ABSTRACT Uncertain times—such as periods of political turmoil, economic instability, health, or climate crises—can diminish individuals' perception of control over their environment. This paper hypothesizes that reduced perceptions of control may impact how individuals relate to their work, specifically, triggering quiet quitting, where employees intentionally refrain from tasks beyond their job requirements. Evidence supports this hypothesis: for example, the phenomenon of quiet quitting has resurged in the post‐pandemic era, coinciding with a significant decline in workers' perceived control around that time. However, no research has yet explored the relationship between perceived control and quiet quitting. Drawing on motivation theory, this paper posits that workers' perceived control, reflected in their beliefs about the effort‐reward link, can explain quiet quitting. To test this, we conducted two extensive online surveys with two main objectives: first, to conceptually refine and operationalize the construct of quiet quitting with a 5‐item scale; second, to examine the relationship between perceived control and quiet quitting. Our findings reveal a significant negative association between workers' perceived control and their propensity to engage in quiet quitting. This relationship is partially mediated by a reduced affective commitment to the employer and an elevated sense of replaceability. A direct implication of our results is that initiatives aimed at restoring workers' sense of agency at work might reduce quiet quitting behaviors.

ABSTRACT Research on corporate sociopolitical activism (CSA) is in its infancy, and more research is needed to examine its effects on employees. We draw from the tenets of Signaling Theory to develop and test a model of how organizations' antiracist signaling after a racial injustice event, as a form of CSA, communicates that racial justice is valued sincerely by organizations, and in turn, motivates employee commitment to diversity—both at work and in their personal lives. We also explore boundary conditions (i.e., climate for inclusion, employee race) of this relationship. We test our model with data collected from 367 employees (37.6% Black, 62.4% White) across 4‐time waves, each 1 month apart, using a mixed‐methods (quantitative and qualitative) approach. Results suggest that organizations are viewed as most sincere when they engage in signaling that includes both words (i.e., releasing a statement) and actions (e.g., hiring a diversity officer) relative to when they don't engage in these words and/or actions. Moreover, when organizations signaled a sincere commitment to antiracism with both words and actions, employees were more committed to diversity at work and in their personal lives, though actions taken by the organization were especially important. Moreover, a strong climate for inclusion reduced the need for actions, while a weak climate for inclusion increased the need for a statement. Theoretical, research, and practical implications are discussed.

This chapter introduces a range of ethics theories and highlights some implications for HRM practice. First, it is suggested that ethical absolutist notions such as the common good, human rights and duty offer useful, if ambivalent, lenses through which ethically charged HRM issues might be evaluated. Then, some ethical merits of challenging conventional morality, upholding individual autonomy and encouraging proximity are considered under the heading of ethical relativism. It is suggested that all these absolutist and relativist themes provide a certain amount of ethical legitimation for participative workplace decision-making. However, a far more explicit endorsement of participation is offered by theories revolving around discourse and personhood, which are elaborated under the section related to intersubjectivist theory. Lastly, the insights of these intersubjectivist approaches are used as a basis for exploring the ethically legitimating potential of various forms of employee voice.

ABSTRACT In this research, we aim to further our understanding of supervisors' enactment of psychosocial risk management and their own psychological responses to supporting employees through stressful work situations. Informed by event system theorizing and the special case of affective events, we examined 342 employee critical events of a stressful nature through the eyes of the supervisor. Thematic analysis revealed 16 supervisor actions that were aggregated into nine supervisor action themes that supervisors evaluated for stressfulness and effectiveness. Clustering stressfulness and effectiveness scores revealed the emergence of three supervisor groups: favorable, unfavorable, and challenge. Multinomial logistic regressions demonstrated that both organizational and supervisor psychosocial risk management capabilities reduced the odds of supervisors developing unfavorable psychological responses in relation to their supervisor action, whereas supervisors with time pressure and psychological distress had increased odds. In addition, supervisors experiencing psychological distress had a twofold likelihood of experiencing their chosen action as both stressful and effective, calling into question the potential for future benefits to arise from what might be otherwise considered a challenge experience. Overall, our findings demonstrate that pre‐existing features of the supervisor's own psychosocial work environment shape their psychological responses to having enacted psychosocial risk management, irrespective of the type of supervisor action.

ABSTRACTThis paper contributes to sustainable HRM theory, policy, and practice by applying and extending systems theory. A framing is developed and applied by triangulating data from 85 interviews with workers, managers, and other stakeholders (e.g., unions, employer representatives, charities) in adult social care, along with qualitative and quantitative secondary data sources. The findings highlight three main (un)sustainable HRM challenges shaped by inconsistencies between employment in the public and independent sectors: constrained system resources, disconnected career structures, and uneven voice patterns. The article contributes to HR theory by re‐framing “(un)sustainable HRM” to include how actors are constrained and/or supported by multi‐level relationships between systems and sub‐systems. The research advances policy and practice by proposing how more sustainable HRM approaches could be implemented.

ABSTRACT As more organizations move to remote hiring assessments, important questions emerge as to the effects on scores, racioethnic, and gender subgroup differences, and candidate reactions. We compare scores of candidates assessed remotely under proctored conditions ( N = 902) versus onsite ( N = 891) in an actual selection context in the same organization, in the same time period, and on the same cognitive ability tests, case exercises, and structured interviews. Controlling for job, there were no differences for cognitive ability tests or case exercises in the remote environment, but higher scores for structured interviews, leading to a slightly higher total score for all assessments combined and a 5% increase in the overall passing rate. Within groups, Hispanic or Latino candidates performed better on the remote cognitive ability test compared with Hispanic or Latino candidates onsite, while Asian candidates performed better remotely for the case exercise. All subgroups performed better on the remote structured interview compared with their onsite counterparts. No between‐group differences emerged by racioethnicity, but women outperformed men on the remote cognitive ability test compared to onsite. Candidate fairness reactions did not differ by test environment for any assessments or subgroups. We conclude that: (1) remote proctored assessments will not create lower overall passing rates (i.e., fewer candidates for hire); (2) differences in remote assessment scores may depend on the type of assessment, with the greatest positive differences for structured interviews; (3) remote assessments do not disadvantage racioethnic minority candidates or candidates overall; and (4) remote assessments do not reduce candidate fairness reactions.

ABSTRACTDespite significant progress in understanding how situational factors influence safety compliance, the effects of team diversity—particularly language diversity—on safety outcomes remain underexplored. This is particularly concerning given the prevalence of language diversity in teams operating in hazardous environments and the disparities in accident rates, injuries, and fatalities among workers from diverse linguistic and racial‐ethnic backgrounds. In this study, we examine how language diversity affects occupational safety, and therefore begin to resolve an unsettled deliberation of whether diversity is a detractor or catalyst of safety outcomes. Integrating social identity theory and work on leader member exchange differentiation, we develop and test a model hypothesizing that team language diversity is positively related to safety compliance and that this relationship can be explained by leaders' relationships with followers. Analysis of survey data from over 1,000 construction workers (162 teams) showed that our hypotheses were generally supported; that team language diversity was positively related to safety compliance. Further, we found that this relationship can be explained by the process of leader‐member exchange differentiation, but only when leaders also exhibit safety‐specific transformational leadership (SSTL). We discuss these results in detail and implications for scientists and human resource practitioners are presented.

ABSTRACTA key question in the literature is how human resource management (HRM) practices influence quiet quitting (QQ), emphasizing the need for a more nuanced theoretical framework to explain its antecedents. This research applies the conservation of resources (COR) theory to delve into how high‐performance work systems (HPWSs) influence QQ through psychological conditions (i.e., psychological meaningfulness and availability). Based on a sample of 422 participants, the study reveals that HPWSs, psychological meaningfulness, and psychological availability each have a negative relationship with QQ. In addition, psychological meaningfulness and availability serve as mediating pathways through which HPWSs can mitigate QQ. The findings pave the way for further research on effective interventions and management practices that can create more fulfilling and productive work environments.

ABSTRACTThe human resource management (HRM) function has witnessed the rapid integration of algorithms into incumbent processes; however, significant employee resistance and aversion to algorithmic decision‐making have also been reported. Research on algorithmic HRM practices indicates an underlying duality of perceptual responses by HRM professionals towards this technology. We seek to understand how HRM professionals experience algorithmic HRM use and determine if there are bright sides to its organizational integration. We undertake a qualitative, open‐ended study based on written responses to open‐ended questions from 58 respondents in the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The data were thematically analyzed using grounded theory, which revealed four themes representing HRM professionals' overarching perspectives on why algorithmic HRM precipitates aversion or appreciation. The first two themes highlight HRM professionals' perceived subjective uncertainty regarding algorithmic HRM and its perceived negative effects on the organization. The third theme acknowledges the positive effect of algorithmic HRM, and the final theme discusses three critical coping strategies (embrace, avoid, and collaborate) that HRM professionals adopt to counteract their experienced fears. Our findings suggest that HRM professionals adopt a cautiously fearful rather than a wholly adverse outlook towards algorithmic HRM, wherein aversion and appreciation appear to emerge simultaneously. We contend this existence of a duality of perceptual responses to algorithmic HRM may be a precursor to setting a harmonious collaboration between humans and algorithms in the HRM domain, contingent on appropriate levels of oversight and governance. Implications for theory and managerial practice are also discussed.