Establishing change readiness may be one of the key factors in determining whether a given change intervention will ultimately be successful or not. Unfortunately, there is a good deal of conceptual confusion in the literature surrounding the term, illustrated by the sheer number of terms that are used to capture the construct (e.g., openness, receptivity, commitment, attitudes toward change) and the varying theoretical foundations that have been proposed. To arrive at a more conceptually sound notion of change readiness, the current article advocates moving beyond state-based conceptualizations toward a process model of change readiness. This process model has the advantage of serving as a framework against which to synthesize extant theorizing on change readiness, incorporating the influences of context and environment over time on an individual’s cognitive and affective evaluations and subsequent positive and proactive responses to change, and capturing readiness as a recursive and multidimensional process.

Ethical business scenarios, Moral disengagement, Subclinical psychopathy, Successful psychopaths, Unethical decision-making,

As an alternative to traditional job analysis, the practice of competency modeling may be appealing to scholars and practitioners of human resource development (HRD) to serve as the foundation for many HRD activities. Among some of its advantages are a more explicit focus on performance and development that is aligned with organizational strategy, fuller integration with human resource systems, and a focus on broad work roles and functions instead of discrete jobs. Unfortunately, the use of competency models is often hindered as a result of conceptual ambiguity, a lack of methodological rigor in the development of such systems, and psychometric issues. The current integrative literature review seeks to clarify the practice of competency modeling within the context of HRD through a critical analysis of its foundations, conceptual and definitional issues, and potential barriers to use while providing the current state of the science and best practices.

This study examines the mechanisms through which workaholism and work engagement impact work-home conflict and enrichment, respectively. Specifically, we examine the mediating role of positive and negative emotions (e.g. joviality and guilt) in the relationship between workaholism, work engagement and work-home outcomes. Results, based on a sample of 340 working adults participating in a two-wave study, indicate that negative emotions-particularly anxiety, anger and disappointment-mediate the relationship between workaholism and work-home conflict and positive emotions-particularly joviality and self-assurance-mediate the relationship between work engagement and work-home enrichment. These results provide further evidence that workaholism and work engagement are related to distinct sets of emotional variables and disparate work and home outcomes.

No abstract