Engaging leader – Engaged employees? A cross-lagged study on employee engagement

The goal of this study is to provide a cross-lagged examination of the relationships between engaging leadership, job resources and employee work engagement. We propose a mediation model and we postulate that engaging leadership can increase perceptions of three specific job resources (i.e. autonomy, support from colleagues and opportunities for learning and development) which theoretically correspond to the three facets of engaging leadership (i.e., inspiring, connecting and strengthening, respectively). Subsequently, in keeping with the extant body of Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) research, we link job resources to employee work engagement. Our hypotheses were tested on data collected at two time-points – T1 (N = 759) and T2 (N = 273) –from employees working for a hotel chain in the Netherlands. In line with our expectations, engaging leadership showed a significant cross-lagged relationship with autonomy and support from colleagues, but did not predict learning opportunities and work engagement across time. While we formulated specific hypotheses, we also tested reversed causation relationships. We found no direct effect from engaging leadership on employee work engagement, however, the reversed effect was significant; employee perceptions of engaging leadership were shaped by their own engagement experiences. Importantly, engaged employees at T1 reported more job resources at T2. By providing a cross-lagged examination of our model, we showed that engaging leaders as well as employees’ positive affective state of being engaged, are essential to shaping a resourceful work context. A comprehensive view on the triggers and outcomes of work engagement and engaging leadership is needed, as the traditional unidirectional cause-effect rationale fails to explain how these concepts relate to one another and to employee experiences of job resources.     

"生态旅游"概念探微

选取国外 44个生态旅游定义作为研究对象 ,通过确认关键词、对关键词进行聚类分析 ,将定义内容归纳为 6大类 11组分 ,进而构建生态旅游概念模型。在检验模型理论上的可靠性和实践上的适应性后 ,依据模型提出自己的生态旅游定义     

《河北理工学院学报》(社会科学版)统计分析研究

运用文献计量学的方法,对《河北理工大学学报》(社会科学版)2001-2004四年载文,栏目设置,作者分布等进行了统计分析。     

《考槃余事》作者考辨

万历三十四年(1606)沈氏尚白斋所刻《考槃余事》四卷,署名明代文学家屠隆,后世学者多认同为屠氏著作而加以引证研究,然书中条目所论对象大多已经重见于前人之作。诸多证据表明,该书作者并非屠隆:其一,是书广泛截取旧作,巧加连缀,造为新编,乃有意作伪;其二,《考槃余事》行文风格与屠隆之文绝然不类;其三,屠隆缺少收藏赏鉴之条件与趣尚。藉此,可判定《考槃余事》应是伪托无疑,后之研究屠隆作品艺术以及思想观念,当谨言慎行而不可笃定为权威凭据。     

A modified LGB method for detecting significant effects based on a half-normal probability plot

In analyzing data from unreplicated factorial designs, the half-normal probability plot is commonly used to screen for the ‘vital few’ effects. Recently, many formal methods have been proposed to overcome the subjectivity of this plot. Lawson (1998) (hereafter denoted as LGB) suggested a hybrid method based on the half-normal probability plot, which is a blend of Lenth (1989) and Loh (1992) method. The method consists of fitting a simple least squares line to the inliers, which are determined by the Lenth method. The effects exceeding the prediction limits based on the fitted line are candidates for the vital few effects. To improve the accuracy of partitioning the effects into inliers and outliers, we propose a modified LGB method (hereafter denoted as the Mod_LGB method), in which more outliers can be classified by using both the Carling’s modification of the box plot (Carling, 2000) and Lenth method. If no outlier exists or there is a wide range in the inliers as determined by the Lenth method, more outliers can be found by the Carling method. A simulation study is conducted in unreplicated $2^4$ designs with the number of active effects ranging from 1 to 6 to compare the efficiency of the Lenth method, original LGB methods, and the proposed modified version of the LGB method.     

Public relations critical intersections special section introduction

The theme of this special section arose from the idea that interdisciplinary interactions, or the cross-fertilization of methods, philosophies, theories, and modes of practice across disciplines, can open out productive ways of addressing complex issues and wicked problems. Our call for papers reached out to public relations scholars and to researchers in other fields to submit articles at these generative intersections at different time. They were invited to reflect on traditional concerns, or current issues, or projected trends in public relations and elsewhere. As editors making a call to open boundaries, we invited participation along a spectrum of possible intersections whether of content, methods, pedagogy or technology. Taking different positions on that spectrum, the articles in the section examine the nature, engagement and evaluation of intersections. In writing this introduction, the editors took an overview of the articles in the light of three fundamental questions: “How and where does interdisciplinarity occur in public relations?”; “Are there indications of how public relations intersects with other fields to engage existing and potential future challenges?”; and “What principles might serve to evaluate answers to questions one and two?” In addition, we explore how each of the selected intersections in the articles might add value to public relations as a discipline and a practice.     

Diaspora Ownership and Homeland Firms' Internationalization

Although the contribution of diaspora to international business is becoming more evident, little is known about the channels used by individual firms to benefit from diaspora. In this paper, we propose equity ownership as a form of connection between the homeland firms and diasporans (i.e. diaspora members). Specifically, we draw on the literature on diaspora combined with an owners-as-resources perspective to theorize about how diaspora owners can affect the homeland firm's internationalization. We suggest that the anticipated entry costs deriving from the liability of foreignness faced by homeland firms explain how the impact of diaspora owners varies depending on entry mode. Finally, we compare diaspora owners to other types of foreign owner which we argue have lower levels of motivation and ability to help homeland firms to internationalize, and contribute relatively less to their internationalization than diaspora owners. We test and confirm our predictions using data on 2608 domestically controlled Indian firms and their internationalization in 2006–2012.