Promoting Role Breadth Self-Efficacy Through Involvement, Work Redesign and Training

By Carolyn M. Axtell, Sharon K. Parker. 2003

199 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9cb24fe1da51e5393ca155d6bcbf7dee7fb85d2e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Designing Motivating Jobs: An Expanded Framework for Linking Work Characteristics and Motivation (2008, result): “Consistent with this reasoning, several researchers have established a link between job enrichment and self-efficacy (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Burr & Cordery, 2001; Parker, 1998; Speier & Frese, 1997).”
The development of five scales to measure employees’ appraisals of organizational-level stress management interventions (2009, background): “…on previous research on teamwork it was hypothesized that successful team implementation would be associated with higher levels of self-efficacy (Axtell & Parker, 2003; van Mierlo, Rutte, Vermunt, Kompier, & Doorewaard, 2006), wellbeing (Rasmussen & Jeppesen, 2006; Sprigg, Jackson, & Parker,…”
Taking Stock: Integrating and Differentiating Multiple Proactive Behaviors (2010, background): “…as an important precursor of taking charge and similar behaviors (e.g., 654 Journal of Management / May 2010 at University of Western Australia on June 9, 2016jom.sagepub.comDownloaded from Axtell & Parker, 2003; Speier & Frese, 1997), it has received less attention as an influence on voice.”
A Great Many Things to Do and Not a Minute to Spare: Can Feedback From Supervisors Moderate the Relationship Between Skill Variety, Time Pressure, and Employees' Innovative Behavior? (2009, background): “Among them are job enlargement and routinization (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Ohly et al., 2006).”
Proactive Work Behavior: Forward-Thinking and Change-Oriented Action in Organizations (2011, background): “This theme fits with broader motivational theories such as goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990), action theory (Hacker, 1985) and social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986), and relates to Crant’s (2000) recommendation to consider the role of goals in proactive behavior. At the simplest level, th”
Making Things Happen: A Model of Proactive Motivation (2010, background): “Several longitudinal studies have shown that job enrichment predicts role-breadth self-efficacy (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Parker, 1998; Parker et al., 1997) and that this type of self-efficacy mediates the link between job enrichment and proactivity (Parker, Williams, et al., 2006).”
Trust in organization as a moderator of the relationship between self‐efficacy and workplace outcomes: A social cognitive theory‐based examination (2018, background): “There is some evidence that men have higher levels of RBSE compared to women (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Parker, 1998).”
Examining the Intermediate Role of Employee Abilities, Motivation and Opportunities to Participate in the Relationship between HR Bundles and Employee Performance (2018, background): “Without the necessary investments in workforce development, greater autonomy for employees would entail their having to assume difficult challenges, which may undermine employee self-efficacy (Axtell and Parker, 2003).”
The relationship between high performance work systems and employee proactive behaviour: role breadth self-efficacy and flexible role orientation as mediating mechanisms (2017, background): “Finally, HPWS help to expand the boundaries of previously narrow jobs by giving employees greater influence in workplace decisions and performing activities they would not normally do, such as solving problems and making improvements (Axtell and Parker, 2003).”
Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. (2006, background): “It has also been shown to be malleable (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Parker, 1998).”
The dynamics of proactivity at work (2008, background): “…have shown that under conditions of autonomy, employees are more likely to display a series of proactive behaviors, including problem-solving and idea implementation (Parker et al., 2006), prosocial rulebreaking (Morrison, 2006), and role expansion (Axtell & Parker, 2003; Parker et al., 1997).”