Proactive champions: how personal and organizational resources enable proactive personalities to become idea champions

Abstract

In investigating the relationship between employees' proactive personality and idea championing, this study addresses how this relationship might be augmented when employees can draw from pertinent personal resources (persuasion self-efficacy and job enthusiasm) and organizational resources (social interaction and organizational support for change). Two-wave survey data, collected among employees in a banking organization, show that employees' proactive personalities increase the likelihood that they mobilize support for innovative ideas, especially if they (1) feel confident that they can defend these ideas successfully, (2) experience their jobs as sources of personal fulfillment, (3) maintain informal relationships with peers, and (4) believe their organizations embrace change. For managers, these findings indicate that employees will leverage their positive energy, derived from their desire for initiative taking, into enhanced change-oriented championing activities if they also can draw from pertinent resources that enhance their ability or motivation to engage in those leveraging efforts.

Achieving organizational effectiveness of MNCs through People: evidence from India and Mozambique

“…The findings of this research are of particular value for the Indian banking companies planning to invest in Mozambique. Our conclusions will support HR informed decisions, complementing extant literature on organizational behavior with data from this Indian Ocean Region country (De Clercq and Pereira, 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2022).…”

The damage of deference: how personal and organizational factors transform deference to leader authority into unethical pro-organizational behavior

“…Model 1 included the control variables, Model 2 added deference to leader authority, Model 3 added the direct effects of the four contingent factors and Models 4–7 added the deference to leader authority × dispositional greed, deference to leader authority × proactive personality, deference to leader authority × workplace status, and deference to leader authority × job rotation interaction terms, respectively. Prior research recommends adding multiple interaction terms sequentially in separate equations, because their concurrent estimation in a single model might obscure the true moderating effects (Covin et al , 2006; De Clercq and Pereira, 2021a). Following the procedure suggested by Aiken and West (1991), I mean-centered the constructs before calculating their respective product terms.…”

“…The four resources also complement one another. First, employees’ dispositional greed and proactive personality are stable characteristics that reflect their personal differences and inclinations (De Clercq and Pereira, 2021a; Hirschfeld and Van Scotter, 2019), whereas their workplace status and job rotation speak to their organizational standing and functioning (De Clercq et al , 2013; Torelli et al , 2014). Second, complementary mechanisms underpin their potential catalytic roles.…”

From workplace bullying to workplace withdrawal: mediating role of fear-based silence and moderating role of personality

“…Research advocates that proactive employee and those with internal locus of control (Rotter, 1966) tend to perceive themselves as proficient of engaging in productive, transforming actions rather than in damaging and inactive withdrawal behaviours like JOEPP 10,2 being late or absent when observing job attributes to be unchallengeable or static. There is an augmented possibility that the employees with PP organize support for innovative ideas when they feel confident that they can defend their ideas effectively, derive personal fulfilment from their jobs, are able to sustain informal relationships with co-workers and trust that their organizations can adapt change (Clercq and Pereira, 2021).…”