Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11861/8307
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDr. PENG Zhengmin, Kellyen_US
dc.contributor.authorWu, Chia-Hueien_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-19T02:46:50Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-19T02:46:50Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationIn Peng, Kelly Z. & Wu, Chia-Huei (Eds.). (2021). Emotion and proactivity at work: Prospects and dialogues. (pp.1-10). Bristol University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9781529208306-
dc.identifier.isbn9781529212655-
dc.identifier.isbn9781529212631-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11861/8307-
dc.description.abstractDue to globalization and technology innovation, the business environment has become more complex and uncertain. To cope with such a changing environment effectively, employees are expected to be proactive, to respond to and master changes effectively, instead of waiting for their supervisors or organizations to instruct them what to do (Griffin, Neal, and Parker, 2007). Being proactive is about taking control to make things happen rather than watching things happen. To date, scholars in the field of organizational behaviour have invested lots of effort to study employee proactive behaviour (proactivity in brief), that is, self-initiating, future-oriented behaviour aiming to improve the work situations or oneself (Parker, Bindl, and Strauss, 2010). Proactivity is initiated by employees themselves owing to their interests, motivation or beliefs, instead of instructions or demands from others. Proactivity is future-oriented, as it is strongly based on anticipating and thinking about the longer-term future. Proactivity is change-oriented as it acts to address those anticipated challenges by improving or altering the status quo. It involves aspiring and striving to bring about change in the environment and/or oneself to achieve a different future (Grant and Ashford, 2008). That is, being proactive requires more motivational energy. As a result, scholars have invested lots of effort to identify motivational forces that can drive proactive behaviour (for example, Parker, Bindl, and Strauss, 2010). As Mitchell and Daniels (2003) indicated, employees’ behaviour can be driven by cold (or cognitive) processes as well as hot (or affective) processes.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBristol University Pressen_US
dc.titleEmotion and proactivity at work: Where are we now?en_US
dc.typeBook Chapteren_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.51952/9781529212655.int001-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Business Administration-
Appears in Collections:Business Administration - Publication
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

14
checked on Jan 3, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Impact Indices

Altmetric

PlumX

Metrics


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.