Perceived prosocial impact, perceived situational constraints, and proactive work behavior: Looking at two distinct affective pathways

Sonnentag, Sabine; Starzyk, Anita

doi:10.1002/job.2005

Cited by 86 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 98 publications

(139 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, in order to make these changes to work processes, agents had to take charge of the issue and push it through a multi-stage process before handing it over to managers to resolve. Put differently, the episodes of proactivity followed a goal regulation process, similar to previous depictions of proactivity in which individuals generated proactive goals (problem recognition and ownership) (Bindl et al, 2012;Grant & Ashford, 2008;Sonnentag & Starzyk, 2015) and strived to attain those goals via consulting with managers, evidence building, and escalating to managers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…First, in proactive goal generation, under one's own volition, one creates a goal to bring about a new and different future by changing the self and/or the environment. Second, proactive goal striving involves the behavioral and psychological mechanisms by which individuals seek to accomplish proactive goals and reflect on their outcomes (see also Sonnentag and Starzyk, 2015, who similarly distinguish between issue identification and issue implementation).…”

Section: Social Context In the Proactivity Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Proactivity routines: The role of social processes in how employees self-initiate change

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proactive work behaviors are self-initiated, future-focused actions aimed at bringing about changes to work processes in organizations. Such behaviors occur within the social context of work. The extant literature that has focused on the role of social context for proactivity has focused on social context as an overall input or output of proactivity. However, in this article we argue that the process of engaging in proactive work behavior (proactive goal-striving) may also be a function of the social context in which it occurs. Based on qualitative data from 39 call center employees in an energy-supply company, we find that in a context characterized by standardized work procedures, proactive goal-striving can occur through a proactivity routine – a socially constructed and accepted pattern of action by which employees initiate and achieve changes to work processes, with the support of managers and colleagues. Our findings point to the need to view proactive work behaviors at a higher level of analysis than the individual in order to identify shared routines for engaging in proactivity, as well as how multiple actors coordinate their efforts in the process of achieving individually-generated proactive goals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Social Context In the Proactivity Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proactivity routines: The role of social processes in how employees self-initiate change

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, we contribute to research on affect at work (Beal & Ghandour, 2011;Sonnentag & Starzyk, 2015). Research in organizational behavior described the role of information and communication technology (ICT) in organizations (Gephart, 2002;Mazmanian, 2013), but has rarely linked aspects of ICT use to affect at work.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeling interrupted—Being responsive: How online messages relate to affect at work

Reinecke²,

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Being constantly connected to others via e‐mail and other online messages is increasingly typical for many employees. In this paper, we develop and test a model that specifies how interruptions by online messages relate to negative and positive affect. We hypothesize that perceived interruptions by online messages predict state negative affect via time pressure and that perceived interruptions predict state positive affect via responsiveness to these online messages and perceived task accomplishment. A daily survey study with 174 employees (a total of 811 day‐level observations) provided support for our hypotheses at the between‐person and within‐person level. In addition, perceived interruptions showed a negative direct association with perceived task accomplishment. Our study highlights the importance of being responsive to online messages and shows that addressing only the negative effects of perceived interruptions does not suffice to understand the full impact of interruptions by online messages in modern jobs.

show abstract

“…Both time pressure (1‐ICC ranged between .31 and .41) and PWB (1‐ICC ranged between .47 and .61) show sufficient levels of within‐person variance across weeks to investigate their fluctuation over time (see Table ). These figures correspond to the proportions of within‐person variability reported in daily diary studies that used the same measures for time pressure (e.g., Ohly & Fritz, , 1‐ICC = .36) and PWB (Fritz & Sonnentag, , 1‐ICC = .28; Sonnentag & Starzyk, , average 1‐ICC = .48). Thus, we modelled time pressure and PWB as Level 1 (within‐person) variables.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 54%

Time pressure and proactive work behaviour: A week‐level study on intraindividual fluctuations and reciprocal relationships

Urbach

Weigelt

2019

J Occupat & Organ Psyc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research on proactive work behaviours (PWBs) pointed out that these behaviours can have negative consequences for the proactive individual. We add to this perspective by showing that PWBs may be a source of strain at work and result in elevated time pressure. Challenging the view of time pressure as a challenge stressor, we hypothesize that over the course of work weeks, time pressure will result in less (rather than more) PWB. We investigate these reciprocal effects as within‐person, week‐level fluctuations of time pressure and PWB based on experience sampling data (N = 52 participants, k = 274 observations). Over the course of three consecutive work weeks, results show a positive lagged effect of PWB in the first week on experiencing time pressure in the second week; in turn, time pressure in the second week had a negative lagged effect on PWB in the third week. Results further suggest that PWB is lowest in work weeks of low time pressure when following a week of high time pressure, indicating a conservation of resources interpretation of the results. Practitioner points Above and beyond the many positive effects of employees’ proactive work behaviour (PWB), organizations need to be aware that these behaviours can have costs for employees, for example, in increasing their experience of time pressure. Over consecutive work weeks, time pressure seems to impede rather than facilitate employees’ PWBs. When work weeks characterized by high time pressure were followed by work weeks of low time pressure, employees used the latter to ‘recharge their batteries’ instead of engaging in more PWB.

show abstract

Perceived prosocial impact, perceived situational constraints, and proactive work behavior: Looking at two distinct affective pathways

Cited by 86 publications

References 98 publications

Proactivity routines: The role of social processes in how employees self-initiate change

Proactivity routines: The role of social processes in how employees self-initiate change

Feeling interrupted—Being responsive: How online messages relate to affect at work

Time pressure and proactive work behaviour: A week‐level study on intraindividual fluctuations and reciprocal relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About