picture from Internet
解析作者 | 唧唧堂管理学研究小组：
YANGZHEN
1、战略多样性领导：高层领导者在推动多样性中的作用
一个组织的高层领导者，由于其在组织内部的最高职位上行使职权，将会影响组织的愿景、战略、组织设计和文化。然而，对多样性的研究并没有充分地考虑到人口多样性和组织内部包容性的动态变化，以及（如何）产生绩效效益。本文提出，要更全面地理解多样性和包容性，需要关注高层领导着在多样性领导中的角色。本文基于战略领导理论，提出了一个战略性多元化领导的框架，侧重探究高层领导者在塑造组织中的多样性意义方面的作用。本文指出高层领导如何看待组织内部的多样性，以及如何在他们的沟通和行动中象征多样性的价值，影响多样性和包容性的程度和性质，并通过它们对组织绩效产生一系列的好处。本文还讨论了影响战略多样性领导的潜在因素，并呼吁发展战略多样性领导理论。
An organization’s senior leaders, given their positions at the apex of power within the organization, shape its vision, strategies, organizational design, and culture. Yet the research on diversity has not sufficiently held them to account for the dynamics of demographic diversity and inclusion within their organizations and for producing performance benefits from diversity. This paper proposes that a fuller understanding of diversity and inclusion requires a focus on senior leaders’ roles in diversity leadership. Specifically, drawing on strategic leadership theory, it proposes a framework for strategic diversity leadership that focuses on the role of senior leaders in shaping the meaning of diversity in their organizations. It proposes that how senior leaders envision diversity within their organizations and symbolize its value in their communications and actions affects the extent and nature of diversity and inclusion, and through them a range of benefits to organizational performance. It also discusses potential antecedents affecting strategic diversity leadership and calls for the development of a theory of strategic diversity leadership.
原文：Martins, L. L. (2020). Strategic Diversity Leadership: The Role of Senior Leaders in Delivering the Diversity Dividend. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1191-1204. doi:10.1177/0149206320939641
2、新冠危机与不平等：管理学研究为何需要社会性转向
随着世界努力应对新冠肺炎疫情大流行，社会中诸多不平等的现象已经凸显，组织与社会之间的相互作用也再次显现。这场危机凸显了管理学者必须转而（更加）关注社会（问题），以及组织实践与经济社会发展不平等之间的相互作用。本文讨论了（不同的）组织实践行为（如企业社会责任，工作设计，招聘和选拔以及薪酬管理）会常态化、加剧或缓解社会经济的不平等现象。最后，本文呼吁关注社会的不平等和管理学的研究者们怀有社会性的态度，以增强管理研究的（社会）相关性和影响力。
As the world struggles to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, the stark inequalities in our societies have been laid bare, and the interplay between organizations and societies has also become evident yet again. This crisis underscores the need for management scholars to take a societal turn and examine how organizational practices interact with societal economic inequality. To illustrate this approach, we discuss organizational practices—corporate social responsibility, work design, recruitment and selection, and compensation management—that can contribute to the normalization, reinforcement, and reduction of economic inequalities in society. We conclude by calling on scholars of inequality, as well as of broader management research, to take a societal turn to enhance the relevance and impact of management research.
原文：Bapuji, H., Patel, C., Ertug, G., & Allen, D. G. (2020). Corona Crisis and Inequality: Why Management Research Needs a Societal Turn. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1205-1222. doi:10.1177/0149206320925881
3、关于2019年企业圆桌会议“公司宗旨声明”
近期，一份由诸多顶尖的企业首席执行官组成的商业圆桌会议声明中，从利益相关者的角度的定义了公司的宗旨，这与以往将董事会服务于股东的利益有所不同。本文简要地描述了股东-股东-利益相关者辩论中的焦点，以表明该声明对管理理论和实践的重要性和该声明对学者和实践管理者的影响。最后，本文根据以下陈述描述了三个需要进一步研究的主题：公司边界，价值创造系统的性质以及有关侵蚀利益相关者价值的理论。
The Business Roundtable, a large group of top CEOs, recently issued a statement defining the purpose of the corporation in stakeholder terms, a direct and intended reversal from an earlier statement that defined the duty of directors as serving the interests of stockholders. In this editorial, we briefly describe the major twists and turns in the stockholders-versus-stakeholders debate that make this statement so significant to management theory and practice. We then describe the implications of the statement for scholars and practicing managers. We end with a description of three specific research topics that require more research in light of this statement: firm boundaries, the nature of value creation systems, and theory regarding the destruction of stakeholder value.
原文：Harrison, J. S., Phillips, R. A., & Freeman, R. E. (2020). On the 2019 Business Roundtable “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation”. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1223-1237. doi:10.1177/0149206319892669
picture from Internet
4、在组织科学中拥抱稳健性和可靠性
当组织科学明确关注稳健性和可靠性时，组织科学将提高其信誉。本期精选评论说明了如何在组织研究中采用稳健而可靠的实践范式。这些评论有助于研究者们通过同行评议体系，改善研究中各个流程，包括理论开发、方法论和质量控制流程。
The science of organizations increases its credibility when it embraces research with an explicit focus on robustness and reliability. This special issue of curated commentaries recommends and illustrates how to incorporate robust and reliable research practices in organizational research. Together, these commentaries help researchers make contributions to improving every step of the research trajectory—theory development, methodology, and the process of quality control through peer review.
原文：Lee, G. K., & Wang, M. (2020). Embracing Robustness and Reliability in the Science of Organizations. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1238-1243. doi:10.1177/0149206320917732
5、通过战略和组织研究中的累积研究识别因果关系
本文强调了为什么严肃地对待因果识别对于战略和组织的研究是重要的。然而，该领域的核心问题的性质，和有必要回答的数据的性质，使得这样做变得复杂。正因为如此，本文建议明确地将（如何）识别视为一个只能通过累积的实证研究来解决的问题。本文概述了目前妨碍采用这种方法的研究规范和做法，并提出了一套行动建议，以帮助克服这些问题。
I highlight why taking causal identification seriously is important for the study of strategy and organizations. Nevertheless, the nature of the questions that are central to our field and the nature of the data we have to answer these questions complicates doing so. Because of this, I suggest that we explicitly consider identification as an issue that can be addressed only through a cumulative body of empirical research. I outline current research norms and practices that impede adopting this approach and recommend a set of actions to help overcome these norms and practices.
原文：Shaver, J. M. (2020). Causal Identification Through a Cumulative Body of Research in the Study of Strategy and Organizations. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1244-1256. doi:10.1177/0149206319846272
6、使用有机数据进行研究的有效性问题
随着计算技术的出现，社会科学领域的研究人员正在使用越来越复杂的方法来收集、处理和分析数据，以寻求科学性的经验证据。鉴于我们到所使用研究方法的复杂性，重要的是要确保研究产生的研究结果是可靠的，而不受研究设计或实践相关的不确定性的显著影响。超自然科学领域（使用科学方法论来研究科学本身）已经研究了这种稳健性要求的各个方面，这些要求使用常规设计的研究（例如，调查，实验室实验）来收集数据。但已有研究缺少对使用“有机数据”来检验经验研究的稳健性的探究，这些数据是没有任何明确的研究设计元素而生成并由数字设备连续记录的数据（如无处不在的传感设备捕获的视频或内容），以及那些从社交网站，推特上提要和点击流中提取的社交互动）。鉴于在管理学研究中越来越多地使用有机数据，必须理解与有机数据的使用和处理有关的问题，这些问题可能会影响研究结果的可靠性。该评论首先概述了在使用有机数据的经验研究中，可能威胁到推论的有效性的常见问题。接下来是有关使有机数据成为未来管理学研究的重要组成部分的一些关键考虑因素和建议的讨论。
With the advent of computing technologies, researchers across social science fields are using increasingly complex methods to collect, process, and analyze data in pursuit of scientific evidence. Given the complexity of research methods used, it is important to ensure that the research findings produced by a study are robust instead of being affected significantly by uncertainties associated with the design or implementation of the study. The field of metascience—the use of scientific methodology to study science itself—has examined various aspects of this robustness requirement for research that uses conventional designed studies (e.g., surveys, laboratory experiments) to collect data. Largely missing, however, are efforts to examine the robustness of empirical research using “organic data,” namely, data that are generated without any explicit research design elements and are continuously documented by digital devices (e.g., video captured by ubiquitous sensing devices; content and social interactions extracted from social networking sites, Twitter feeds, and click streams). Given the growing popularity of using organic data in management research, it is essential to understand issues concerning the usage and processing of organic data that may affect the robustness of research findings. This commentary first provides an overview of commonly present issues that threaten the validity of inferences drawn from empirical studies using organic data. This is followed by a discussion on some key considerations and suggestions for making organic data a robust and integral part of future research endeavors in management.
原文：Xu, H., Zhang, N., & Zhou, L. (2020). Validity Concerns in Research Using Organic Data. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1257-1274. doi:10.1177/0149206319862027
picture from Internet
7、结果提供了有关发现重要性的累积概率的信息：让我们报告该信息
通常报告的统计数据，如t值和p值，包含有关根据所分析样本的属性发现统计显著性的累积概率的有用信息。但不幸的是，将t值和p值转换成这种形式的信息是不直观的，甚至是不正确的。本文展示了自助法（bootstrap）如何提供一种方法来理解基于特定样本的特征和所使用的统计模型发现显著性的累积概率。本文也提供了一种简单的方法从t值估计这个概率，而不必依赖于自助法。报告基于样本的概率可以通过在结果的讨论中传递适当的不确定性水平来帮助促进稳健和可靠的研究。本文有利于作者、编辑、审稿人、读者和教育工作者对抗起源性偏见(即多大程度上单一研究发现应该被视为可靠或可信)和其他偏见，这些偏见与对报告“统计意义重大”研究结果固有的差异性的误解有关。
Commonly reported statistics, such as the t value and p value, contain useful information about the cumulative probability of finding statistical significance based on the properties of the sample being analyzed. Unfortunately, converting t values and p values into this form of information is not intuitive and is often done incorrectly. We show how the bootstrap can provide a way to understand the cumulative probability of finding significance based on the characteristics of a specific sample and the statistical model being used. We also provide a simple way to estimate this probability from t values without having to rely on the bootstrap. Reporting sample-based probabilities can help promote robust and reliable research by conveying appropriate levels of uncertainty into discussions of results. We provide recommendations to authors, editors, reviewers, readers, and educators to help counter origination bias (i.e., how much a single study finding should be viewed as solid or sacred) and other biases tied to misunderstanding the variability inherent associated with reporting “statistically significant” findings.
原文：Bliese, P. D., & Wang, M. (2019). Results Provide Information About Cumulative Probabilities of Finding Significance: Let’s Report This Information. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1275-1288. doi:10.1177/0149206319886909
8、事实证明：形式模型如何对组织理论的理论和经验稳健性做出贡献
这篇评论的目的是展示形式模型(包括封闭形式和计算)的使用如何能改善组织理论中的理论发展和理论检验。本文还提供了一些实用性建议(针对考虑开发正式模型的博士生和研究人员)，以应对开发和编写正式模型论文时的挑战。通过揭示形式化模型对组织理论的贡献以及提出形式化论文所受的约束，这篇评论也可以帮助模式化论文的研究者从这种研究方法中获得更多价值。
The aim of this commentary is to show how the use of formal models—both closed form and computational—can improve theory development and theory testing in organization theory. I also provide practical suggestions (aimed at PhD students and researchers considering developing a formal model) for dealing with challenges in developing and writing a formal modeling paper. By uncovering how formal models contribute to organization theory and presenting the constraints that formal modeling papers are subject to, this commentary can also help consumers of modeling papers to extract more value from this research method.
