emlyon business school

When employees face hostility from others, emotion regulation is needed to perform effectively but can be personally costly. On the basis of current evidence, employees both perform better and avoid well-being costs with engagement-focused regulation (i.e., modifying feelings through deep acting) rather than with disengagement (i.e., modifying or faking expressions through surface acting). Yet, emotion regulation theorizing suggests this good–bad dichotomy is an oversimplification, and no known work has simultaneously considered the performance and well-being consequences of emotion regulation strategies at the event level. To address these issues, we apply the comprehensive six-strategy emotion regulation framework to identify emergent combinations of regulation strategies used in response to hostile events. Across two studies, we find six emotion regulation profiles, with the pattern of these profiles largely replicating across samples. Study 2 reveals that profile enactment is driven by the intensity of the event and has distinct consequences for employees’ event performance and well-being. We also find the first known evidence of a trade-off, where profiles that result in the highest negative affect were also the most effective for episodic performance. Meanwhile, profiles that maintained low levels of negative affect were linked with lower event performance ratings. Thus, in contrast to the good-bad strategy dichotomy common in the emotion regulation literature, we find that enhancing event performance comes at a cost to affect, and vice versa. This high-hostility work context points to a no-win situation for employees, who must choose between maximizing event performance and minimizing personal costs.

Meaningful work is work that offers a degree of autonomy and the opportunity to receive recognition from others. It is traditionally associated with highly skilled jobs whereas low-skilled jobs are often equated with meaningless work. Previous research assumes that workers in low-skilled roles have little access to the autonomy or recognition characteristic of highly skilled labour. Rather it suggests that in their efforts to make their working lives more tolerable, such workers are limited to either discursively reframing the significance of their roles or engaging in acts of resistance against the organization. In this paper, based on an eight-month ethnographic study of a mould-producing company in France, we identify three processes through which workers in low-skilled roles find temporal opportunities to engage in anomalous craft where latent or underused craft skills and attitudes are utilized to enable them to work more autonomously and earn recognition from peers and supervisors, rendering their work more meaningful. Our work offers insights into how workers can use craft to activate or re-establish meaning in contexts where work has been stripped of significance.

Many cities struggle with financing their infrastructure projects. When decision makers cannot fully capture the benefits of their investments, there is a risk of underinvestment. Hong Kong’s transit operator created a model where it not only collects fare revenues but also engages in property management, leveraging the positive effects of public transport on nearby property values. In the article titled “Monetizing Positive Externalities to Mitigate the Infrastructure Underinvestment Problem,” the authors present a stochastic Stackelberg game of timing to examine the reasoning behind this approach. The issue is complex because the operator faces a two-dimensional optimal stopping problem that cannot be simplified by changing the numéraire. The authors determine the operator’s optimal investment strategy through the use of a “penalized problem” and provide comparative statics. They also identify the conditions in which capitalizing on positive externalities can encourage infrastructure investment. Other management challenges share similar structures.

Recent advances in research have shed some light on why and how CBEs emerge and the factors that lead to their successful creation. Yet, important gaps in knowledge persist about how CBEs evolve successfully once they have emerged. This lack of attention is intriguing given the widespread proliferation of community-based enterprises as an instrument for socioeconomic development. We apply socioemotional wealth (SEW) as an analytical lens beyond its traditional realm of family businesses to the context of community-based enterprises (CBEs). Our research setting is a Colombian CBE, comprising 325 families, that balances its economic objectives with its affective needs. Through an abductive approach to theory elaboration, our paper contributes to the CBE literature by proffering a new construct, community socioemotional wealth applicable to CBEs. Our findings provide insights into how the presence of community socioemotional wealth enables the CBE to successfully fulfill its multiple goals and achieve enduring success. We observe the presence of socioemotional wealth’s five dimensions at the community level, but notably, we uncover two novel dimensions (empowerment and holistic mission) that are unique to CBEs. These seven dimensions create a valuable new construct to study community socioemotional wealth and, when observed, help explain the presence of a favorable terrain for CBEs to succeed.

Merchants often use personalized pricing: they charge different consumers different prices for the same product. We assess the ethicality of personalized pricing by generalizing and extending an earlier model by Coker and Izaret (Journal of Business Ethics 173:387–398, 2021) who found that price personalization ethically outperforms unitary pricing. Using a simulation analysis, we show that these results crucially depend on the choice of parameters and do not hold universally. We further incorporate additional sources of marginal cost into the utility function that will likely arise from personalized pricing. These include the expectation that personalized pricing is widely considered unfair by consumers who prefer that all consumers are charged the same price (unitary pricing), and that firms often approximate the consumers’ willingness-to-pay in ways that may raise negative sentiments among consumers who feel that their privacy is breached. By extending our model with disutility from unfairness perception and disutility from surveillance aversion, we demonstrate that personalized pricing is quickly outperformed by unitary pricing under social welfare functions that tend to prioritize total utility (utilitarianism and prioritarianism), whereas personalized pricing can ethically outperform unitary pricing under social welfare functions that tend to prioritize equality (egalitarianism and leximin). Our findings illustrate various intricacies and dynamics regarding the circumstances under which personalized pricing can be considered ethical.

Même si la valeur de la technologie (par rapport à l’homme) pour développer des produits et offrir des services a été largement explorée du point de vue du consommateur, les managers comprennent-ils vraiment à quel point la technologie présente une valeur ajoutée pour les consommateurs ? Cette recherche met en évidence des disparités entre les perceptions des managers et celles des consommateurs concernant la valeur de la technologie en tant que ressource pour les services et produits. Sept études (N = 1320) réalisées dans différents contextes montrent que la technologie est perçue comme une ressource plus précieuse du point de vue des managers que du point de vue des consommateurs (études 1A–D). Ces différences sont liées au fait que les managers accordent une plus grande importance aux avantages liés à l’efficience de la technologie, contrairement aux consommateurs (étude 2). Pour réduire l’écart entre managers et consommateurs, mettre en avant les avantages technologiques pour les consommateurs peut accroître leur évaluation de la technologie au niveau de celle des managers (étude 3). Cependant, informer les managers des objections des consommateurs à l’égard de la technologie n’a pas permis de corriger leurs évaluations excessivement optimistes de la technologie (étude 4). Nos résultats soulignent l’importance de reconnaître l’écart entre les managers et les consommateurs concernant l’utilisation de la technologie dans les entreprises.

While the value of adopting technology (vs human) to develop products and provide services has been extensively explored from the consumer’s standpoint, do managers fully comprehend how valuable technology is to consumers? This research reveals notable disparities between managers’ and consumers’ perceptions about the value of technology adoption. Seven studies ( N = 1,320) in different contexts show that people with a manager perspective perceive technology as a more valuable resource than those with a consumer perspective (studies 1A–D). These differences arise because managers place a higher value on the efficiency-related benefits of technology than consumers (study 2). To reduce the manager-consumer gap, highlighting technology-driven efficiency benefits for consumers can increase their technology valuation to the manager’s level (study 3). However, informing managers about consumers’ objections to technology failed to correct their overly optimistic assessments of technology contribution (study 4). Our findings attest to the importance of acknowledging the manager-customer gap when it comes to technological adoption.

The forwarding behavior of social media users within social circles facilitates intensive discussions of specific social events in cyberspace, significantly contributing to the dissemination and development of public opinions. Existing models for calculating the popularity of public opinion (PPO) overlook the effects of forwarding behavior. This article addresses this gap with two primary objectives: 1) by developing a calculation model for PPO that integrates the forwarding dynamics within social networks; and 2) by establishing a predictive model that is applied to the temporal evolution of forwarding circles, thus enabling a time-series prediction for PPO. The approach commenced by determining the information entropy based on the structural attributes of forwarding circles. Then, we assess the similarity between information entropy production and the Baidu search index to validate the calculation model’s accuracy. Building on this foundation, public opinion data centered around 30 social events with a total sample size of 15.567 million blogs were collected for modeling. Finally, we design a deep learning algorithm to predict the PPO trend. The results demonstrate that the information entropy of forwarding circles accurately represents PPO, and the proposed predictive model can capture the time-series evolution trend of PPO on social media. These findings offer valuable insights into public opinion analysis and present a robust method for academics and social media practitioners.

Take a deep breath. Although nothing is more natural or essential to human bodies than breathing, this simple yet vital act is the critical result of complex organizational, material, and political processes. We suggest that breathing can be thought of as a political model of organizing insofar as it shapes questions of life and death while rooting these “operationally” in immediate, urgent, collective and more-than-human intra-action. Breathing is also a social act because the self is bound up with others in a fabric of relations upon which each person depends, and so breathing can serve as a trope for regenerating and rethinking social structures, institutions and organizing blueprints. We take the act of breathing—its literal and metaphorical (im)possibility and collective organization—as the focus of a reflection on relations among humans and between other living beings, humans, and their ecological surroundings. Re-thinking the question of whose breathing we care about and whose breathing counts, we offer a political model that embraces the mutuality principle for post-humanistic and post-anthropocentric organizing and community building. We thereby hope to “inspire” and materialize new social and political realities for organizing our shared future, conceptualized as building a (scholarly) community of breathers who breathe and let breathe.

ChatGPT’s debut in 2022 heralded the entry of generative AI into mainstream public attention. The radical technology could do what no machine had done before: mimic humans’ complex linguistic abilities. The ghost had entered the machine. In their essay, Phillips, Kalvapalle and Kennedy (2024) argue that one of the important aspects of generative AI is that it participates in the social construction of categories. Many other technologies also participate in the social construction of categories, yet this process often goes unnoticed. Why? We argue that the degree to which technologies are perceived to participate in the social construction process depends on three elements: the degree to which we anthropomorphize the technology, whether its affordances allow for easy interaction, and the vested interests of powerful stakeholders. We agree that humans and machines co-construct categories, but we argue that this process is itself socially constructed through an iterative process among participating stakeholders.

Customer insights play a critical role in innovation. In recent years, articles studying customer insights for innovation have risen in marketing and other fields such as innovation, strategy, and entrepreneurship. However, the literature on customer insights for innovation grew fragmented and plagued by inconsistent definitions and ambiguity. The literature also lacks a precise classification of different domains of customer insights for innovation. This article offers four key contributions. First, it clearly and consistently defines customer insights for innovation . Second, it proposes a “customer insights process” that describes the activities firms and customer insights intermediaries (e.g., market research agencies) use to generate, disseminate, and apply customer insights for innovation. Third, it offers a synthesis of the knowledge on customer insights for innovation along ten domains of customer insights for innovation: (1) crowdsourcing, (2) co-creating, (3) imagining, (4) observing, (5) testing, (6) intruding, (7) interpreting, (8) organizing, (9) deciding, and (10) tracking. Fourth, the authors qualify and quantify the managerial importance and potential for scholarly research in these domains of customer insights for innovation. They conducted 12 in-depth interviews with executives at market research agencies such as Ipsos, Kantar, Nielsen, IQVIA, and GfK to do so. They surveyed 305 managers working in innovation, marketing, strategy, and customer experience. The article concludes with a research agenda for marketing aimed at igniting knowledge development in high-priority domains for customer insights for innovation.

This chapter zooms into the final stage of the acceleration process, when entrepreneurs have tested and refined their product and business model, defined a marketing strategy, created an impact thesis and indicators, and produced a compelling story around impact. Picking up on the investment committees, I examine how impact investors capture and evaluate the credibility of entrepreneurs’ impact promises. By zooming into their evaluation practices, I show how investors move beyond self-reported intention, social mission, and visible characteristics, to examine entrepreneurs’ impact promise in a way that is both analytical and subjective. Their evaluation centers on four interrelated aspects of entrepreneur’s behavior: entrepreneurs’ proven awareness and use of impact indicators and methodologies, selected biographical aspects that connect to their social goals, entrepreneurs’ management of their venture and social impact, and their views about the future of the latter. In doing so, investors strive to detect opportunistic entrepreneurs while creating beliefs about the credibility of entrepreneurs’ promises that embolden investment decisions.

This chapter is about how the staff and corporate partners select entrepreneurs. The different interests and goals of these partners, alongside the lack of shared evaluation criteria, and diverging understandings of what social impact means and why it matters, challenge this process. By following the staff during interviews with short-listed entrepreneurs on selection committees, I uncover what makes an early-stage impact enterprise worth accelerating. I complexify the primacy of social and economic values in impact entrepreneurship to suggest that what makes impact enterprises valuable is eminently plural. I unearth five evaluation criteria: problem-solving capability, maturity, technical innovation, social impact, and network capability. I argue that their interplay informs the worth of a social impact start-up and conveys use, technical, social, and relational values. These values form an “ensemblage of worth,” revealing that an impact enterprise has no intrinsic worth; its worth is socially constructed during evaluation.

This chapter concludes by summarizing the argument presented in the book, before taking up the idea that impact emerges iteratively from a process of social engagement and negotiation. As the title makes clear, this book is about impact entrepreneurship. However, many books could be written about this topic, each with specific audiences in mind. I did not write this book just for entrepreneurship scholars. I like to think that Impact Work might interest social scientists in general. I also hope that the book might interest a broader audience of impact aficionados interested in discovering the dynamics underlying the production of impact work by examining the backstage of this production world. This book is not about prescriptive practical recommendations or general theory. Instead, it is about the lived experience of impact work by a group of passionate people.

This chapter uncovers entrepreneurs’ experiences during their socialization to impact entrepreneurship by Seal. Entrepreneurs tend to be inclined toward a social or commercial demand, and Seal transforms them into impact entrepreneurs. They must integrate the social with the commercial in developing a new role. With this aim, internal and external mentoring and cohort training provide shared social knowledge and form a nuanced understanding of behavioral expectations, leading to salient adjustments in the entrepreneurs’ roles. These socialization activities also enable them to gain the necessary skills to turn their idea into an impact enterprise. I propose the notion of “contradictory role demands” to explain how entrepreneurs gain awareness and gradually integrate these demands. I develop this notion by following the entrepreneurs during their day-to-day routine, combining an examination of their biographies with an investigation of their struggles to either make sense of these demands or quit.