To prosper, organizational psychology should… adopt a global perspective
By Michele J. Gelfand, Lisa M. Leslie, Ryan Fehr. 2008
120 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Communication, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/477cd1609003e0a77f97455fcf0dc9a419534e72
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Communication
- V. Taras
- Piers Steel
- Chang‐qin Lu
- Bradley L Kirkman
- M. Gunkel
- Christopher Schlaegel
- Robert L. Engle
- Christopher Schlägel
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
In Social Psychology
Citations in the corpus
- Work–life balance: a longitudinal evaluation of a new measure across Australia and New Zealand workers (2014, background): “…regions other than the USA and Europe have, for example, recently increased, in an attempt to address previous limitations and to widen the support for key organisational behaviour theories and measures (Tsui et al. 2007; Gelfand et al. 2008; Cadogan 2010; Brough et al. 2013; Siu et al., in press).”
- When Preference Is Not Satisfied but the Individual Is (2014, unknown): “We thus urge scholars to reexamine possible cultural biases in basic assumptions undergirding fit theories, which assume that individuals are “largely independent and have freedom of choice” (Gelfand et al., 2008: 495).”
- Examining the impact of Culture's consequences: a three-decade, multilevel, meta-analytic review of Hofstede's cultural value dimensions. (2010, background): “Gelfand, Leslie, and Fehr (2008) identified the examination of moderators of cultural value effects as one of the major needs in the cross-cultural psychology and organizational behavior fields.”
- Validation of the Job Demands-Resources model in cross-national samples: Cross-sectional and longitudinal predictions of psychological strain and work engagement (2013, background): “These methodological and theoretical research strengths answer repeated calls for such comprehensive research designs and for objective theory-testing procedures within this field of organizational behavior (e.g., Brough & O’Driscoll, 2010; Gelfand et al., 2008; Zapf et al., 2006).”