Reframing commitment in authentic leadership: Untangling relationship–outcome processes

Affective organizational commitment is theorized and empirically tested as a key mediator between authentic leadership and desirable employee outcomes. The results of a two-wave survey of 830 business people in Australia support a serial mediation model of authentic leadership efficacy. Followers' perceptions of authentic leadership behavior influence their personal identification and affect-based trust in the leader, which in turn are mediated by affective organizational commitment to positively influence their work engagement and job satisfaction. These findings reinforce previous work that positions personal identification and affect-based trust as the two primary mediating mechanisms of authentic leadership. This paper extends prior research by demonstrating the important role of followers' affective bonds with their organization in the operation of authentic leadership, moving beyond the dyad in our understanding of follower outcomes.

The Real Relationship

Although writing about the real relationship has existed from the beginnings of the talking cure,” it is only in recent years that empirical research has focused on this phenomenon. The real relationship is the personal relationship between patient and therapist marked by the extent to which each is genuine with the other and perceives/experiences the other in ways that are realistic. The strength of the real relationship is determined by both the extent to which it exists and the degree to which it is positive or favorable. In this chapter, a meta-analysis is presented on the association between the real relationship and the outcome of psychotherapy. Summed across 16 studies, this meta-analysis revealed a moderate association with outcome (r =.38, 95% confidence interval [.30, .47], p<.001, d = 0.80, N = 1,502 participants). This real relationship–outcome association was independent of the type of outcome studies and of the source of the measure. We also present frequent measures of the real relationship, limitations of the research, and patient contributions. The chapter concludes with diversity considerations and practice recommendations for developing and strengthening the real relationship.

Predictors of Relationship Outcome between Disabled and Non-Disabled Siblings

In recent years, there has been increasing research on individuals with a disabled sibling looking at the impact of the relationship on the adjustment and behaviour of the non-disabled sibling and predictors of sibling relationships such as behaviour disabled sibling. Although research to date has focused on individual factors, there is a need for research on the relative contributions of multiple factors. The purpose of this study is to understand the sibling relationship outcome between a disabled and non-disabled sibling as predicted by the stressors caused by the disabled sibling, the non-disabled sibling’s relationship perception and available coping and resources. This study will use the ABCX model (McCubbin & Patterson, 1983) as a framework to study predictors of relationship outcome between disabled and non-disabled siblings. Predictor variables will include: stress, aA factor, (demographic information and behaviour of sibling with a disability), resources, bB factor (knowledge about disability and resource use), perceptions, cC factor (self-efficacy and comfort with disabled sibling) and outcome, xX factor (relationship quality). I hypothesize that when the non-disabled sibling is more comfortable and knowledgeable about the disability and has a higher level of self-efficacy and available resources, the relationship will be perceived more positively, improving relationship quality and leading to a positive relationship outcome. Participants will consist of approximately 100 individuals aged 16 – 26 who have a sibling with a developmental disability. Data will be collected through an online survey. The results of this study are valuable, as understanding what the predictors are that lead to a positive versus negative relationship outcome is the first step in helping to intervene in the relationship and input the right implementations to ensure a positive outcome

Interactive value formation in interorganizational relationships

The article builds a framework for interactive value formation (IVF) in interorganizational relationships. The framework describes IVF as interplay between resource integration and a multilevel service system, which manifests in interaction episodes accumulating into a relationship. The interplay generates outcomes in which the actors are better off (co-creation), worse off (co-destruction), or indifferent (no-creation) to value gained. The framework is demonstrated in an empirical case of a cultural sponsorship relationship where the co-destructive and no-creative interaction episodes dominated co-creative instances, finally accumulating into a relationship outcome of value no-creation for both parties. The framework and the launched novel conceptualization of value no-creation contribute to the research on service systems, resource integration for value, and failure in value co-creation. The research on failure in value co-creation, that is, value co-destruction, is scant. This article further elaborates this research stream and bridges to the research on co-creation.

Complex Considerations in Couples’ Financial Information Management: Extending the Theory of Motivated Information Management

Using Time 1 to Time 2 data from 387 adults, we examine the effectiveness of the theory of motivated information management (TMIM) in accounting for the various processes by which adults in committed romantic relationships manage financial uncertainty via communication with their partners. Our results indicate that the TMIM operates well in this context. We also contribute to the theoretical development of TMIM’s revised theoretical framework in three ways, namely, by (a) examining the joint operation of positive and negative emotions (anxiety and optimism, respectively) on information management, (b) testing two types of outcome expectancies (knowledge and relationship), and (c) testing the model’s prediction of multiple information management strategies (i.e., direct and indirect information seeking, avoidance, and cognitive reappraisal). Findings indicate that both (a) anxiety and optimism, and (b) knowledge outcome expectancies and relationship outcome expectancies differentially contributed to information management decisions.