PhD Seminar Series: Muyu Xia and Rujuta Bhagwat

When Workplace Experiences Diverge: Attributional and Moral-Emotional Pathways to Behavioral Outcomes 

Speaker: Muyu Xia (Bocconi University)

Abstract: Project 1: Abusive Supervision, Attributions, and Moral Disengagement
Drawing on moral disengagement and attribution theories, this project examines how abusive supervision shapes the direction of subordinates’ unethical behaviors. We propose a dual-mechanism model in which abusive supervision activates both moral disengagement and attribution processes. Moral disengagement justifies unethical conduct, whereas attributions determine its direction. When abusive supervisory behavior is attributed to performance-promotion motives, subordinates are more likely to engage in unethical pro-leader behavior (UPLB). When it is attributed to injury-initiation motives, they are more likely to engage in leader-directed deviance (LTD). Leader–member exchange (LMX) further moderates these indirect effects. The hypotheses will be tested using two multi-wave field studies and one experimental study.
Project 2: Workplace Interpersonal Capitalization, Emotions, and Knowledge Behaviors
This project distinguishes between two types of positive work events shared in capitalization attempts: mutual-beneficiary and self-beneficiary events. We propose that these forms elicit different emotional responses in recipients—gratitude and greed, respectively—which shape subsequent knowledge behaviors toward the discloser. Mutual-beneficiary capitalization is expected to promote knowledge sharing via gratitude, whereas self-beneficiary capitalization is expected to increase knowledge hiding via greed. Recipients’ general attributions of the discloser’s motives are proposed to moderate these emotional pathways. The hypotheses will be tested using an experience-sampling study, a multi-wave, multi-source field study, and a laboratory experiment.

From Market for Carbon to Market for Ideas: How scientific capabilities reshaped firm innovation 

Speaker: Rujuta Bhagwat (Bocconi University)

Abstract: Incumbent firms have systematically reduced internal science engagement as innovation has become distributed across markets for technology. Yet science-based innovation commands increasing private value — and patents grounded in a firm's own science are valued most. This creates a structural tension: as the scientific intensity of valuable innovation rises, firms' heterogeneous science capabilities may increasingly determine the strategies through which they can participate in science-intensive innovation. The paper exploits the EU Emissions Trading Scheme as a demand shock, increasing returns to green innovation. Using matched difference-in-differences from 1995 to 2015, baseline results show that firms increase green innovation by 22% and increase acquisition of green innovation by 35%. Findings show that the demand shock does not uniformly accelerate innovation — it reveals and amplifies pre-existing capability differences. Science-reliant firms show strategic stability, consistent with the shock validating prior capability investments. Non-science-reliant firms shift toward external acquisition and combination strategies — but only when they possess the capacity to absorb external science. Firms without either form of science engagement show no significant response. Patent quality analyses confirm that adapting firms targeted more science-intensive green innovation.