Dejun Tony Kong’s research while affiliated with University of Colorado Boulder and other places

Organizational humour research is accelerating; however, scholars seem to disagree on how to conceptualize and operationalize interpersonal humour. A widely used approach draws from personality psychology and conceptualizes humour as a typology of four styles. This “humour styles” approach possesses conceptual shortcomings and introduces important questions about construct validity. Specifically, the humour styles tend to conflate inferred motives and outcomes within the definition of each style, raising concerns about circularity and tautology. Moreover, its typological foundation – originally developed for an intrapersonal context – becomes less tenable when applied interpersonally. To support the progression of humour scholarship, we begin by clarifying the core construct of humour, which serves as the basis for a broader conceptual critique of the humour styles approach. This critique is then illustrated through a multi‐study research program (N = 1086; six samples). We conclude by proposing the MOHM model (Model of Organizational Humour Motives) as a conceptually grounded alternative to guide future research on interpersonal humour. This research contributes to humour scholarship by clarifying the core humour concept, critiquing a popular approach (which is reducing construct clarity), and offering a forward‐looking framework to inspire more precise and impactful research on humour in organizational settings.

Human resource (HR) practices hold great promise in fostering employee trust, and insights into how HR practices relate to employee trust are critical to evidence-informed management. However, extant research findings are fragmented and dispersed across disciplines and use a confusing plethora of concepts, limiting insights. To address these problems, we conducted a systematic review to offer a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of “what,” “how,” and “when” HR practices influence employee trust toward four referents (supervisor, management, peers, and organization). Specifically, we identify the evidence-based patterns regarding “what” HR practices are related to employee trust toward “what” referents, “how” HR practices are related to employee trust, and “when” HR practices are more or less related to employee trust. We find that while bundles of HR practices are positively associated with vertical trust toward management, lateral trust toward peers, and organizational trust, individual HR practices have differential associations with trust toward the four referents, which in turn predict different outcomes. We discuss research limitations and opportunities and provide a framework and set of methodological recommendations to guide a new wave of future research. We propose a broader set of theories to enrich understanding of “how” HR practices lead to employee trust, further clarifications on the HR and trust concepts examined, and explore additional moderators. These efforts will further integrate trust and HR research and generate more rigorous knowledge to inform management of employee trust through HR practices.

Existing voice research tends to focus on the positive outcomes associated with promotive voice and the negative outcomes associated with prohibitive voice. We adopt a self‐determination theoretical lens to examine what voicers stand to gain by engaging in both types of voice despite the potential backlash against them for their voice behavior (particularly prohibitive voice). We conducted two experience‐sampling studies that examined the fluctuation of voice on a daily (Study 1) and weekly (Study 2) basis. In Study 1, we found that while promotive voice was positively associated with the voicer's psychological need satisfaction, prohibitive voice was not. In addition, the association between promotive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction was stronger than that of prohibitive voice and the voicer's psychological need satisfaction. In Study 2, we found that both promotive voice and prohibitive voice were indirectly related to the voicer's authentic self‐expression and helping behavior through the mediating mechanism of psychological need satisfaction, although the indirect effects of promotive voice were stronger than the indirect effects of prohibitive voice.

The opaqueness of author naming and ordering, when coupled with power dynamics, can lead to a number of disadvantages in academic careers. In this commentary, we investigate gender differences in authorship experiences in a large prospective meta-analytic study (k = 46; n = 3,565; 12 countries). We find that women’s and men’s authorship experiences differ significantly with women reporting greater prevalence of problematic behaviors. We present seven actionable recommendations for improving the receipt and reporting of intellectual credit. Such actions are needed to ensure fairness in authorship, which is one of the most powerful factors in academics’ career outcomes.

McNamara and Schleicher (2024) have identified four principal paths for contributing to the Journal of Management (JOM): theoretical insights, phenomenon-driven research, research methodologies, and review papers. This editorial focuses on phenomenon-based research, emphasizing its potential for enhancing management knowledge by offering a nuanced understanding of real-world phenomena. Unlike traditional approaches, phenomenon-based research prioritizes the complexity of phenomena over the immediate generation of theoretical contributions. Grounded in established theory, phenomenon-based research utilizes the phenomenon itself as the primary source of insight, facilitating the development of relevant organizational frameworks. We propose a multistep framework encompassing phenomenon selection, framing, data collection, and study constraints, highlighting criteria—Pertinence, Reach, Insightfulness, Magnification, and Expediency (PRIME)—to guide scholars in identifying meaningful phenomena. Additionally, we discuss constraints that may limit research, including cultural, logistical, ethical, academic, and resource-related challenges (CLEAR). By addressing these considerations, we encourage management scholars to explore diverse and impactful phenomena, ultimately aiming to position JOM as a leading platform for phenomenon-based research and its contributions to real-world organizational challenges. This editorial advocates for a balanced approach that values both theory-driven and phenomenon-driven research in advancing management scholarship.

Purpose This study aims to address the question of why managers make different decisions in employee downsizing when their firms face external threats. Our research intends to shed light on whether and how CEOs' cognition (motivational attributes associated with regulatory focus) influences their decision-making and firms’ strategic actions on downsizing under high resource scarcity in the industry environment. Design/methodology/approach We used a longitudinal panel of 5,544 firm-year observations of US firms from 2003 to 2015 to test our conceptual model. The data was obtained from various sources, including corporate earnings call transcripts and archival databases. We used panel logistic regressions with both fixed and random effects in our research design. Findings Our results suggest that CEOs' motivational attributes could influence their employee downsizing decisions in response to external threats. We find that CEOs who are more promotion-focused (a stronger drive towards achieving ideals) are less likely to lay off employees during high resource scarcity. Conversely, CEOs with a higher prevention focus (a greater concern for security) do not have a meaningful impact on employee downsizing during periods of external resource scarcity. Originality/value Previous research has argued that a significant external threat would diminish individuals' impact on firm strategies and outcomes. Our findings challenge this idea, indicating that CEOs with a stronger drive towards achieving ideals are less inclined to lay off employees when resources are scarce in the environment. This study contributes to behavioral strategy research by providing new insights into how upper echelons’ cognition can influence their decision-making and firms’ employee downsizing.

When advantaged group employees courageously stand up for the rights of their colleagues with marginalized identities, research suggests that they communicate a powerful, public “message of value” to such individuals. Yet, this beneficiary-focused perspective, while valuable, does not address the self-meanings that third-party observers may derive from such oppositional courage (OC) and the implications for their behavior toward the courageous actor. Drawing on the social comparison literature, we propose that perceptions of OC can be a source of upward moral comparison information for advantaged group observers. Thus, on the one hand, we argue that perceptions of OC can convey to observers that they lack the moral character of the courageous actor, which is associated with feelings of moral inferiority and, in turn, a motivation to negatively gossip about the actor. On the other hand, we suggest that perceptions of OC can also signal to observers their moral capacity to actively contribute to an equitable, inclusive workplace, which is associated with feelings of moral elevation and, in turn, a motivation to positively gossip about the actor. Central to our theory, we argue that these different reactions depend on observers’ own self-confidence to engage in similar courageous action—what we refer to as oppositional courage self-efficacy. Using data from White employees, we conducted one pilot study (i.e., a critical incident analysis) and two main studies (i.e., an experiment and a three-wave survey), on OC for racial and ethnic minorities and found support for our hypotheses. We conclude by discussing the implications of our research.