Organizational commitment has traditionally been measured by focusing on the employees' identification with the organization. Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, and Sowa have suggested that employees' commitment is affected by their perception of the organization's commitment to the employees. We propose that this type of commitment consists of both a perception of a global, organizational commitment to employees and a perception of support from supervisors. This study describes the translation of the Survey of Perceived Organizational Support and the development of a Survey of Perceived Supervisory Support to measure these concepts.

PurposeAims to look at the way women in Western industrialized countries have made significant career advancements but barriers remain which necessitate organizational intervention. A number of initiatives that have commonly been introduced to help women in their career development have produced only modest gains in women's advancement.Design/methodology/approachArgues that four basic underlying processes – social cognitions, justice, threat, and utility – must be considered and managed as part of the development, implementation, and evaluation of initiatives targeting women's career advancement, if such initiatives are to have their desired impact. These underlying processes and their implications are presented with recommendations for organizational leaders and human resource professionals.FindingsThe goal of women's advancement is both noble and vital to long‐term organizational success, and initiatives to further the cause are needed. These goals are not, however, without their obstacles. By understanding how social cognitions, perceptions of fairness, threat, and utility can individually and collectively impact the success or failure of programs to advance women, organizational leaders can develop and implement informed practices that are embraced by all members of the organization and which, consequently, further the advancement of all organizational members.Originality/valueThe article focuses on the key underlying processes that are believed to be critical for understanding the barriers to women's career advancement, but it is necessary to note that, as with any organizational initiative, there are other organizational factors that must be considered, such as top management support, and the history of the organization with regard to gender.

This study sought to develop an individual measurement scale for use as a general tool in identifying personal ethical beliefs that could potentially conflict with perceived company interests. A total of 225 employed people ranging from high school graduates to master's degree students responded to a 16-item survey. Two interpretable factor loadings emerged from the factor analysis. The first appeared to be a general "company support" factor and the second a "lie to protect the company" factor. Reliability analysis supported the factor analysis results. This scale represents an employee's beliefs about ethical behavior and could be used in organizational settings to identify potential ethical conflicts.

In their lead article, Hogan, Chamorro-Premuzic, and Kaiser (2013) suggested that the topic of employability has been below the radar of most, if not all, industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists' research activities. Although we agree that research addressing employability is scarce in the mainstream I–O journals, we argue that I–O psychologists involved in the training of future I–O psychologists have addressed the employability of their graduates as a sustainability factor for I–O graduate programs (Munson, Phillips, Clark, & Mueller-Hanson, 2004). In addition, those who teach undergraduates, including undergraduates with an interest in the I–O area, also establish internships to enhance the employability of their graduates (e.g., Bott, Stuhlmacher, & Powaser, 2006; Carducci et al., 1987).

In this case analysis, we apply the toxic triangle framework, in its entirety, to a public university upon the entry of a new president. We found considerable fit of the theoretical triad to the university: a destructive leader, an enabling environment, and susceptible followers. Consistent with the theory, an environment that lacked fundamental checks and balances, coupled with instability and perceived threats, spawned the conditions that brought a toxic leader to the institution, which, in turn, revealed and fostered conformers and colluders. We describe three episodes (critical incidents) that show how the toxic triangle evolved and strengthened over time. We also offer a critical examination of all three components of the toxic triangle with a special focus on the psychosocial forces that paralyzed even tenured faculty from resisting. In this critical examination, organizational miasma, rationalizations, and control myths provide substantive explanations for ineffective employee action. Further, we suggest that leadership as processual communication can be used to advance the value of the framework. We conclude by highlighting areas for future inquiry.