In this paper, we examine the career histories of the chief executive officers (CEOs) affiliated with the 500 largest organizations in Europe and the 500 largest in the United States. Our purpose is to determine whether frequent career moves across employers, a phenomenon we label an “external labor market strategy,” brings greater career rewards than moves inside the same organization. The results reveal that an external labor market strategy is negatively related to career success. On both continents, CEOs who have spent a smaller fraction of their career in their current organization or have changed employers more often have taken a longer time from the start of their career to be promoted to the most influential corporate positions. The labor market institutions in the 22 countries sampled do not influence the relationship between an external labor market strategy and career success, while the specific geographic region in which the employers are located has a limited impact on this relationship. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

No abstract

No abstract

In the last 22 years, research on diversity in teams has been propelled by information processing and social categorization theories, and more recently, by theories of disparity/(in)justice and access to external networks. These theories stress different diversity processes, treating team diversity respectively as variety of information, as separation, as disparity, and as variety of access. We appraise this literature by identifying major problems in the way these four foundational theories are used either alone or in combination, arguing that the related theoretical models are inherently incomplete and static. In an attempt to resolve these problems, we introduce a metatheoretical framework that relates these four foundational theories according to the metadimensions of group boundary and diversity mindset. We also propose a metatheoretical model that identifies interactions among the four diversity processes and specifies diversity response patterns to team success or failure over time. Our metatheoretical approach resolves significant omissions in the literature and penetrates into the dynamic nature of team diversity in more complex, temporally sensitive and synthetic ways.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health crisis that poses a challenge to humanity. Drawing on the stress and coping literature, we argue that people around the world alleviate their anxiety and stress induced by the pandemic through both prosocial and 'self-interested' hoarding behaviours. This cross-cultural survey study examined the pushing (threat perception) and pulling (moral identity) factors that predicted prosocial acts and hoarding, and subsequently psychological well-being. Data were collected from 9 April to 14 May 2020 from 251 participants in the United Kingdom (UK), 268 in the United States (US), 197 in Germany (DE), and 200 in Hong Kong (HK). Whereas threat perception was associated positively with both prosocial acts and hoarding, benevolent moral identity was associated positively with the former but not the latter behaviour. We also observed cross-cultural differences, such that both effects were stronger in more individualistic (UK, US) countries than less individualistic (HK, DE) ones. The findings shed light on the prosocial vs. self-interested behavioural responses of people in different cultures towards the same pandemic crisis.