Psychosocial effects of proactivity. The interplay between proactive and collaborative behavior
| Published date | 05 March 2018 |
| Date | 05 March 2018 |
| Pages | 294-318 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-08-2016-0209 |
| Author | Brenda E. Ghitulescu |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
Psychosocial effects of proactivity
The interplay between proactive and
collaborative behavior
Brenda E. Ghitulescu
School of Business, Department of Management,
The College of New Jersey, Ewing, New Jersey, USA
Abstract
Purpose –Although proactivity is thought to havepositive effects in the workplace,researchers still need to
learn more aboutthe contingent aspects of theseeffects. Proactivity, a challengingform of promotive behavior
that is generallydesired by organizations,can lead to unexpected consequencessuch as role overload,job strain,
and conflictwith coworkers, which may undermine future proactivity.The purpose of this paperis to examine
the impact of proactive behavior on job satisfaction, affective commitment, and conflict with coworkers, in
the context of collaborative work. This study investigates the extent to which collaborative behavior, an
affiliative formof promotive behavior, can mitigate theimpact of proactive behavior on conflict and promote
positive individual psychosocialoutcomes, thus making proactivebehavior more sustainablein the workplace.
Design/methodology/approach –Using a survey methodology, data were collected from a sample of
170 teachers engaged in collaborative work.
Findings –Results show that both proactivity and collaborative behavior positively impact affective
outcomes, but have opposite effects on conflict. Collaborative behavior complements proactive behavior in
that it enhances the effects of proactivity on satisfaction and reduces its impact on conflict.
Research limitations/implications –Creating the appropriate organizational conditions to support
employee proactivity is critical for enhancing proactive employees’work experience and success, effectively
motivating and retaining them, and promoting future proactivity. The results indicate that collaboration
creates a context where the positive effects of proactivity are enhanced and its negative effects are weakened.
Originality/value –This research is one of the first studies to examine the interactive effects of proactivity
and collaboration. The study shows that collaborative behavior can play an important role in enhancing the
benefits of proactivity. Thus, the research advances a contingency perspective of proactivity and contributes
to a better understanding of its effects.
Keywords Quantitative, Proactive behaviour, Affective commitment, Job satisfaction, Conflict,
Collaborative behaviour
Paper type Research paper
Significant changes in the world of work in recent decades require workers to be more
proactive in addressing emergent demands and opportunities at work without the need
for close supervision (Griffin et al., 2007; Bindl and Parker, 2010). Employee proactivity
has emerged as a topic of interest among organizational scholars and practitioners
(Grant and Parker, 2009). Proactivity is anticipatory action that employees initiate to impact
themselves and their work environment, generally aimed at enacting work more effectively
(Grant and Ashford, 2008). Examples ofproactive behavior include initiating improved work
procedures, seekingfeedback, or actively adaptingto new environments. Many organizations
view employee proactivity as critical for remaining relevant and competitive in a dynamic
environment(Ashford et al., 2003; Frese and Fay,2001). Indeed, the ability to attractand retain
proactive workers represents an important source of competitive advantagefor organizations
(Bolino et al., 2010).
Organizations also expect employee collaboration to achieve challenging organizational
goals. Collaboration is increasingly important in a world that is more interdependent, and
Personnel Review
Vol. 47 No. 2, 2018
pp. 294-318
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0048-3486
DOI 10.1108/PR-08-2016-0209
Received 16 August 2016
Revised 1 April 2017
16 June 2017
Accepted 25 June 2017
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0048-3486.htm
This research was part of a larger study supported by the National Science Foundation
(Award No. 0228343).
294
PR
47,2
teamwork has become a central part of work in organizations. Members of work groups are
expected to cooperate effectively and group leaders are judged by how well they deliver
results in collaborative settings. Since proactivity and collaboration are increasingly
relevant in the world of work and often occur together, there is merit in studying how
collaborative behavior impacts the effects of proactivity. Indeed, scholars have argued that
there is an increased need to research new dimensions of performance relevant in today’s
world of work (Grant and Parker, 2009; Griffin et al., 2007; LePine and Van Dyne, 2001).
Following their call, this study considers collaborative and proactive behaviors as key
actions that contribute to organizational effectiveness in settings where workers need to
initiate changes and work together.
Specifically, this research examines the impact of proactivity on individual psychosocial
outcomes in a work setting that requires employees to collaborate. Our focus is on proactive
behavior as self-directed action to initiate change and shape the current boundaries of work
roles (similar to job crafting, Wrzesniewski and Dutton, 2001; Parker et al., 2006; Crant,
2000). Collaborative behavior captures the relational behavior that occurs between
individuals with different expertise, who see different aspects of a problem and work
together to find novel solutions (Gray, 1989). Proactivity and collaboration are promotive
behaviors, in that they promote, encourage, or cause things to happen (as opposed to
prohibitive behaviors, such as whistleblowing, which are protective and preventative)
(Van Dyne and LePine, 1998). Proactive behavior is a challenging form of promotive
behavior because it is change oriented, challenges the status quo, and can damage
relationships; in contrast, collaborative behavior is affiliative because it is interpersonal,
cooperative, and can strengthen relationships. Our study extends existing research and
contributes to our knowledge of what happens when organizations expect employees to
engage in these two forms of promotive behavior with such different orientations.
To date most proactivity research has focused on the positive organizationally oriented
outcomes of proactive behavior. The literature provides a strong theoretical foundation and
empirical evidence for the organizational benefits of proactivity. For example, meta-analytic
evidence supports the positive impact of proactivity on desired organizational outcomes
such as job performance and innovation (Thomas et al., 2010; Tornau and Frese, 2013).
However, there is limited understanding of the potential downsides of proactivity. When
organizations expect proactive behavior, such expectations could also lead to undesirable
consequences for employees because proactivity has risks (Bolino et al., 2010; Grant et al.,
2011; Cooper-Thomas and Burke, 2012; Glaser et al., 2016; Strauss et al., 2017; Fay and
Hűttges, 2017). Proactive individuals may use methods that are inappropriate, or take
actions that are poorly timed or do not create value. Importantly, being proactive may lead
to job strain because it consumes time, mental energy, and depletes individuals’resources;
proactive employees may also experience a sense of pressure or face resistance from
coworkers, thus undermining the sustainability of proactivity over time. Specifically,
proactivity can lead to increased conflict with coworkers over different ideas and task
strategies. Although task-related conflict can encourage task innovation, much research has
found that it can also impair the viability of collaborative work (De Dreu and Weingart,
2003; Lau and Murnighan, 2005) and thus undermine collaborative performance that is
critical to organizations (Amabile et al., 2001).
This paper argues that collaborative behavior can mitigate the negative effect of
proactivity by reducing conflict with coworkers, while enhancing proactive individuals’
work attitudes. The study examines the impact of proactivity and collaboration on job
satisfaction, affective commitment, and task-related conflict. Our choice of outcomes was
guided by the literature. Building on conservation of resources theory (Hobfoll, 1989) and
research on sustaining proactivity (Strauss et al., 2015), we focus on resources that enable
proactive individuals to sustain proactivity over time. Job satisfaction, a key indicator of
295
Psychosocial
effects of
proactivity
To continue reading
Request your trial