Abstract
The article is a reply to a paper by Peter Lorenzi concerning the satisfaction-causes-performance hypothesis. The author argues that Lorenzi's critique was inaccurate, that Lorenzi puts him in an anti-operant position, and that social exchange propositions are in agreement with operant concepts. Gift-giving or rewarding behavior in organizations is a variable and has consequences. The author comments on his use of a social-exchange framework to offer a plausible explanation for the phenomenology and logic in the satisfaction-causes-performance hypothesis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
