Social scientists often estimate models from correlational data, where the independent variable has not been exogenously manipulated; they also make implicit or explicit causal claims based on these models. When can these claims be made? We answer this question by first discussing design and estimation conditions under which model estimates can be interpreted, using the randomized experiment as the gold standard. We show how endogeneity – which includes omitted variables, omitted selection, simultaneity, common-method variance, and measurement error – renders estimates causally uninterpretable. Second, we present methods that allow researchers to test causal claims in situations where randomization is not possible or when causal interpretation could be confounded; these methods include fixed-effects panel, sample selection, instrumental variable, regression discontinuity, and difference-in-differences models. Third, we take stock of the methodological rigor with which causal claims are being made in a social sciences discipline by reviewing a representative sample of 110 articles on leadership published in the previous 10 years in top-tier journals. Our key finding is that researchers fail to address at least 66% and up to 90% of design and estimation conditions that make causal claims invalid. We conclude by offering 10 suggestions on how to improve non-experimental research.

On making causal claims : A review and recommendations

Personality and Motivation Structure and Measurement.

Drawing upon theories of conservation of resources, social information processing and organizational creativity, this study examines the potential effects of environmentally-specific servant leader...

Examining the effects of environmentally-specific servant leadership on green work outcomes among hotel employees: the mediating role of climate for green creativity

textIn contrast to the abundance of evidence on employee reactions to manager unfairness, we know very little about factors that predict whether managers will act fairly or not. This article explores the effect of procedural unfairness that emanates from higher level managers on procedural fairness enactment at lower levels in the organization. We argue that lower level managers can enact both more and less fair procedures in response to higher level unfairness and that this depends on the extent to which lower level managers define the self in terms of their relation with their higher level manager (i.e., relational-interdependent self-construal). We study both the moderating role of self-construal and how it is embedded in the physical environment of the organization. We pay particular attention to how spatial distance between higher and lower management affects self-construal at lower levels and—because of this relationship—the enactment of fair procedures within the organization. We conduct four studies (in two of which we study spatial distance as an antecedent for self-construal) and show that relatively high levels of relational-interdependent self-construal lead to assimilation in terms of procedural fairness enactment, whereas relatively low levels lead to contrast.

Fairness Enactment as Response to Higher Level Unfairness: The Roles of Self-Construal and Spatial Distance

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to investigate the mediating role of threat and challenge appraisals in the relationship between performance pressure and employees' work engagement, as well as the buffering role of emotional stability, as a personal characteristic, in this process. Design/methodology/approach-Data were collected using a three-wave research design. Hypotheses were examined with a sample of 247 white-collar employees from French organizations. Findings-Performance pressure is appraised as either threat or challenge. Challenge appraisal positively mediated the performance pressure and work engagement relationship, whereas threat appraisal negatively mediated the performance pressure and work engagement relationship. Emotional stability moderated these effects, suggesting performance pressure was appraised as a challenge rather than a threat, which then enhanced employee work engagement. Practical implications-This study has shown that employees with high emotional stability who perceived performance pressure as a challenge achieved stronger employee work engagement. Originality/value-Building on Lazare's theory of stress and Mitchell et al. 's theorization, this research demonstrates mediating and moderating mechanisms driving the role of performance pressure on employee work engagement relationships.

/pdf/linking-performance-pressure-to-employee-work-engagement-the-2mvfo2fxka.pdf

Linking performance pressure to employee work engagement: the moderating role of emotional stability

This research unpacks the relationship between employees' perceptions of organizational injustice and their counterproductive work behaviour, by detailing a mediating role of organizational identification and a moderating role of discretionary human resource (HR) practices.,The hypotheses were tested with a sample of employees in Pakistan, collected over three, time-lagged waves.,An important reason that beliefs about unfair organizational treatment lead to enhanced counterproductive work behaviour is that employees identify less strongly with their employing organization. This mediating role of organizational identification is less salient, however, to the extent that employees can draw from high-quality, discretionary HR practices that promote their professional development and growth.,For management practitioners, this study pinpoints a key mechanism – the extent to which employees personally identify with their employer – by which beliefs about organizational favouritism can escalate into purposeful efforts to inflict harm on the organization and its members. It also reveals how this risk can be subdued by discretionary practices that actively support employees' careers.,This study adds to previous research by detailing why and when employees' frustrations about favouritism-based organizational decision making may backfire and elicit deviant responses that likely compromise their own organizational standing.

Perceived organizational injustice and counterproductive work behaviours: mediated by organizational identification, moderated by discretionary human resource practices

Shakir Sardar

Papers

Perceived organizational injustice and counterproductive work behaviours: mediated by organizational identification, moderated by discretionary human resource practices

Linking performance pressure to employee work engagement: the moderating role of emotional stability