Offer from U of Kansas

leepee

Just share an early offer. OB PhD program from U of Kansas.

Good Luck for everyone!

还在等其他的消息，简单分享一下背景，仅供参考：

美国硕士in HRM, 有一定的研究经历，没有published papers, 但目标比较明确。GPA3.7+  GRE 680+800，几个研究项目。推荐信都来自美国这边的教授（无牛推）。我去年申请过，有经验教训总结。。。

galluplinc

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 7:31:17)

glad we have a collection of people doing LMX differentiation and shared leadership


craig pearce @ our program is currently reshaping the whole idea of measuring shared leadership. actually there are paper out there measuring shared leadership through SNA. but those paper had made it explicitly that the measures employed were context-based, which generates virtually nothing across settings. there will be one JAP and one AMJ paper coming out with more advanced technique measuring shared leadership. we will soon see it ~


as you mentioned, the current definition on shared leadership is kinda vague.... pearce has been trying so hard to redefine it. the problem, though, is that reviewers and editors all have quite strong arguments on the dimensions to be included in the core construct. pearce has an AMR paper with charles manz @ UMass, who is the founder of self-leadership, that is intended to address the theoretical puzzle out there. that manuscript is currently under 2nd R&R. it would come out eventually for sure 'cause the editor has already tossed the greenlight out.


good to know people are doing shared leadership stuff. we may have a talk on this @ AoM this year~ best luck w/ ur research

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/9 8:19:46)

Yes, it's a limitation that conclusions drawn from SNA are not generalizable. However, I've seen a quite smart approach from several articles which transfer the network data into variables of a regression. I'm curious about the more advanced technique you mentioned. Can you reveal a bit here? Did they use simulation methods?

Also there is something interesting going on in the qualitative field. I don't refer to leadership or OB in particular, but to the qualitative research method as a whole. They are working on the technique called textmining. It's actually a big surprise to me that qualitative methods are increasingly systematic and scientific.

I'm working on LMX dif but not shared leadership because the latter is too advanced to me at my current level. I may approach it in the future if there is a chance.

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 19:48:58)

the method integrating SNA data into regression is for sure problematic since those researchers did not even check how to do dyadic analysis. yet their idea was novel for those specific contexts, which definitely added in credibility to their paper.


as for the qualitative approach, it is an amazing area that most OB scholars don't know anything about. and you can see the debates over inductive vs. deductive methods. if you feel like doing it, check AMJ and AMR paper from eisenhardt. she is the top of the top among qualitative researchers in OB/Strategy. here at our program, we have an affiliated faculty named creswell who is actually among the top 3 guys in qualitative methods, like judge in meta. yet very few doctoral students would take the qualitative method seminar from him since it takes years of training. u can learn to use fancy HLM techniques probably in 3 months, but u may hardly find yourself ending up w/ sth in learning qualitative methods. so, it's kinda trade-off between being novel using mixed methods and eating up 2-3 yrs learning the basic qualitative stuff. anyway, it's totally up to u.


as for the advancement in measuring shared leadership, i am sorry that i could not tell u any more detail on that. but, pls keep in mind that OB people, reviewers specifically, are always critical on whatever method u r using. so, the measurement for shared leadership is, from my own standpoint, open to development. yet the vital issue of a more punctual nature is the theoretical building and construct ramification. it's a battle that never ends though .....


good luck w/ ur research~

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/11 7:22:40)

Thank you for sharing your valuable insights. I don’t knowif I have interpreted your comments correctly. Do you mean dyadic analysiscould have been used to replace SNA in answering those research questions? Iagree dyadic analysis is a good way to address paired relationships. However,when we are interested in some network properties, isn’t network analysis abetter option. To be honest, I have problem to distinguish the complex form ofdyadic analysis (the so-called SRM) with SNA.

I also agree that this approach is somehow problematic. Andthe problem, I assume, is concerned with the validity issue. I do have problemof framing the question to depict the type of relationship compatible with thetheory. Please let me know if you have another story.

Recently I had a discussion of one professor of myqualitative methodology course. He talked about the possibility to bridge thegap between the big N and small N, i.e. bridge the qualitative thematicanalysis with quantitative formal concept analysis. Although this idea has onlybeen applied in political science, I can see it’s potential in organizationalstudies. I understand that qualitative approach is challenge because theresearcher needs a really high level of theoretical sensitivity in order togenerate meaningful codes. As you said, it’s a trade off.

From your comments, I can tell you are quite knowledgeablein this area. So I did some background research on you (mainly through yourpast posts if you don’t mind). Your other posts are definitely valuableresources to me since I’m also thinking about applying for some PhD programmesof OB in the states. Finally, can you tell me how to change the username for myCD account? I saw you did it quite successfully.

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/13 10:17:51)

what i was saying is that there lies a methodological difference between employing SNA in a network context where no dyad is observed and using SNA in a group context where dyadic relationship is the research object. dan brass and steve borgatti both had criticized the misuse of SNA in current OB research 'cause most OB researchers do not really know how to do SNA.


as for the username change, haha, u may SM "zero", who is the administrator of CD forum~

yujia1122

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 7:31:17)

glad we have a collection of people doing LMX differentiation and shared leadership


craig pearce @ our program is currently reshaping the whole idea of measuring shared leadership. actually there are paper out there measuring shared leadership through SNA. but those paper had made it explicitly that the measures employed were context-based, which generates virtually nothing across settings. there will be one JAP and one AMJ paper coming out with more advanced technique measuring shared leadership. we will soon see it ~


as you mentioned, the current definition on shared leadership is kinda vague.... pearce has been trying so hard to redefine it. the problem, though, is that reviewers and editors all have quite strong arguments on the dimensions to be included in the core construct. pearce has an AMR paper with charles manz @ UMass, who is the founder of self-leadership, that is intended to address the theoretical puzzle out there. that manuscript is currently under 2nd R&R. it would come out eventually for sure 'cause the editor has already tossed the greenlight out.


good to know people are doing shared leadership stuff. we may have a talk on this @ AoM this year~ best luck w/ ur research

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/9 8:19:46)

Yes, it's a limitation that conclusions drawn from SNA are not generalizable. However, I've seen a quite smart approach from several articles which transfer the network data into variables of a regression. I'm curious about the more advanced technique you mentioned. Can you reveal a bit here? Did they use simulation methods?

Also there is something interesting going on in the qualitative field. I don't refer to leadership or OB in particular, but to the qualitative research method as a whole. They are working on the technique called textmining. It's actually a big surprise to me that qualitative methods are increasingly systematic and scientific.

I'm working on LMX dif but not shared leadership because the latter is too advanced to me at my current level. I may approach it in the future if there is a chance.

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 19:48:58)

the method integrating SNA data into regression is for sure problematic since those researchers did not even check how to do dyadic analysis. yet their idea was novel for those specific contexts, which definitely added in credibility to their paper.


as for the qualitative approach, it is an amazing area that most OB scholars don't know anything about. and you can see the debates over inductive vs. deductive methods. if you feel like doing it, check AMJ and AMR paper from eisenhardt. she is the top of the top among qualitative researchers in OB/Strategy. here at our program, we have an affiliated faculty named creswell who is actually among the top 3 guys in qualitative methods, like judge in meta. yet very few doctoral students would take the qualitative method seminar from him since it takes years of training. u can learn to use fancy HLM techniques probably in 3 months, but u may hardly find yourself ending up w/ sth in learning qualitative methods. so, it's kinda trade-off between being novel using mixed methods and eating up 2-3 yrs learning the basic qualitative stuff. anyway, it's totally up to u.


as for the advancement in measuring shared leadership, i am sorry that i could not tell u any more detail on that. but, pls keep in mind that OB people, reviewers specifically, are always critical on whatever method u r using. so, the measurement for shared leadership is, from my own standpoint, open to development. yet the vital issue of a more punctual nature is the theoretical building and construct ramification. it's a battle that never ends though .....


good luck w/ ur research~

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/11 7:22:40)

Thank you for sharing your valuable insights. I don’t knowif I have interpreted your comments correctly. Do you mean dyadic analysiscould have been used to replace SNA in answering those research questions? Iagree dyadic analysis is a good way to address paired relationships. However,when we are interested in some network properties, isn’t network analysis abetter option. To be honest, I have problem to distinguish the complex form ofdyadic analysis (the so-called SRM) with SNA.

I also agree that this approach is somehow problematic. Andthe problem, I assume, is concerned with the validity issue. I do have problemof framing the question to depict the type of relationship compatible with thetheory. Please let me know if you have another story.

Recently I had a discussion of one professor of myqualitative methodology course. He talked about the possibility to bridge thegap between the big N and small N, i.e. bridge the qualitative thematicanalysis with quantitative formal concept analysis. Although this idea has onlybeen applied in political science, I can see it’s potential in organizationalstudies. I understand that qualitative approach is challenge because theresearcher needs a really high level of theoretical sensitivity in order togenerate meaningful codes. As you said, it’s a trade off.

From your comments, I can tell you are quite knowledgeablein this area. So I did some background research on you (mainly through yourpast posts if you don’t mind). Your other posts are definitely valuableresources to me since I’m also thinking about applying for some PhD programmesof OB in the states. Finally, can you tell me how to change the username for myCD account? I saw you did it quite successfully.

galluplinc

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 7:31:17)

glad we have a collection of people doing LMX differentiation and shared leadership


craig pearce @ our program is currently reshaping the whole idea of measuring shared leadership. actually there are paper out there measuring shared leadership through SNA. but those paper had made it explicitly that the measures employed were context-based, which generates virtually nothing across settings. there will be one JAP and one AMJ paper coming out with more advanced technique measuring shared leadership. we will soon see it ~


as you mentioned, the current definition on shared leadership is kinda vague.... pearce has been trying so hard to redefine it. the problem, though, is that reviewers and editors all have quite strong arguments on the dimensions to be included in the core construct. pearce has an AMR paper with charles manz @ UMass, who is the founder of self-leadership, that is intended to address the theoretical puzzle out there. that manuscript is currently under 2nd R&R. it would come out eventually for sure 'cause the editor has already tossed the greenlight out.


good to know people are doing shared leadership stuff. we may have a talk on this @ AoM this year~ best luck w/ ur research

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/9 8:19:46)

Yes, it's a limitation that conclusions drawn from SNA are not generalizable. However, I've seen a quite smart approach from several articles which transfer the network data into variables of a regression. I'm curious about the more advanced technique you mentioned. Can you reveal a bit here? Did they use simulation methods?

Also there is something interesting going on in the qualitative field. I don't refer to leadership or OB in particular, but to the qualitative research method as a whole. They are working on the technique called textmining. It's actually a big surprise to me that qualitative methods are increasingly systematic and scientific.

I'm working on LMX dif but not shared leadership because the latter is too advanced to me at my current level. I may approach it in the future if there is a chance.

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 19:48:58)

the method integrating SNA data into regression is for sure problematic since those researchers did not even check how to do dyadic analysis. yet their idea was novel for those specific contexts, which definitely added in credibility to their paper.


as for the qualitative approach, it is an amazing area that most OB scholars don't know anything about. and you can see the debates over inductive vs. deductive methods. if you feel like doing it, check AMJ and AMR paper from eisenhardt. she is the top of the top among qualitative researchers in OB/Strategy. here at our program, we have an affiliated faculty named creswell who is actually among the top 3 guys in qualitative methods, like judge in meta. yet very few doctoral students would take the qualitative method seminar from him since it takes years of training. u can learn to use fancy HLM techniques probably in 3 months, but u may hardly find yourself ending up w/ sth in learning qualitative methods. so, it's kinda trade-off between being novel using mixed methods and eating up 2-3 yrs learning the basic qualitative stuff. anyway, it's totally up to u.


as for the advancement in measuring shared leadership, i am sorry that i could not tell u any more detail on that. but, pls keep in mind that OB people, reviewers specifically, are always critical on whatever method u r using. so, the measurement for shared leadership is, from my own standpoint, open to development. yet the vital issue of a more punctual nature is the theoretical building and construct ramification. it's a battle that never ends though .....


good luck w/ ur research~

yujia1122

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 7:31:17)

glad we have a collection of people doing LMX differentiation and shared leadership


craig pearce @ our program is currently reshaping the whole idea of measuring shared leadership. actually there are paper out there measuring shared leadership through SNA. but those paper had made it explicitly that the measures employed were context-based, which generates virtually nothing across settings. there will be one JAP and one AMJ paper coming out with more advanced technique measuring shared leadership. we will soon see it ~


as you mentioned, the current definition on shared leadership is kinda vague.... pearce has been trying so hard to redefine it. the problem, though, is that reviewers and editors all have quite strong arguments on the dimensions to be included in the core construct. pearce has an AMR paper with charles manz @ UMass, who is the founder of self-leadership, that is intended to address the theoretical puzzle out there. that manuscript is currently under 2nd R&R. it would come out eventually for sure 'cause the editor has already tossed the greenlight out.


good to know people are doing shared leadership stuff. we may have a talk on this @ AoM this year~ best luck w/ ur research

-- by 会员 galluplinc (2011/3/9 8:19:46)

Yes, it's a limitation that conclusions drawn from SNA are not generalizable. However, I've seen a quite smart approach from several articles which transfer the network data into variables of a regression. I'm curious about the more advanced technique you mentioned. Can you reveal a bit here? Did they use simulation methods?

Also there is something interesting going on in the qualitative field. I don't refer to leadership or OB in particular, but to the qualitative research method as a whole. They are working on the technique called textmining. It's actually a big surprise to me that qualitative methods are increasingly systematic and scientific.

I'm working on LMX dif but not shared leadership because the latter is too advanced to me at my current level. I may approach it in the future if there is a chance.

leepee

欢迎讨论！！等消息等得太无聊，我明天到Kansas先去看看（campus visit~~~)

galluplinc

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

-- by 会员 yujia1122 (2011/3/9 7:31:17)

glad we have a collection of people doing LMX differentiation and shared leadership


craig pearce @ our program is currently reshaping the whole idea of measuring shared leadership. actually there are paper out there measuring shared leadership through SNA. but those paper had made it explicitly that the measures employed were context-based, which generates virtually nothing across settings. there will be one JAP and one AMJ paper coming out with more advanced technique measuring shared leadership. we will soon see it ~


as you mentioned, the current definition on shared leadership is kinda vague.... pearce has been trying so hard to redefine it. the problem, though, is that reviewers and editors all have quite strong arguments on the dimensions to be included in the core construct. pearce has an AMR paper with charles manz @ UMass, who is the founder of self-leadership, that is intended to address the theoretical puzzle out there. that manuscript is currently under 2nd R&R. it would come out eventually for sure 'cause the editor has already tossed the greenlight out.


good to know people are doing shared leadership stuff. we may have a talk on this @ AoM this year~ best luck w/ ur research

yujia1122

喔， 真开心这里有人讨论leadership 的话题!! 我现在的方向是LMX differentiation，正在学习SNA.  Shared leadership 我读的不多，感觉这个定义有些模糊。大部分读到的还是leadership in teams (hierarchical teams with a designated leader) 的东西，我很期待用shared leadership和social network analysis的作品呀

aprilarchy

congrats!!

leepee

哇，好早好早，真是非常恭喜

-- by 会员 judydongxueni (2011/1/22 20:54:40)

谢谢Judy~~~