Employee adjustment to an organizational merger: An intergroup perspective

Adopting an intergroup perspective, the research was designed to examine predictors of employee responses to an organizational merger Data were collected from 465 fleet staff employed in a newly merged airline company. As predicted from social identity theory, the negative effects of the merger were most marked for employees of the low-status premerger organization. Also, as predicted, the perception of permeable intergroup boundaries in the new organization was associated positively with identification with the new organization and both job-related and person-related outcomes among employees of the low-status premerger organization but negatively with person-related outcomes among employees of the high-status premerger organization. As predicted, there was some evidence that the main and interactive effects involving status, perceived permeability, and intergroup contact on employee adjustment were mediated through strength of identification with the new organization.

Modelling knowledge production performance of research centres with a focus on triple bottom line benchmarking

We demonstrate a portable process for developing a triple bottom line model to measure the knowledge production performance of individual research centres. For the first time, this study also empirically illustrates how a fully units-invariant model of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) can be used to measure the relative efficiency of research centres by capturing the interaction amongst a common set of multiple inputs and outputs. This study is particularly timely given the increasing transparency required by governments and industries that fund research activities. The process highlights the links between organisational objectives, desired outcomes and outputs while the emerging performance model represents an executive managerial view. This study brings consistency to current measures that often rely on ratios and univariate analyses that are not otherwise conducive to relative performance analysis.

The graying of R&D workgroups: The effects of age diversity on developing publicly usable knowledge

Does the graying of scientific research teams matter? This study addresses how workgroup processes and external environmental factors contribute and inhibit the effect of age diversity in R&D project groups on the production of innovative publicly usable knowledge outcomes in the form of publication outputs. We examined the relationships between group age diversity (age cohort diversity, mean age, age dispersion), R&D workgroup member self-ratings of workgroup processes, their supervisor�s assessment of the external environmental factors the project groups faced, and their supervisor�s ratings of group performance, the number of scientific publicly available publications produced by the group and the use of multiple authorships on publications. Usable data was obtained from 32 R&D workgroups of a large Government Agricultural Research and Development Agency. Consistent with the literature, workgroup processes and external environmental factors were found to directly effect innovation outcomes. Contrary to expectation, but consistent with Social Identity theory, workgroup age diversity generally negatively impacted upon innovation outcomes. An exception was where multiple authorship on publications for project groups increased as the dispersion of age within groups increased. Importantly, workgroups that were both more age homogeneous and perceived to have optimally functioning work processes produced more R&D innovation outcomes than other groups. Generally, these differences appear to be related to the greater division of labor practices (and less multi-tasking) employed by the older and more homogeneous workgroups. Implications for R&D workgroup resource theory and practices are discussed.