The mechanisms of regulatory focus

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Zivnuska ◽  
K. Michele Kacmar ◽  
Matthew Valle
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Role Overload ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Regulatory Focus Theory ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Career Trajectories ◽  
Member Exchange ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the mechanisms underlying prevention-focus and promotion-focus, two distinct dimensions of regulatory focus undertaken to fulfill different goals. The authors explore distinct triggers (mindfulness and leader-member exchange (LMX)) and outcomes (role overload and burnout) of each. Design/methodology/approach The model is grounded in regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997), and is tested with data collected at two times from 206 full-time workers. Findings Findings revealed mindfulness was positively related to prevention- and promotion-focus, while LMX was positively related to only promotion-focus. Prevention-focus mediated the relationship between mindfulness and role overload and burnout, while promotion-focus mediated the relationship between both mindfulness and LMX and role overload, but not burnout. Originality/value This research expands the nomological network describing individual and dyadic antecedents to regulatory focus. It also explores the nature of the relationships between regulatory focus and career management consequences, and may allow us to offer useful advice for practicing managers trying to understand employee career trajectories.

Transactional leadership and dynamic capabilities: the mediating effect of regulatory focus

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (9) ◽  
pp. 2284-2306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feng Xu ◽  
Xiaohong Wang
Keyword(s):  
Transactional Leadership ◽  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Dynamic Capabilities ◽  
Mediating Effect ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Collaborative Innovation ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The mechanism of leadership’s impact on dynamic capabilities has aroused widespread interest, but few studies focus on transactional leadership, especially empirical research by micro foundations in the R&D departments from collaborative innovation alliances. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how the mechanism of transactional leadership affects dynamic capabilities based on the mediating effect of regulatory focus. Design/methodology/approach In order to better illustrate the role of transactional leadership on dynamic capabilities, the authors introduced regulatory focus as a mediator based on previous research. A sample of 245 dyads comprised of full-time employees and their immediate supervisors was collected from the innovation teams of industry-university alliances through questionnaires in China and analyzed via hierarchical regression method. Non-response bias and endogeneity testing were also conducted to confirm the validity of the findings. Findings Contingency-reward behavior promotes the development of employee sensing and seizing capability. Management-by-exception promotes the development of employee reconfiguration capability. Promotion focus positively mediates the relationship between contingency-reward and sensing-seizing capability. Prevention focus positively mediates the relationship between management-by-exception and sensing-seizing capability. In addition, management-by-exception is also positively related to sensing capability and promotion focus is positively related to reconfiguration capability. Originality/value This paper confirmed different dimensions of transactional leadership favor different dimensions of dynamic capabilities based on different dimensions of regulatory focus, which enriches the theory of strategic leadership and dynamic capabilities, and is conducive to the management of collaborative innovation in technological innovation alliances.

Why do I conform to your ideas?

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 346-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongzheng Qu ◽  
Wen Wu ◽  
Fangcheng Tang ◽  
Haijian Si ◽  
Yuhuan Xia
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Development ◽  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Voice Behavior ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research Perspective ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Positive Effect

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to advance and test a new construct, harmony voice. Furthermore, according to the social influence theory, the relationship betweenzhongyong, an essential Confucian orientation mode and voice behavior, and the moderating role of coworker’s regulatory focus (promotion focus and prevention focus) has been examined.Design/methodology/approachA field study has been designed to test our hypotheses. We used samples of 291 employee–coworker dyads from a variety of organizations in China to test this study’s hypotheses.FindingsThe results of this empirical study show thatzhongyongis positively related to harmony voice. Coworkers’ promotion focus strengthens the positive effect ofzhongyongon harmony voice, and coworkers’ prevention focus weakens the positive effect ofzhongyongon harmony voice.Research limitations/implicationsTraditionally defined voice and harmony voice might cause different risks to the voicer. However, how and what kinds of risks may be differently caused by these two types of voice behaviors have not been examined in this study. Future empirical research can explore the different effects of traditionally defined voice and harmony voice.Practical implicationsManagers responsible for managing Chinese employees should notice the difference in some important ways of thinking between Easterners and Westerners. Specifically,zhongyongmay direct people to express issues related to work in ways that are different from those of their Western counterparts. Harmony voice can benefit the Chinese organization without disrupting organizational development.Social implicationsBy examining the relationship betweenzhongyongand harmony voice, we contribute to identifying antecedents of voice by using an emic research perspective.Originality/valueWe made significant theoretical contributions to voice literature. We developed the construct of harmony voice, and we examined the relationship betweenzhongyongand voice.

scholarly journals When information about one’s counterpart matters

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-240
Author(s):  
Mauro Giacomantonio ◽  
Femke S. ten Velden ◽  
Valeria De Cristofaro ◽  
Bianca Beersma
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Cooperative Behavior ◽  
Interpersonal Behavior ◽  
Regulatory Focus Theory ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
General Hypothesis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
The Impact

Purpose To avoid (costly) conflict, it is imperative to uncover when negotiators cooperate. The previous study has shown that negotiators’ cooperative or competitive behavior is oftentimes guided by cues about their counterpart; information about his/her traits or behavior. Using regulatory focus theory, this paper aims to investigate when this is likely to happen. The authors hypothesize and test that because prevention focus (rather than promotion focus) is associated with concerns for safety and concrete surroundings, it strengthens the impact of counterpart cues. Design/methodology/approach The authors used two scenario studies and one behavioral negotiation study to test the general hypothesis. The authors measured or manipulated participants’ regulatory focus, manipulated counterpart cues by varying the information negotiators received about their counterpart’s traits and behavior, and measured participants’ cooperative or competitive concession making behavior. Findings Results from the studies confirmed that under prevention focus, negotiators’ cooperative behavior depended on whether they received cooperative versus competitive counterpart cues more than under promotion focus. Furthermore, results also showed that under prevention focus, negotiators’ behavior was relatively unaffected by their own social motivation – i.e. their personal goal to obtain favorable outcomes for oneself or for both negotiation parties. Originality/value By showing that regulatory focus determines when counterpart cues affect negotiation behavior, this paper furthers the understanding of when contextual factors affect negotiators' behavior. In addition, it contributes to the understanding of the complex effects of prevention focus in interpersonal behavior.

The mediational effect of regulatory focus on the relationships between mindfulness and job satisfaction and turnover intentions

2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 494-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha C. Andrews ◽  
K. Michele Kacmar ◽  
Charles Kacmar
Keyword(s):  
Job Satisfaction ◽  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Turnover Intentions ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of mindfulness as a predictor of the two components of regulatory focus theory (RFT): promotion and prevention focus. It further examines promotion focus and prevention focus as mediators of the mindfulness-job satisfaction and mindfulness-turnover intentions relationships. Finally, job satisfaction is also examined as a mediator of the mindfulness-turnover intentions relationship. Design/methodology/approach – The model was tested using data collected via a snowball approach. Online surveys were distributed to undergraduate students enrolled in a business course. Students were then given the opportunity to earn extra credit by sending the survey to potential respondents. The relationships were tested using structural equation modeling. Findings – Support was found for four of the six hypotheses. Prevention focus did not negatively mediate the relationship between mindfulness and job satisfaction as well as the relationship between mindfulness and turnover intentions. Research limitations/implications – One limitations of this research is the placement of mindfulness as an antecedent to promotion and prevention focus. Another plausible alternative is to consider mindfulness as a consequence. An additional limitation is the use of a snowball sampling technique. Future research should examine these findings using employees of a single organization. Originality/value – This research theoretically and empirically links RFT and mindfulness. This study also adds to the limited research empirically linking RFT and turnover intentions, both directly and indirectly via job satisfaction. Finally, this research extends previous research that established the positive relationship between mindfulness and job satisfaction by examining the mindfulness-job satisfaction-turnover intentions relationship.

To adjust or not to adjust in the host country? Perspective of interactionism

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 329-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao-Chih Hung ◽  
Tzung-Cheng Huan ◽  
Chun-Han Lee ◽  
Hsin-Mei Lin ◽  
Wen-Long Zhuang
Keyword(s):  
Career Development ◽  
Psychosocial Support ◽  
Work Adjustment ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Situational Factor ◽  
Personality Factor ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship of regulatory foci (promotion focus and prevention focus) to expatriate adjustments (general, interaction, and work adjustments) and explore whether mentoring functions (psychosocial support, role modeling, and career development) moderate the aforementioned relationship. Design/methodology/approach Using 141 questionnaired primary data (response rate 32.25 percent) gathered from at least six months experienced expatiates of multinational companies in six industries, this study adopts regression method to examine the moderating effect. Findings This study found that promotion focus was positively related to the interaction and work adjustment, respectively; prevention focus was positively related to the general, interaction, and work adjustment, respectively. Psychosocial support function moderates the relationship between promotion focus and general adjustment. Career development function moderates the relationships between promotion/prevention foci and work adjustment. Originality/value According to the interactionism perspective, behavior is a result of the interaction between personality and situational influences, has a long history in social and personality psychology. This study extends this perspective to the interactive effects of mentorship (situational factor) and expatriates’ regulatory foci (personality factor) on expatriate adjustment.

Workplace resources and employee resilience: the role of regulatory profiles

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joana Kuntz ◽  
Philippa Connell ◽  
Katharina Näswall
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Joint Effects ◽  
Main Effects ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the independent and joint effects of regulatory focus (promotion and prevention) on the relationship between workplace resources (support and feedback) and employee resilience. It proposed that, at high levels of resource availability, a high promotion-high prevention profile would elicit the highest levels of employee resilience. Design/methodology/approach An online survey was completed by 162 white collar employees from four organisations. In addition to the main effects, two- and three-way interactions were examined to test hypotheses. Findings Promotion focus was positively associated with employee resilience, and though the relationship between prevention focus and resilience was non-significant, both regulatory foci buffered against the negative effects of low resources. Employees with high promotion-high prevention focus displayed the highest levels of resilience, especially at high levels of feedback. Conversely, the resilience of low promotion-low prevention individuals was susceptible to feedback availability. Practical implications Employee resilience development and demonstration are contingent not only on resources, but also on psychological processes, particularly regulatory focus. Organisations will develop resilience to the extent that they provide workplace resources, and, importantly, stimulate both promotion and prevention perspectives on resource management. Originality/value This study extends the research on regulatory focus theory by testing the joint effects of promotion and prevention foci on workplace resources, and the relationship between regulatory foci and employee resilience.

Achievement vs avoidance

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 14-16
Keyword(s):  
Emotional Exhaustion ◽  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Work Performance ◽  
Reading Time ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Pertinent Information ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies. Design/methodology/approach This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context. Findings The effects of a promotion focus, prevention focus, and a dual regulatory focus on work performance, sickness, and emotional exhaustion were investigated for managers and non-managers in The Netherlands. The dual focus relates more to managers, who have more complex roles and are called on to be able to act in flexible ways on a continual basis. It was tentatively found that a dual focus is not as beneficial as previously expected, and perhaps enhancing a promotion focus for managers and non-managers is more advantageous for an organization. Practical implications The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world’s leading organizations. Originality/value The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent, information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

Regulatory focus and learning

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (4/5) ◽  
pp. 425-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica E. Federman
Keyword(s):  
Informal Learning ◽  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Learning Performance ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Learning Behaviors ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Differential Effects ◽  
Performance Success

Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand how regulatory focus influences informal learning behaviors. A growing body of research indicates that regulatory focus has significant consequences for goal pursuit in the workplace, yet it has not been readily studied or applied to the field of human resource management (Johnson et al., 2015). This is one of the few studies to examine the relationship between informal learning and regulatory focus theory that can be applied to the training and development field. Design/methodology/approach Using a qualitative research design, a semi-structured interview was used to increase the comparability of participant responses. Questions were asked in an open-ended manner, allowing for a structured approach for collecting information yet providing flexibility for the sake of gaining more in-depth responses. An interview guideline was used to standardize the questions and ensure similar kinds of information were obtained across participants. A typological analytic approach (Lincoln and Guba, 1985) was used to analyze the data. Findings In a sample of 16 working adults, (44% female and 56% male), participants who were identified as having either a promotion- or prevention-focus orientation were interviewed about types of informal learning strategies they used. The results revealed that performance success and failure have differential effects on learning behaviors for prevention and promotion-focus systems. Stress and errors motivate informal learning for the prevention-focus system, whereas positive affect motivates informal learning for the promotion-focus system. Prevention-focus participants articulated greater use of vicarious learning, reflective thinking and feedback-seeking as methods of informal learning. Promotion-focus participants articulated greater use of experimentation methods of informal learning. Originality/value This study provides an in-depth understanding of how regulatory focus influences informal learning. Few studies have considered how regulatory focus promotes distinct strategies and inclinations toward using informal learning. Performance success and failure have differential effects on informal learning behaviors for regulatory promotion and prevention systems. This has theoretical and practical implications in consideration of why employees engage in informal learning, and the tactics and strategies they use for learning.

scholarly journals The impact of challenge-hindrance stressors on creativity: the mediating role of regulatory focus and the moderating role of proactive personality

2021 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 03031
Author(s):  
Yixin Yang ◽  
Mingjian Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Proactive Personality ◽  
Regulatory Focus Theory ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Mediating Role ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Moderating Role ◽  
Focus Theory

Based on the challenge-hindrance stressors framework and regulatory focus theory, this study explored the mediating role of promotion focus between challenge stressors and employee creativity, and the mediating role of prevention focus between hindrance stressors and creativity. In addition, we further explored the moderating role of proactive personality in this model. In the end, we discuss implications and limitations of our argument for theory and practices.

The role of regulatory focus and team mindfulness in megaproject conflicts

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dedong Wang ◽  
Yuxue Wang
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Task Conflict ◽  
Relationship Conflict ◽  
Prevention Focus ◽  
Promotion Focus ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Process Conflict ◽  
Positive Effect

PurposeProject conflicts are inevitable. Megaproject conflicts need to be managed across different levels. The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of individual-level regulatory focus and organization-level team mindfulness in managing megaproject conflicts.Design/methodology/approachBy combining the individual motivation basis and organizational background of conflict resolution, this study constructed a multi-level structural equation model. The hypothesis is tested based on data collected from 182 respondents.FindingsThe findings of this study show that project manager's promotion focus has a direct positive effect on task conflict and a negative effect on relationship conflict. Prevention focus has a positive effect on relationship conflict and a negative effect on task conflict and process conflict. Team mindfulness has a negative effect on relationship conflict and process conflict and a positive effect on task conflict. Task conflict was negatively affected by the interaction between team mindfulness and promotion focus. The interaction between team mindfulness and prevention focus had a positive effect on relationship conflict.Originality/valueThis study verifies the positive role of project manager's promotion focus and prevention focus in conflict management and clarifies the strengthening role of team mindfulness in constructive conflict and the prevention role in destructive conflict. This study also confirms that team mindfulness can act as a reinforcement and complementary factor of regulatory focus in megaproject conflict, contributing to the current understanding of the project manager's role in megaproject mindfulness contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document