273). This research leads to support for Kongsberg developing training that could teach employees techniques for managing their emotional displays, and management can incorporate emotional display behaviors in goal-setting and performance reviews. References

Diefendorff, J., Richard, E., & Croyle, M. (2006). Are emotional display rules formal job requirements? Examination of employee and supervisor perceptions. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 273-298.

Pater, Van Vianen, Bechtoldt, and Klehe (2009) noted the importance of promotability evaluations when it comes to employees' career development as well as the organization's human resource management procedures. The researchers found that there was limited research on this topic, with most focused on the employee's current job performance and non-behavioral, fixed predictors. As such, they took a behavioral approach to determine "besides how one performs (i.e. job performance) what one performs also serves as an indicator of promotability. Specifically, (they) examine the relationship between employees' promotability over and above employees' current job performance" (p. 297). Kongsberg can use this information to develop challenging work assignments and appropriate evaluations of their promotability.

References

Pater, I., Van Vianen, a., Bechtoldt, M., & Klehe, U. (2009). Employees' challenging job experiences and supervisors' evaluations of promotability. Personnel Psychology, 62, 297-325.

Allen, Jimmieson, Bordia, and Irmer (2007) surmised that there is a lack of understanding about the processes involved with an employee addressing perceptions of uncertainty as a major consequence of organizational change. As such, their research examined "the role that different sources of communication play in addressing change-related uncertainty for employees" (p. 187). To this end, the researchers performed a qualitative study of 25 interviews of organization employees, to examine how employees handle change-related uncertainties. It was found that in certain instances, these uncertainties should be addressed by different communication sources. Kongsberg can use their findings that direct supervisors are the best source of providing implementation-related and job-relevant information during times of change. In contrast, Kongsberg senior management should be the source of strategic information.

References

Allen, J., Jimmieson, N., Bordia, P., & Irmer, B. (2007 Jun). Uncertainty during organizational change: Managing perceptions through communication.. Journal of Change Management, 7(2), 187-210.

Kassing's (2009) study explored how employees justified their participation in circumvention activities, such as going around or above their supervisor. They detailed a time when they participated in a circumvention, on the survey instrument. Kassing found that the primary reasons for circumvention were due to supervisor inaction, supervisor indiscretion or supervisor performance. In addition, it was found that the employees enhanced the severity of the issue as a means of further justifying the circumvention. Kongsberg supervisors should be aware of this proclivity in an effort to minimize circumvention and as a means of keeping the communication lines through the chain of command intact.

References

Kassing, J. (2009 Jul). Breaking the chain of command: Making sense of employee circumvention. Journal of Business Communication, 46(3), 311-334.

Liu and Batt (2010) conducted a study to examine the individual and synergistic effects of how supervisors improve their employees' performance, with the use of group management and coaching practices. Subject participants were call center agents, in a highly standardized field of employment. The results showed "that the amount of coaching that an employee received each month predicted objective performance improvements over time" (p. 265). In addition, employees showed higher performance in instances where the supervisor implemented group assignments and group incentives. Lastly, a positive relationship was found between coaching and performance when group incentives were involved. Kongsberg can utilize this information to help improve their employee performance, through coaching, group assignments and group incentives.

References

Liu, X. & Batt, R. (2010). How supervisors influence performance: A multilevel study of coaching and group management in technology-mediated services. Personnel Psychology, 63, 265-298.

Camuffo and Gerli (2007) noted that although manufacturing has decreased in most North American and European regions, northeast Italian organizations have been successful because of their "superior manufacturing capabilities grounded, among other things, on people's competencies" (p....

As such, the researchers investigated the nature of the competencies employed by production supervisors in this region. Their research identified four threshold competencies and nine distinctive competencies, which offered insight into the relationship these competencies and their organization's manufacturing capabilities. Threshold competencies were: efficiency orientation, initiative, empathy, and group management. Distinctive competencies included: planning, attention to detail, persuasiveness, networking, self-confidence, developing others, use of concepts, using technology, and social objectivity. Kongsberg supervisors can use this information to implement tools to develop skill development in these critical areas to increase their manufacturing competitiveness.