In this review, we examine developments in how organization members’ responses to change have been conceptualized, measured, and predicted, and the outcomes they have been shown to produce. We focus on quantitative studies and use four conceptual lenses to analyze them: the tripartite approach, the change response circumplex model, change ambivalence, and levels of analysis. Drawing on established classifications of change response antecedents, we present current understandings of the factors and the mediating and moderating mechanisms that explain responses to change. Particular attention is given to the roles of national culture and time in shaping responses and our understanding of them. We end with directions for future research and practice, emphasizing the need to consider response activation, ambivalence, and timing in understanding and managing responses to organizational change.

This review examines the development and evolution of meeting science over the past three decades. Drawing on diverse disciplinary foundations—including the organizational sciences, communication studies, and computer science—we provide a thematic discussion of meetings research. We organize the body of literature into five key areas of inquiry: (a) meetings as stressors and affective inducing events; (b) meetings as a communication technology that drives performance; (c) meetings as a platform for employee voice, participation, and inclusion; (d) meetings as a stage for leadership and power dynamics; and (e) meetings as an expression of culture and identity. We present illustrative findings from each research stream and conclude by outlining a research agenda that addresses how to build upon what we know around meetings as well as new frontiers.

Star performers—individuals who make exceptionally significant contributions to their organizations—are increasingly capturing the attention of both researchers and practitioners alike. However, studies on these uber-performers often employ disparate definitions, theoretical foundations and assumptions, and methods and analyses, which creates significant tension and confusion in the comparison of findings and the formation of a clear understanding of what star performance truly entails and its impact on individuals, teams, and organizations. This review aims to clarify these issues by presenting a framework for identifying stars based on four key factors: type of performance, comparison group, duration of observation, and threshold for stardom. We summarize current research on the emergence of stars, their productivity over time, and the spillover effect on nonstars. We also address the unique challenges of studying stars—such as their rarity and the skewed nature of their performance—and offer guidance on research designs and analytical tools that can more effectively capture these dynamics. We conclude with a roadmap for future research aimed at developing a more consistent and useful understanding of star performers.

This article first reviews the history of the research on organizational climate and then organizational culture with definitions of each. The research approaches to both constructs are explicated in some detail, with climate being characterized by survey/quantitative approaches and culture by qualitative methods. Early climate struggles with levels and validity issues are followed by summaries of research since the 1980s on specific outcomes such as service and safety. Culture research has pursued the deeper meanings employees attach to organizational norms and values without attention to specific outcomes. As these different approaches to understanding organizations yield different learnings, we propose integrating research on the two constructs as a useful basis for understanding how people in organizations interpret decisions, actions, and what is important for organization effectiveness. We conclude by exploring the potential benefits of such an integrative approach for understanding and facilitating organizational change and effectiveness.

In this review, we distill existing research on gratitude and its role in organizations. We begin by examining how gratitude is conceptualized and defined, considering its manifestations as an emotion, an expression, and a feature of a collective. We next develop a model arguing that gratitude is best understood as a phenomenon that begins within the self but has the potential to cascade beyond the self and emerge at higher levels of analysis. After reviewing the key theories that underpin gratitude scholarship, we explore existing research on gratitude's functions. We follow with a consideration of gratitude's antecedents. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of promising trajectories for future research, emphasizing important directions for both theory and practice.

We critically review classic and contemporary theory and research on employee turnover and retention and frame a future research agenda that generates new directions for these theories. We first review first- and second-generation turnover models that shaped conventional understanding of why employees voluntarily quit, classifying reasons as representing perceived desirability of movement or ease of movement. We next review the more contemporary unfolding model and its derivatives (i.e., shocks research, leader-departure effect, turnover event theory) that upended traditional explanations of how and why employees quit. After reviewing classic and contemporary turnover models, we shift our focus to job embeddedness, which over the past 20-plus years has taught us a great deal about why employees stay. We synthesize original job embeddedness research before appraising its extensions and recent developments. We conclude with a discussion of how organizations can cultivate the “right” kind of staying.

Humor is a fundamental managerial tool that can help managers communicate, build trust, and promote cooperation. Humor, however, is complex, and humor scholarship has identified both benefits and risks of using humor for leaders, employees, and organizations. Although humor is both pervasive and impactful in organizations, humor scholarship is vastly under-represented relative to its managerial relevance and impact in leading management journals. In this review, we build on scholarship in the psychology, communication, and management literatures to define humor, introduce a framework and nomenclature for studying humor, and distinguish organizational humor from social humor. We identify open questions worthy of scholarly attention and barriers that have likely limited the publication of humor scholarship in management journals. We conclude with a call to action to guide future research in organizational humor.

Experts and expertise contribute to consequential organizational decisions from recruitment to CEO succession, but these constructs are inconsistently operationalized and poorly understood. To better explicate how experts and expertise function in organizations, we first conduct an integrative review of the general literature to describe what is known about these phenomena in cognitive science, psychology, and the clinical and technical professions. This review of the general literature indicates that expertise represents domain-specific hierarchical knowledge structures developed by an individual over time. The quality of the individual's domain-related education, training, and opportunities for practice and learning affects the level of expertise acquired. We then review what is known about experts and expertise in organizations. Many organizational studies on expertise focus on an individual's years of experience rather than the nature of that experience or its contribution to expertise. Conflating expertise with years of experience generally leads to less consistent effects on performance than operationalizing expertise in terms of individual cognitive processes, knowledge, and capabilities. Findings from organizational studies that do assess expertise are in line with the general literature, indicating that the quality of practice and learning experiences are particularly important in developing expertise. We then offer ways for scholars to better study how expertise functions in organizations and conclude by developing implications for practice.

The employee-organization relationship (EOR) is a well-established research topic in the applied psychology and organizational behavior literatures. However, the potential links between the EOR and employee health and well-being are understudied in comparison to the effects of the EOR on traditional organization-focused outcomes such as organizational commitment, job performance, and turnover. To address the need for development of the role of the EOR on employee health, we focus on two of the most popular EOR concepts: psychological contracts and perceived organizational support. We review the empirical research on the EOR and health and well-being as well as theoretical underpinnings of social exchange and reciprocity. We then suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased emphasis on employee health and well-being, resulting in heightened employee expectations from their organization. Subsequently, we present a model based on social exchange theory to explain how this increased attention on health is linked with employee perceptions of organizational support and psychological contracts, ultimately contributing to enhanced or decreased health and well-being. Finally, we discuss the practical implications of the changing emphasis on the health and well-being of employees for the EOR and the importance of an expansion of research linking the EOR with health and well-being.