Organizational error management culture and its impact on performance: a two study replication

The authors argue that a high-organizational error management culture, conceptualized to include norms and common practices in organizations (e.g., communicating about errors, detecting, analyzing, and correcting errors quickly), is pivotal to the reduction of negative and the promotion of positive error consequences. Organizational error management culture was positively related to firm performance across 2 studies conducted in 2 different European countries. On the basis of quantitative and qualitative cross-sectional data from 65 Dutch organizations, Study 1 revealed that organizational error management culture was significantly correlated with both organizational goal achievement and an objective indicator of economic performance. This finding was confirmed in Study 2, using change-of-profitability data from 47 German organizations. The results suggest that organizations may want to introduce organizational error management as a way to boost firm performance

Reversing the Extraverted Leadership Advantage: The Role of Employee Proactivity

Extraversion predicts leadership emergence and effectiveness, but do groups perform more effectively under extraverted leadership? Drawing on dominance complementarity theory, we propose that although extraverted leadership enhances group performance when employees are passive, this effect reverses when employees are proactive, because extraverted leaders are less receptive to proactivity. In Study 1, pizza stores with leaders rated high (low) in extraversion achieved higher profits when employees were passive (proactive). Study 2 constructively replicates these findings in the laboratory: passive (proactive) groups achieved higher performance when leaders acted high (low) in extraversion. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for leadership and proactivity

A relational model of perceived overqualification : the moderating role of interpersonal influence on social acceptance.

Theories of perceived overqualification have tended to focus on employees’ job-related responses to account for effects on performance. We offer an alternative perspective and theorize that perceived overqualification could influence work performance through a relational mechanism. We propose that relational skills, in the form of interpersonal influence of overqualified employees, determine their tendency to experience social acceptance and, thus, engage in positive work-related behaviors. We tested this relational model across two studies using time-lagged, multisource data. In Study 1, the results indicated that for employees high on interpersonal influence, perceived overqualification was positively related to self-reported social acceptance, whereas for employees low on interpersonal influence, the relationship was negative. Social acceptance, in turn, was positively related to in-role job performance, interpersonal altruism, and team member proactivity evaluated by supervisors. In Study 2, we focused on peer-reported social acceptance and found that the indirect relationships between perceived overqualification and supervisor-reported behavioral outcomes via social acceptance were negative when interpersonal influence was low and nonsignificant when interpersonal influence was high. The implications of the general findings are discussed

Building and Sustaining Proactive Behaviors: The Role of Adaptivity and Job Satisfaction

© 2013, Springer Science+Business Media New York. Purpose: The purpose was to investigate how job satisfaction and adaptivity influence proactivity over time. Proactivity describes employees’ efforts to initiate positive change in the organization and can be differentiated from adaptivity: the positive behavioral response to ongoing change. We investigated how adaptivity supports subsequent proactivity and how job satisfaction can be a motivational resource for maintaining high levels of proactivity over time. Design/Methodology/Approach: We surveyed 75 employees on two occasions separated by a period of 2 years. Findings: Our findings provide initial support for the role of adaptivity in facilitating proactivity over time. Highly satisfied employees maintained their level of proactivity, whether high or low, over the 2-year period. Employees low in job satisfaction who showed high levels of proactive behavior at Time 1 did not report high levels of proactive behavior at Time 2. Implications: In uncertain environments, organizations rely on their employees to support and promote change and innovation. Our results suggest that high adaptivity can build proactivity, while high satisfaction can sustain proactivity. Originality/Value: Distinguishing adaptivity from proactivity provides a better understanding of the nature of proactivity in organizations. Inconsistent results concerning the link between satisfaction and proactivity are addressed

Proactivity routines: The role of social processes in how employees self-initiate change

Proactive work behaviors are self-initiated, future-focused actions aimed at bringing about changes to work processes in organizations. Such behaviors occur within the social context of work. The extant literature that has focused on the role of social context for proactivity has focused on social context as an overall input or output of proactivity. However, in this article we argue that the process of engaging in proactive work behavior (proactive goal-striving) may also be a function of the social context in which it occurs. Based on qualitative data from 39 call center employees in an energy-supply company, we find that in a context characterized by standardized work procedures, proactive goal-striving can occur through a proactivity routine – a socially constructed and accepted pattern of action by which employees initiate and achieve changes to work processes, with the support of managers and colleagues. Our findings point to the need to view proactive work behaviors at a higher level of analysis than the individual in order to identify shared routines for engaging in proactivity, as well as how multiple actors coordinate their efforts in the process of achieving individually-generated proactive goals