Employee, manage thyself: The potentially negative implications of expecting employees to behave proactively

By M. Bolino, Sorin Vâlcea, Jaron Harvey. 2010

193 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, General Health Professions, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a81c3525da227ce56a500f8aad91abbbe1f0c392

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

In General Health Professions

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Citations in the corpus

Leader reactions to follower proactive behavior: Giving credit when credit is due (2015, background): “Bolino et al. (2010) suggest that some leaders may value follower proactive behavior while others prefer for followers to focus upon their job duties.”
A self-regulation approach to understanding citizenship behavior in organizations (2012, background): “Indeed, Bolino et al. (2010) reported that citizenship pressure is associated with higher levels of stress.”
When does proactivity have a cost? Motivation at work moderates the effects of proactive work behavior on employee job strain (2017, background): “depletion effects (Bolino et al., 2010; Hahn et al., 2012), we have hypothesized that only in the situation where autonomous motivation is low and controlled motivation is high, do we expect proactive behavior to be associated with increase strain.”
Making the most of structural support: : moderating influence of employees' clarity and negative affect. (2013, background): “As Bolino, Valcea, and Harvey (2010) argued, behaving proactively is likely to deplete time and mental energy because it entails future-oriented anticipation and planning, and because it often involves additional responsibilities, it also consumes physical energy.”
Daily job crafting and momentary work engagement: A self-determination and self-regulation perspective (2019, methodology): “This may create friction between proactive and less proactive employees and result in conflict (Bolino et al., 2010; Luvison & Cummings, 2017).”
A resources perspective on when and how proactive work behaviour leads to employee withdrawal (2019, background): “First, it has been argued that proactivity under pressure might be stressful and thus drain cognitive resources (Bolino et al., 2010).”
The performance implications of ambivalent initiative: The interplay of autonomous and controlled motivations (2011, background): “Recently, scholars have called for a more nuanced view of the performance consequences of initiative (e.g., Bolino et al., 2010; Grant & Ashford, 2008) and empirically demonstrated variability in these consequences (e.g., Chan, 2006; Grant, Gino, & Hofmann, in press; Grant et al., 2009).”