This article reviews the individual and organizational implications of gig work using the emerging psychological contract between gig workers and employing organizations as a lens. We first examine extant definitions of gig work and provide a conceptually clear definition. We then outline why both organizations and individuals may prefer gig work, offer an in-depth analysis of the ways in which the traditional psychological contract has been altered for both organizations and gig workers, and detail the impact of that new contract on gig workers. Specifically, organizations deconstruct jobs into standardized tasks and gig workers adapt by engaging in job crafting and work identity management. Second, organizational recruitment of gig workers alters the level and type of commitment gig workers feel toward an employing organization. Third, organizations use a variety of nontraditional practices to manage gig workers (e.g., including by digital algorithms) and gig workers adapt by balancing autonomy and dependence. Fourth, compensation tends to be project-based and typically lacks benefits, causing gig workers to learn to be a "jack-of-all-trades" and learn to deal with pay volatility. Fifth, organizational training of gig workers is limited, and they adapt by engaging in self-development. Sixth, gig workers develop alternative professional and social relationships to work in blended teams assembled by organizations and/or adapt to social isolation. Challenges associated with these practices and possible solutions are discussed, and we develop propositions for testing in future research. Finally, we highlight specific areas for further exploration in future research.

Over the last two years, awareness about the sexual mistreatment of women has stunned the world. According to analysis by the New York Times, the defeat of Hilary Clinton and election of Donald Trump spurred a women’s movement in the US that began in November of 2016 and resulted in protests across the country, including the largest single-day protest in history on January 21, 2017. Later that year, the #MeToo movement (starting in October 2017) and subsequent #TimesUp movement (starting in January 2018) galvanized women to unite against sexual assault and sexual harassment, which has become the hallmark of the current women’s movement. But has anything changed over this time period in regard to the sexual harassment of women? Using a repeat cross-sectional survey from over 500 women collected at two points in time (September 2016 and September 2018), we found reduced levels of the most egregious forms of sexual harassment (unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion) but increased levels of gender harassment in 2018. More importantly, sexual harassment had a weaker relationship with women’s negative self-views (lower self-esteem, higher self-doubt) in 2018 compared to 2016. Qualitative interviews collected from women in the fall of 2016 and in the fall of 2018 from the same women, support the quantitative data. They suggest that the changes in sexual harassment are due to the increased scrutiny on the topic. The interviewees also emphasize that they feel better supported and empowered and are not ashamed to speak up about sexual harassment.

We investigated the relationship of emotional labor to perceived team support, extra-role behaviors, and turnover intentions. Our primary research question involved whether the relationships of individual deep acting with perceived team support and extra-role behaviors were conditional on the level of peer deep acting in the team. The possibilities were explored in two field studies. Study 1 sampled 195 students in 47 project teams multiple times over the course of a semester. Study 2 surveyed 202 nurses and their supervisors within 35 teams in a hospital. The multilevel results of both studies showed that the relationships between individual deep acting and outcome variables were dependent upon the level of peer deep acting in the team. As expected, individual and peer surface acting had only direct relationships with the same outcomes. These findings provided general support for our model and suggested that team-level effects are an important

No abstract

No abstract