This paper analyzes the impact of job resources on academic productivity measured by publication and credit points in 53 departments in one large Norwegian university. The theoretical framework is the so-called conservation of resources theory (COR). The resources data came from the so-called ARK Intervention Program. The results showed that engagement and administrative and technical support for research and teaching stimulated research publications but had adverse effects on credit points from teaching, thus also contributing to the research-teaching nexus debate. To avoid adverse trade-offs between research and teaching, and to gain further positive effects on research productivity, targeted means and reward structures seem important.

No abstract

The aim of the study was to develop, test, and partly validate a set of organizational communication factors for use in an organizational-change setting. Based on literature reviews and pilot interviews, a survey study was conducted using three samples. First, the testing involved construct validation through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Second, the sample was divided into three groups: employees who experienced change, those who had recently had finished a change process, and those who had not experienced any change processes. The communication factors were then examined as predictors of employee assessment of communication in these three groups, respectively. The results of the study indicated eight robust dimensions included in five categories: social contact, central leadership, information, influence, and barriers to improvement. The results of the factor analyses indicated satisfactory reliability and construct validity of the communication factors, and the confirmatory factor analysis revealed a satisfactory model fit.

Overall, the KIWEST measure showed promising psychometric properties as a psychosocial work environment measure.

IntroductionLeaders in academia must navigate a situation in which academic autonomy is a fundamental value and therefore, has been argued, should be protected and encouraged by university management (Boyd et al., 2011), while academic activities are becoming increasingly diverse (Musselin, 2007). In the past, the core activities of research and teaching were emphasized more strongly, while academics nowadays engage more in diverse activities, such as proposal writing, maneuvering e-learning programs, and various bureaucratic obligations. Due to this diversification, academics may increasingly perceive many of their work tasks as unreasonable, which risks lowering both their job autonomy (Apostel et al., 2018) and motivation (Schmitt et al., 2015). Lower motivation among academics is, in turn, associated with lower academic productivity (Christensen et al., 2018). A potential remedy for alleviating these risks is effective academic leadership, characterized by the facilitation of participation in vital decisions, the encouragement of open dialogue, the generation of a collegial sense of community, and the provision of recognition (Bryman, 2007). Moreover, academics are professionals, which means they are likely to thrive better under subtler types of leadership behavior, comprised of protection and support, rather than direction and control (Mintzberg, 1998).In these regards, empowering leadership, defined as leader behaviors that share power with employees and encourage their use of power (Amundsen & Martinsen, 2014;Conger & Kanungo, 1988;Vecchio et al., 2010) shows promise. Empirical research has shown that empowering leadership is positively associated with valued outcomes, such as job satisfaction (Dallner et al., 2000), affective commitment (Albrecht & Andreetta, 2011), psychological empowerment (Amundsen & Martinsen, 2014), creativity (Zhang & Bartol, 2010), knowledge sharing, team efficacy, and performance (Srivastava et al., 2006). Empowering leadership has also been found to be positively related to motivation in the form of work engagement (Tuckey et al., 2012).Relatively little empirical attention has been paid to how and why empowering leadership is associated with motivation (Gilbert & Kelloway, 2014), but researchers have suggested that empowering leadership is related to work engagement because it shapes work characteristics (Tuckey et al., 2012). Based on empowerment and empowering leadership theories (