Doing better leadership science via replications and registered reports

In 2018, the Leadership Quarterly commissioned a Special Issue (SI) on replications of previously published studies in leadership. We adopted the Registered Reports path for this special issue to facilitate constructive reviewer feedback prior to data collection and to minimize any bias against non-significant findings in the publishing process. In this editorial, we reflect on how this approach worked, what we learned about replications, and identify three myths that we have seen throughout this process regarding the value and conduct of replications. We then offer actionable solutions to further advance replications in science. We close with a discussion of the six studies included in this SI and the implications of these studies for leadership science. We hope that this work continues to inspire replications and registered reports and in support The Leadership Quarterly offers an open call for such submissions.     

Universal-deterministic and probabilistic hypotheses in operations management research: a discussion paper

Abstract

Based on Karl Popper’s approach to science, this conceptual article aims at promoting a discussion on important issues debated in the OM literature. Our focus is on the different types of hypotheses used in OM investigations and the implications of this for the formulation and testing of theory with an emphasis on case study research. Given that Popper’s methodology calls for an adequate testing of scientific propositions (universal-deterministic or probabilistic), we illustrate how case study research can be used to conduct a severe test of a scientific theory. It is also explained how case studies can be utilized to propose universal-deterministic hypotheses that should then be tested. Our investigation further discusses why it is important to clearly acknowledge the differences between the two types of hypotheses. Otherwise, inadequate research designs, deficient policy advice, and other similar problems, can arise. Topics for future research and discussion are also offered.     

Braucht Coaching eine philosophisch begründete Ethik?

Does coaching need a philosphically substantiated ethics? On the foundation of a systemic value oriented imperative for coachingThe general claim that coaches have to take responsibility for their clients is in contrast to the low interest in scientific discussion about ethics in coaching. One of the reasons for that seems to be the fact that this discussion is dominated by systemic thinking and its conviction that ethical aspects should be discussed as matter of contingency. From a philosophical point of view we can realize that this statement contains many ethical implications. Concerning a further development of coaching theory the author discusses these implications with regard to philosophical concepts of Kant, Habermas, Prange, Heidegger, Bauman and the Dalai Lama leading to the suggestion that systemic thinking should be more based on value orientation. On this theoretical grounds an ethical coaching imperative can be formulated with regard to the “categorical imperative” of Kant.     

Coaching im Spagat zwischen Praxis und Wissenschaft

Coaching between practice and science. Coaching theory and -practice are two sides of the same coin. As contrasted with the successful practice the theoretical and scientific explanation of coaching is still unattended despite the fact that serious coaching conceptions are to base on epistemological and scientific premises; and this only for the sake of practice. The text at hand will point out the limits and the possibilities to approach the task for answering to the questions of differences between science, theory and practice.     

The evolution of Omega-The International Journal of Management Science over the past 40 years: A bibliometric overview

The aim of this study is to reflect on where Omega-The International Journal of Management Science (Omega) comes from and evaluate where Omega currently is in a field that arguably paves the way for the challenging task of identifying future directions and trends. To achieve this goal, this study presents a bibliometric overview of Omega over the past 40 years, from 1979 to 2018. First, this study outlines the basic bibliometric profile of Omega. Second, VOSviewer is employed to visualize the collaborative relationships that Omega has with other journals to show how Omega has linked to them over the past 40 years. Finally, co-occurrences of keywords are analysed and strategic diagrams are built to reveal the thematic trends in Omega. The results show that Omega has substantial influences in the field of operational research and management science (OR&MS), with contributors from all over the world. Omega has strong connections with other leading journals in the fields of OR&MS and engineering. The mainstream research of Omega mainly focuses on production and manufacturing management, mathematical modelling for optimization problems, supply chain management, data envelopment analysis, multicriteria and decision making. Moreover, motor themes, highly developed-and-isolated themes, emerging-or-declining themes, and basic-and-transversal themes are identified. The study provides strong evidence that Omega has been a story of success, and the findings of this study will support decision making for the Omega-related scientific community.     

Strategic Appraisal of Environmental Risks: A Contrast Between the United Kingdom's Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change and its Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

In this article, we compare two high‐profile strategic policy reviews undertaken for the U.K. government on environmental risks: radioactive waste management and climate change. These reviews took very different forms, both in terms of analytic approach and deliberation strategy. The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change was largely an exercise in expert modeling, building, within a cost‐benefit framework, an argument for immediate reductions in carbon emissions. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, on the other hand, followed a much more explicitly deliberative and participative process, using multicriteria decision analysis to bring together scientific evidence and stakeholder and public values. In this article, we ask why the two reviews were different, and whether the differences are justified. We conclude that the differences were mainly due to political context, rather than the underpinning science, and as a consequence that, while in our view “fit for purpose,” they would both have been stronger had they been less different. Stern's grappling with ethical issues could have been strengthened by a greater degree of public and stakeholder engagement, and the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management's handling of issues of uncertainty could have been strengthened by the explicitly probabilistic framework of Stern.     

Your E‐mail Trail: Where Ethics Meets Forensics1

This article addresses ethical and legal issues arising from the increasing use of e‐mail and other forms of instant written communication in the conduct of business. E‐mail communications are often casual and informal. Yet e‐mail is a written record that can be more permanent and widely accessible than a paper communication. This article focuses on the implications of this fact, including (1) how individuals compromise their own privacy by the voluntary use of e‐mail; (2) how e‐mail has complicated the duty of confidentiality of employees to employers, and professionals to clients; (3) whether the use of e‐mail affects ethical deliberation and choice; and (4) the use of e‐mail as evidence of corporate conduct and intent in civil and criminal litigation. The article suggests that e‐mail users think “forensically” about their e‐mail—i.e., consider its potential as evidence in the context of other emails and underlying events—before pressing the “send” button.     

Moral Utility Theory: Understanding the motivation to behave (un)ethically

Moral Utility Theory provides an integrative framework for understanding the motivational basis of ethical decision making by modeling it as a process of subjective expected utility (SEU) maximization. The SEUs of ethical and unethical behavioral options are proposed to be assessed intuitively during goal pursuit, with unethical conduct emerging when the expected benefits of moral transgressions outweigh the expected costs. A key insight of the model is that any factors that increase the value of a goal—including incentives, framings, and mindsets—can motivate misbehavior by increasing the SEU of unethical conduct. Although Moral Utility Theory emphasizes the automatic and habitual nature of most SEU appraisals, it also describes a mechanism for initiating the deliberative moral reasoning process: the experience of moral uncertainty. Moral uncertainty is proposed to occur when the SEUs of ethical and unethical behaviors are similar in magnitude, thereby activating the behavioral inhibition system and motivating the allocation of attentional resources toward the decision process. This framework bridges the gap between affective and cognitive perspectives on ethical decision making by identifying automatic evaluations as a central driver of moral decisions while also specifying when and how moral reasoning processes are initiated. By combining dual-process models of morality with well-validated principles from the science of motivation, Moral Utility Theory provides theoretical parsimony and formal modeling potential to the study of ethical decision making. The framework also suggests practical strategies—from employee selection and training to goal setting and compensation systems—for encouraging ethical behavior in organizations.     

What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis

This article aims to systematise and provide a structure for research into the Future of Work (FoW). We used SciMAT to conduct a science mapping analysis based on co-word bibliographic networks. The Web of Science (WoS) database was used for article retrieval, and a total of 2,286 documents were identified from 1959 to 2019. Our results are counterintuitive, as concerns over satisfaction, leadership values or corporate social responsibility (CSR) appear alongside traditional human resource management (HRM) themes, such as organisational commitment or careers, as well as more current FoW themes, such as the impact of technological change on employment, wage inequality, vulnerable workers, telework or talent management. In addition, we offer a classification of the most prolific FoW research themes and challenges into technological, social, economic and political categories.     

Eight puzzles of leadership science

In the early 1900s, David Hilbert introduced a set of 23 mathematical problems. These problems caught the imagination of mathematicians around the world for the coming century and beyond. The advantage of such defined scientific puzzles is to galvanize coordinated efforts to pursue key scientific questions, whose answers can also address the grand challenges faced by society. Consequently, science can advance more quickly in a theory-driven, rigorous, open and collaborative manner, with meaningful implications for stakeholders. In the current editorial, I propose eight puzzles that could similarly motivate and guide leadership science. Whereas this list is not exhaustive--rather it is just eight starting points--beginning to solve such puzzles will accelerate our science and deliver on shared promises to our stakeholders. I then present actionable guidelines necessary to solve these puzzles and conclude by discussing the role The Leadership Quarterly will play in facilitating the pursuit of solutions to these puzzles.     

The power of “mapping the territory”. Why economists should become more aware of the performativity of their models

Economics is not simply about representing reality; it is also about shaping it, an approach encapsulated in Donald MacKenzie’s aphorism that economics is best conceived as an “engine, not as a camera” (MacKenzie and Millo (Am J Sociol 109(1):107–145, 2003). The making and application of economic theories and models contribute actively and intentionally towards the making of our social world, by encouraging, guiding and legitimizing actions and decisions, or discouraging others, and by steering them in certain directions. It follows that economists do not simply draw maps of the economic territory within their compass: they are not straightforwardly the cartographers of the economy, and cannot be seen as the disinterested observers that they commonly represent themselves to be, and indeed are often thought of as. Their theoretical work has or aims at practical consequences for the economy, and indeed for society at large, and their interests and influence are thus by no means confined to academia alone. This article calls for a discussion of the ethical responsibilities of economists, and of economics, and challenges the discipline properly to assume those responsibilities; and it concludes by considering the key questions—what makes a ‘good’ economic model; and what criteria should be used to distinguish the good models, and the ‘good ways’ of handling models and their results, from the bad ones. As far as epistemology, the methodology of research programmes and the relation of theory and (social) practice are concerned, the insights of mainly von Hayek (Br J Philos Sci 6(23):209–225, 1955, The pretence of knowledge. Lecture to the memory of Alfred Nobel, 1974; Individualism and economic order, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 33–56, 1980a; Individualism and economic order, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 57–76, 1980b; The theory of complex phenomena. Readings in the philosophy of social science, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1994) and Popper (e.g. The myth of the framework: in defence of science and rationality, Routledge, New York 1994a; Models, instruments, and truth. The status of the rationality principle in the social sciences, pp 154–184, 1994b) provide the background of my discussion of the mentioned issues.     

The Ethics of Management Research: An Exploratory Content Analysis

Management academics have tended to rely on ethics codes developed by social researchers in related fields to inform their research practice. The point of this paper is to question whether this remains a viable approach in the current climate that is characterized by a significant increase in ethical regulation across the social sciences. We suggest that management researchers face ethical issues of a different nature to those most frequently confronted by other social science researchers, and argue for more explicit acknowledgement of contextual factors involved in management research. An exploratory analysis of the content of ethics codes formulated by nine social scientific associations is undertaken to identify the main ethical principles they cover and to analyse their underlying ethical tone. Drawing attention to the principle of reciprocity, which is found in very few codes, we suggest that an ethics code could be used to formulate new ways of thinking about management research relationships. Despite the risk that ethics codes may encourage instrumental compliance with minimal ethical obligations, we suggest they also have the potential to reflect a more aspirational agenda. The development of an ethics code for management research should therefore be seen as a potentially worthwhile project.     

Paradigm lost: Reinvigorating the study of organizational culture

In spite of the importance of organizational culture, scholarly advances in our understanding of the construct appear to have stagnated. We review the state of culture research and argue that the ongoing academic debates about what culture is and how to study it have resulted in a lack of unity and precision in defining and measuring culture. This ambiguity has constrained progress in both developing a coherent theory of organizational culture and accreting replicable and valid findings. To make progress we argue that future research should focus on conceptualizing and assessing organizational culture as the norms that characterize a group or organization that if widely shared and strongly held, act as a social control system to shape members’ attitudes and behaviors. We further argue that to accomplish this, researchers need to recognize that norms can be parsed into three distinct dimensions: (1) the content or what is deemed important (e.g., teamwork, accountability, innovation), (2) the consensus or how widely shared norms are held across people, and (3) the intensity of feelings about the importance of the norm (e.g., are people willing to sanction others). From this perspective we suggest how future research might be able to clarify some of the current conflicts and confusion that characterize the current state of the field.     

Ethical leadership and follower organizational deviance: The moderating role of follower moral attentiveness

The literature on ethical leadership has focused primarily on the way ethical leaders influence follower moral judgment and behavior. It has overlooked that follower responses to ethical leaders may differ depending on the attention they pay to the moral aspects of leadership. In the present research, we introduce moral attentiveness as an important moderator for the relationship between ethical leadership and unethical employee behavior. In a multisource field study (N = 90), we confirm our hypothesis that morally attentive followers respond with more deviance to unethical leaders. An experimental study (N = 96) replicates the finding. Our paper extends the current leader-focused literature by examining how follower moral attentiveness determines the response of followers to ethical or unethical leadership.     

Ethical issues in tracking cellular telephones at an event

Early in 2007, the CSIR conducted an experiment to track the cellular telephones of a small group of people as they moved to and from an event, to test the viability of using such tracking to provide the participants with useful traffic information. This project raised a number of ethical issues, which prompted this paper and which we discuss here. These include:

• the ethics of modelling data, including the treatment of research participants;

• privacy and surveillance issues related to tracking the movement of people;

• the risks inherent in being tracked vs the benefits of being tracked; and

• the ethics related to sending messages to drivers.

We have reviewed the literature on ethics and used the results to assemble a check list of relevant ethical issues, adding a few of our own (i.e. a deontological ethics approach), against which the conduct of this research project was assessed. We also provide an overview of the experiment and the results obtained.     

Positive Psychology and the Distinction Between Positive and Negative Reinforcement

Abstract

The authors make a reasonable point, that behavior analysis should be concerned with effective behavior in its own right and not only as a replacement for ineffective behavior. But positive psychology is then described as “a science of positive subjective experience, positive individual traits, and positive institutions …” based largely on correlations among self-report inventories; a science which has the goal of identifying traits that function as the explanations of the behavior of interest. An effort is made to justify this move in a nonbehavioral direction by reference to the distinction between positive and negative reinforcement and an exhortation that OBM practitioners emphasize the former. But this rationale is seriously flawed by either a clearly erroneous or a drastically oversimplified understanding of this distinction. Furthermore, all of the more specific recommendations can be easily justified in terms of ordinary behavioral advantages without recourse to the achievement motivation literature or such concepts as self-efficacy.     

Analyzing Precautionary Regulation: Do Precaution,Science, and Innovation Go Together?

In this article we argue that the precautionary principle, as applied to the regulation of science and technology, cannot be considered in any general manner inconsistent with the norms and methods of scientific knowledge generation and justification. Moreover, it does not necessarily curtail scientific‐technological innovation. Our argument flows from a differentiated view of what precaution in regulation means. We first characterize several of the most relevant interpretations given to the precautionary principle in academic debate and regulatory practice. We then use examples of actual precaution‐based regulation to show that, even though science can have varying functions in different circumstances and frames, all of those interpretations recur to scientific method and knowledge, and tend to imply innovation in methods, products, and processes. In fact, the interplay of regulation and innovation in precautionary policy, at least in the case of the interpretations of precaution that our analysis takes into account, could be understood as a way of reconciling the two fundamental science and technology policy functions of promotion and control.     

On the etiology of conflict cultures

Conflict has long been conceived as a fundamental part of all organizational systems. Yet the literature on conflict is largely divorced from its organizational roots and instead focuses on general processes of conflict management at the individual and small group levels of analysis. To re-establish the organizational basis of conflict, we develop a macro-theory of conflict cultures, or shared norms that specify how conflict should be managed in organizational settings. We propose a typology of conflict cultures that draws upon two dimensions – active versus passive conflict management norms and agreeable versus disagreeable conflict management norms – and discuss the etiology of four distinct conflict cultures: dominating conflict cultures (active and disagreeable), collaborative conflict cultures (active and agreeable), avoidant conflict cultures (passive and agreeable), and passive–aggressive conflict cultures (passive and disagreeable). We discuss top-down processes (e.g., leadership, organizational structure and rewards, industry, community, and societal factors) and bottom-up processes (e.g., personality, demographics, values and social networks) through which these conflict cultures develop. We explore both positive and negative organizational outcomes associated with each conflict culture, as well as moderators of proposed effects. We conclude with theoretical, practical, and empirical implications of a conflict culture perspective.     

Making corporate governance count: the fusion of ethics and economic rationality

Corporate governance codes extensively appeal to ethical standards of conduct. Rather than being articulated alongside economic axioms, ethical and moral precepts are intertwined within neo-classical economic argumentation across corporate governance standards. This paper explores the fusion between ethics and modern economic rationality and reflects on the scientisation of economics and ethics in academic discourse. The argument is then made that the enlistment of ethics within the epistemologically privileged posture of economics characterises corporate governance codes. The UK Combined Corporate Governance Code of 2006 is analysed to draw out the paper’s contention.