Podsakoff is an expert in leadership and organizational behavior.
Industry Expertise (2)
Areas of Expertise (7)
Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Relationships between Employee Attitudes and Behaviors
Leadership Behavior and Effectiveness
Social Power and Influence Processes
Organizational Research Methods
Substitutes for Leadership
Experimental designs in management and leadership research: Strengths, limitations, and recommendations for improving publishabilityThe Leadership Quarterly
Philip M Podsakoff, Nathan P Podsakoff
2019 Despite the renewed interest in the use of experimental designs in the fields of leadership and management over the past few decades, these designs are still relatively underutilized. Although there are several potential reasons for this, chief among them is misunderstanding the value of these designs. The purpose of this article is to review the role of laboratory, field, and quasi-experimental designs in management and leadership research. We first discuss the primary goals of experimental studies. Next, we examine the characteristics of experimental designs and how to distinguish laboratory, field, and quasi-experiments from one another and from non-experimental studies. Following these discussions, we provide examples of each type of experimental design and discuss their relative strengths and limitations. Finally, we discuss steps that researchers can take to increase the probability of having articles reporting experiments accepted by leadership and management journals.
Can Early-Career Scholars Conduct Impactful Research? Playing “Small Ball” Versus “Swinging for the Fences”Academy of Management Learning & Education
Philip M Podsakoff, Nathan P Podsakoff, Paresh Mishra, Carly Escue
2018 Given the disproportionate influence that high-impact articles have on the field of management, it is not surprising that PhD students trying to establish themselves early in their careers would like to know how to write such articles. Unfortunately, these students often receive conflicting advice about whether they should bide their time by conducting incremental research until they reach tenure (play “small ball”), or try to write impactful research early in their careers (“swing for the fences”). We explore the characteristics of high-impact management articles and examine whether early-career scholars are capable of publishing them. Our analysis shows that over half (53%) the authors of 235 high-impact management articles published them in the pre-tenure period of their careers. We use the results of this study, along with the lessons from previous research, to provide recommendations to faculty mentors and advisors on how PhD students can increase their chances of conducting high-impact research.
Individual- and Organizational-Level Consequences of Organizational Citizenship BehaviorsThe Oxford Handbook of Organizational Citizenship Behavior
Scott B MacKenzie, Nathan P Podsakoff, Philip M Podsakoff
2018 Although the effects of organizational citizenship behaviors on individual-level and organizational-level outcomes have been well documented in the literature, far less is known about the theoretical mechanisms that explain these effects, or the boundary conditions that influence their strengths. Thus, for the purposes of this chapter, after providing a brief summary of the effects of OCB on individual- and organizational-level outcomes, we identify the theoretical mechanisms through which OCBs are believed to produce their effects, and the individual, group, supervisor, task, organizational, and cultural/environmental characteristics that moderate these effects. In addition, we also suggest how several prototypical forms of OCB (helping, sportsmanship, and voice) might be related to these mediators and how the relationships between these different forms of OCB and individual- and organizational-level outcomes might be influenced by these moderators.
Recommendations for Creating Better Concept Definitions in the Organizational, Behavioral, and Social SciencesOrganizational Research Methods
Philip M Podsakoff, Scott B MacKenzie, Nathan P Podsakoff
2016 Despite the importance of establishing good, clear concept definitions in organizational research, the field lacks a comprehensive source that explains how to effectively develop and articulate a concept’s domain. Thus, the purpose of this article is to explain why clear conceptual definitions are essential for scientific progress and provide a concrete set of steps that researchers can follow to improve their conceptual definitions. First, we define what is meant by a concept, describe the functions served by concepts in scientific endeavors, and identify problems associated with a lack of conceptual clarity. Then we explain why it is so difficult to adequately define concepts. Next, we provide a series of recommendations for scholars in the organizational, behavioral, and social sciences who are either trying to define a new concept or revise the definition of one that already exists in the field. Following this, we provide some examples that generally meet the criteria for a good conceptual definition. We conclude with a set of questions that authors, reviewers, and editors can use as a guide for evaluating concept definitions.
One (rating) from many (observations): Factors affecting the individual assessment of voice behavior in groups.Journal of Applied Psychology
Nathan P Podsakoff, Timothy D Maynes, Steven W Whiting, Philip M Podsakoff
2015 This article reports an investigation into how individuals form perceptions of overall voice behavior in group contexts. More specifically, the authors examine the effect of the proportion of group members exhibiting voice behavior in the group, the frequency of voice events in the group, and the measurement item referent (group vs. individual) on an individual’s ratings of group voice behavior. In addition, the authors examine the effect that measurement item referent has on the magnitude of the relationship observed between an individual’s ratings of group voice behavior and perceptions of group performance. Consistent with hypotheses, the results from 1 field study (N = 220) and 1 laboratory experiment (N = 366) indicate that: (a) When group referents were used, raters relied on the frequency of voice events (and not the proportion of group members exhibiting voice) to inform their ratings of voice behavior, whereas the opposite was true when individual-referent items were used, and (b) the magnitude of the relationship between observers’ ratings of group voice behavior and their perceptions of group performance was higher when raters used group-referent, as opposed to an individual-referent, items. The authors discuss the implications of their findings for scholars interested in studying behavioral phenomena occurring in teams, groups, and work units in organizational behavior research.