SHRM-SIOP Science of HR White Paper Series
NEW TALENT STRATEGY:
ATTRACT, PROCESS, EDUCATE, EMPOWER, ENGAGE AND RETAIN THE BEST


George Graen
Center for Advance Study
University Of Illinois, C-U (Ret.)
10819 Gram B Circle
Lowell, AR 72745
479-631-9394
lmxlotus@aol.com
http://www.lmxlotus.com
and
Miriam Grace
Senior Technical Design Fellow
The Boeing Company
6116 South 296th Court
Auburn, WA 98001
425-306-1606 (Cell)
miriam.grace@boeing.com

Illustrations by Michael Erickson, The Boeing Company
Copyright George B. Graen, 2014

ABSTRACT

In reaction to the dramatic changes the millennial culture is bringing to the workplace and the co-incidence of dramatic business disruptions that are driving the need for more innovative employees, Human Resources Departments are changing their existing approaches to talent acquisition and retention based on the new strategic realities.  These new realities were revealed by researchers contracted by Price-Waterhouse-Cooper, Ltd. to identify the reasons their under 30s employees globally were resigning from high paying professional positions before two years of employment.  These positions in the past were held by the same employees for 40 plus years.  In addition, the recent competition for the best talent worldwide has favored the new global technology companies.  These “Google-like” organizations treat their employees as important as their customers.  Their new talent strategies are attracting and retaining the best innovators.  This White Paper will introduce several new approaches existing firms may employ to compete for the best talent in a changing world of work.  The recommendation is that human resource practitioners begin training for their many new career opportunities.

“Nothing is more important that the quality of hiring.”
Eric Schmidt, Chairman of Google
(Schmidt & Rosenberg, 2014)

According to The 2014 Annual Global CEO Survey, companies are preparing to implement new talent strategies for their firms (PwC, 2014).  In sharp contrast to their existing talent strategies, the new ones focus on hiring and retaining employees whose new product and service innovations will sustain their firms.  Questions these data raise are: (1) What new developments in business strategy are fueling this change? (2) What developments in talent strategy realities are influencers? (3) What are the implications for Human Resource professionals? 

Taking a global perspective for understanding new developments in business strategy, we can refer to the work of the UK Department of Business Innovation and publications of that department’s Design Council that point to “governments across the globe who are investing heavily in sponsoring and promoting design[1] as a key route to stimulating innovation, jobs and exports and as a means to systematically address challenges. China’s Premier Minister, Wen Jiabao stated a desire to move from ‘Made in China’ to ‘Designed in China.’ Over recent years China has driven national and regional design policy, with investment in education and national promotions. Other Asian governments are vigorously committed to the promotion of design, notably those in Singapore, Korea and Malaysia” (Temple, 2010, p. 1).

The discipline of design has been positioned between the sciences and the humanities (Banathy, 1996), where the domain of science represents the knowing of the natural world and the humanities represent the knowing of the human experience. Design represents the knowing of the man-made world. Design capabilities draw from multiple disciplines, perhaps most heavily from psychology. Emergent design practice is founded on Industrial Psychology, Industrial Design, and Human Factors or what has been standardized by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (2010) as Human-Centered Design. In the U.S., the “d-school” at Stanford in its partnership with the industrial design firm, IDEO, have popularized the term “Design Thinking” (Kelley and Kelley, 2013) as a “how-to-guide” for innovation and created a highly teachable set of methods and tools for doing end-to-end design work. Pertinent to our discussion here, these methods and tools can be adopted for any design context, including talent management, and we recommend that you explore this knowledge base to inform your talent management strategy within your unique business environment.  

Because of the ubiquity of the internet, a wide variety of new markets have emerged and companies with the best talent have become the new “Wall Street stars.”  The good news is Human Resource Departments within the new “star companies”, organizations that recruited and retained the best innovators, have exploded in influence and status.  New organizational structures are being designed to facilitate and institutionalize innovative behavior across whole employee populations in order to maximize business value yield. Clearly, a new world of opportunities has appeared for professionals in what Google-like companies call “People Operations” departments.  This new organizational structure is charged with concentrating on attracting, processing (placing), educating (in design), empowering (sharing team leadership), engaging (making a difference) and retaining the best innovators, many of whom are millennials.  This is driving not just a re-labeling, but a profound re-structuring of the job of HR professionals. It follows that professional members of SHRM need to be prepared for more powerful talent-centric approaches as a part of emergent business strategies and to become very familiar with the attributes of workplace culture that appeal to those professionals (many of whom are millennials) who can strengthen the innovative core of businesses. 

The purposes of this paper are to present a brief overview of the problem of talent acquisition and retention, especially of the millennial workforce, discuss research related to the challenges faced, and to provide practical tips for implementing change. Highlights of the paper include the results of benchmark studies conducted at Price-Waterhouse-Cooper and Google that set the bar for talent acquisition, retention and promising approaches for HR research and practice. The paper concludes that Human Resources practitioners must develop new talent acquisition and retention strategies that match the workplace culture talented employees are demanding.

WHAT IS KNOWN
Recent big data studies (“big data” being a collection of large and complex data sets) in the Human Resources domain show that the under 30s (millennials) are rejecting the prevailing definitions of “professional careers,” “work” and “peer-like collaborative communities.”  In what Price-Waterhouse-Cooper (PwC) claim is “the largest global generational study ever conducted”, Price-Waterhouse-Cooper (PwC) turned to researchers at the University of Southern California and the London Business School to identify the critical expectations and preferences of the their employees with regard to continued employment (PwC, 2013a).  Resulting from this research, PwC is proactively redesigning its talent strategy to match the identified under 30s’ reality.  In addition, PwC’s 16th Annual Global CEO Survey showed that 77 percent of CEOs were redesigning their talent strategies for the next year (PwC, 2013b).  The above two-year global investigation of PwC employees should help clarify the argument regarding the significance of generational differences for talent strategies.  Millennials are being hired into critical organizational roles more every day, but they are resigning at a much more alarming rate compared to previous generations. This could be due, in part, to talent strategies that were designed for baby boomers who had different priorities and different expectations of an employer. This recent phenomena of the revolving door for new (especially millennial) hires is occurring across industries in disturbing numbers, and the majority of those employees are leaving before two years on the job.  This disconnect of between expectations of young workers and traditional business work cultures is threatening the availability of talent and will impact the survival of corporations which do not adapt to the new reality.

What Price-Waterhouse-Cooper found
The PwC study involved 18 global territories, 44,000 web-based surveys, 1,000 millennials and 45 managers in online “jam” sessions, 300 interviews and 30 focus groups (PwC, 2013a).  This massive effort was in response to the observation that under-30 hires were showing a lack of interest in traditional professional services career paths and were resigning before they reached their second year of employment.  PwC employs 180,529 people in 158 countries and its study has global implications.  By 2016, almost 80% of the PwC workforce will be millennials.  An intergeneration analysis of (a) 9,120 millennials and (b) 4,030 baby boomer senior associates and managers was compared at the entry years in 2011 and 2012.  This study found:

More millennials reject the traditional work/life balance accepted by baby boomers
Both cohorts seek greater flexibility at work
Millennials seek more collaborative team-oriented work settings
Both cohorts are equally committed to their work
Millennials from the US/Canada and Western Europe were similar
Millennials place greater importance on mutual trust, respect, support and positive feedback.

The new talent strategy components recommended are shown in Table 1.

Place Table 1 about here

What is Google doing?
Lazlo Bock (2011), Senior Vice President of Google’s “People Operations Program” (POP) operates his organization as a component of the top strategy team of the Google Company. Talent acquisition and retention at Google are considered strategic and mission critical; the organizational culture that enhances the Google brand is based on design principles increasingly being recognized as enablers of employee innovation (Kelley and Kelley, 2013).  The new collaborative design environment that seems to work well with Google’s strategic trajectory was described by Steiber (2011):

An innovative and flexible culture and management system that replaces rules with guidelines, and commands with peer-oriented negotiating among associates across pay levels.

A company strategy that values employees and customers equally and demonstrates that belief by selecting the best and treating those employees as main contributors by providing proper career opportunities and rewards, and trusting them with inside information.

Encouraging and training managers at all levels to work with individuals in appropriate ways by tailoring mentoring and coaching activities and clearing away impediments.

Balancing the emphasis on innovation and operational excellence by fostering the development of subcultures that are equally valued.

Extending strategic networks for externally developed technical innovations, forming cooperative alliances with leading universities/researchers, and investing in new technologies and ventures.

Designing collaborative communities of professional peers learning from each other.

Overall emphasis on having fun while serving the greater good.

The concept of a collaborative design culture and its increasing importance to global business may be unfamiliar to you; however, the popularity of design as an innovation method (Grace & Graen, 2014) is driving change in organizations and, therefore, deserves the attention of SHRM members.  Organizations across the globe are shifting their focus from their output (products and the metrics associated with a product-focused culture) to the front end of their value streams where customer knowledge increases in importance. In the new reality, innovation methods are increasingly top-of-the-mind of executives, like Bock. Human Resource executives are increasingly focused on technology enablers such as advanced analytics (the discovery and communication of meaningful patterns in research data to enable critical decision making), and, as a result, significant challenges exist for HR professionals in getting up-to-speed with these new tools and with regards to acquiring and retaining the talent needed for this dynamic new work space.

Place Box 1 about here

Clearly, the talent strategies suggested by PwC and Google require a multi-level approach with collaborative organizational design at the strategic and operational levels.  Teams of professional managers and designers are needed to collaborate, identify what works, what to build, and what to live with.  The advent of big data analytical techniques has made it possible to consolidate data pools across various data streams not previously accessible to many organizations. This disruptive technology now allows employees to create new intelligence for decision making, so what is assumed to be fact in one company can be benchmarked against others with similar business models or industry reference. In fact, many of the most critical questions that companies are beginning to ask about their talent strategies can't be fully answered without external perspectives. External talent data benchmarking lends context to internal talent data and provides insight into how talent strategies must evolve to support an organization’s strategic agenda. Increasingly, HR professionals will need to understand how to query talent analytics tools and use the available human capital data to predict the next generation of people strategies.

In the next section, we summarize alternative talent management approaches and discuss their applicability to the challenge of attracting and retaining millennials and mid-career professionals who are looking to refresh their skills and potentially transition their careers to adjacent or different opportunities. Throughout, we make recommendations for action you can take to enhance retention of talented individuals in your organization.

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
Unfolding approach
Talent strategies have two basic functions: (1) to attract, process, educate, empower, engage and retain valued employees and (2) to enable optimal team performance.  Today’s reality (as revealed by the PwC study) is that millennial employees are saying “I quit” to their first career jobs within the first two years of employment.  This voluntary turnover may be healthy or unhealthy and if unhealthy avoidable or unavoidable.  In the case of millennials, the disconnect appears to be unhealthy for the companies and the question of avoidability is yet to be determined.  What is clearly established by turnover research is that one size does not fit all (Allen, 2010).

Turnover research was advanced significantly by the development of the “unfolding model” (Allen, 2010).  Unfolding assumes four different paths to quitting a job: (1) Dissatisfaction, (2) Better alternatives, (3) Following a plan and (4) Having no plan.  It is a comprehensive approach that offers ways to detect which paths are pertinent for your unique workplace situation and recommends retention strategies. In the case of the two studies cited in this paper, millennial employees are placed on path four (quitting their selected career jobs before their second year and having no plan).  Research suggests that as they understand their role within their workplace clearly, yet they are finding a disconnect between their experience and their personal vision for their career: they do not see their position as a path to a future they seek.  Unfolding theory suggests ways HR professionals can redesign retention strategies to address this disconnect and enable young employees to see an attractive path in their future with their current employers.  For example Human Resource professionals should begin to assess the particular career paths available in their company for these target groups and communicate these paths in a systemic manner. 

Place Box 2 about here

New innovation team approach
Today most organizations have some form of assigning groups of people to work together toward common goals (Hills, 2007; Kozlowski & Bell, 2003; Lawler, Mohrman, & Ledford, 1995; Morgenson, DeRue & Karam, 2010).  Unfortunately, most teams fail to achieve their full potential due to the incomplete use of leadership sharing (Graen, 2013; Hogan & Ahmad, 2010).  In contrast, innovation teams are expected to encourage the individual expression of both intellect and personality in a millennial friendly culture of collaborating peers on a common mission (Graen & Schiemann, 2013).  In a sense, the innovation team culture is designed to become a safe haven to try new ideas and have fun in the process of experiential learning and helping the team succeed.  Teams may achieve their full potential by engaging each other in "leadership sharing." Leadership sharing involves building partnerships of respect and trust with other team members who agree to exchange acts of leadership.  Leadership sharing actions have been cataloged for ready reference (Morgenson, DeRue & Karam, 2010).  As the example in Table 2 shows, the authors list actions expected to move the team forward.

Place Table 2 about here

The sharing of leadership can be infectious in teams and enables them to reach their full potential.  However, a transformation of teams into cultures attractive to millennials may not happen without the proper intervention of HR professionals (Kaiser, Hogan & Craig, 2008).  First, people joining a team need to become team players who are likely to respect the competence and trust the ideas of each other.  Competence alone is not adequate for admission.  Second, teams need to be trained together in leadership sharing methods and goals.  Teams may be taught by an HR instructor with a respected executive to clarify and validate the company’s expectations of leadership sharing.  Training includes simulations which demonstrate how partnerships may move the team forward.  Third, teams need to be coached during their missions to fine-tune their operations and sustain team focus.  Finally, teams need to be recognized formally for their accomplishments in both procedures and performance.  Several teams may be coordinated by a person trained in supporting innovation teams.

These interventions need to be monitored by their coach for effectiveness at the proper times.  Periodic interviews with team members individually may be useful to successively approximate full potential.  For example, to assess partnership quality, one set of progress questions asks all team members about six characteristics of each of their potential partners (Graen & Schiemann, 2013).  This "LMX Team" [2]measure asks pairs of teammates about:

Having confidence in one another’s ideas
Helping one another cooperatively toward common goals
Having respect for one another’s capabilities
Having trust in one another’s dependability
Having an excellent working relationship
Having confidence in one another’s work.

The higher the agreement with these six characteristics of partnership, the more leadership sharing can be expected.  Teams with higher proportions of pairs sharing leadership are the goal of training.  Big data research finds that those fortunate enough to share leadership most completely achieve the most opportunities to tailor their personal contributions and rewards (Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, Brouer, & Ferris, 2012; Gerstner & Day, 1997; Ilies, Nahgong, & Morgeson, 2007; Rockstuhl, Dulebohn, Ang & Shore, 2012).  Fortunately, these opportunities seem to be those most valued by the under 30 professionals.  This use of innovation teams may be a first step in modifying the culture of the entire organization to value employees as highly as customers.

In summary, the building of a comprehensive set of innovation teams with complete sharing of leadership may be useful in transforming companies using unfolding tools to become more likely to hire and retain the best.  Finally, a more long-term program of successive, more inclusive innovation teams may be tailored for career growth and continued retainment of the best talent.  We foresee new career opportunities for HR practitioners in this transformation.

An integrated approach: Collaborative design
The development of the innovation team approach lays the foundations for the next level of collaborative design (Grace & Graen, 2014), which is focused on creating a workplace culture that deeply engages employees in the most challenging problems faced by business today – how to differentiate their company in the marketplace.  “The discipline of design, which instructs on the purposeful creation of things, and the mind-set of design thinking, both a paradigm and a rich set of methods and tools, have proven to be competitive differentiators.  Over the last several decades, design has moved up the business value chain from enhancing the aesthetic appeal and style of products, to taking center stage in new-product development, and within the last decade, to proving its worth to corporate innovation initiatives” (Grace, 2014, pp 3-4).

Today, we know that the design of the new team-based organizations must begin with primary intentions to build a flexible organization that is able to adapt and innovate more quickly in the rapidly changing market conditions of the present. Tailoring jobs and habitats for the new innovators as they advance through an organization is a function of this new strategy.  Executives too often can’t foresee what is over the horizon, and so they stay the course until it is too late to change.  This may be fatal for their company.  But a Human Resources-inspired organizational culture of collaborative designing and workforce planning can shift the strategy from quickly patching-up the old design to building a new one for the future.  A collaborative design focus can create an innovative and flexible management system that can then be tuned to balancing innovation and operational excellence.  The whole system is thus continuously seeded through a commitment to searching for opportunities everywhere, while leveraging alliances with universities, consultants, peer companies, customers and suppliers, and investing in new technology and ventures (adapted from Steiber, 2011).  The basic principles of collaborative design for career attraction, processing, education, empowerment, engagement and retention according to recent research can be seen in Table 3.

Place Table 3 about here

The collaborative design method, much like a good story, engages people around the development of empathy for the stakeholders involved in a particular context (for example, a specific problem situation) and provides easy-to-learn tools and techniques that generate insights about the behavior of the target individuals, looked at from multiple perspectives, and instructs on how to reach a shared point of view for effective change. This shared point of view combines quantitative and qualitative analysis to enable more evidence-based, business decision making.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE ACTION
Exploring and then implementing the following steps toward the creation of a collaborative design capability in your organization is where you can start. The typical phases of the design method, tailored for a talent management context, thus would include the following.

Forming an innovation design team focused on a small but important talent management problem (team composition is important (see Grace, 2009 and Graen and Schiemann, 2013).

Getting to know the people involved in and deeply understanding the specific context of the problem space (qualitative analysis).

Considering investing in and becoming proficient with HR analytics tools to enrich insights (quantitative analysis)

Discovering aspects of common dysfunctions in present talent strategies.

Trying out different talent strategies in small, iterative in-house experiments to inform the team.

Designing new talent strategies based on this work.

Implementing the new strategies with a small scope and continuously improving on them.

Throughout the process, the team continuously re-aligns to retain a shared point of view relative to the goals, ensuring that they are solving the right problem, and continuously asking “Why?” with regard to their assumptions, so that the end result hits the mark. People professionals, like you, play critical roles in this design process.  Your knowledge of the particular context in your workplace enables you to assist in accurate problem finding, solution analysis and implementation at appropriate levels.

Based on the analysis on the engagement of millennials cited in this paper and available from other sources, you should accelerate any current efforts in your organization to match talent strategies to the new workforce realities for professionals.  Leverage the latest technology in collaborative design to find and build the most promising talent strategies for various talent categories within industrial classifications (Grace & Graen, 2014). Actions that you can take now to get up to speed are presented in Table 4.

Place Table 4 about here

You should prepare now for the emergence of more challenging and responsible “people operations” positions than exist today.  Make it a habit to study leading-edge companies and watch them as they change their organizational and talent strategy designs.  Today information age companies are turning this trend on its head.  The new marching orders to HR professionals are to attract, process, educate, empower, engage and retain the best talent.  With this direction, ask yourself the questions in Table 5.  Your answers will inform you as to where you need to place your professional development emphasis over the next several years. Ask your peers to answer these same questions and compare results. Your collective responses will suggest where to put your organizational emphasis and potentially highlight a problem area to explore using the design process outlined above.

Place Table 5 about here

SUMMARY
This white paper has described some of the most promising research and practice approaches that enable the matching of talent strategies to the new workforce realities.

We have looked at the Price-Waterhouse-Cooper and Google studies and found that leveraging HR analytics offers tremendous opportunities to study and understand workplace trends and inform strategic decision making.

We have looked at alternative approaches to change and found that an integrative model that leverages the latest thinking in collaborative design offers a holistic method that addresses talent acquisition, engagement, and retention.

We have looked at the dynamics and complexities HR professionals face in the transition from the traditional approaches that worked for the baby-boomer generation to the requirements of millennials.

We have looked at recommendations for future action and presented several promising areas for future action.

CONCLUSION
Roger Martin, Dean of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, summed up the business challenge of the 21st century: “Now it’s no longer enough to get better; you have to ‘get different’ (Martin, 2004). Getting different means learning how to turn our information into knowledge, attracting young people to our businesses, having a vigorous and innovative workplace culture, and maintaining dynamic and creative design processes. Human Resource research and practice has a growing array of promising approaches that may enable it to more effectively match talent acquisition and retention strategies with the unrelenting new workforce realities. This growing array of promising approaches to the matching of millennial employee workplace needs with workplace realities offers HR professionals an excellent opportunity. The time is now to seize this new interpretation of the HR function and concentrate on attracting, processing, educating, empowering, engaging and retaining the best millennial innovators available. Efforts to match talent strategies applied to the new workforce realities for professionals should be accelerated.  SHRM members need to step-up and lead their colleagues with talent-related innovations and by proactively preparing for more talent-centric approaches. This paper recognizes the important role that organizations such as SHRM play in developing out-of-the-box thinking throughout their membership.

"CEOs who are able to come up with their twist on ‘Googleyness’– whether through internships, training programs, flexible hiring processes or transparency with employees – will probably have an easier time attracting rock stars.”  (Lev-Ram, 2014, p. 101).

Note.—We thank Joan Graen for her managing of this project and her great editing.  We thank Michael Erickson for his excellent, informative graphics.  Finally, we thank James Kurtessis for his help throughout the project and his reviewers, Karen Wessels, Michael Tonowski, Ben Porr and Cole Napper.


REFERENCES
Allen, D. G. (2010).  The five misconceptions of employee turnover.  Academy of Management Perspective, 2, 24.

American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (2010). Ergonomics of Human-System Interactions: Part 210: Human-Centered Design for Interactive Systems. ISO 9241-210:2010.

Banathy, B. (1996). Designing Social Systems in a Changing World. New York: Plenum Press.

Bock, L. (2011).  Passion, not perks.  Think-Insights-Google.  Think Quarterly: The People Issue.  Google Incorporated.

Dugan, B. A. & O’Shea, P. G. (2014).  Leadership development: Growing talent strategically.  SHRM-SIOP Science of HR White Paper Series.

Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R., & Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: Integrating the past with an eye toward the future. Journal of Management, 38, 1715-1759.

Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1997).  Meta analytic review of leader-member exchange theory: Correlates and construct ideas.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 827-844. 

Grace, M. (2009).  What is a game-changing design?  In G. Graen & J. Graen (Eds.) Predator’s game-changing designs: Research-based tools (pp. 1-18).  Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Grace, M. (2014).  Welcome to the future: Design, analytics, innovation.  In Grace, M. & Graen, G. B. (2014). Millennial Spring: Designing the Future of Organizations (pp. 15-40).  Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Grace, M. & Graen, G. B. (2014). Millennial Spring: Designing the Future of Organizations.  Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Graen, G. B.  (2013).  The missing link in network dynamics.  The Oxford Handbook of Leadership, M. Rumsey (Ed.), (pp. 359-375). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press,

Graen, G. B. & Schiemann, W. (2013).  Leadership-Motivated Excellence Theory: An Extension of LMX.  Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28, 5, 452-469.

Hewer, S. (2014).  Google scientist searches the workplace.  APS Observer, 27, 7, p. 21.

Hills, H. (2007).  Team-Based Learning.  Burlington, VT: Gower.

Hogan, R., & Ahmad, G. (2010).  Leadership.  In A. Furnham, & S. VonStumm (Eds.).  Handbook of Individual Differences.  pp 408-426.  London, Wiley-Blackwell.

Ilies, R., Nahgong, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007).  Leader-member exchange and citizenship behavior: A meta-analysis.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 269-277.

Kaiser, R. B., Hogan, R. & Craig, S. B. (2008).  Leadership and the fate of organizations.  American Psychologist, 63, 96-110.

Kelley, T. & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. New York: Crown Publishing

Kozlowski, S. J., & Bell, B. S. (2003). Work groups and teams in organizations. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski, Handbook of psychology (Vol. 12): Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 333-375). New York: Wiley.

Lawler, E. E., Mohrman, S. A., & Ledford, G. E. (1995).  Creating high performance organizations:  Practices and results of employee involvement and total quality management in Fortune 1000 companies.  San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Lev-Ram, M. (2014).  Fortune Magazine, September 22, 2014. 

Martin, R. (2004). "The design of business," Rotman Management, 5(1), pp. 6-10, Toronto: Rotman University Press.

Morgeson, E. P., DeRue, D. S. & Karam, E. P. (2010).  Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structure and processes.  Journal of Management, 36, 1, 5-39.

Nelson, H. & Stolterman, E. (2003).  The Design Way: Foundations and Fundamentals of Design Competence, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications, p. 10.

PwC. (2013a).  PwC’s next generation: A global generational study.  http://www.pwc.com.

PwC. (2013b). 16th Annual CEO Survey.  http://www.pwc.com.

PwC. (2014).  Annual Global CEO Survey (2013).  http://www.PwC.com

Rockstuhl T., Dulebohn J. H., Ang S, & Shore L. M. (2012)  Leader-member exchange (LMX) and culture: a meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 1097-1130

Schmidt, E. & Rosenberg, J. (2014).  How Google works.  San Francisco, CA: Grand Central Publishing.

Steiber, A. (2011).  Research report on Managerial Leadership Needs.  Society for Human Research Management.  .  New York: SHRM.

Temple, M. (2010). The Design Council Review. Department for Business Innovation and Skills, London: Crown. Retrieved from http://www.bis.gov.uk/URN 10/1178.

Table 1
The PwC Study Recommends
A flexible work culture based on unique talent and engagement
Access to the best tools for collaboration and operation
Transparent performance and reward decisions
Building workplace culture maintained by unit (team) managers
Greater opportunities as expats
Improving the impact of millennials as contingency workers
Connecting and staying connected with all employees
On size does not fit all


Table 2
Examples of Leadership Sharing in Teams
Alert team to flaws in team procedures or output
Explain team's actions to concerned stakeholders
Suggest new ways of doing things
"Pitch in" and help team members
Participate in problem solving with the team
Help team acquire needed resources
Encourage team to take care of its own problems
Go beyond own interests for the team


 
Table 3
Collaborative Design Principles
Employees are as valuable as customers
Employees need periodic changes in different aspects of their jobs over the life of their careers
Talent strategies must be explored continuously and changed to match workforce realities
Big data on workforce realities are as valuable as those on customer realities
Policies and practices need to be consistent with talent strategies
Organizational talent strategies change slowly and require consistent executive and managerial action until achieved company wide
(Grace & Graen, 2014)



Table 4
Getting Up to Speed
Alert colleagues and collaborate as peers
Generate interest in new opportunities
Gather information available in your company
Seek new information by communicating with colleagues
Search the internet including social media to stay informed
Talk to those in university placement roles
Reach outside to HR professionals
Discover what your competition is doing
Brief management and continuously update


 
Table 5
Self-Evaluation Questions
Foundation             Do I grasp the huge changes needed?
                                 Do I see the significance of a People Operations Department?
                                 Can I develop partnerships with coworkers in other departments?
Growth                    Have I taken steps to learn new skills and learn new areas?
                                 Have I kept up with the new wave?
                                 Have I become enthused about the emerging career opportunities?
Evaluation              How are the goals and expectations of the talent strategy changing?
                                 How do I expect to design new homes for innovation teams?
                                 How quickly do I expect change to occur?
                                 How will the changes affect my career?
                                 Am I preparing for my future?
Adapted from Dugan and O’Shea, 2014 p. 8


Box 1
HR design for a good manager
Continuous education concerning
Clear vision and strategy
Good coaching and communications
One-on-one discussions about expectations
Action for employee’s well being
Assessment by employees
Jennifer Kurkoski
Director, People Innovations
Google (Hewer, 2014)


Box 2
HR analytics are becoming more mainstream. Companies are using models to identify the optimal employee profile for recruiting and hiring and can identify attrition risks for proactive employee engagement, training and retention activities.  Two of these are IBM’s Smarter Workforce and Google’s Big Query.

BIO
George Graen
George Graen received his Organizational Psychology Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota and was honored early as an American Psychological Association Distinguished Research Fellow (1976).  George is well-known internationally for discovering, refining and validating the new Leadership Making Exchange (LMX) Theory of Career Development using Leadership sharing in a progression of innovation teams.  After a career of teaching beginning at the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana, he turned to communicating to practitioners his research findings on the new wave of peer collaborations in firms.  He has been prolific in research publications and his ninth book in his leadership series is Millennial Spring (2014).  George’s career has been devoted to coaching students and executives on the art and science of leadership sharing throughout their organizations.  Finally, George’s driving value reads: “Employees need to be valued for their career contributions as much as customers for their coin.”

Please direct all correspondence to lmxlotus@aol.com and view http://www.lmxlotus.com


BIO
Miriam Grace
Miriam Grace, Ph.D. is the Chief Architect for Sales, Business Development, and Marketing across The Boeing Company where she focuses on business/technology strategy. Miriam is a thought leader in the implementation of collaborative and holistic design principles and practices across Boeing and in the architecture profession. She serves the global community of architects as the Chair of the Curriculum Committee for Iasa Global, a learning and certification authority for the business and IT architecture profession. Miriam is a published author, writing on whole systems design, innovation and creativity, architecture, technical leadership, and mentoring in both books and peer reviewed journals.


[1] "the ability to imagine that which does not yet exist, to make it appear in concrete form as a new, purposeful addition to the real world" (Nelson & Stolterman, 2004).

[2] LMX-Team is a diagnostic device validated to identify problem areas in the development of team partners.

















 

POSITIVE INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY:
DESIGNING FOR TECH SAVVY, OPTIMISTIC AND PURPOSEFUL MILLENNIAL PROFESSIONALS (1980 – PRESENT)

George Graen
Center for Advance Study
University Of Illinois, C-U (Ret.)
10819 Gram B Circle
Lowell, AR 72745
479-631-9394
lmxlotus@aol.com
http://www.lmxlotus.com

and

Miriam Grace
Senior Technical Design Fellow
The Boeing Company
6116 South 296th Court
Auburn, WA 98001
425-306-1606 (Cell)
miriam.grace@boeing.com


The purpose of this rebuttal to Costanza and Finkelstein (2015) is (1) to examine findings surrounding the new generations at work, (2) to suggest the risks of not responding to change in generations with new talent strategies, and (3) to propose a new theory about the development of new millennial culture and how practitioners and researchers may capitalize on the promise of a more positive and joyful workplace culture.  We propose to accomplish these points by (1) citing recent global findings showing the new culture that millennial professionals (1980-present) find incompatible with existing company culture, (2) presenting a theory of the development of a new millennial culture that is based on positive industrial and organizational psychology, and (3) recommending that the method of innovation design teams be used to render workplaces compatible with the emerging culture.

The new culture of millennial professionals (1980-present) has met that of the existing workplace, and people from both cultures were disappointed and hurt (Graen & Grace, 2015).  Millennial professionals happily accepted well-paying career positions with top firms, but after discovering the existing culture left the field before two years.  Managers from their parents' generation (1950-1980) dismissed the work requests of their young employees with complaints and stereotypes.  When leading companies discovered that they were losing their future leaders, they had the issues researched by professionals.  Results of these studied concluded that the existing talent strategy was incompatible with that of the millennial professionals and recommended designing one more compatible with the culture of the millennial professional (PwC,2013; 2014; 2015).  These are the big data facts.  The questions this series of events raises are: (1) What were the driving trends that permitted such an innovative culture to develop and take hold of those born after about 1980? (2) What are the identifying characteristics of this new culture? (3) How may a more compatible talent strategy be designed and implemented? (4) How will this new culture change as the driving trends continue to transform our youth?

NEW RESEARCH

Millennial professionals (1980-present) have identified their acceptable company cultures after quitting their high paying career positions designed for their parents before two years (Grace & Graen, 2014; Graen & Schiemann, 2013).  However, it was not until 2013 that big data studies were completed by the University of California and the London School of Business focusing on Price-Waterhouse-Cooper's critical generational problem (PwC, 2013).  These investigations over two years concluded that their existing talent strategy needed to be replaced immediately with one compatible with young hires (millennial professionals).  In addition, large studies by Delloite, (Brooks, 2015; Brown, 2013) Johnson Controls (Johnson, 2010), Clark (Schutte, 2014) and Duke University (Graham, 2014) and others supported the conclusions of these studies (Graen, Grace & Canedo, 2015).  Moreover, studies of Google's company culture further tested and supported the talent strategies designed to attract and retain the best young people (Graen & Grace, 2015).  Although the new talent strategies remain works-in-progress, their results globally have been encouraging (PwC, 2014).  In sum, this movement to new talent strategies is likely to define the leading firms in the near future (Grace & Graen, 2014).

Place Table 1 about here

The big data studies are impressive for both their scope and depth.  For example, the studies of Price-Waterhouse-Cooper claimed to be the largest generational investigation ever conducted.  This investigation involved 20 global territories, 44,000 web-based surveys, 1,000 millennial professionals and 45 managers in on-line "jam" sessions, 300 interviews and 30 focus groups (PwC, 2013).  Resulting recommended features of new talent strategies for their subsidiaries around the world are shown in Table 1.  In agreement with these recommended features, the results of a year-long, embedded study of Google showed how they attract and retain the best young innovators (Steiber, 2011).

An innovative and flexible culture and management system that replaces rules with guidelines, and commands with peer-oriented negotiating among associates across pay levels.
A company strategy that values employees and customers equally and demonstrates that belief by selecting the best and treating those employees as main contributors by providing proper career opportunities and rewards, and trusting them with inside information.
Encouraging and training managers at all levels to work with individuals in appropriate ways by tailoring, mentoring and coaching activities and clearing away impediments.
Balancing the emphasis on innovation and operational excellence by fostering the development of subcultures that are equally valued.
Extending strategic networks for externally developed technical innovations, forming cooperative alliances with leading universities/researchers, and investing in new technologies and ventures.
Designing collaborative communities of professional peers learning from each other.
Overall emphasis on having fun while serving the greater good.

THE MAKING OF MILLENNIAL PROFESSIONALS: A THEORY
Positive psychology movement
The authors of the lead paper suggest that no theory is feasible for explaining the millennials' reaction to the existing workplace culture.  We respectfully disagree.  We studied the defining events that happened during the formative years of those born since 1980 and found three powerful movements changing the culture.  First, the positive psychology movement took hold globally about 1980.  Parents and all adults were to treat children as "special" individuals and prioritize praise for participation (Drew, 2015).  This movement encouraged adults to treat children as peers and to protect children from damaging their positive self-concepts in interactions.  Not only were child-rearing practices changed dramatically, but schools, churches, social activities and finally the universities were changed. (Graen & Grace, 2015) 

Based on published research, the new culture concerned the development of the self-concept knowledge and positive feelings (Craig, 2006).  It has been described as a positive psychology of growth.  One objective is to protect the individual's feelings of respect for one's self.  It prescribes that participation should be given priority over defeat.  Individuals should not experience failures that may lead to a loss to one's self concept.  Thus, adults and peers are instructed to treat children as peers by engaging in rational discourse at the proper level.  Children also need to be encouraged to be entrepreneurial and function as independent contractors not employees.  Their work should be done in flexible teams of peers who learn from each other (often by virtual communications).  They should be given the latest information technology tools and treated as resident experts who have the world knowledge at their thumbs (iPhones).  They should be encouraged and rewarded for innovative thinking and having fun at work.  Teachers, ministers, social instructors and business managers should respect them as peers and never subordinate them.  They should be educated to understand individual and cultural differences.  Finally, they should strive to make a better world.

In spite of published research showing negative or null relationships, the positive psychology movement has grown into a global force in industrialized nations.  It has established the rules for proper education of children.  It began in the late 1960s with the publications of professor of psychology Stanley Coopersmith from California, and John Vasconcellos, state assemblyman, persuading the California Governor to establish a self-esteem taskforce which resulted in legislation.  Today, the positive psychology of development and maintenance is taught in schools, churches, social programs, government organizations and universities globally.  Academic research finds that the millennial generation has shown higher self-esteem ratings and beliefs than did their parents at the same time in college (Twenge, 2006).  As Craig (2006) states the real question is "about how relevant self-esteem issues are across different domains such as education and work".  Twenge's big data research showed that in a sample of 40,000 children the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventor (SEI) decreased between 1965 and 1979 and then increased from 1980 to 1993 (Campbell, 1993).  Moreover, this trend was only shown for children but not college students.  This seems reasonable in view of facts that the self-esteem movement became a fixture of the educational systems about 1980 and the children's self-esteem innovators (SEI) considers specific areas, including family, peers and school.  When correlations are found between social indicators and self-esteem, Campbell finds it involves children and not adults. 

One basic premise of the theory is that humans are an adaptable species.  Humans have adapted their cultures to chronic opportunities and threats repeatedly according to their own history books.  Many of the culture changing movements were driven by theories, e.g., religious, political, economic, psychological and so forth.  In the case of millennials, (1980-present) three movements became popular about 1980 and complemented each other.  One movement (positive psychology) was supported by almost no research evidence despite numerous attempts to find related outcomes (Trzesniewski & Donnellan, 2010; Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman & Lance 2010).  Such was the case before the publication of the series of generational investigations seeking to identify the reasons college graduates born after 1980 who achieved well-paid career positions with a leading firm (Price-Waterhouse-Cooper, Ltd.) were quitting before two years (PwC, 2013).  The movement (Craig, 2006) was accepted as a theory in action by these professionals who taught it, practiced it and proselytized it broadly.  It was accepted because it "felt good". 

Positive psychology has two concepts, namely, the idea of feeling good and doing well.  The general idea is that positive reinforcement of each other's self-concepts will lead to psychologically stronger people who experience feelings of joy and efficacy.  The objective is to teach the children from birth to maturity to respect and treat others with ego boosting opportunities.  Available institutions of socialization, namely, schools, churches, social groups, health organizations and other agencies were employed to educate parents and children.  They aimed to create a kinder and gentler culture.  One in which everyone is valued and expects to be positively reinforced for participating and there by contributing something positive no matter how small (Seligman, 2006).  During the same period, the middle class grew and further provided a sense of self-confidence and economic security.  Finally, children were told that they were the promise of a far better world. 

Information technology movement
Complementing this, the computer and internet applications exploded in the 1980s and thereafter with ever increasingly powerful products.  Considering only the inventions of Steve Jobs since 1980, the list includes: Apple III, MacG3, USA Mouse, iPod, MHCG4, iPod GUI, Power Adapter, iPhone, Magic Mouse, iPod Shuffle, iPhone 4 and iPad (Grace & Graen, 2014).  By 1980, computers were in the home, the school and organizations of many kinds.  Children born during 1980 and thereafter grew up with the computer as a virtual best friend and companion.  The rapid improvement in computer applications frustrated their parents' generation and many refused to learn how to operate yet another application language.  In contrast, the young people were attracted to these tools and integrated them into their social lives 24 hours a day and 7 days a week.  One side-effect of this was that children earned higher status because they were more tech savvy than their parent's generation and could help adults with the ever-changing products.  Gradually, social customs evolved making the computer applications necessary for nearly all social activities.  The hardwired appliances were rendered obsolete.  New social rules and norms were invented to routinize the new cultures.  These changes were gradually more accepted as the reality of the millennial culture.

Innovation movement
The final piece of the theory of the making of the (1980-present) millennial professionals is the movement to innovation as the business strategy of the future.  Given the outstanding success in the market of the Goggle-like companies based on innovative products and services, business strategies changed with the decline from the "lean movement" to that of the exploding innovation movement (Brooks, 2015).  New ideas were valued in nearly every area.  Innovations were the ideas that the internet sent worldwide.  Clearly, it was not a single event, but movements that caught on and changed everyday life.  The evidence for the innovation movement was presented in the publication of the UK Department of Business Innovation's Design Council.  These publications point to "governments investing heavily in sponsoring and promoting design as a key to stimulating innovation, jobs and exports as a means to systematically address challenges".  Their publication cites that "China's Prime Minister, Wen Jiabao stated a desire to move from 'made in China' to 'designed in China'.  Over recent years, China has driven national and regional design policy, with investments in education and national promotion.  Other Asian governments are vigorously committed to promotion of design, notably those in Singapore, Korea and Malaysia" (Temple, 2010 p. 1).

Based on these movements, our theory of the making of millennial professionals  follows.  The outcomes of these events produced a new culture for millennial professionals.  This new culture was described above based on recent trustworthy studies.  This culture is what millennials accept as normal life.  They seek to continue this culture during their careers.  Unfortunately, existing talent strategies violated their culture and once they realized that this incompatible world of an employee would not change, they left the company (many simply went home) (PwC, 2013).

CONCLUSION
Judging from the reasons for quitting one's dream career employer and the identified characteristics of the corporate culture that would encourage them to join and stay, those who resigned prematurely were suffering from a culture shock.  They were socialized from infants to college graduates under a positive psychology –tech savvy-innovation culture and were transported to a foreign culture.  They were shocked at the treatment by their bosses and coworkers who disrespected their inflexible demands and played "dirty tricks".  They were given no time for innovation or fun.  The lack of balance between work and fun left them feeling that they had no private life.  The lack of teams of peers learning from each other left empty feelings.  Finally, they spread the word of their cultures incompatibility with their parents work culture by quitting their career jobs and going home to welcoming families.

In concluding, we argue that (1) because the lead authors failed to find available and well-known research on generational differences in the workplace, their affirmation of the null hypothesis is not recommended practice, and of employing myths and stereotypes in the case of millennials is unfounded, (2) millennials have been found to demand a different talent strategy than those designed for baby boomers, (3) leading companies globally are changing their talent strategies to become more compatible with the millennial culture and (4) we recommend an innovation design team approach to make needed changes in constructing new talent strategies (Graen & Grace, 2015), (5) finally, we propose a new theory of three game changing movements (positive psychology, information product improvements and the innovation search).  These three continuing drivers produced a new culture for millennials which was normatively different from their parents' culture.  Our theory summarizes existing research finding in the workplace and hypothesizes new relationships.  A few of these hypotheses are as follows. 

H1      The new "Leadership-Motivating Excellence" (LMX) Team practices will be more effective with members of the millennial generation than traditional command and control management practices (Graen & Schiemann, 2013).
Millennial professionals demand from their company culture more than the preceding professional in terms of the following:

H2.     Flexibility based on unique talent and engagement.
H3.     Access to the best tools for collaboration and operation.
H4.     Transparent performance and reward decisions.
H5.     A workplace of peers learning from each other.
H6.     Opportunities and rewards for expatriates.
H7.     Opportunities as contingency workers.
H8.    Connecting and staying connected with all coworkers.
H9.     Continuous improvement.

Our first hypothesis was stated as referenced in 2013.  The remaining hypotheses are stated herein.  The first hypothesis is that LMX-Team practices are compatible with the new millennial culture.  Hypotheses two to nine were based on empirical research findings reviewed above.

One question remains to be understood, namely, how is it that the lead authors did not find the many studies reviewed herein?  We speculate the following.  The lead article was based partly on the junior author's doctoral dissertation with the senior author as chair of her committee.  Academic doctoral committees tend to be extremely questioning about any research citations not published in a proper referred academic outlet.  All of the lead paper's research citations were in such publications, whereas, ours are not.  Our references are the result of company sponsored consulting research found on the internet under "millennials at work", "millennials quitting employment" and the like key words.  We also employed relevant academic literature in our research review.  By checking the references of both papers, the results are supportive of our speculation.  The lesson we take from this disagreement is that we should review both academic referred journals and company sponsored internet research before we publish conclusions that contradict the weight of the research evidence.

Our theory about the development of a new culture may be fruitful in designing innovative structures to render the dysfunctional existing talent strategy obsolete and replacing it  by a more appropriate one for the new game changers (Graen & Grace, 2015).


REFERENCES
Brooks, C. (2015).  The corporate values that attract millennial employees.  Business New Daily, January 15, 2015.

Brown, M. (2013).  Business needs to reset its purpose to attract Millennials, according to Deloitte’s annual survey, January 14, 2015, http://www.mdeloitte.com/millennialsurvey. 

Campbell, W. K. (1993).  Self-esteem of college students increased substantially over 25-year period.  http://www.mentalhealth.about.com. 

Costanza, D. P., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2015).  Generationally based differences in the workplace: Is there a there there?  Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice. 

Craig, C. (2006).  A short history of self-esteem.  http://www.centreforconfidence.com.uk. 

Drew, A. (2015).  Talkin' about you generation.  Observer, 28, 1.

Grace, M. & Graen, G. B. (2014).  Millennial Spring: Designing The Future Of Organizations.  LMX Leadership: The Series Vol IX.  Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Graen, G. B. & Grace, M. (2015).  New talent strategy.  SHRM-SIOP – White Paper.  http://www.shrm.com. 

Graen, G. B. Grace, M. & Canedo, J. (2015).  A New Approach to Integrating Information Technology and Human Resource Science within the Evolving Design Movement:  Training Teams and Professional Coaches in Implementing Proper Information Applications and Team Leadership in Innovation Design Teams.  IT and HR Journal, in press.

Graen, G. B. & Schiemann, W. (2013).  Leadership-Motivated Excellence Theory: An Extension of LMX.  Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28, 5, 452-469.

Graham, J. (2014).  Duke University, CFO Survey.  http://www.Duke.edu.

Johnson, C. (2010).  Generation Y and the workplace Global Workplace Innovations, http://www.OXYGEN.com.

PwC. (2013).  PwC’s Next Generation: A Global Generational Study.  http://www.pwc.com.

PwC. (2014).  Annual Global CEO Survey (2013).  http://www.PwC.com

PwC. (2015).  Annual Global CEO Survey (2014).  http://www.PwC.com

Schutte, B. (2014).  New poll:  Reality may bit 30 something's stay wildly optimistic.  The Washington Post.  October 2014.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2006).  Learned Optimism: How to change your mind and your life.  New York: Vintage.

Steiber, A. (2011).  Research report on Managerial Leadership Needs.  Society for Human Research Management.  .  New York: SHRM.

Temple, M. (2010). The Design Council Review. Department for Business Innovation.

Trzesniewski, J. M., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010).  Rethinking "Generation Me": A study of cohort effects from 1976-2006.  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 58-75.  DOI: 10.1177/1745691609356789.

Twenge, J. M. (2000).  The age of anxiety?  Birth cohort change in anxiety and neuroticism, 1952-1993.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 1007-1021.  DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.1007.

Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010).  Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing.  Journal of Management, 36, 1117-1142. DOI: 10.1177/0149206309352246.

Table 1

The PwC Study Recommends
A flexible work culture based on unique talent and engagement
Access to the best tools for collaboration and operation
Transparent performance and reward decisions
Building workplace culture maintained by unit (team) managers
Greater opportunities as expats
Improving the impact of millennials as contingency workers
Connecting and staying connected with all employees
On size does not fit all
From Graen & Grace, 2015
 


Educational History
1961 - B.A., University of Minnesota (Cum Laude); Psychology
1963 - M.A., University of Minnesota; Industrial Relations
1967 - Ph.D., University of Minnesota; Industrial and Organizational Psychology

Professional History
January, 1962 - June, 1963 - Research Assistant, Labor Management Laboratory, Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota.
June, 1963 - July, 1965 - Research Assistant, Consumer Research Project, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Minnesota.
July, 1965 - August, 1967 - Research Assistant and Research Fellow, Acting Project Director Work Attitudes Project, Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota.
September, 1967 - 1971 - Assistant Professor of Psychology in Department of Psychology and in Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations.  University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
1971-1977 - Associate Professor of Psychology in Department of Psychology and Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations , University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

1972 - 1973 -  Keio - Illinois Distinguished Exchange Professor of Organizational Psychology,  Keio University, Tokyo, Japan.
1974 - 1975 - Semester I - Associate in the Center for Advanced Study, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.  1974 - 1975 - Semester II - James McKeen Cattell Scholar in Applied Psychology.
1975 - 1977 - Program Chairperson, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
1977 - 1980 - Professor of Organizational Behavior and Head, Department of Management, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
1980 - 1990 - Director, Center for Strategic Management Studies, and Professor of Organizational Behavior, Department of Management, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
1984 - 1985 - First Johnson's Wax Fulbright Senior Research Fellow to Japan, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan.  First such Fellowship sponsored by the Japan Fulbright Alumni Association.
1989 - 1997 - Executive Director, Center for the Enhancement of International Competitiveness, College of Business, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
1994 - January to June - Visiting Professor at Hong Kong University Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China.
1996 - January to June - Visiting Professor at Hong Kong University Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China.
1997 – 2001 - Gene Brauns Chaired Professor in International Business, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, Louisiana.
2007 - Director of Sharing Network Leadership Centre.

Professional Societies

Academy of International Business
Academy of Management
Allied Southern Management Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Psychology Society Division 14 Organizational and Industrial (Distinguished Fellow)
Association of Japanese Business Studies - AJBS (Founding Member)
Beta Gamma Sigma
Decision Sciences
Fulbright Alumni Association (Lifetime)
International Association of Applied Psychology
International Association for Chinese Management Research (Founding Member)
International Leadership Association (ILA)
International Scholar Society
Japan American Society of Greater Cincinnati
Japan Ohio International Network
Japanese Association of Administrative Behavior (Founding Member)
Leadership Lafayette
Management Laureate (2002)
MBA Association University of Louisiana, Lafayette
MESO, Wharton (Founding Member)
Phi Beta Delta
Fayetteville Rotary International
Sigma Si, The Scientific Research Society
Society of Organizational Behavior - SOB (Founding Member)
Southwestern Management Association
World Trade Organization (New Orleans)

Awards
1967 - Honorable mention in the American Institutes for Research Creative Talent Award Program.  This recognition was for creative dissertation research during 1967 for a project in psychology.
May, 1967 - Honorable mention in the McKinsey Foundation for Management Research Competition.  This recognition included a $500 honorarium.  This recognition was for original research design during 1967 on a project in managerial behavior.
September, 1968 - Presented the James McKeen Cattell Award by the Division of Industrial Psychology, the American Psychological Association.  This award included a $500 honorarium.  The award was for original research design during the year 1967 in Industrial Psychology.
September, 1969 - Honorable mention in the James  McKeen Cattell competition for original research design during the year 1968 in Industrial Psychology.  This recognition included a $100 honorarium.
1972 – Distinguished Exchange to Keio University, Tokyo, Japan as Professor of Organizational Psychology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois.
January, 1974 - Presented the James McKeen Cattell Award by the James McKeen Cattell Fund.  This award was $8,200 in research funds.  The award was for outstanding research in applied psychology and designed to supplement sabbatical research.
1984 - 1985 - First Johnson's Wax/Fulbright Senior Research Fellow to Japan, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan.
March, 2000 - Recipient of the "Outstanding Graduate Faculty Researcher" award from the graduate program of the College of Business Administration, University of Louisiana.
June 2003-2005 – Senior Fulbright Fellow to Chinese University in Hong Kong for work on Global Business MSc.
January 20, 2005 – Rotary International Foundation Paul Harris Fellowship

Honors
1971 - Appointed as Keio-Illinois Distinguished Exchange Professor.  Selected from among the University of Illinois faculty by Keio University to teach and to conduct research at Keio University during their 1972 academic year.
October, 1972 - Named to the Fulbright Commission's Psychology Committee to review applicants for 1973 - 1974 Fulbright awards, the East-West Center, and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
September, 1973 - Invited to become a founding member of the Society of Organizational Behavior.
2005-06 - Rotary Foundation Individual Grant Recipient to Chiang Mai, Thailand.
2005 - 2007 - Governing Board of Society of Organizational Behavior.
2006 - Present World Service Committee Chair, Fayetteville Rotary.
February, 1974 - Appointed as an Associate in the Center of Advanced Study of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.  Appointment was full-time for semester I of the 1974-1975  academic year.  Purpose of the appointment was to devote time to a study of role-making processes in complex organizations.
September, 1976 - Elected APA Fellow in Industrial-Organizational Psychology (Division 14).
1975 - 1977 - Appointed as member of Division 14 Scientific Affairs Committee, the American Psychological Association.
1980 Elected Faculty member in Beta Gamma Sigma - Honorary Business Fraternity.
1982 - Granted special research leave winter quarter to devote full time to investigating the Productive Leadership System.
1982 - 1983 Appointed to President's Private Sector Survey, EPA Study Group.
January, 1985 - June 1, 1985 - First Johnson's Wax Research Fellow to Japan.  Japan-United States Educational Commission.
January, 1993 - June 1995 - President of Association of Japanese Business Studies (AJBS) with Directorate at the University of Pennsylvania.  (An Association of over 700 Japan scholars worldwide).
January 1994 - June 1994 - Senior Visiting Professor of Management at the University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong.
September, 1994 - Appointed as Co-Executive Director of the West Lake International Center for Joint Venture Management, Hangzhou, China.
January 1996 - June 1996 - Senior Visiting Professor of Management at the University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong.
March 1997 - Keynote speaker at International Human Resource Strategy conference for MNC HR professionals at West Lake Center, Hangzhou, China.
June 1997 - Gene Brauns Endowed Chair in International Business, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, Louisiana.
May 1999 - Invited lecturer in International Business, Dong Hua University (CTU), Shanghai, P.R. China.
May 2000 - Appointed as Co-Executive Director of East China University, Center for Sino-Foreign Joint Venture Research and Training, Shanghai, China.
May 2000 – May, 2003 - External accreditation examiner for undergraduate International Business program, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.  Duties include site visit and programs assessments of International Business Department, College of Business Administration.
2000 - Academy of Management Executive selected "An examination of leadership and employee creativity:  The relevance of traits and relationships" for its Research Briefs section.
August 2000 - Invited to visit Japanese Business Research Group, Rennes University, Rennes, France.
2001 - Invited LMX leadership keynote lecture for Southwestern Academy of Management.
2001 - "LMX Reflections: An Interview with George Graen", Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship.
2001 – Selected Management Laureate for career of research.
2002-2003 – External Examiner of Masters of International Business, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Awards for Doctoral Research by Student Advisees
1967 - Present Chaired 27 Ph.D. Dissertations.
1971 - University of Illinois Sociology Department's Geissert Award to William J. Haga for the best proposal for doctoral research.
1976 - Honorable Mention American Psychological Association, Division of Industrial and Organizational's S. Rains Wallace Award to James F. Cashman for the best doctoral dissertation in organizational research.
1977 - APA S. Rains Wallace Award to William  Schiemann for the best doctoral dissertation in Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
1979 - U. of Michigan, Dissertation, Monograph series:  "Research for Business Decisions," Published Mitsuru Wakabayashi's doctoral dissertation.
1980 - APA S. Rains Wallace Award to Min Basadur for the best doctoral dissertation in Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
1983 - Richard D. Irwin Foundation Award to John R. Weitzel for doctoral research. 
1986 - American Assembly of Collegiate School of Business Fellowship to Terri A. Scandura for doctoral research.
1990 - Richard D. Irwin Foundation Award to Mary Uhl-Bien for doctoral research.
1995 - ASTD Best dissertation awarded to Lisa Bell.

Listings 
Biographical Directory of the American Psychological Association
Cattell Men of Science
Cattell Men and Women of Science
Institute for Scientific Information
Marquis Who's Who in Frontier Science and Technology

Editorial Duties
1970 - 1994           Reviewer Board for Journal of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process.
1989 - 1998           Reviewer Board for Leadership Quarterly.
1989 - 2002          Reviewer Board for Group and Organization Management.
2001 - Present      Reviewer Board for International Management.
2001 – Present     Reviewer Board for Journal of Research in Management Education and Training.
2012 – Present     Journal of Managerial Psychology

Reviewer of Manuscripts for:
Academy of Management Journal
Academy of Management Program Committee
Administrative Science Quarterly
American Educational Journal
APA, National Program Committee
Association of Japanese Business Studies (AJBS)
Human Relations
Journal of Applied Psychology
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
Psychological Bulletin
SIU Leadership Symposium
Society of Industrial & Organizational Psychology
Southwestern Academy of Management
International Association for Chinese Management Research (Founding Member) (IACMR)

Occasional Reviewer of Proposals for:
Army Research Institute
Australian Research Council
Canada Research Council Humanities and Social Sciences Division
HEW
National Institute of Education and Department of Education
National Institute of Mental Health
National Science Foundation, (various programs)
Undergraduate Business Program at Chinese University, Hong Kong

REFERENCES ON REQUEST


Publications
Motivator and hygiene dimensions for research and development engineers, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1966, 50, pp. 563-566.


Addendum to "An empirical test of the Herzberg two-factor theory," Journal of Applied Psychology, 1966, 50, pp. pp. 551-555.


Testing traditional and two-factor hypothesis concerning job satisfaction, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, pp. 366-371.


Review of Martin Fishbein,  Reading in attitude theory and measurement, Psychometrika, 1968, 33, pp. 387-389.


Review of Felician F. Foltman, White-and-Blue collars in a mill shutdown:  A case study of relative redundancy, Personnel Psychology, 1968, 21, pp. 69-72.


Need type and job satisfaction among industrial research scientists, (with R V. Dawis & D. J. Weiss), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, pp. 286-289.


Addendum to "An empirical investigation of two implications of the two factor theory of job satisfaction", (with C. L. Hulin), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, pp. 341-342.


Instrumentality theory of work motivation:  Some experimental results and suggested modifications, Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 1969, 53, (Whole No. 2, Part 2).


Review of educational testing service, Motivation of managers, Personnel Psychology, 1969, 22, pp. 91-94.


Review of Ray C. Hackman.  The motivated working adult, Personnel Psychology, 1969, 22, pp. 352-355.


Work motivation:  The behavioral effects of job-content and job-context factors in an employment situation, Creative Talents Award Program Pittsburgh:  American Institutes for Research, 1969.


Review of Robert N. Ford, Motivation through the work itself, Contemporary Psychology, 1970, 15, pp. 291-294.


The contingency model of leadership effectiveness:  Antecedent and evidential results, (with K. Alvares, D. Orris, & J. Martella), Psychological Bulletin, 1970, 74, pp. 285-296.


A measure of work attitudes for high-school-age-youth, (with R. V. Dawis), Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1971, 1, pp. 343-353.


The contingency model of leadership effectiveness:  Some experimental results, (with D. Orris & K. Alvares), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971, 55, pp. 196-201.


Biographical correlates of work attitudes, (with M. Ace & R. Dawis), Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1972, 2, pp. 191-199.


Dysfunctional leadership styles, (with F. Dansereau, Jr., & T. Minami), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1972, 7, pp. 216-236.


An empirical test of the man-in-the-middle hypothesis among executives in a hierarchical organization employing a unit set analysis, (with F. Dansereau, Jr., & T. Minami), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1972, 8, pp. 262-285.


Review of M. Scott Myers, Every employee a manager:  More meaningful work through job enrichment, Contemporary Psychology, 1973, 18, pp. 13-14.


Leadership behaviors as cues to performance evaluation, (with F. Dansereau, T. Minami & J. Cashman),  Academy of Management Journal, 1973, 16, pp. 611-623.


Instrumentality theory and equity theory as complementary approaches in predicting leadership and turnover among managers, (with F. Dansereau, Jr., & J. Cashman), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1973, 10, pp. 194-200.


Organization assimilation and role rejection, (with T. Johnson), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1973, 10, pp. 72-87.


Role assimilation processes in a complex organization, (with D. Orris & T. Johnson), Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1973, 3, pp. 395-420.


Review of Duane P. Schultz, Psychology and industry today, Contemporary Psychology, 1974, 19 p. 474.


Expectancy as a moderator of the relationship between job attitudes and turnover, (with F. Dansereau, Jr., & J. Cashman), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1974, 59, pp. 228-229.


Professionalism and role making within a service organization:  A longitudinal investigation, (with W. Haga & F. Dansereau), American Sociological Review, 1974, 39, pp. 122-133.


Review of Siegel and Lane, Psychology in industrial organization, Contemporary Psychology, 1975, 20, p. 669.


A role making model of leadership in formal organizations:  A development approach, (with J. Cashman), Organization and Administrative Sciences, 1975, 6, pp. 143-165.


A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations; a longitudinal investigation of the role making process, (with F. Dansereau & W. Haga), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1975, 13, pp. 46-78.


Role making processes within complex organizations.  In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.  Chicago:  Rand McNally, 1976, pp. 1201-1245.

Organizational understructure and leadership:  A longitudinal investigation of the managerial role making process, (with J. Cashman, F. Dansereau, & W. Haga), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance.  1976, 15, pp. 278-296.

Managerial professionalism and the use of organization resources, (with W. Haga), The American Journal of Economics and Sociology.  Malden: 1976, 35, pp. 337–348.

Effects of linking-pin quality upon the quality of working life of lower participants:  A longitudinal investigation of the managerial understructure, (with J. Cashman, S. Ginsburgh, & W. Schiemann), Administrative Science Quarterly, 1977, 22, pp. 491-504.

Job resignation as a function of role orientation and leader acceptance:  A longitudinal investigation of organizational assimilation, (with S. Ginsburgh), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1977, 19, pp. 1-17.

Japanese private university as a socialization system for future leaders in business and industry, (with K. Sano, M. Wakabayashi, & T. Minami), International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1977, 2, pp. 269-289.

Leader-member agreement:  A vertical dyad linkage approach, (with W. Schiemann), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1978, 63 pp. 206-212.

Generalizability of the vertical dyad linkage model of leadership, (with R. Liden), Academy of Management Journal, 1980, 23, pp. 451-465.

Management progress:  Japanese Style, (with M. Wakabayashi, T. Minami,  K. Sano & M. Novak), International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1980, 4, pp. 391-420.

Managerial career development:  Japanese style, (with M. Wakabayashi, T. Minami, M. Hashimoto, K. Sano, & M. Novak), International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 1981, 4, pp. 391-420.

Training in creative problem solving:  Effects on ideation and problem finding and solving in an industrial research organization, (with M. Basadur and S. G. Green), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1982, 30, pp. 41-70.

The role of leadership in the employee withdrawal process, (with R. Liden & W. Hoel), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1982, 67 pp. 868-872.

The effects of leader-member exchange and job design on productivity and satisfaction:  Testing a dual attachment model, (with M. Novak & P. Sommerkamp), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance.  1982, 30, 1, pp. 109-131.

Bias in management research:  A defense, Business Horizons, 1983, June, pp. 42-50.

Where management research is needed:  Transitional management, Business Horizons, 1983, 26 pp. 44-50.

The interaction of job stress and social support:  A strong inference investigation, (with A. Seers, G. W. McGee & T. T. Serey), Academy of Management Journal, 1983, 26, pp. 273-284.

The moderating effects of initial leader-member exchange status on the effects of a leadership intervention, (with T. A. Scandura), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984, 69, pp. 428-436.

A dual attachment concept:  A longitudinal investigation of the combination of task characteristics and leader-member exchange, (with A. Seers), Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1984, 33, pp. 283-306.

The Japanese career progress study:  A seven-year follow up, (with M. Wakabayashi), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984, 69, pp. 603-614.

Review of worker capitalism and worker participation, Contemporary Psychology, 1986, 31, pp. 885-886.

Training effects on attitude toward divergent thinking among manufacturing engineers, (with M. Basadur & T. Scandura), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1986, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 612-617.

A field experimental test of the moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity, (with T. A. Scandura & M. R. Graen), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1986, 71, pp. 484-491.

A theory of dyadic career reality, (with T. A. Scandura).  In G. Ferris & K. Rowland (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management.  Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1986, pp. 147-181.

When managers decide not to decide autocratically.  An  investigation of decision influence in managerial dyads, (with T. A. Scandura & M. Novak), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1986, 71, pp. 579-584.

Agreement in dyadic leadership, (with W. Schiemann).  In F. Landy (Ed.)  Readings in Industrial and Organizational Psychology.  Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  Prentice Hall, 1986.

Vertical dyad linkage theory of leadership, (with T. A. Scandura).  In A. Kieser, G. Reber, & R. Wunderer (Eds.) Handbook of Leadership.  C. E. Paeschel Verlag:  Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 377-389.

Toward a psychology of dyadic organizing, (with T.A. Scandura).  In B. Staw and L.L. Cummings (Eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior.  Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1987, pp. 175-208.

Exchange theories of leadership, (with M. Zalesny).  In A. Kieser, G. Reber, and R. Wunderer (Eds.) Handbook of Leadership.  C. E. Paeschel Verlag:  Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 714-727.

Human resource development of Japanese managers:  Leadership and career investment, (with M. Wakabayashi)  In K. Rowland and G. Ferris (Eds.), Research on International Human Resource Management, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1988.

Japanese management progress:  Mobility into middle management, (with M. Wakabayashi, & M.R. Graen), Journal of Applied Psychology, 1988, 73, pp. 217-227.

Unwritten Rules For Your Career:  Fifteen Secrets For Fast-Track Success. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., October, 1989.

Comparing attitudes toward divergent thinking of managers and non-managers before and after training, (with M. Basadur, J. Takai, & M. Wakabayashi), Japanese Journal of Administrative Behavior, 1989, 4, pp. 19-27.

Career development under the lifetime employment system of Japanese organizations, (with M. Wakabayashi and D. Gallagher), Journal of Organizational Research, 1989.

System development project effectiveness:  Problem-solving competence as a moderator variable, (with J. R. Weitzel), Decision Sciences, 1989, 20, pp. 507-531. 

Designing productive leadership systems to improve both work motivation and organizational effectiveness.  In U. Kleinbeck et al, (Ed.) International Work Motivation.  New York:  Erlbaum, 1990, pp. 200-233.

Identifying individual differences in creative problem solving styles, (with M. Basadur, & M. Wakabayashi), Journal of Creative Behavior, 1990.  Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 111-131.

A theory of dyadic career reality, (with T. Scandura)  In K. Rowland and G. Ferris (Eds.) Career and Human Resources Development.:  New York:  JAI Press, 1990, pp. 147-181.

Belief in paternalism as an indicant of the "right type" of manager for the Japanese corporation, (with M. Uhl-Bien, P. Tierney & M. Wakabayashi), Group and Organization Studies, 1990, 15, pp. 414-430.

Generalizability of the hidden investment hypothesis among line managers in five leading Japanese corporations, (with M. Uhl-Bien & M. Wakabayashi), Human Relations, 1990, 43, pp. 1099-1116.

Japanese transplants in the united states:  Problems in domestic management assimilation, (with M. Wakabayashi)  In B. Shaw & K. Rowland (Eds.), International Human Resources Management, 1990 Vol. 2, New York:  JAI Press.

Attitudes toward divergent thinking before and after training.  Focusing upon the effects of individual problem-solving styles, (with M. Wakabayashi and M. Basadur), Creativity Research Journal 1990, 3, pp. 22-32.

International generalizability of American hypotheses about Japanese management progress:  A strong inference investigation, (with M. Wakabayashi, M.R. Graen & M.G. Graen), The Leadership Quarterly, 1990, 1, pp. 1-23. 

Transformation of work group professionals into self-managing and partially self-designing teams:  Toward a theory of leadership-making, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Journal of Management Systems, January, 1991, pp. 34-48.

Leadership-making applies equally well to teammate -- sponsor, teammate -- competence network, and teammate -- teammate relationships, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Journal of Management Systems, 1991, pp. 49-54.

The transformation of professionals:  Toward a theory of leadership-making, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Technology Management Research, 1991, 3, pp. 33-48.

Cross-cultural human resource development for transfer of management technology, (with M. Wakabayashi).  In M. Trevor (Ed.), International Business and the Management of Change,  1991, Worchester GB:  Avebury Publishing, pp. 147-169.

Self-management and team-making in cross functional work teams:  Discovering the keys to becoming an integrated team, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Journal of High Technology Management, 1992, pp. 225-241.

Identifying differences in creative problem solving style (with M. Basadur and M. Wakabayashi). In Source Book for Creative Problem Solving, Editor Parnes, S.J.  1992, pp. 111-131. Buffalo, N.Y.: Creative Education Foundation Press.

Adapting Japanese leadership techniques to their transplants in the united states:  Focusing on manufacturing, (with M. Wakabayashi).  In M. Serapio, (Ed.) Research in International Business and International Relations. 1992, 5, pp. 259-278.

Leadership-making in self-managing professional work teams:  An empirical investigation, (with M. Uhl-Bien).  In K. E. Clark, M. B. Clark, & D. P. Campbell (Eds.), The Impact of Leadership, 1993, West Orange, NJ:  Leadership Library of America.

Team leadership-making theory:  From mature dyads grow higher performance teams, (with M. Uhl-Bien).  In A. Kieser, G. Reber & R. Wunderer (Eds.), Handbook of Leadership (Second Edition), Poeschl Verlag: Stuttgart, 1994, pp. 177-389.

Cross-cultural leadership-making:  Bridging American and Japanese diversity for team advantage, (with M. Wakabayashi).  In M. D. Dunnette, M. Hough & H. Triandis (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 4, Consulting New York:  Psychologists Press 1994, pp. 415-446.

Exchange theory in leadership revisited:  Same actors, different plot and location, (with M. Zalesny).  In A. Kieser, G. Reber & R. Wunderer (Eds.), Handbook of Leadership (Second Edition), Poeschl Verlag: Stuttgart, 1994, pp. 714-727.

Leadership of people in your firm, a chapter in M. J. Dollinger, Entrepreneurship:  Strategies and Resources.  Flossmor, IL:  Austen Press 1995.

Finally a production system that works and allows everyone to be an insider, (with C. Hui), International Journal of Applied Psychology, 1995, 45, 2, pp. 130-135.

Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years:  applying a multi-level-multi-domain perspective, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Leadership Quarterly 1995, 6, 2, pp. 219-247.

Third culture training for joint ventures in China, (with Z.M. Wang), Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology, Cross-cultural partnership-making in action, 1995.

Who’s the Boss?, Wall Street Journal.  Panel of 11 top experts in International Business Ventures, September 26, 1996.

Review of Japanese industry in the American south by Choong Soon Kim, New Asian Review, 1996.

Managing changes in globalizing business:  How to manage cross-cultural business partners, (with C. Hui), Journal of Organizational Change Management, 1996, 9, 3, pp. 62-72.

Effects of team gender and racial composition on perceptions of team performance in cross-functional teams, (with G. Baugh), Group and Organization Management, 1997, Vol. 22, Issue 3, pp. 366-383.

Cross-cultural research alliances in organizational research, (with C. Hui, M. Wakabayashi, & Z.M. Wang).  In C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.) Cross-Cultural Research in Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass, 1997, pp. 160-189.

Guanxi and professional leadership in contemporary Sino-American joint ventures in mainland China, (with C. Hui), Leadership Quarterly, Winter, 1997, Vol. 8 4, pp. 451-465.

When to use which approach of leadership: Building towards a complete contingent model of leadership.  In Work Motivation in the Context of a Globalizing Economy, (with C. Hui), Erez, M., Kleinbeck, U. & Theirry, H. (Eds.), Mah Wah, NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Publishers 1998.

U.S. army leadership in the twenty-first century:  Challenges and implications for training.  (with C. Hui).  In J.G. Hunt, G.E. Dodge & L. Wong, (Eds.), Out-Of-The-Box Leadership:  Transforming the Twenty-First-Century Army and Other Top-Performing Organizations, 1998, pp. 239-252.

Individual self-management:  Analysis of professionals’ self-managing activities in functional and cross-functional work teams, (with M. Uhl-Bien), Academy of Management Journal, June, 1998, Vol. 41, Issue 3, pp. 340-351.

Sino-foreign joint ventures in coastal China, American Council of Learned Societies, 1999.

Transcultural global leadership in the twenty-first century:  Challenges and implications for development, (with C. Hui), In W.H. Mobley, V. Arnold & M. Gessner (Eds.), Advances in Global Leadership., Vol. 1, 1999, pp. 9-26, Stamford, CT:  JAI Press.

An examination of leadership and employee creativity:  The relevance of traits and relationships, (with P. Tierney & S. Farmer), Personnel Psychology.  1999. Autumn Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 591-620.

Third culture management issues in two-culture business ventures in the United States and the People's Republic of China, (with M. Wakabayashi, & C. Hui), Japanese Journal of Administrative Science, 2000, 13, 2, pp. 87-98.

Implication of leader-member exchange (LMX) for strategic human resource management systems:  Relationships as social capital for competitive advantage, (with M. Uhl-Bien & T. Scandura), (G Ferris Ed.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management.  2000, Vol. 18, pp. 137-185. Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

Approaches to leadership:  Toward a complete contingency model of face-to-face leadership, (with C. Hui), (M. Erez and P.C. Earley Eds.), Work Motivation to Clinical Language Problems, New York: Erlbaum Publishing, 2001.

"It's about LMXs stupid ": Collect high quality data, follow it, trust LMXs and seek serendipity always, Management Laureates: A Collection of Autobiographical Essays.  Art Bedeian (Ed.), 2002 Vol. 6, JAI Press, pp. 52-81.

Helping business students to cope with 911 attack.  Academy of Management Learning and Education, 36, August, 2002.

Dealing With Diversity, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor) 2003, Vol. 1.  Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

Role making onto the starting work team using LMX leadership: Diversity as an asset, Dealing With Diversity, LMX Leadership: The Series.  (series editor) 2003, Vol. 1, Information Age Publishing, Inc., Greenwich, CT.  pp. 1-28

Interpersonal workplace theory at the crossroads: LMX and transformational theory as special cases of role making in work organizations, Dealing With Diversity, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor).  2003, Vol. 1, pp. 145-182, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT,

New Frontiers of Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series (series editor). 2004 Vol. 2.  Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

A new approach to team leadership: Upward, downward, and horizontal differentiation, (with Chun Hui and Elizabeth T. Taylor) New Frontiers of Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series (series editor).  2004, Vol. 2, pp. 33-66,.  Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT,

Asian model of management efficacy and leadership: A glimpse into the future, (with Mitsuru Wakabayashi and Ziguang Chen) New Frontiers of Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series (series editor).  2004, Vol. 2, pp. 121-137.  Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

A new approach to intercultural cooperation, (with Chun Hui and Qing Liang Gu) New Frontiers of Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor).  2004, Vol. 2, pp. 225-246.  Information Age Publishing Greenwich, CT, Vol. 2, pp. 225-246.

Global Organizing Designs, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor).  2005 Vol. 3.  Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT,

Japanese models of managerial progress:  Sponsored, tournament, and two-stage mobility, (with Mitsuru Wakabayashi).  Global Organizing Designs, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor). 2005. Vol. 3, p. 153-172, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

Three dyadic leadership theories:  Comparative multiple hypotheses testing.  Global Organizing Designs, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor). 2005.  Information Age Publishing, Inc., Greenwich, CT.

Proper levels of analysis, hierarchical linear models, and leadership theories, (with Dora Lau)  Global Organizing Designs, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor).  2005, Vol. 3, p. 235-269, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

Review of contagious capitalism: Globalization and the politics of labor in China by Mary Elizabeth Gallagher.  Princeton University Press, 2005.

Japanese career progress: an empirical examination, (with R. Dharwadkar, R. Grewal, & M. Wakabayashi), Journal of International Business Studies, 2006. pp. 148-161

Sharing Network Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series, (series editor).  2006 Vol. 4, August,.  Information Age Publishing. Greenwich, CT.

Experience-based learning about LMX leadership and fairness in project teams:  A dyadic directional approach, (with C. Hui, & E. Taylor), 2006 Vol. 5 4 pp. 448-460.  Academy of Management Learning and Education.

To share or not to share leadership: New LMX-MMX network leadership or charismatic leadership on creative projects.  Sharing Network Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series, (editors G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen), 2006 Volume 4, pp. 23-36.  Information Age Publishing.

Post Simon, March, Weick and Graen: New leadership sharing as a key to understanding organizing.  Sharing Network Leadership, LMX Leadership: The Series, August, 2006, (editors G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen), 2006 Volume 4, pp. 269-278. Information Age Publishing:  Greenwich, CT.

In the Eye of the Beholder: Cross-Cultural Lesson in Leadership from Project GLOBE.  2006 20 4 pp. 95-101. Academy of Management Perspectives.

New Multinational Network Sharing, LMX Leadership: The Series Volume V, Editor, 2007.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC

Phenotype for enhancing multinational network leadership, New Multinational Network Sharing, LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.). 2007 Vol V, pp. 23-42.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC

New genotype for enhancing shared network leadership, New Multinational Network Sharing, LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.).  2007 Vol V, pp. 1-22.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

Integrating Graen’s LMX leadership theory and Hackman’s job characteristics model.  New Multinational Network Sharing, LMX Leadership: The Series.  (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), Volume V, pp. 197-209.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

Emerging integration of organizational leadership. New Multinational Network Sharing, LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), Vol V, pp. 211-229.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

Asking The wrong questions about leadership, The American Psychologist, 2007 Volume 62, 6, pp 604-605.

Jessica’s Web.  Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC.  2007.

Global study seeks only national self-stereotypes.  Academy of Management Perspectives, 2007 Vol. 21, Issue 1, pp 5-6.

Enriched engagement through assistance to systems change: A proposal.  Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2008 Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 74-75.

Linking Chinese leadership theory and practice to the world: leadership secrets of the middle kingdom.  In Business Leadership in China: Philosophies, Theories and Practices, (C. C. Chen and Y-T Lee, Eds.).  Cambridge Press, London.  2008.

New approaches for cultivating and nourishing communications networks, (Charles Wankel, Ed.).  Handbook Of 21st Century Management, Sage Publishing.  2008.

Knowledge-Driven Corporation: Complex Creative Destruction.  LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), 2008 Vol VI Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

What is a knowledge-driven corporation?  Knowledge-driven corporation: Complex, creative, destruction.  LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), 2008 Vol. VI, pp 1-18.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

Why knowledge-driven corporations should invest in developing emergent response leadership for both face-to-face and far-flung teams, Knowledge-driven corporation: Complex, creative, destruction LMX Leadership: The Series, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), 2008 Vol. VI, pp 231-242.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.

Growing power using cherry picking strategies, Power And Interdependence In Organizations, (Dean Tjosvold & Barbara Van Knippenberg, Eds.), 2008 pp 103-117.  Cambridge University Press. 

Predator’s game-changing designs: Research-based tools, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), 2009 Vol VII, LMX Leadership: The Series, Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.
Strategic development of competence networks to implement adaptation.  Predator’s Game-changing designs: Research-based tools, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), LMX Leadership: The Series.  2009 Vol VII pp 43-64.  Information Age Publishing:.Charlotte, NC.
CEO summary: Find-design-capture comparative advantage.  Predator’s game-changing designs: Research-based tools, (G. B. Graen & J. A. Graen, Eds.), LMX Leadership: The Series, 2009 Vol VII pp 209-228.  Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC:

Educating new management specialists from an evidence-based perspective:  A proposal.  Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2009 8, 2, pp 255-258.

Don’t forget Sam Walton, Business Week, April 13, page 70.  2009.

Excellence in socio-technical teamwork requires both cognitive and emotional bonding.  American Psychologist  2009 Volume 64, 1.

9-11-08 Crash: I-O Psychology can help.  The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 2009 Volume 46, 3.

Operationalizing and comparing leadership measures, (with Rowold, J. & Heinitz, K.) Leadership Quarterly, 2010 21, 3, 563-575.

A longitudinal examination of the effects of LMX, ability, differentiation on team performance, (with L. J. Naidoo, C. A. Scherbaum, & H. A. Goldstein).  Journal of Business and Psychology.  2011 346-357.

Top management and HRM’s due diligence for employee engagement in beyond business as usual teams.  The Handbook of Employee Engagement.  (Simon Albrecht, Ed.).  2011 San Francisco, CA: Sage Publishing.

Upgrading your bench for your future business olympics.  Chinese Harvard Business Review 2012 (In Chinese).

What employers want: A post-modern framework, (with M. Wakabayashi & C. Hui).  Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice 2012.

Manager-direct report alliances as a context for integrating cross-cultural and diversity research, (with M. Wakabayashi & C. Hui) Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2012.

How to engage your people: Talk the talk or walk the walk regarding LMX, authentic, or transformational protocol, (with M. Wakabayashi & C. Hui).  International Society for the Advancement of Management Proceedings, Limerick University, Ireland, June 27, 2012.

Expert advice from those who serve.  In George B. Graen and Joan A Graen (Eds.), Management of Team Leadership in Extreme Context:  Defending Our Homeland, Protecting Our First Responders.  LMX Leadership: The Series.  2013 Vol. VIII, Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC:

Using the advice.  In George B. Graen and Joan A Graen (Eds.), Management of Team Leadership in Extreme Context:  Defending Our Homeland, Protecting Our First Responders.  LMX Leadership: The Series, Vol. VIII.  2013 Information Age Publishing Charlotte, NC.

Management of Team Leadership in Extreme Context:  Defending Our Homeland, Protecting Our First Responders.  LMX Leadership: The Series.  2013 Vol. VIII, Information Age Publishing Charlotte, NC.

Leadership-Motivated Excellence Theory: An Extension of LMX, (with W. Schiemann).  Journal of Managerial Psychology 2013.

Where pure leadership is revealed: Harm’s way, (with M. D. Bowman).  In C. M. Grannatonio & Hurley-Nelson (Ed.) Leadership in Extreme Contexts, Edward Elgar Publishing 2013.

The missing link in managerial network dynamics Chapter in Oxford Handbook of Leadership, (Michael G. Rumsey, Ed).  Oxford University Press, 359-375, 2013.

Overview of future research directions for team leadership.  Chapter in Oxford Handbook of Leadership, (Michael G. Rumsey, Ed).  Oxford University Press, 167-183, 2013.

If we took our published research seriously.  Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice. 2013.  (with M. Wakabayashi & C. Hui).  

What have we learned that is intersubjectively testable regarding the leadership process and leadership-performance, Industrial and Organizational Psychology Perspectives, 7, 193-196, 2014.

Millennial spring: Designing the future of organizations (with Miriam Grace Co-editor) Volume IX of LMX Leadership: The Series, 2014.  Information Age Publishing:  Charlotte, NC.

Butterfly Designs For Y-Careers.  In Volume IX of LMX Leadership: The Series.  Millennial Spring: Designing the Future of Organizations, 2014.  Information Age Publishing:  Charlotte, NC.

Thou Shall Not Depublish.  TIP, Vol. 52, Number 2, pp 16-17, October 2014.

New talent strategy: Attract, process, educate, empower, engage and retain the best. SHRM-SIOP White Paper, April, 2015.

Positive industrial and organizational psychology: Designing for tech-savvy, optimistic and purposeful millennial professional company cultures I/O Psychology, 2015.

Goal-setting theory gets complicated in practice, TIP, 2015.

Information technology transforming human resource operations:  Basic technology used to create collaboratively designed innovations for career attraction, processing, education, empowerment, engagement and retention, with M. Grace and J. Canedo.  Special issue Information Technology and Human Resource. 2015.

Selected to author the New Oxford Research Bibliography on the "New Workplace Leadership Development for Knowledge Teams in Companies (with J. Canedo), Ricky Griffin, Editor of Series.  Oxford University Press. 2015

Job Performance Ratings of Contributions to Company Health and Prosperity Depend on What, When, Where and Why of Realized Criteria (2016). (with J. Canedo and M. Grace).  Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspective on Research and Practice.

In Preparation

Workbook for Defending our Homeland, Protecting our First Responders, Expert Advice from Those Who Serve, (with M. D. Bowman).  Information Age Publishing:  Charlotte, NC.

Guanxi: China’s Secret.  Business book.

East Meets West:  Chinese Career Guanxi and Western Interpersonal Strategic Alliance networks.  Information Age Publishing: Charlotte, NC

Examining the dyad: The nexus between LMX and conflict management (with Melanie Cohen and Ron Clark.

What if we designed a MBA for the future?  Integrating a mix of advances in architecture and mathematics (with M. Grace).  Decision Sciences Journal for Innovative Education.

I/O and OB contribute to the evolution of talent strategy to accommodate the new workforce reality: Alternative approaches.  (with Julio Canedo and Miriam Graqce).  Annual Review of I/O and OB.

Papers

Differential perceptions of work motivation by high and low job satisfied engineers.  Paper presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, April, 1965.

A "study of values" for high school students.  Paper presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, May, 1966.

Pay promotion, and work itself:  Where can they lead?  Paper presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, May, 1967.

An instrumentality approach to path-goal models of work motivation:  Some experimental results and suggested hypotheses.  Paper presented at a symposium at the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, September, 1968.

Strategies for research in complex organizations.  Invited address presented at the Academy of Management, Atlanta, August, 1971.

Role making processes and administration.  Presented at a symposium at the American Psychological Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, August, 1973.

Role making processes and organizational entry.  Presented at a symposium at the American Psychological Association.  New Orleans, August, 1974.

Role making processes and administrative leadership.  Presented at the third Leadership Symposium, Carbondale, Illinois, March, 1975.

Boundary conditions for motivation models.  Presented at the Midwestern Meeting of the Academy of Management.  St. Louis, 1976.

Organizational behavior in the seventies and beyond.  Invited address at Wayne State University, Detroit, 1978.

Role making processes of leadership development.  A paper delivered in the symposium entitled "New Light of Leadership Processes."  American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC, February, 1978.

The interface of organizational behavior and management, American Psychological Association Meetings, Toronto, September, 1978.

Leadership in organizations.  Invited address at Ohio State University, Columbus, 1978.

Concept of 'the principal' in organizational research, Society of Organizational Behavior Meetings, Houston, October, 1978.

Leader-member exchange model of leadership, Invited address at Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, April, 1979.

Generalizability of the vertical dyad model of leadership, Midwestern Academy of Management Meetings, (with R. Liden), Cleveland, April, 1979.

Management development in the 1980's.  Organizational Behavior Teaching Conference, Cincinnati, June, 1979.

Leader-member exchange research in organizations, Society of Organizational Behavior Meetings, Houston, October, 1979.

Testing the job characteristics and leader-member exchange models in a field experiment.  Army Research Institute, Washington, DC, November, 1980.

Strategic management in the gas and electric utility industry.  Keynote address at the Accounting Division of AGA and EEI.  Phoenix, Arizona, December, 1980.

Residential energy efficiency in the 1980's.  Invited address Cincinnati Mayor's Energy Committee, Cincinnati, Ohio, June, 1981.

Organizational behavior and strategic management research.  Society of Organizational Behavior, Chicago, October, 1981.

Organizational conflict and ambiguity.  AIDS, San Francisco, November, 1982.

Managing through creative leadership.  Invited address McMasters University, Hamilton, Canada, October, 1983.

A dyadic approach to managerial effectiveness, AIDS, Toronto, November 7, 1984.

An on-the-job management development model.  Academy of Management, San Diego, CA, August 12, 1985.

Career mobility framework for understanding position change dynamics.  Symposium at Decision Sciences, Las Vegas, November 12, 1985.

When managers share decision influence, (with T. Scandura), Academy of Management, Chicago, August 15, 1986.

Mentorship in the executive suite.  Midwest Academy of Management, Bloomington, Indiana, April 10, 1987.

Dyadic analyses of career investments.  Midwest Academy of Management, Bloomington, Indiana, April 11,1987.

Relational characteristic of leader-member exchange.  Academy of Management, New Orleans, August 10, 1987.

Building management teams through responsibility statements, Purdue University, February 12, 1988.

The current state of leadership theories:  Integration, research, applications.  Symposium at the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology meetings in Boston, Mass., April 30, 1989.

Unwritten rules for our research.  Invited Address at McMasters University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, November 27, 1989.

Japanese transplants in America:  Direct foreign investment.  Association of Japanese Business Studies, Nashville, TN, January 5, 1990.

Leadership as a prototypical meso concept in the study of behavior in organizations.  Symposium at the First Annual Meeting of MESO, Wharton Business School, University of Pennsylvania, March 18, 1990.

International competitiveness:  Lessons from the Japanese transplants in America.  Invited Address, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, March 26, 1990.

Unwritten rules for research on leadership.  Invited Address, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, March 26, 1990.

Our new Japanese neighbors in the golden triangle.  Invited Address pre-MITI Minister Seminar, Cincinnati, OH, June 27, 1990.

Leader-member relations for facilitating creative work culture of Kaizen work group, (with M. Wakabayashi and M. Basadur) Presented at the 22nd International Congress of Applied Psychology, Kyoto, Japan, July 21, 1990.

Unwritten rules for career management in Japanese Kaisha.  Invited address Osaka Personnel, Osaka, Japan, July 22, 1990.

International competitiveness in the machine tool industry.  Invited Address Chu-San-Ren (Central Japan Industries Association) Nagoya, Japan, July 23, 1990.

Japanese manufacturing viewed from the American business society.  Invited Address Aichi Gakuin University, Nagoya, Japan, July 23, 1990.

A model of management technology transfer process, (with M. Wakabayashi) Presented at the 22nd International Congress of Applied Psychology, Kyoto, Japan, July 24, 1990.

Hidden investment among Japanese managers in Japanese corporations.  Academy of Management, San Francisco, CA, August 14, 1990.

Japanese use of the Toyota team organization in Japan and U.S. 1990, International Conference on Self-Managed Work Teams, Denton, Texas, September 27, 1990.*

Transformation of work group professionals into self-managing teams:  Toward a theory of leadership making.  1990 International Conference on Self-Managed Work Teams, Denton, Texas, September 27, 1990.

Issues faced by self-managed work teams:  A leadership challenge.  1990 International Conference on Self-Managed Work Teams, Denton, Texas, September 27, 1990.

International competition and its implications for marketing.  Business/Professional Advertising Association.  Cincinnati, Ohio October 16, 1990.

Company paternalism and the "right type" for Japanese corporations.  Association of Japanese Business Studies.  Honolulu, Hawaii, January 5, 1991.

Hidden investment and careers in Japanese organizations.  Association of Japanese Business Studies.  Honolulu, Hawaii, January 5, 1991.

International competitiveness center's study of the machine tool industry.  National Machine Tool Builders Associating Meeting, January 25, 1991.

Pitfalls and pratfalls in cross-cultural research.  Symposium at the Midwestern Academy of Management Meeting, Cincinnati, April 12, 1991.

Lean team production and getting the U.S. internationally competitive in lagging industries.  CEIC Seminar on International Competitiveness, April 24, 1991.

Job redesign:  Managing for high performance.  Total Employee Involvement Conference, Dallas, Texas, June 7, 1991.

Transformational and transactional leadership as components of leadership and followership making among professional cross-discipline teams.  American Psychological Society, Washington, DC, June 16, 1991.

Transformational leadership as a compliment of transactional leadership:  An empirical test, (with M. Uhl-Bien) Center For Creative Leadership, Colorado Springs, Colorado, July 30, 1991.

Cultural universals in leadership, Academy of Management Panel, Miami, Florida, August 12, 1991.

Super-leadership may be dangerous to the performance of cross-discipline project teams.  Academy of Management Panel, Miami, Florida, August 13, 1991.

Leadership as a means of creating supportive climates for research and development, Academy of Management Panel, Miami, Florida, August 14, 1991.

Cross-cultural team leadership-making in Japanese transplants in the United States.  Association of Japanese Business Studies, Denver Colorado, January 5, 1992.

Cross-cultural partnership-making between American and Japanese colleagues.  Presidential address at the Association of Japanese Business Studies, New York, January 8, 1993.

Toward a contingency model of empowerment, (with M. Uhl-Bien).  Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA, August 9, 1993.

Leadership of 'blue skyers' and 'tinkerers' in industrial research and development, (with P. Tierney), Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA, August 10, 1993.

Cross-cultural partnership process at Hong Kong University of Science & Technology.  Society of Organizational Behavior, Virginia Beach, VA, October 3, 1993.

Culture can no longer be ignored by business schools.  Invited address at Southern Academy of Management, November 6, 1993.

Leadership as leader, follower, and relationship:  A twenty-five year perspective.  Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, February 24, 1994.

Leadership-making theory and research.  City Poly Tech College, Hong Kong, April 14, 1994.

Cross-cultural partnerships in Japanese plants in North America.  Hangzhou University, April 28, 1994.

Third culture development training for Asian managers.  Making Asian Managers conference, Hong Kong, May 19, 1994.

Leadership in Asian organizations.  University of New South Wales, Australia, June 1, 1994.

Twenty-five years of leader-member exchange research.  Academy of Management, Dallas, TX, August 17, 1994.

Problems with Japanese management in the United States.  Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan, September 15, 1994.

Cross-cultural research methodology.  Invited address at University of Science & Technology, Hong Kong, September 16, 1994.

Enhancing international competitiveness of Chinese managers.  Keynote address at First Annual International Joint Venture Conference, Hangzhou University, China, September 19, 1994.

Leadership of International Joint Ventures in China.  First Annual Joint Venture Conference, Hangzhou University, China, September 21, 1994.

Transculturals in cross-cultural research:  Alliances that work.  Society of Organizational Behavior, October 22, 1994.

An integration of eastern and western leadership models.  Invited address, Nagoya University, December 7, 1994.

Leadership research and the growing acceptance of relational models.  University of Washington, February, 1995.

Twenty-five years of leader-member exchange research, University of Oregon, February, 1995.

Strategic management in joint ventures, Hangzhou University, China, March, 1995.

Doing business in East Asia, Thomas More University, Kentucky, April, 1995.

Contingency leadership in international joint ventures.  Invited address, Hangzhou University, February 10, 1996.

Beyond leadership to partnership.  Developing an engaging third culture.  Invited address Tel Aviv, Israel, February 27, 1996.

Strategy implementation, Hangzhou University, China, April 26, 1996.

Leadership choice across cultures, Hong Kong, May 11, 1996.

Leadership in China’s joint ventures.  Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China, May 23, 1996.

Cross-cultural leadership.  Conference in Taiwan, May 28, 1996.

World-class leadership, Tammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand, June 7, 1996.

Twenty-three year management progress study.  AJBS, Nagoya, Japan, June 12, 1996.

Self-management in multifunctional teams of professionals, (with M. Uhl-Bien).  Academy of Management, Cincinnati, OH, August 12, 1996.

Creativity in research and development and leadership, (with P. Tierney).  Academy of Management, Cincinnati, OH, August 12, 1996.

Third culture development in Sino-Foreign joint ventures:  A strategy component for multinations.  Keynote address at the International Human Resources Management Conference, Hangzhou University, China, March 19, 1997.

What we’ve learned from this conference.  Summation address IHRM Conference, Hangzhou University, China, March 21, 1997.

What went wrong?  A need for “third culture.”  Symposium entitled “Mitsubishi Motors (America) sexual harassment case, AJBS, Washington, DC, June 13, 1997.

Predicting managerial advancement of 23 years:  Japanese management progress study.  AJBS Symposium, Washington, DC, June 14, 1997.

New formulations of leadership for century XXI.  Symposium (all academy) at Academy of Management Conference, Boston, August 1, 1997.

My Fulbright scholar experience in Japan.  Academy of Management Conference, Boston, August 11, 1997.

Project teams performance and development under punctuated equilibrium (with E.T. Phillips & C. Hui), Academy of Management Conference, Boston, August 13, 1997.

International business plans for USL:  What we need and when we need it.  Presented at CBA, USL Alumni meeting, March 20, 1998.

International business research:  What can industrial psychology contribute?  Presented at Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology meetings, Dallas, Texas, April 25, 1998.

Japanese career progress study:  Twenty-three year assessment.  Presented at the Association of Japanese Business Studies meetings at McDonald’s University, Oakbrook, Illinois, May 29, 1998.

Taking Japanese firms to court in the United States:  Analysis and discussion, presented at the Association of Japanese Business Studies meetings at McDonald’s University, Oakbrook, Illinois, May 29, 1998.

Third culture training for employees in Sino-foreign joint ventures in coastal China:  What we’ve learned in the last five years.  Presented to general managers at Zibo High Technology Economic Zone, Zibo City, P.R. China, June 12, 1998.

Graen’s Leader-Member Exchange theory of leadership applied to directed teams.  Presented at Academy of Management meetings, August 10, 1998.

The new China, Phi Beta Delta, USL, September 17, 1998.

Doing business in China (with A. Lamson).  World Trade Club, Lafayette, Louisiana, October 15, 1998.

What do high and low LMX dyads talk about at work?  (with J. Komaki), Society of Organizational Behavior meetings, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., October 17, 1998.

Third culture research in China and team leadership research, Society of Organizational Behavior meetings, Washington D.C., October 17, 1998.

Leadership research needs.  Allied Business Administration, New Orleans, November 5, 1998.

Cross-cultural research on third cultures in People's Republic of China.  Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA, April 30, 1999.

Graduate Research and Teaching at UL COBA.  Dean's Advisory Board, Lafayette, March 2, 1999.

Issues in cross-cultural research using Graen's China studies.  Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), Atlanta, GA, April 30, 1999.

Leader-Member Exchange theory and human asset competitive advantage.  Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA, May 1, 1999.

Master mentor of creative technicians:  M. Dunnette.  Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Atlanta, GA, May 1, 1999.

Look back over the last 30 years of leadership research:  LMX theory reigns.  SIOP, Atlanta, GA, May 1, 1999.

Mentor, monitor and motivator of creative technicians:  Marv Dunnette.  SIOP, Atlanta, GA, May 1, 1999.

Sino-foreign joint ventures in Shanghai area:  Third culture, East China University, Shanghai, China, May 28, 1999. 

International Business at University of Louisiana.  University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, July 12, 1999.

Foreign ventures in People's Republic of China.  Procter & Gamble, Fayetteville, AR, July 13, 1999.

We are University of Louisiana's International Business:  Progress and goals.  World Trade Club, Lafayette, LA, September 9, 1999.

International Business at the University of Louisiana and our China connection.  Chinese Trade Delegation Conference, Hilton Hotel, Lafayette, LA, September 13, 1999.

International Business Research and Domestic Sanitation.  Society of Organizational Behavior (SOB), Toronto, Canada, October 10, 1999.

Doing creative and rigorous leadership research.  Southern Academy of Management, October 29, 1999.  

Japanese business studies of the third culture and leadership.  Rennes University, Rennes, France, December 13, 1999.

Leader-member exchange theory of leadership:  A thirty-year review.  Keynote address, Southwestern Academy of Management meeting, San Antonio, Texas, March 16, 2000.

Team leadership functions performed by followers on leaders, peers on peers, and leaders on followers.  Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology meeting, New Orleans, LA, April 16, 2000.

Japanese firms operating in the United States: Issues in managing the American workforce.  AJBS, Oiso City, Kanagawa Prefecture, Japan, June 10, 2000.

Third culture theory and research applied to Sino-Western joint ventures in the People's Republic of China.  Presented at East China University in Shanghai on June 6, 2000.

LMX and the third culture.  Invited Seminar.              Southwestern Academy of Management.  New Orleans, LA, March 2-3, 2001.

LMX future research directions.  Seminar presented at the Academy of Management, Washington, DC, August 7, 2001.

Interview as management laureate for Management Journal, Washington, DC.  August 7, 2001.

Current state of LMX leadership theory and research.  Colloquium at the University of Arkansas, February 15, 2002.

Current state of LMX research and theory.  Address to University of Science and Technology of Hong Kong.  May 10, 2002.

Cross-cultural conflict and Chinese manager turnover in Shanghai.  Presentation at Dong Hua University, Shanghai, PRC.  May 17, 2002.

Is a radical change in Kaisha’s approach to bicultural ventures needed?: Not your company’s culture or mine — but ours.  Paper presented at AJBS meetings, St. Louis, MO, and special issue of Annual of International Management, June 6, 2002.

Does Japan need third cultures for its foreign ventures?, Academy of Management, proceedings, August, 2002.

Chinese manager’s cultural conflicts in Shanghai area Sino-Foreign joint ventures.  Presentation at Don Hua University, Shanghai, PRC, October 9, 2003.

Self-efficacy exchange (SEE) in the east and west.  Presentation at University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, October 13, 2003.

Dealing with diversity in the east and the west.  Presentation at Chinese University of Hong Kong, October 14, 2003.

Self-efficacy exchange (SEE) leadership and organization citizenship behavior (OCB) as brothers in the east and the west.  Presentation City University of Hong Kong, October 14, 2003.

“Third cultures” in Sino-Foreign joint ventures in Asia.  Lingnan University of Hong Kong, October 15, 2003.

Negotiating and enforcing contracts in PRC.  Presentation at Zhong Shan University, Guangzhou, PRC, October 16, 2003.

Self-efficacy exchange (SEE) leadership and dealing with diversity.  Presentation at Society of Organizational Behavior, October 18, 2003.

Leadership of technology in the knowledge industries, presentation to Hong Kong Polytechnical University, September 7, 2004.

A team leadership model of LMX, presentation to Lingnan University Hong Kong, September 9, 2004.

Chinese manager study in Western joint ventures, presentation to Donghau University, Shanghai, China, September 22, 2004.

Leadership sharing via LMX consequences for team performance, presentation at SIOP, Los Angeles, CA, April 16, 2005.

Cross-cultural working relationship development for Eastern College, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 17, 2006.

Dealings between American's and Thais, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 17, 2006

Transcultural negotiations with Americans Payap University Graduate School of Business, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 18, 2006.

Working with Americans, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 20, 2006.

Contracting with Americans, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 22, 2006.

Letting Americans help. Chiangmai, Thailand, February 24, 2006.

Working more effectively with Americans.  Chang Puak Rotary Club, Chiangmai, Thailand, February 24, 2006.

Career opportunities for doctoral graduates in Asia.  Chinese University of Hong Kong, February 27, 2006.

Doctoral dissertation topics in leadership in China.  Chinese University of Hong Kong, March 1, 2006.

It Takes Two to Tango, Society of Organizational Behavior, Fayetteville, Arkansas, October 7, 2006.

Shared network leadership for coping with dangerous 21st century contexts.  Invited address at the Global Leadership Conference, April 14, 2007 at West Point Military Academy, New York

Joe McGrath was right about focusing on the ABCs.  Society of Organizational Behavior, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, October 21, 2007.

LMX in the twenty-first century.  New Zealand, 2008,

LMX theory.  Anaheim, 2008.

Leadership motivating excellence (LMX).  New Orleans, 2009.

LMX as a proper leadership theory.  University of Maryland, 2009.

Misguided leadership training.  Debate.  SIOP Atlanta, 2010

Hong Kong University - May 9, 2011.  LMX versus Transformational Leadership.

Hong Kong City University - May 11, 2011.  The missing link:  Interpersonal Alliance

Chinese University, Hong Kong - May 12, 2011.  New Scientific Approaches to Leadership.

Donghau University, Shanghai - May 20, 2011.  Guanxi and Interpersonal Business Alliance.

Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand - May 28, 2011.  New Ways Out of the Box of Administrative Leadership.

SIOP April, 2012.  LMX research after 40 years:  Correcting misleading interpretations.  Symposium on LMX research.

How to engage your people:  Talk the talk or walk the walk or both or neither, June 27, 2012.  IFSAM meetings, Limerick, Ireland.

Saving our new millennium work force.  July 12, 2012.  Fayetteville Rotary Club, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Academy of Management Meeting, Boston.  PDW Wicked Problems in Organizational Behavior August 4, 2012.

Academy of Management Meeting Symposium paper: Leadership is revealed in extreme contexts, Boston, August 4, 2012.

LMX symposium at Academy of Management Meeting.  LMX research over the last 40 years:  We’ve come a long way baby!  August 6, 2012. 

Two disciplines of Industrial and Organizational Psychology.  Society for Organizational Behavior, Fort Collins, Colorado, September 30, 2012.

Do-it-yourself leadership development.  University of Hawaii, Manoa.  Invited address, March 15, 2013.

Leadership-motivated excellence incubator.  Academy of Management, Orlando, Florida, August 11, 2013.

Design thinking in management.  Academy of Management, Professional Development Program, Orlando, Florida, August 12, 2013.

Butterfly Designs for Millennials, Society of Organizational Behavior, November 3, 2013.

LMX Incubator.  Academy of Management meeting, 2015, Vancouver, Canada.

Keynote presentation for the HR Magazine of Turkey’s “Recruitment and Talent Management Summit” (with Miriam Grace), in October 6 - 7, 2015. Istanbul, Turkey.

 

Rv-12-8-15

CURRICULUM VITA

George B. Graen

George B. Graen, Ph.D.