Generally theorized and empirically examined as an organization phenomenon, collaboration may be more productively explored from a mesolevel model that simultaneously addresses group, organizational, and public frames. Examining how individuals communicate in those frames revealed four discursive productions of collaboration, which were previously undertheorized. Thus, we propose a communicative model that details the simultaneously occurring communication at multiple levels that gives rise to the emergence and effectiveness of collaborating talk. In this model, communication is no longer described as one of the component(s) of collaboration; communication is elevated to the essence of collaboration. Working from observations and records of a 9-month interorganizational collaboration, this article develops a mesolevel communicative model of collaboration and demonstrates that the bulk of collaborative communication occurs at the team level-indeed, the level where relationships among individuals and organizations is revealed and acted upon.The critique and conceptual analysis that follows underlie the development of a communicative model of interorganizational collaboration. The model applies to problem-centered teams that perform tasks, such as facilitating organizational mergers, addressing public policy or civic issues, and creating product or service innovations across industries. That is, individuals in the collaboration represent multiple and potentially competing organizational or constituency interests. Limiting collaboration in this way highlights conditions influencing communication that may not be present or are hidden in other forms of collaborating.Focusing on organizational representatives rather than organizations makes two advances. First, it identifies a series of constructs that influence an individual's organizational representation and, therefore, his or her communication in COMMUNICATION THEORYa collaboration process. These constructs are as follows: investment in resources, expected impact of collaborative activity, network uncertainty, and network instability. Second, the model recognizes that ''by their very nature, organizations are multilevel, [thus] no construct is level free'' (Klein, Dansereau, & Hall, 1994, p. 198).To wit, collaboration must be considered at multiple levels. One level is the face-toface communication of representatives in the collaborative group. At the team level, the model addresses both communication within and among collaborative teams. At the organizational level, it addresses communication among represented organizations and between a facilitating organization and its direct and indirect (public) stakeholders. As such, the model is situated in both micro-and macrocontexts and applies to both zero-history groups and those with a past and an expectation of a future, as the conditions of the model are primarily based on organizational membership, not on the duration or history of the team.A communication-based model of interorganizational collaboration, in our view...

This article develops a theoretical framework that explains how life complexity and dynamism affect work-life balance. The authors explain the moderating effects of munificence and accessibility of resources in one’s life as well as the personality differences and individual value systems on the relationship between life complexity/dynamism and work-life balance. The analysis leads to implications for future research and practice.

No abstract

This study was designed to examine professional human resource managers' recommendations and inferences about prototypical applicants who had identical qualifications, in which the presence of periods of unemployment and name (feminine, masculine) of applicants were manipulated. Results indicate that although overall income for female applicants was less than male applicants in some conditions, male applicants were penalized and evaluated more harshly than female applicants when they had experienced periods of unemployment. Specifically, male applicants with employment gaps were seen as less committed and as less hirable than their female counterparts. Overall, male applicants were less likely to be recommended for an interview, and, when they experienced multiple gaps, they were less likely to be recommended for further consideration.

This study is the first to examine the predictive validity of the Karnani and Wernerfelt theoretical model. We developed measures for four variables, and explored whether they successfully operationalized the dimensions in the theoretical model. The model proposed four response strategies, and six were observed in the data. Incumbent firms most frequently did not respond at all to another firm's entry, even though a counterattack response was predicted by the model. Since the independent variables did not predict responses as proposed by the model, exploratory analyses identified “best” predictors of responses.