proactivity directed toward the team

Proactivity Directed Toward the Team and Organization: the Role of Leadership, Commitment and Role-breadth Self-efficacy Karoline Strauss, Mark A. Griffin and Alannah E. Rafferty 1 Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK, and 1 School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Australia Emails: k.strauss@sheffield.ac.uk; m.griffin@sheffield.ac.uk; a.raff[email protected] Employees’ proactive behaviour is increasingly important for organizations seeking to adapt in unc erta in economic env iron men ts. Thi s study examined the link betwee n leadership and proactive behaviour. We differentiated between organizational leadership and team leadership and proposed that transformational leadership by team leaders would enhance commitment to the team, which would predict team member proactivity. In contrast, transformational leadership by leaders of the organization would enhance commitment to the organization, which we expected to predict organization member proact ivi ty. Transf ormati ona l leaders hip on bot h leve ls was expe cte d to inc rease employees’ role-breadth self-efficacy, the confidence necessary to engage in proactive behaviour. Our results demonstrate the importance of leadership as an antecedent of proact ive work behavi our and sugges t tha t leaders hip at different leve ls influ enc es proactivity via different mediators. Transformational team leaders seem to facilitate proact ivity by increa sing employ ees’ confide nce to initia te chang e. Transf ormat ional organizational leaders on the other hand increase proactivity by enhancing employees’ commitment to the organization. Emplo yees ’ proac tive work behaviour s are cru- cial to organizational success in rapidly changing economic environments (Crant, 2000; Frese and Fay, 2001; Parker , 2000) and ar e es pe ci al ly impor tant in unce rtain environme nts where the mos t effect ive wor k beh avi our s cannot be pre - scr ibe d in advance (Griffin, Neal and Parker, 200 7). Pr oac tive ind ivi duals take sel f-di re cte d ac ti on to anti ci pate or init iate change in the work system or work roles (Grant and Ashford, 2008). Pr oact ive be havi our is cruc ial in the process of innovation, influencing the transition from idea generation to idea impleme ntation (Rank, Pace and Frese, 2004). In recent years, cons ider able resear ch has sou ght to ide nti fy bot h indivi dua l fac tors (e. g. Bateman and Crant, 1993; Frese et al ., 1996) and contextual characteristics (e.g. Fay and Sonnen- tag, 2002; Frese and Fay, 2001; Parker, Williams and Turner, 2006) that might influence proactive behaviour. Leadership is one potentially important contex tual influen ce on proac tivity (Crant, 200 0). Howeve r, rec ent stu die s of pro act ivi ty have not demonstrated a link between leadership and pr oa ct ive be havi our (Fre se, Te ng an d Wi jnen, 1999; Parker, Wi ll iams and Turner , 2006) . Thes e studi es have investiga ted suppo r- ti ve le ader ship, whic h mi ght not be the most important le ader be havi ou r for pr omot in g proactivity. The cur rent stu dy inv est iga tes tra nsf orma- tional leadership. Transformational leaders influ- enc e fol lower s’ val ues , att itud es and emotions (Bass, 1985) and motivate followers to perform British Journal of Management, Vol. 20, 279–291 (2009) DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00590.x r 2008 British Academy of Management. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA.

Upload: moeshfieq-williams

Post on 02-Jun-2018

214 views

Category: