Leaders' guanxi human resource management (HRM) practices are prevalent in East Asian organizational contexts shaped by Confucian culture. In such settings, leaders often allocate limited resources to beneficiaries with whom they share guanxi, at the expense of victims who lose access to those resources. While prior research has primarily focused on the self-directed consequences of leaders' guanxi HRM practices for victims, much less attention has been paid to the other-directed behavioral responses-particularly from the perspective of interactions between guanxi victims and beneficiaries. Drawing from theories of social comparison and dual-system self-control, this paper develops a theoretical model to elucidate how and when leaders' guanxi HRM practices lead victims to ostracize beneficiaries. Across three studies conducted with Chinese samples, we found that leaders' guanxi HRM practices elicit both contempt (via downward comparison) and envy (via upward comparison) toward beneficiaries among victims, which in turn lead to ostracism of beneficiaries. Moreover, victims' orientation toward superficial harmony was found to weaken the relationship between contempt and ostracism, although its moderating effect on envy-ostracism was not significant. The stronger the victim's tendency toward superficial harmony, the weaker the indirect effect of leaders' guanxi HRM practices on their ostracism toward beneficiaries via contempt. This paper advances the literature on guanxi HRM practices by shifting the focus from intra-individual to interpersonal consequences and provides practical insights for managers to optimize guanxi-based human resource decisions.

家族企业实际控制人于任职期间意外离世会对组织产生极大冲击，如何塑造韧性以应对此类突发事件是现代家族企业面临的治理难题。对中国历史上10个政治大一统朝代的史料数据进行多水平计量统计分析，并结合扎根理论方法探索实控人骤然离世后影响组织韧性的特征要素，构建出贯通古今的“家族—从属双系统”理论模型。在此基础上，采用NCA和fsQCA方法，剖析28家案例企业双系统特征要素的复杂耦合机制对组织韧性的多重并发因果路径。研究表明，在实控人突然离世背景下，家族—从属双系统协同应对内外部冲击：家族系统“关系融合”、从属系统“协同规约”特征要素发挥核心作用(稳健共济型组态)时，或家族系统“代际致治”、从属系统“转换绸缪”特征要素发挥核心作用(独挽狂澜型组态)时组织韧性较强。研究提供了家族企业组织韧性形成条件的异质性解释，深化了对组织整体韧性和局部特征要素之间关系的系统性认识，为组织应对家族性突发事件提供了借鉴和参考。

PurposeSome scholars argue that wrongdoers with high hierarchical levels are less likely to be subjected to negative gossip in comparison to wrongdoers with low hierarchical levels, others hold the opposing view. To reconcile these conflicting views, we explored whether wrongdoers' hierarchical levels were associated with observers' negative gossip behavior and in what manner, from an attributional perspective.Design/methodology/approachTwo different experiments were conducted with 200 and 240 participants respectively, all of whom were from China. This study conducted two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), hierarchical regression analysis and bootstrapping approach to test the hypotheses.FindingsThe results indicate that the direction of the effect of wrongdoers' hierarchical levels on observers' negative gossip behavior is dependent on the hierarchical type (i.e. power hierarchy and status hierarchy). When the hierarchical type is a power hierarchy, the wrongdoers' hierarchical levels positively affect the observers' negative gossip behavior due to the observers' increased intentionality attributions and unethical perception; when the hierarchical type is a status hierarchy, the wrongdoers' hierarchical levels have a negative effect on the observers' negative gossip behavior, due to the observers' inhibiting intentionality attributions and unethical perception.Originality/valueThese results reconcile previous inconsistent conclusions and establish a theoretical reference on the mechanism in which different types of wrongdoers' hierarchy have differential impacts on observers' judgment and behaviors.

PurposeDebate persists regarding the transformation between team task conflict and relationship conflict. Based on conflict spiral and team effectiveness theory, this study aims to explore whether and when these conflicts transform over time.Design/methodology/approachTo address endogeneity in existing research and to test theoretical model, the authors conduct a two-stage structural equation modeling meta-analysis using a cross-lagged panel model based on 32 longitudinal studies (N = 2361).FindingsThe meta-analytic results are as follows: (a) Early team task conflict leads to an increased subsequent relationship conflict while controlling for another form of conflict at each time point (Time 1 and Time 2). This relationship is positively moderated by team size and negatively moderated by interdependence, but not moderated by time lag. Specifically, task conflict generates higher levels of relationship conflict in larger teams or teams with lower interdependence. (b) While controlling for another form of conflict at each time point, early relationship conflict within teams does not significantly relate to task conflict over time. Team size, interdependence and time lag do not significantly moderate this relationship.Research limitations/implicationsThese findings help scholars better understand team conflict transformation processes and present managerial implications for practitioners. The limited sample sizes precluded the exploration of more moderators and the interactions among them.Originality/valueThe uniqueness of this paper is related to its effort in clarifying the temporal precedence of two forms of conflict, reconciling previous inconsistencies in conflict transformation by exploring moderators and addressing endogeneity in existing research.

在组织行为领域,元分析研究通常涉及多变量关系分析,导致研究者不可避免地需要明确不同预测变量对因变量的相对贡献,即进行相对重要性分析,以确定对因变量贡献更大的预测变量或证明构念的研究价值。然而,基于近十年发表在组织行为领域元分析中的文献,本研究发现不少研究者未能意识到因变量类型、相对重要性分析方法、抽样和测量误差对相对重要性分析结果的可靠性带来的影响,导致对此方法感兴趣的元分析研究者难以使用规范的流程开展相对重要性分析。因此,本研究基于组织行为元分析中相对重要性分析的应用现状和真实的元分析数据,着重介绍能够在单一因变量元分析中处理多重共线性问题的优势分析、相对权重分析方法的原理、优势、差异、适用研究问题和显著性检验,以及这两种方法在组合因变量元分析中的拓展。此外,提供在元分析中进行相对重要性分析的实施程序,为组织管理领域元分析研究者开展规范有效的相对重要性分析提供理论依据。

权力接近-抑制行为理论是解释权力和行为关系的重要理论,但应用该理论的实证研究却存在与理论相矛盾的结论。通过对2003～2023年探索权力与接近和抑制行为关系的154篇文献、245个实证样本的261个效应值的元分析整合,本研究检验了权力与接近-抑制行为关系的双刃剑作用机制及边界条件,以期解释以往研究结论不一致的原因。结果显示权力与接近-抑制行为的关系具有双刃剑效应,客观权力既会通过主观权力间接增加接近行为并减少抑制行为,也会对抑制行为产生直接的促进作用,且主观权力对行为的解释力强于客观权力。调节效应结果显示,权力距离能够加强主观权力对接近行为的正向影响,并强化主观权力对抑制行为的负向影响。上述结论有助于深化和拓展权力接近-抑制行为理论框架。

Power and status are two critical elements of social hierarchy. However, whether power and status have similar effects on unethical behavior has received inconsistent results. We constructed a theoretical model of power, status, and unethical behavior to address this issue by integrating the approach-inhibition theory and expectation states theory. We verified this model based on 132 samples reported in 95 articles. Our meta-analytic results show that power and status affect unethical behavior differently, such that power is positively related to unethical behavior. Contrastingly, status is negatively associated with unethical behavior. Furthermore, power and status have different indirect effects on unethical behavior through moral cognition. Compared with power, status has a stronger indirect inhibitory effect on unethical behavior through moral cognition. We also examined the moderating role of power distance in the indirect effects of power and status on unethical behavior. The results of the moderated mediation meta-analysis show that the indirect positive effect of power on unethical behavior through moral cognition and the indirect negative effect of status on unethical behavior through moral cognition are stronger when power distance is higher. These findings help scholars better understand how power and status may increase or inhibit unethical behavior and when this occurs. Furthermore, these findings provide more convincing and referential evidence for practitioners.

以往管理领域的元分析研究重点关注定量元分析方法的使用,导致众多质性研究结论未得到有效的整理与提炼,而质性元分析作为对质性研究进行整合的方法,能够有效解决以往管理质性研究之间存在的孤岛现象,旨在构建一般性的管理理论。鉴于此,首先,介绍了质性元分析方法的内涵、认识论基础和相较其他研究方法的优势。在此基础上,回顾以往研究,归纳总结了该方法目前的应用现状,包括适用的研究问题和规范的操作策略。最后,从问题、操作和方法3个方面提出了未来管理研究中质性元分析方法的应用前景。

权力的行为效应是近年来组织管理领域的热点话题。尽管组织中个体的权力会影响其竞争意识,但权力通过何种机制以及何时增加组织成员的竞争行为尚不明确。为弥补上述不足,在整合权力的接近-抑制理论和自我评价理论的基础上,通过实验和调