s) Technology Empirical 1.Virtuality 1. Team effectiveness: Sample of 60
old and 2.Interdependence (Podsakoff,MacKenzie, global,virtual
something(s) 3.Percentage of time Lee, & Podsakoff, supply teams
new: Modeling allocated to team 2003) from a large
drivers of 4.Preparation 2. Team mediator multi-national
global virtual activities variables: Mathieu and organization
team 5.Transactive Marks (2006)
effectiveness memory systems
6.Team effectiveness
The role of Organizational Empirical 1. Organizational Watson and Clasrk Sample size
affect and Change Change (1992) (n=430)
leadership 2. Transformational
during Leadership
organizational 3. Commitment to
change Change
4. Affect
Perceived Perceived Empirical 1. Perceived 1. Eisenberger et al.’s Review of 70
organizational Organizational Organizational scale studies
support: A Support Support 2. Hrebiniak and
review of the 2. Fairness Alutto (1972)
literature 3. Organizational 3. Perceptions of
Rewards Politics Scale (Ferris &
4. Job Conditions Kacmar, 1992)
5. Supervisor
Support
60
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
61
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
development
9. Organizational
context
10. Performance
62
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
63
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
64
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
65
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
66
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
67
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
68
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
69
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
70
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
71
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
72
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
73
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Variables are categorized on the basis of their sub-area and distribution over years (1990-
2019). Table II includes the categorization of the variables used in 81 papers (empirical as
well as conceptual) considered for the study.
SUB-AREA 1990-1994 1995-1999 2000-2004 2005-2009 2010-2014 2015-2019
Leadership Superior’s - - Positive Paternalistic Employee out-
Leadership psychological Leadership comes
Qualities capital
Transformati Attitudes towards
Autonomy Positive moral onal leader
perspective Leadership
Leadership
Leader self- Nurturant constructs
awareness task
Leadership Follower cultural
Leader self- values
regulation Participative
Leadership Leader and
Leadership subordinate
processes/beh Authoritaria demographics
aviors n Leadership
Follower self-
regulation
Follower
development
Organizationa
l context
Performance
Socially
responsible HRM
Organizational
identification
Perceived
Organizational
Support
74
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Cooperative
norms
Emotions - - Behavior - Affective Collective
Patterns Empathy Emotional
Intelligence
Emotional Cognitive
Adequacy Empathy Team Academic
Performance
Behavioral
Empathy Collective
General Self-
State and Efficacy (GSE)
Trait
Empathy Team-Level GSE
(Team Potency)
Observer
Empathy and
Judged
Empathy
Sympathy/E
mpathic
Concern/Co
mpassion
Emotional
Contagion
and Affective
Crossover
Emotional
Intelligence
Organizationa Grapevine
l Identification
Communication
Satisfaction
Organization Organization Perceived Coworker Transformati Occupational
al Change al Support Organizational support onal future time
Support Leadership perspective
Coworker
Fairness antagonism Commitment Organizational
to Change Citizenship
Organizational Role Behaviour
Rewards perceptions Affect
Job Satisfaction
Job Conditions Work
attitudes
Supervisor
Support Withdrawal
Effectiveness
75
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Dedication
Absorption
Job security
Good wages
Interesting
work
Promotion
and growth
in the
organization
Personal or
company
loyalty to
employees
Good
working
conditions
Competition Competitive
Aggressiveness
Performance
Performance
76
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Competitive
Complexity
Preparation
activities
Transactive
memory
systems
Team
effectiveness
Impression
Management
Employee
Selection Process
77
Kalwani, Mahesh / Journal of Business and Management, 26 (1), March 2020, 40-78.
Acknowledgment
Shilpi Kalwani*
Department of Management,
Birla Institute of Technology and Science,
Pilani, Rajasthan (India)
Country: India
Tel.: +91-8085681072
E-mail: [email protected]
Jayashree Mahesh
Department of Management,
Birla Institute of Technology and Science,
Pilani, Rajasthan (India)
Country: India
Tel.: +91-8949709082
E-mail: [email protected]
*Corresponding author
78
Copyright of Journal of Business & Management is the property of Journal of Business &
Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.