The risks and benefits of initiating change at work: Social consequences for proactive employees who take charge

Zhang, Melody J.; Law, Kenneth S.; Lin, Wang

doi:10.1111/peps.12423

Cited by 42 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 121 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Proactivity may require an employee to focus on the future, challenge the status quo, and “mak[e] things happen” ( Parker et al, 2019 ). Although proactive behavior may promote career success and performance for employees ( Fuller and Marler, 2009 ; Thomas et al, 2010 ; Tornau and Frese, 2015 ), scholars have argued that proactive behavior is not always appreciated by leaders and coworkers and may lead to some negative outcomes ( Spychala and Sonnentag, 2011 ; Fay and Huttges, 2017 ; Pingel et al, 2019 ; Cangiano et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). In this paper, we argue that proactivity generates workplace anxiety.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In an interdependent work environment, violating or changing the prescribed pattern means that proactivity will affect other people’s work. Thus, being proactive is not always welcome or may even be rejected or envied by others ( Bolino et al, 2010 ; Sun et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). For example, previous studies have suggested that, although proactive behavior is necessary, it should conform to the leader’s expectations ( Campbell, 2000 ; Grant et al, 2010 ).…”

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Proactivity has received much attention in recent years because it benefits organizations in many ways, such as by increasing organizational effectiveness ( Griffin et al, 2007 ; Grant et al, 2010 ) or enhancing long-term working conditions ( Frese et al, 2007 ). Nonetheless, a small but growing body of research has revealed that there is a dark side to proactive behavior as it can have a negative impact on an individual’s health, well-being, and family life ( Fay and Huttges, 2017 ; Cangiano et al, 2019 ; Altura et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ). Work-family conflict refers to role pressure from one domain (work and family) transferring to another domain (family and work; Kahn et al, 1964 ; Greenhaus and Beutell, 1985 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Relationship Between Proactive Behavior and Work-Family Conflict: A Moderated Mediation Model

Cui

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to explore the linking mechanisms and conditional processes underlying the relationship between proactive behavior and work-family conflict. Considering the conservation of resources theory, we argue that workplace anxiety mediates the relationship between proactive behavior and work-family conflict. Furthermore, we suggest that immediate supervisor perspective taking and employee emotional intelligence moderate this proposed indirect effect. Two-wave, multisource lagged data were collected from 450 employees of seven domestic Chinese firms to examine the hypothesized moderated mediation model. Our findings support the hypothesis that proactive behavior is positively related to work-family conflict and that workplace anxiety partially mediates this relationship. Immediate supervisor perspective taking moderates the positive association of proactive behavior with workplace anxiety and the indirect relationship between proactive behavior and work-family conflict through workplace anxiety. Emotional intelligence moderates the positive association of proactive behavior with workplace anxiety and the indirect relationship between proactive behavior and work-family conflict through workplace anxiety. The results deepen our theoretical understanding of the consequences of proactivity by demonstrating the positive associations between proactive behavior and work-family conflict. The current study also contributes to the literature by identifying workplace anxiety as a mediating mechanism explaining the relationship between proactivity and work-family conflict. Furthermore, supervisor perspective taking and employee emotional intelligence moderate the above mediating effect.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Framework and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Relationship Between Proactive Behavior and Work-Family Conflict: A Moderated Mediation Model

Cui

2021

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rapid changes in current technologies, business models, and work environments have restricted managers’ capabilities to deal with complex and dynamic issues [ 1 , 2 ]. To cope with these changes and maintain competitive advantages, increasing organizations are turning their attention to the employees because employees are the ones who are truly exposed to the “front line” and are most sensitive to changes when the company environment changes [ 3 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To cope with these changes and maintain competitive advantages, increasing organizations are turning their attention to the employees because employees are the ones who are truly exposed to the “front line” and are most sensitive to changes when the company environment changes [ 3 ]. Organizations count on employees to proactively detect and solve problems to promote their effectiveness [ 1 , 2 ]. Given this trend among the practitioners, researchers have paid growing attention to proactive behaviors [ 2 , 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job Insecurity and Employees’ Taking Charge Behaviors: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model

Sun

Zheng

Lan

2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the rapid changes in current technologies, business models, and work environments, organizations and managers increasingly rely on their employees’ proactive behaviors, such as taking charge, to gain competitive advantages. Taking charge involves a range of risky and future-oriented behaviors, and it requires employees to work hard to achieve them in the future. For employees with high job-insecurity, their job continuity in the future is threatened. Thus, they may not be willing to take risks to do additional work that is “future-oriented”. To our knowledge, the effect of job insecurity on employees’ taking charge has rarely been studied. As a result, the purpose of our study is to investigate whether, how, and when job insecurity will influence taking charge. Drawing on the conservation of resources theory and proactive motivation model, we develop a theoretical model. Moreover, we employed a multi-wave and multi-source survey to test our predictions. Based on the data from 194 full-time employees paired with their direct supervisors, the results provided consistent support for the proposed hypotheses. Specifically, the results indicate that job insecurity prohibits employees’ taking charge behaviors through deteriorating their work engagement. Furthermore, employees’ perception of interactional justice moderates the negative influence of job insecurity on their work engagement and, consequently, their taking charge behaviors. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

The role of digitalization and inclusive climate in building a resilient workforce: An ability–motivation–opportunity approach

Zahoor,

Roumpi,

Tarba

et al. 2024

J Organ Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryOrganizations need resilient employees to navigate and leverage constant change and maneuver in turbulent, disruptive contexts. As such, it is imperative to advance a nuanced understanding of drivers and enablers of employee resilience, especially in the current business context of pervasive digitalization and the growing practice of work‐from‐everywhere. Our research explores how digitalization in the organization is reflected in the employees' behavior of taking charge and resilience. By accounting for core self‐evaluation, digital literacy, and inclusive climate boundary conditions, we offer a holistic picture of under what conditions digitalization enhances taking charge and employee resilience. To test our study model, we follow a survey research design and rely on 173 employees' data working in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Our results show that digitalization is positively related to employee resilience. Further, our findings show that core self‐evaluation, digital literacy, and inclusive climate moderate the impact of digitalization on employee resilience. Our results received further support in a two‐wave online survey with 306 employees in the United States. The support we found for the hypothesized mediating relationship highlights the criticality of taking charge in relation to digitalization and employee resilience. Taking charge is critical in relatively turbulent environments as it helps employees deal with changes in processes, procedures, and structures.

show abstract

The risks and benefits of initiating change at work: Social consequences for proactive employees who take charge

Cited by 42 publications

References 121 publications

The Relationship Between Proactive Behavior and Work-Family Conflict: A Moderated Mediation Model

The Relationship Between Proactive Behavior and Work-Family Conflict: A Moderated Mediation Model

Job Insecurity and Employees’ Taking Charge Behaviors: Testing a Moderated Mediation Model

The role of digitalization and inclusive climate in building a resilient workforce: An ability–motivation–opportunity approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About