Proactive Work Behavior: Forward-Thinking and Change-Oriented Action in Organizations

By Uta K. Bindl, Sharon K. Parker. 2011

421 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7a895f55285740cdd50556d509f931cb0e727a64

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 Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

When and Why People Engage in Different Forms of Proactive Behavior: Interactive Effects of Self-construals and Work Characteristics (2017, background): “Although situational factors have been widely examined in proactivity literature (see Bindl & Parker, 2010, for a review), to our knowledge, the investigation of how these factors drive different forms of proactive behavior has been limited.”
Redesigning work through idiosyncratic deals (2014, background): “Incumbents also proactively shape their jobs through self-initiated and change-oriented behaviours, such as job crafting and interactions with others (Ashford & Black, 1996; Bindl & Parker, 2011; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001).”
The process of reinventing a job: A meta–synthesis of qualitative job crafting research (2019, methodology): “Moreover, contextual characteristics are considered important antecedents of proactive work behaviors (e.g., Bindl & Parker, 2011; Ohly & Schmitt, 2017; Zhang & Parker, 2018).”
The relationship between perceived organizational support and proactive behaviour directed towards the organization (2016, background): “They are consistent with Crant’s (2000) and Bindl and Parker’ (2011) suggestion that organizational factors and, in particular, a supportive organizational culture is likely to positively influence employees’ proactivity.”
Revisiting How and When Perceived Organizational Support Enhances Taking Charge (2015, background): “Is this only whether or not to speak up or does it extend to other change-oriented and proactive behaviors (Bindl & Parker, 2010; Chiaburu, Lorinkova, & Van Dyne, in press)?”
Proactive Vitality Management, Work Engagement, and Creativity: The Role of Goal Orientation (2018, background): “…goal-driven processes, proactive vitality management may be seen as a specific form of proactivity that may indeed fall under the proactive goal generation process, and more specifically under the umbrella of proactive person-environment fit behaviour (Bindl & Parker, 2010; Parker & Collins, 2010).”
Successful aging at work: A process model to guide future research and practice (2020, background): “Although previous research has examined enabling factors of proactive behavior at work (e.g., Bindl & Parker, 2011), this research did not focus on self-regulation behaviors aimed at maintaining or restoring P-E fit during workers’ aging process.”
Making Change Happen (2013, methodology): “…adaptive behavior (i.e., “I adapt well to change”) and proactive behavior (i.e., “I make things happen”) might result in less valid answers because of social desirability, relative to context-specific measures where social desirability is less obvious (Bindl & Parker, 2010; Parker et al., 2006).”
Impact of inclusive leadership on innovative work behavior: The role of psychological safety (2017, background): “…on innovative work behavior JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT & ORGANIZATION 119 Leaders who demonstrate this behavior, learn, help, and lead the employees (Vaill, 1996), and motivate them to show IWB (Crant, 2000; Hollander, 2009; Bindl & Parker, 2010; Shore, Randel, Chung, Dean, Ehrhart, & Singh, 2011).”
Personal Initiative and Job Performance Evaluations: Role of Political Skill in Opportunity Recognition and Capitalization (2017, methodology): “As in the previous studies we controlled for age and gender, because these variables are known to influence both the amount of personal initiative shown (Bindl & Parker, 2010) and job performance evaluations (age: Waldman & Avolio, 1986; gender: Bowen et al., 2000).”
Leader reactions to follower proactive behavior: Giving credit when credit is due (2015, background): “Behaviors such as these are considered ‘proactive’ because they are selfinitiated, anticipatory or future-oriented and are intended to constructively change current circumstances (Bindl and Parker, 2011; Crant, 2000; Grant and Ashford, 2008).”