Scholarlink

<p>The scientific and practical impact of situational strength research has been limited by the tendency of existing research to: (1) focus almost exclusively on situational strength’s role as a moderator (vs. as a predictor with main and mediating effects), (2) formulate identical (vs. differentiated) predictions for different situational strength facets, and (3) discount the impact of <i>changes</i> in situational strength over time. In the current paper, we reconceptualize situational strength as a dynamic focal predictor of employee affect and performance. Specifically, we propose a “good versus bad” situational strength distinction and examine the impacts of daily <i>shift</i> and <i>stability</i> in a prototypical “good” facet (clarity) and a prototypical “bad” facet (constraints) of situational strength on employee affect and performance via a 15-workday experience sampling study (180 full-time employees from diverse industries providing 2,372 daily observations) using polynomial regression with response surface analysis. Results support the expected good versus bad distinction, albeit revealing a more nuanced pattern of results than initially hypothesized. Specifically, results reveal distinct affective “channels” for situational strength shift and stability: for shift, clarity and constraints operate primarily through positive and negative affect, respectively, whereas, for stability, both clarity and constraints operate primarily through negative affect. These results offer practical implications to management regarding optimizing levels of clarity and constraints in organizational settings. We discuss implications, limitations, and future research directions.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Good versus bad situational strength? The relationship of within-person situational strength shift and stability with affect and job performance

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月25日

查看全文
  • JeongJin Kim,
  • Reeshad S. Dalal,
  • John A. Aitken,
  • Seth A. Kaplan,
  • Julia I. Baines,
  • Ze Zhu,
  • Jordan Hassani

摘要

The scientific and practical impact of situational strength research has been limited by the tendency of existing research to: (1) focus almost exclusively on situational strength’s role as a moderator (vs. as a predictor with main and mediating effects), (2) formulate identical (vs. differentiated) predictions for different situational strength facets, and (3) discount the impact of changes in situational strength over time. In the current paper, we reconceptualize situational strength as a dynamic focal predictor of employee affect and performance. Specifically, we propose a “good versus bad” situational strength distinction and examine the impacts of daily shift and stability in a prototypical “good” facet (clarity) and a prototypical “bad” facet (constraints) of situational strength on employee affect and performance via a 15-workday experience sampling study (180 full-time employees from diverse industries providing 2,372 daily observations) using polynomial regression with response surface analysis. Results support the expected good versus bad distinction, albeit revealing a more nuanced pattern of results than initially hypothesized. Specifically, results reveal distinct affective “channels” for situational strength shift and stability: for shift, clarity and constraints operate primarily through positive and negative affect, respectively, whereas, for stability, both clarity and constraints operate primarily through negative affect. These results offer practical implications to management regarding optimizing levels of clarity and constraints in organizational settings. We discuss implications, limitations, and future research directions.