Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T16:58:15.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taking Time Seriously as a Component of Employee Resilience

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

David K. Palmer
David K. Palmer*
Affiliation:
Department of Management, College of Business & Technology, University of Nebraska at Kearney
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David K. Palmer, Department of Management, West Center 255W, College of Business & Technology, University of Nebraska at Kearney, Kearney, NE 68849. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Britt, Shen, Sinclair, Grossman, and Klieger (2016) recommend that our understanding of resilience would be advanced by making its temporal nature explicit. As a dynamic process, resilience is historical and temporal. The animating adverse event(s) and the resilient response(s) are dynamic and unfold over time; they often unfold as trajectories. This notion of trajectories implies a dynamic process, one progressing from one response or adaptation to another. These “temporal processes are a bit of a black box in I-O research” (Britt et al., p. 394). What would an extension of Britt et al.’s recommendation that researchers explicitly integrate time or temporality look like? Fully acknowledging the importance of time in this model may suggest worthwhile future research and potential interventions.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 517 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ancona, D., & Chong, C.-L. (1996). Entrainment: Pace, cycle, rhythm in organizational behavior. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 18, pp. 251–284). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Ancona, D. G., Goodman, P. S., Lawrence, B. S., & Tushman, M. L. (2001). Time: A new research lens. Academy of Management Review, 26, 645–663.Google Scholar
Bluedorn, A. C. (2000). Time and organizational culture. In Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P. M., & Peterson, M. F. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational culture and climate (pp. 117–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bluedorn, A. C. (2002). The human organization of time: Temporal realities and experience. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britt, T. W., Shen, W., Sinclair, R. R., Grossman, M. R., & Klieger, D. M. (2016). How much do we really know about employee resilience? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 9 (2), 378–404.Google Scholar
Claessens, B. J. C., van Eerde, W., Rutte, C. G., & Roe, R. A. (2007). A review of the time management literature. Personnel Review, 36, 255–276.Google Scholar
Clark, P. (1985). A review of the theories of time and structure for organizational sociology. In Bacharach, S. B. & Mitchell, S. M. (Eds.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 4, pp. 35–79). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159–170.Google Scholar
Hall, E. T. (1983). The dance of life: The other dimension of time. Garden City, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person–organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landy, F. J., Rastegary, H., Thayer, J., & Colvin, C. (1991). Time urgency: The construct and its measurement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 644–657.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, Y. M., & Seers, A. (1993). Time dimensions of work: Relationships with perceived organizational performance. Journal of Business and Psychology, 8, 91–102.Google Scholar
McGrath, J. E., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Time and behavior in organizations. In Cummings, L. L. & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 57–101). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, D. K. (2003, April). Multiple organizational times and the concept of plurichronicity. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Conference of the Midwest Academy of Management, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
Palmer, D. K., & Schoorman, F. D. (1999). Unpacking the multiple aspects of time in polychronicity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14, 323–344.Google Scholar
Schriber, J. B., & Gutek, B. A. (1987). Some time dimensions of work: Measurement of an underlying aspect of organizational culture. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 642–650.Google Scholar
Wright, L. (1988). The Type A behavior pattern and coronary artery disease: Quest for the active ingredients and the elusive mechanism. American Psychologist, 43, 2–14.Google Scholar