Can employees perform well if they fear for their lives? Yes – if they have a passion for work
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
Purpose With a basis in conservation of resources theory, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the mediating role of championing behaviour in the relationship between employees’ fear of terror and their job performance, as well as the buffering role of their passion for work, as a personal resource, in this process. Design/methodology/approach The tests of the hypotheses rely on three-wave, time-lagged data collected from employees and their supervisors in Pakistan. Findings An important reason that concerns about terrorist attacks diminish performance is that employees refrain from championing their own entrepreneurial ideas. This mediating role of idea championing is less salient, however, to the extent that employees feel a strong passion for their work. Practical implications For human resource managers, this study pinpoints a key mechanism – a reluctance to mobilize active support for entrepreneurial ideas – by which fears about terrorism attacks can spill over into the workplace and undermine employees’ ability to meet their performance requirements. It also reveals how this mechanism can be better contained by the presence of adequate personal resources. Originality/value This study adds to burgeoning research on the interplay between terrorism and organizational life by specifying how and when employees’ ruminations about terrorism threats might escalate into diminished performance outcomes at work.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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