東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Production of star performers in org...

Joo, Young Ki.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms./
作者:	Joo, Young Ki.
面頁冊數:	121 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International77-10A(E).
標題:	Organizational behavior. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10109295
ISBN:	9781339725925

Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms.
Joo, Young Ki.

Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms. - 121 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, 2016.

How variably or uniformly should opportunities (i.e., opportunities to perform) be allocated among newcomers to facilitate the production of star performers over time, and why? I used publicly available data on Major League Baseball (MLB) and National Basketball Association (NBA) players. The data set contains 135 batter cohorts, 135 pitcher cohorts, and 60 basketball player cohorts consisting of 16,422 players in MLB and 3,649 players in NBA. In Study 1, I pitted two competing models of opportunity allocation. Results supported the opportunity variability model (i.e., allocate varying amounts of opportunities), not the opportunity uniformity model (i.e., allocate similar amounts of opportunities). To examine why opportunity variability "won," I examined potential mechanisms in Studies 2 and 3. In Study 2, results supported neither opportunity-for-performance (i.e., allocate opportunities based on different performance levels) nor variability-beyond-performance (i.e., establish opportunity variability beyond that explained by differences in performance). In Study 3, given that potential level represents a newcomer's performance and KSAOs, results provided support for opportunity-for-potential (i.e., allocate opportunities based on different potential levels), but only partial support for variability-beyond-potential (i.e., establish opportunity variability beyond that explained by differences in potential levels). So, overall, allocating opportunities based on newcomers' KSAOs rather than performance levels facilitates star production. Though tying managerial practices (e.g., pay) to individual performance is often effective, the same principle does not seem to apply to allocating opportunities among newcomers for the purpose of facilitating the production of stars.

ISBN: 9781339725925Subjects--Topical Terms:

516683
Organizational behavior.

Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms.
LDR:02692nmm a2200277 4500 001 2115525
005 20170323101038.5
008 180830s2016 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781339725925
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10109295
035 $a AAI10109295
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Joo, Young Ki. $3 3277179
245 1 0 $a Production of star performers in organizations: An examination of two competing models and mechanisms.
300 $a 121 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 77-10(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Herman Aguinis.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, 2016.
520 $a How variably or uniformly should opportunities (i.e., opportunities to perform) be allocated among newcomers to facilitate the production of star performers over time, and why? I used publicly available data on Major League Baseball (MLB) and National Basketball Association (NBA) players. The data set contains 135 batter cohorts, 135 pitcher cohorts, and 60 basketball player cohorts consisting of 16,422 players in MLB and 3,649 players in NBA. In Study 1, I pitted two competing models of opportunity allocation. Results supported the opportunity variability model (i.e., allocate varying amounts of opportunities), not the opportunity uniformity model (i.e., allocate similar amounts of opportunities). To examine why opportunity variability "won," I examined potential mechanisms in Studies 2 and 3. In Study 2, results supported neither opportunity-for-performance (i.e., allocate opportunities based on different performance levels) nor variability-beyond-performance (i.e., establish opportunity variability beyond that explained by differences in performance). In Study 3, given that potential level represents a newcomer's performance and KSAOs, results provided support for opportunity-for-potential (i.e., allocate opportunities based on different potential levels), but only partial support for variability-beyond-potential (i.e., establish opportunity variability beyond that explained by differences in potential levels). So, overall, allocating opportunities based on newcomers' KSAOs rather than performance levels facilitates star production. Though tying managerial practices (e.g., pay) to individual performance is often effective, the same principle does not seem to apply to allocating opportunities among newcomers for the purpose of facilitating the production of stars.
590 $a School code: 0093.
650 4 $a Organizational behavior. $3 516683
650 4 $a Sports Management. $3 2122869
690 $a 0703
690 $a 0430
710 2 $a Indiana University. $b Business. $3 1019045
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 77-10A(E).
790 $a 0093
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2016
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10109295