Determinants of How Managers Cope with Organisational Downsizing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
201 cadres de deux services relevant du gouvernement fédéral qui ont été confrontés à une réduction d’effectifs ont constitué un panel en vue d’une étude longitudinale qui a porté sur la relation entre les ressources présentes avant la réduction du personnel (T1) et les contraintes et stratégies de traitement du problème évaluées pendant la période elle‐même (T2 et T3). Les contraintes en T2 (travail aliénant, absence perçue de succès professionnel à venir et conséquences jugées négatives de la contraction des effectifs) agissaient sur la relation entre les ressources disponibles en T1 et les stratégies déployées en T2. Les ressources relevant de l’individu (optimisme et sécurité perçue du travail) et celles relevant de l’organisation (le vécu du soutien apporté par le supérieur et l’organisation et l’implication affective dans l’organisation) étaient en relation avec une appréciation plus favorable des contraintes, ce qui, en retour, avaient des retombées sur la mise en œuvre des stratégies T2 de fuite et de contrôle. Les conduites T2 de contrôle étaient significativement corrélées de façon négative aux contraintes T3 tandis que les conduites de fuite T2 étaient significativement corrélées de façon positive à ces mêmes contraintes T3. Les futures recherches ne devraient pas seulement étudier le rôle des ressources exploitées par ceux qui affrontent victorieusement une contraction des effectifs, mais aussi identifier et tenir compte des contraintes qui peuvent contrecarrer ou inhiber l’usage de certaines stratégies de coping. Managers ( N = 201) in two federal government departments undergoing downsizing participated in a longitudinal panel study examining the relationship among pre‐downsizing (T1) coping resources and coping constraints and coping strategies assessed during the downsizing period (T2, T3). T2 coping constraints (work alienation, perceived lack of future career success, and perceived negative downsizing effect) mediated the relationship between T1 coping resources and T2 coping strategies. Individual‐related (optimism and perceived job security) coping resources and organisation‐related (perceived organisational and supervisor support and organisational affective commitment) coping resources were associated with a more favourable evaluation of the coping constraints which, in turn, influenced the use of T2 control‐oriented and escape coping strategies. T2 control‐oriented coping was significantly negatively related to T3 coping constraints whereas T2 escape coping was significantly positively related to T3 coping constraints. Future research should not only examine the role of coping resources in how survivors cope with organisational downsizing but also identify and examine coping constraints that may restrict or inhibit the use of certain coping strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it