Getting Closer at the Company Party: Integration Experiences, Racial Dissimilarity, and Workplace Relationships

References

• Abrams D, Hogg MA (1990) Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (Springer-Verlag, New York).Google Scholar
• Adler PS, Kwon S (2002) Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Acad. Management Rev. 27:17–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aiken LS, West SG (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Albrecht TL, Hall BJ (1991) Facilitating talk about new ideas: The role of personal relationships in organizational innovation. Comm. Monogr. 58:273–288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allport GW (1954) The Nature of Prejudice (Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
• Altman I, Taylor D (1973) Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships (Rinehart & Winston, New York).Google Scholar
• Andrews A, Bailyn L (1993) Segmentation and synergy: Two models linking work and family. , Hood JC, ed. Men, Work, and Family (Sage, Newbury Park, CA), 262–275.Google Scholar
• Asch SE (1946) Forming impressions of personality. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 41:258–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashforth BE, Kreiner GE, Fugate M (2000) All in a day’s work: Boundaries and micro role transitions. Acad. Management Rev. 25:472–491.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bacharach SB, Bamberger PA, Vashdi D (2005) Diversity and homophily at work: Supportive relations among white and African-American peers. Acad. Management J. 48:619–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baruch Y, Holtom BC (2008) Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations 61:1139–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bazerman MH, Moore DA (2009) Judgment in Managerial Decision Making, 7th ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• Berscheid E (1985) Interpersonal attraction. , Lindzey G, Aronson E, eds. Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 2, 3rd ed. (Random House, New York), 413–484.Google Scholar
• Blau PM, Schwartz JE (1997) Crosscutting Social Circles (Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ).Google Scholar
• Bollen K, Lennox R (1991) Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psych. Bull. 110:303–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown G, Robinson SL (2011) Reactions to territorial infringement. Organ. Sci. 22:210–224.Link, Google Scholar
• Byrne DE (1971) The Attraction Paradigm (Academic Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Carmeli A, Ben-Hador B, Waldman DA, Rupp DE (2009) How leaders cultivate social capital and nurture employee vigor: Implications for job performance. J. Appl. Psych. 94:1553–1561.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carron AV, Spink KS (1995) The group size-cohesion relationship in minimal groups. Small Group Res. 26:86–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Casey C (1995) Work, Self and Society: After Industrialism (Routledge, London).Google Scholar
• Chatman J, O’Reilly C (2004) Asymmetric reactions to work group sex diversity among men and women. Acad. Management J. 47:193–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatman JA, Polzer JT, Barsade SG, Neale MA (1998) Being different yet feeling similar: The influence of demographic composition and organizational culture on work processes and outcomes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43:749–780.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay P (1999) Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demographic dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Acad. Management J. 42:273–287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay P (2003) Can dissimilarity lead to positive outcomes? The influence of open versus closed minds. J. Organ. Behav. 24:295–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay P, Finn C, Ashkenasy NM (2010) Affective responses to professional dissimilarity: A matter of status. Acad. Management J. 53:808–826.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chattopadhyay P, George E, Lawrence SA (2004) Why does dissimilarity matter? Exploring self categorization, self-enhancement and uncertainty reduction. J. Appl. Psych. 89:892–900.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark SC (2000) Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations 53:747–770.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Collins NL, Miller LC (1994) Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review. Psych. Bull. 116:457–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook C, Heath F, Thompson RL (2000) A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or internet-based surveys. Ed. Psych. Measurement 60:821–836.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cozby PC (1972) Self-disclosure, reciprocity and liking. Sociometry 35:151–160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cozby PC (1973) Self-disclosure: A literature review. Psych. Bull. 79:73–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davidson MN, James EH (2007) The engines of positive relationships across difference: Conflict and learning. , Dutton JE, Ragins BR, eds. Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical Research Foundation (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ), 137–158.Google Scholar
• Desrochers S, Hilton JM, Larwood L (2005) Preliminary validation of the work-family integration-blurring scale. J. Family Issues 26:442–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Bagozzi RP (2000) On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psych. Methods 2:155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ely RJ (2004) A field study of group diversity, participation in diversity education programs, and performance. J. Organ. Behav. 25:755–780.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ely RJ, Thomas D (2001) Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46:229–273.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ensari N, Miller N (2002) The out-group must not be so bad after all: The effects of disclosure, typicality, and salience on intergroup bias. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 83:313–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ensari NK, Miller N (2006) The application of the personalization model in diversity management. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 9:589–607.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Evans MG (1985) A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 36:305–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falconi RR (1997) It’s my company party, and I’ll cry if I want to. Financial Executive 13:18–19.Google Scholar
• Finkelstein LM, Protolipac DS, Kulas JT (2000) The role of subordinate authoritarianism in cross-level extra-role relationships. J. Psych. 134:435–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming P, Spicer A (2004) “You can checkout anytime, but you can never leave”: Spatial boundaries in a high commitment organization. Human Relations 57:75–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ, Chatman JA, Spataro SE (2001) Getting to know you: The influence of personality on impressions and performance of demographically different people in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46:414–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Forrester WR, Tashchian A (2006) Modeling the relationship between cohesion and performance in student work groups. Internat. J. Management 23:458–464.Google Scholar
• Frey FE, Tropp LR (2006) Being seen as individuals versus as group members: Extending research on metaperception to intergroup contexts. Personality Soc. Psych. Rev. 10:265–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon J, Whelan K (1998) Successful professional women in midlife: How organizations can more effectively understand and respond to challenges. Acad. Management Executive 12:8–27.Google Scholar
• Gruenfeld DH, Mannix EA, Williams KY, Neale MA (1996) Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 67:1–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison DA, Price KH, Bell MP (1998) Beyond relational demography: Time and effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Acad. Management J. 41:96–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison DA, Price KH, Gavin JA, Florey AT (2002) Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Acad. Management J. 45:1029–1045.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2012) PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling. White paper, Ohio State University, Columbus. http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf.Google Scholar
• Hays RB (1984) The development and maintenance of friendship. J. Soc. Personal Relationships 1:75–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hewlin PF (2003) And the award for best actor goes to…: Facades of conformity in organizational settings. Acad. Management Rev. 28:633–656.Google Scholar
• Hewlin PF (2009) Wearing the cloak: Antecedents and consequences of creating facades of conformity. J. Appl. Psych. 94:727–741.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hewlett SA, Luce CB, West C (2005) Leadership in your midst: Tapping the hidden strengths of minority executives. Harvard Bus. Rev. 83(11):74–82.Google Scholar
• Hodson R (1996) Dignity in the workplace under participative management: Alienation and freedom revisited. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 61:719–738.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hodson R (2004) Work life and social fulfillment: Does social affiliation at work reflect a carrot or a stick? Soc. Sci. Quart. 85:221–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoffman E (1985) The effect of race-ratio composition on the frequency of organizational communication. Soc. Psych. Quart. 48:17–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hurlbert JS (1991) Social networks, social circles, and job satisfaction. Work Occupations 18:415–430.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1995) Race, opportunity and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Acad. Management J. 38:673–703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ingram P, Morris MW (2007) Do people mix at mixers? Structure, homophily, and the “life of the party”. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52:558–585.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iverson RD, Roy P (1994) A causal model of behavioral commitment: Evidence from a study of Australian blue-collar employees. J. Management 20:15–41.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson PT, Thoits PA, Taylor HF (1995) Composition of the workplace and psychological well-being: The effects of tokenism on America’s black elite. Soc. Forces 74:543–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson SE, Joshi A, Erhardt NL (2003) Recent research on team and organizational diversity: SWOT analysis and implications. J. Management 29:801–830.Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Shah PP (1997) Interpersonal relationships and task performance: An examination of mediation processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 72:775–790.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehn KA, Northcraft G, Neale M (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in work groups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:741–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jonas E, Schulz-Hardt S, Frey D, Thelen N (2001) Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: An expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 80:557–571.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joshi A, Roh H (2009) The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta analytic review. Acad. Management J. 52:599–628.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kanter RM (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation (Basic Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Kidwell REJrMossholder KW, Bennett N (1997) Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior: A multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals. J. Management 23:775–793.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirchmeyer C (1995) Managing the work-non-work boundary: An assessment of organizational responses. Human Relations 48:515–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knouse SB (2006) Task cohesion: A mechanism for bringing together diverse teams. Internat. J. Management 23:588–596.Google Scholar
• Konrad A, Gutek B (1987) Theory and research on group composition: Applications to the status of women and ethnic minorities. , Oskamp S, Spacapan S, eds. Interpersonal Processes (Sage, London), 85–121.Google Scholar
• Kossek E, Lautsch B (2012) Work-family boundary management styles in organizations: A cross level model. Organ. Psych. Rev. 2:152–171.Google Scholar
• Kreiner GE (2006) Consequences of work-home segmentation or integration: A person environment fit perspective. J. Organ. Behav. 27:485–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kreiner GE, Hollensbe EC, Sheep ML (2006) Where is the “me” among the “we”? Identity work and the search for optimal balance. Acad. Management J. 49:1031–1057.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kreiner GE, Hollensbe EC, Sheep ML (2009) Balancing borders and bridges: Negotiating the work-home interface via boundary work tactics. Acad. Management J. 52:704–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leslie L (2013) A status-based, multilevel model of ethnic diversity and work unit performance. Working paper, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
• Long CP, Bendersky C, Morrill C (2011) Fairness monitoring: Linking managerial controls and fairness judgments in organizations. Acad. Management J. 54:1045–1068.Crossref, Google Scholar
• MacKenzie SB, Podsakoff PM, Jarvis CB (2005) The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. J. Appl. Psych. 90:710–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Martins LL, Eddleston KA, Veiga JF (2002) Moderators of the relationship between work-family conflict and career satisfaction. Acad. Management J. 45:399–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehra A, Kilduff M, Brass DJ (1998) At the margins: A distinctiveness approach to the social identity and social networks of underrepresented groups. Acad. Management J. 41:441–452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller N (2002) Personalization and the promise of contact theory. J. Soc. Issues 58:387–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mollica KA, Gray B, Treviño LK (2003) Racial homophily and its persistence in newcomers’ social networks. Organ. Sci. 14:123–146.Link, Google Scholar
• Mullen B, Copper C (1994) The relation between group cohesion and performance: An integration. Psych. Bull. 110:210–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nippert-Eng CE (1996) Home and Work: Negotiating Boundaries Through Everyday Life (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nishii L (2013) The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender diverse groups. Acad. Management J. Forthcoming.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Farrell B, Harlan S (1982) Craftworkers and clerks: The effect of male co-worker hostility on women’s satisfaction with non-traditional jobs. Soc. Problems 29:252–265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olson-Buchanan J, Boswell W (2006) Blurring boundaries: Correlates of integration and segmentation between work and nonwork. J. Vocational Behav. 68:432–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Onyx J, Bullen P (2000) Measuring social capital in five communities. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 36:23–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Caldwell DF, Barnett WP (1989) Work group demography, social integration, and turnover. Admin. Sci. Quart. 34:21–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Reilly CA, Williams KY, Barsade S (1998) Group demography and innovation: Does diversity help? , Neale M, Mannix E, Gruenfeld O, eds. Research on Managing Groups and Teams: Composition, Vol. 1 (JAI Press, Stanford, CT), 183–207.Google Scholar
• Pelled LH, Eisenhardt KM, Xin KR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:1–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE (2006) Social yet creative: The role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Acad. Management J. 49:85–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettigrew TF (1998) Intergroup contact theory. Annual Rev. Psych. 49:65–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 90:751–783.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips KW, Northcraft G, Neale M (2006) Surface-level diversity and information sharing: When does deep-level similarity help? Group Processes Intergroup Relations 9:467–482.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips KW, Rothbard NP, Dumas TL (2009) To disclose or not to disclose: Status distance and self-disclosure in diverse environments. Acad. Management Rev. 34:710–732.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Baron JN (1997) Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. Amer. Soc. Rev. 62: 673–693.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. J. Management 12:531–544.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. 58:879–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Paine JB, Bachrach DG (2000) Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literatures and suggestions for future research. J. Management 26:513–563.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Polzer JT, Milton LP, Swann WBJr (2002) Capitalizing on diversity: Interpersonal congruence in small work groups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 47:296–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell GN, Greenhaus JH (2010) Sex, gender and the work-to-family interface: Exploring negative and positive interdependencies. Acad. Management J. 53:513–534.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pratt MG, Rosa JA (2003) Transforming work-family conflict into commitment in network marketing organizations. Acad. Management J. 46:395–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF (2007) Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behav. Res. 42:185–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramarajan L, Barsade SG, Burack OR (2008) The influence of organizational respect on emotional exhaustion in the human services. J. Positive Psych. 3:4–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reagans R (2011) Close encounters: Analyzing how social similarity and propinquity contribute to strong network connections. Organ. Sci. 22:835–849.Link, Google Scholar
• Reis HT, Shaver P (1988) Intimacy as an interpersonal process. , Duck S, ed. Handbook of Personal Relationships (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK), 367–389.Google Scholar
• Repetti RL (1987) Individual and common components of the social environment at work and psychological well-being. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 52:710–720.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riordan CM, Shore LM (1997) Demographic diversity and employee attitudes: An empirical examination of relational demography within work units. J. Appl. Psych. 82:342–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberson L, Kulik CT, Pepper MB (2001) Designing effective diversity training: Influence of group composition and trainee experience. J. Organ. Behav. 22:871–885.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberson QM (2006) Disentangling the meanings of diversity and inclusion in organizations. Group Organ. Management 31: 212–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts LM (2005) Changing faces: Professional image construction in diverse organizational settings. Acad. Management Rev. 30:685–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP (2001) Enriching or depleting? The dynamics of engagement in work and family roles. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46:655–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP, Brett JM (2000) Promote equal opportunity by recognizing gender differences in the experience of work and family. , Locke EA, ed. The Blackwell Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior (Blackwell, Oxford, UK), 389–403.Google Scholar
• Rothbard NP, Phillips KW, Dumas TL (2005) Managing multiple roles: Work-family policies and individuals’ desires for segmentation. Organ. Sci. 16:243–258.Link, Google Scholar
• Rynes S, Rosen B (1995) A field survey of factors affecting the adoption and perceived success of diversity training. Personnel Psych. 48:247–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez-Burks J (2002) Protestant relational ideology and inattention to relational cues in work settings. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 83:919–929.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez-Burks J (2005) Protestant relational ideology: The cognitive underpinnings and organizational implications of an American anomaly. , Kramer R, Staw BM, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 265–305.Google Scholar
• Sanders K, Nauta A (2004) Social cohesiveness and absenteeism: The relationship between characteristics of employees and short-term absenteeism within an organization. Small Group Res. 35:724–741.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schreiber C (1979) Changing Places: Men and Women in Transitional Occupations (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Segal MW (1979) Varieties of interpersonal attraction and their interrelationships in natural groups. Soc. Psych. Quart. 42:253–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sheldon KM, Ryan RM, Deci EL, Kasser T (2004) The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: It’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 30:475–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shelton JN, Richeson JA, Salvatore J (2005) Expecting to be the target of prejudice: Implications for interethnic interactions. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 31:1189–1202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith KG, Smith KA, Olian JD, Sims HP, O’Bannon DP, Scully JA (1994) Top management team demography and process: The role of social integration and communication. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39:412–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stephens JP, Heaphy E, Dutton JE (2011) High quality connections. , Cameron KS, Spreitzer GM, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 385–399.Google Scholar
• Tajfel H (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Tajfel H, Turner J (1986) The social identity of intergroup behavior. , Worchel S, Austin W, eds. Psychology and Intergroup Relations (Nelson-Hall, Chicago), 7–24.Google Scholar
• Toosi NR, Babbitt LG, Ambady N, Sommers SR (2012) Dyadic interracial interactions: A meta-analysis. Psych. Bull. 138(1):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tropp LR, Pettigrew TF (2005) Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psych. Sci. 16:951–957.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsui A, O’Reilly C (1989) Beyond simple demographics effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Acad. Management J. 32:402–423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsui A, Egan T, O’Reilly C (1992) Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37:549–579.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Turner RN, Hewstone M, Voci A (2007) Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended outgroup contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 93:369–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D, Schippers MC (2007) Work group diversity. Annual Rev. Psych. 58:515–541 Crossref, Google Scholar
• Voci A, Hewstone M (2003) Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The meditational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes Intergroup Relations 6:37–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vorauer JD (2005) Miscommunications surrounding efforts to reach out across group boundaries. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 31: 1653–1664.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vorauer JD, Sakamoto Y (2006) I thought we could be friends, but…: Systematic miscommunication and defensive distancing as obstacles to cross-group friendship formation. Psych. Sci. 17:326–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Werner C, Parmelee P (1979) Similarity of activity preferences among friends: Those who play together stay together. Soc. Psych. Quart. 42:62–66.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams KY, O’Reilly CA (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. , Staw BM, Sutton R, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 20 (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), 77–140.Google Scholar