Giving Time, Time After Time: Work Design and Sustained Employee Participation in Corporate Volunteering

By Adam M. Grant. 2012

356 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/39b702d8616dddb8e001cb501714a98c1a01db8f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Weekly job crafting and leisure crafting: Implications for meaning‐making and work engagement (2017, background): “, via job crafting); therefore, they can be expected to compensate for these needs via leisure activity (Grant, 2012).”
Finding Meaning through Volunteering: Why Do Employees Volunteer and What Does It Mean for Their Jobs? (2013, methodology): “In doing so, this research responds to recent calls for researchers to join the discussion of employee volunteering that is currently dominated by practitioners (Grant, 2012) and to contribute theoretical perspectives to a literature that is currently lacking conceptual models (Tschirhart, 2005).”
Service employees and self-verification: The roles of occupational stigma consciousness and core self-evaluations (2014, background): “Further, managers can orchestrate community outreach or volunteer opportunities so that employees can find another outlet to find meaning in what they do (Grant, 2012).”
The Bright Side of Being Prosocial at Work, and the Dark Side, Too: A Review and Agenda for Research on Other-Oriented Motives, Behavior, and Impact in Organizations (2016, background): “…to learn more about the contextual factors that motivate employees to care about helping others and the psychological and behavioral consequences of making a difference, finding that when employees see the positive impact of their work on others, they are more productive (e.g. Grant, 2007, 2012a).”
On Corporate Social Responsibility, Sensemaking, and the Search for Meaningfulness Through Work (2019, background): “…and Mish (2015); Liu and Ko (2011) Social influences Rupp et al. (2011) Stakeholder theory Agle, Mitchell, and Sonnenfeld (1999) Stewardship theory Aguilera et al. (2007) Work design Grant (2012); Pajo and Lee (2011) Note: Some of the sources are associated with more than one variable and theory.”
Engaged and Productive Misfits: How Job Crafting and Leisure Activity Mitigate the Negative Effects of Value Incongruence (2016, background): “…Greenglass, 1987; Edwards & Rothbard, 2000), as well as more specific research on leisure activities, suggest that leisure activities can serve as a substitute for unmet needs in the workplace (e.g., Grant, 2012; Heine et al., 2006; Tinsley & Eldredge, 1995; Tinsley, Hinson, Tinsley, & Holt, 1993).”
Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: The moderating role of CSR‐specific relative autonomy and individualism (2018, background): “This is consistent with Aguinis and Glavas's argument that when employees take part in CSR activities of their own volition (i.e., bottom‐up CSR management), they are more likely to find meaning in their work, which contributes to their work engagement (see also Glavas, 2016; Grant, 2012).”
Beyond motivation: job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. (2014, background): “The positive effects of relational work design are boosted by transformational leadership (Grant 2012b).”
Tensions in Corporate Sustainability: Towards an Integrative Framework (2014, unknown): “With such programmes, firms formally sponsor employees’ community involvement by approving time off and providing additional resources (Grant 2012).”
Perceptions of Employee Volunteering: Is It “Credited” or “Stigmatized” by Colleagues? (2016, background): “This manuscript expands what is currently a rather limited understanding of employee volunteering (Grant, 2012; Tschirhart, 2005).”
The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person-centric systematic review (2017, background): “The second is employees’ need for external recognition that, according to Grant (2012), operates as a powerful driver of participation in volunteering and helps produce a new “volunteer” identity that can compensate for a job that offers poor social enrichment.”
Win–Win–Win: The Influence of Company‐Sponsored Volunteerism Programs on Employees, NGOs, and Business Units (2013, methodology): “…research should assess the change in employees’ identity, attitudes, and values toward volunteering (Clary et al., 1998; Finkelstein et al., 2005; Grant, 2012; Penner, 2002) as a function of volunteer assignments’ characteristics, volunteers’ experiences (Grube & Piliavin, 2000; Pajo & Lee,…”
(Mis)Using employee volunteering for public relations: implications for corporate volunteers' organizational commitment (2015, background): “However, while the literature provides valuable insights into why CSEV relates to employee outcomes, there is a need for a more comprehensive understanding of the conditions under which those outcomes occur (Grant, 2012).”
When corporate social responsibility motivates employee citizenship behavior: The sensitizing role of task significance (2018, background): “Some companies even have corporate volunteering programs that allow employees to volunteer for nonprofit organizations through their workplace (Grant, 2012; Jones, 2010).”
Social Entrepreneurial Intention Formation of Corporate Volunteers (2013, background): “…defining entrepreneurial orientation (Lumpkin and Dess 1996; Lumpkin and Dess 2001) were identified in our sample of corporate volunteers (cf. Grant 2012; Organ 1988; Peterson 2004): continuous innovation, adaptation, and learning (Dees 1998; Lumpkin and Dess 1996) within the different…”
Working with creative leaders: Exploring the relationship between supervisors' and subordinates' creativity (2017, background): “Hence, observing and learning from leaders’ behaviors during social interactions can be an important and salient source of subordinates’ role identity development (Farmer et al., 2003; Sluss & Ashforth, 2008; Grant, 2012; Van Dyne & Farmer, 2004).”