The current study meta-analytically examined the gendered nature of lateral and upward influence attempts. Drawing from gender role theory, we investigated the extent to which the gender of the influence actor affected the use and effectiveness of influence behaviors. The role of a gendered environmental context was also examined. The results provided limited support of gender role theory such that men were more likely to use agentic influence tactics and women were more likely to receive personal advancement outcomes when they used communal influence tactics. Overall, the current work suggests that influence tactics may be gendered in nature such that there may be gender differences in the frequency of use and subsequent outcomes thereof. Recommendations for future research on influence include increased attention to the potentially gendered nature of influence behaviors as well as more explicit considerations of the impact of gender and gendered environment on influence effectiveness.

No abstract

There is renewed interest in the factors that affect negotiations, as they are a significant part of organizational life. While we understand that there are many barriers to effectively reaching optimal solutions in a negotiation, we are still unclear as to the means by which to meet this goal. In this paper, we offer creativity training as a possible antecedent to effective negotiation. Our results show that individuals trained to think creatively reached more integrative solutions or solutions that were mutually beneficial to all negotiation participants than individuals who did not receive creativity training. We discuss implications and future research.Keywords Creativity in negotiations · Negotiations · Creativity · Creativity training · ExperimentThe creativity construct has been well researched, and scholars have provided support for the theoretical perspective that creativity is essential to organizations' sustainability (Ramus 2001;Woodman et al. 1993). Creativity is the ability to generate or produce ideas, insights, or solutions that are original, novel, and unique (i.e., that were not previously available or present), but that are also relevant to solving ill-defined problems (these solutions are appropriate to and useful given the context of the problem) (Ama-

No abstract

This study puts forth the following research questions: (i) Are there any differences between remotes' and co-locates' knowledge portfolios, and (ii) if so, are these differences significant? We contend that significant differences occur in how remotes configure their knowledge activities. To search for possible differences, we examined three sources of knowledge-based activities that are associated with remotes and co-locates: university collaborations and innovative activities such as patenting and scanning. Using survey data from a study of 197 U.S. biotechnology firms, this study found that remotes and co-locates have similar portfolio diversity, but remotes sponsor more faculty research, have a lower patent efficiency rate, and do not scan as frequently as co-located firms.