This study examined how personnel managers (n, = 19) and line managers ( n = 28) make disciplinary decisions. Using a policy-capturing approach, subjects were asked to respond to disciplinary incidents that varied in terms of three factors likely to affect managerial attributions about the cause of the disciplinary problem (managerial provocation, personal problems, or tenure). The incidents also varied in terms of factors made relevant by the economic, institutional/legal, and hierarchical contexts. Of the six variables manipulated, the factor relating to the institutional/legal context had the largest impact on the decisions made by the personnel managers, and the factor relating to the hierarchical context had the largest impact on the decisions made by the line managers. While provocation was relatively important for both line and personnel managers, personal problems, tenure, and the economic implications of the decision had more modest impacts on managerial decisions. The results also suggest that there is substantial variation across managers in terms of the decision rules employed when responding to disciplinary cases.Much of existing research about how managers make disciplinary decisions uses an attribution theory framework (Jones & Davis, 1965). Consistent with attribution theory, research suggests that managers attempt to determine the cause of a behavioral problem in deciding how to respond to that problem. For example, studies show that as the consistency of a performance problem increases, so too does the likelihood of the subject making an internal attribution (attributing the cause of the problem to the employee) and, in turn, the likelihood of a harsh response (Mitchell & Wood, 1979). Similarly, when subjects believed that the reason for the performance problem was a lack of effort or ability, more severe action was taken than if the problem was attributed to task difficulty or bad luck (Pence, Pendleton, Dobbins, & Sgro, 1982). Findings that organizational status and family problems affect discipline (Rosen & Jerdee, 1974) also suggest that disciplinary decisions may be ~ Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Brian S. Klaas, College of Business Administration, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208. COPYRICiHT 0 IWO PERSOKNEL PSYCHOLOGY. INC

No abstract

Firms are increasingly turning to the controversial practice of employment arbitration to resolve workplace disputes. Yet little is know about how decisions are made by employment arbitrators or how their decisions compare to those made in traditional dispute-resolution forums. This study uses a policycapturing design and hierarchical linear modeling to compare how decisions about termination cases are made by employment arbitrators, labor arbitrators, and jurors. The results indicate significant differences in the overall willingness to uphold termination, with labor arbitrators being the most likely to rule in favor of the employee, followed by jurors, employment arbitrators judging statutory and for-cause claims, and employment arbitrators judging statutory-only claims. Significant differences were also observed between categories of decision makers in the weight given to procedural compliance, evidence of discrimination, employee work history, and stress-inducing personal circumstances.

This study examines determinates of two employee behaviors in the union organizing process: pro-union activism in the organizing campaign, and vote for union certification. Using data gathered from six union organizing attempts, campaign activism and voting behavior is analyzed in terms of hypotheses drawn from Wheeler's (1985) theory of industrial conflict. Results indicate that support for union certification is influenced by a perceived lack of job security, management's lack of respect for employees, the belief that union representation would be effective, favorable attitudes about unions, and anger at the employer. Few differences were found for union activism and vote, suggesting that distinctive forms of union support are not influenced by different determinants.

No abstract