A Golden Rule Over Time: Reciprocity in Intergenerational Allocation Decisions

By Kimberly A. Wade-Benzoni. 2002

204 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Gender Studies, General Health Professions

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6c276e1c3ed02383b3f793cdc3a7d7da952dd617

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Gender Studies

In General Health Professions

Citations in the corpus

Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance (2013, background): “While there are a wide array of other specific things one might cite as important to individual stakeholders, there is a need for parsimony in any model: to offer a model that is both specific enough to capture core features and broad enough to capture the range of the phenomenon in question.”
The Legacy Motive: A Catalyst for Sustainable Decision Making in Organizations (2010, methodology): “Drawing attention to the intergenerationally benefi cent actions of previous generations has been shown to increase individuals’ willingness to forgo current benefi ts to preserve resources for the future (Wade-Benzoni, 2002a).”
Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework (2014, unknown): “corporate decision-making(Slawinski and Bansal 2012; Wade-Benzoni 2002).”
In fairness to future generations: The role of egocentrism, uncertainty, power, and stewardship in judgments of intergenerational allocations (2008, background): “Prior research on intergenerational decisions revealed that the perceived generosity of prior generations affects the beneficence of the present generation toward future generations—a phenomenon called ‘‘intergenerational reciprocity’’ (Wade-Benzoni, 2002).”
Millennials in the Workplace: A Communication Perspective on Millennials’ Organizational Relationships and Performance (2010, background): “but each modern generation has arrived in the workplace with its own unique set of qualities (Noble and Schewe 2003; Wade-Benzoni 2002).”
Toward a theory of business (2015, background): “…a number of social psychologists are working today to understand just how people make forward-looking intergeneration resource allocation decisions (Tost, Wade-Benzoni, & Johnson, 2015; Wade-Benzoni, 2002; Wade-Benzoni, Hernandez, Medvec, & Messick, 2008; Wade-Benzoni, Sondak, & Galinsky, 2010).”
Promoting Stewardship Behavior in Organizations: A Leadership Model (2008, background): “Even though individuals may think about how they would like to have been treated by the previous generation, they are more likely to respond to how they were actually treated by the previous generation (Wade-Benzoni, 2002).”
[Editorial] Trade-offs in corporate sustainability: you can't have your cake and eat it (2010, background): “Sporadically, intergenerational aspects in corporate behaviour have been examined (Wade-Benzoni, 2002).”
The Bright Side of Being Prosocial at Work, and the Dark Side, Too: A Review and Agenda for Research on Other-Oriented Motives, Behavior, and Impact in Organizations (2016, background): “Second, the intended target can range from individual beneficiaries to 24 † The Academy of Management Annals the entire organization (Williams & Anderson, 1991) and from current to future generations (Wade-Benzoni, 2002; Wade-Benzoni & Tost, 2009).”
Family Control and Family Firm Valuation by Family CEOs: The Importance of Intentions for Transgenerational Control (2012, background): “Likewise , duration of control is important because, over time, socioemotional wealth can increase through the heirloom effect and as the family firm becomes the depository of univocal reciprocity (Janjuha-Jivraj and Spence 2009, Wade-Benzoni 2002).”
Employees without a Cause: The Motivational Effects of Prosocial Impact in Public Service (2008, background): “…others, including helping and citizenship behavior (e.g., Brief and Motowidlo 1986; Meglino and Korsgaard 2004), giving and generosity (e.g., Wade-Benzoni 2002; 2006), social responsibility (e.g., Wood 1991), generativity (e.g., McAdams and de St. Aubin 1992), social contribution (e.g.,…”