ABSTRACT
Current dynamic work environments call for proactive employees who are not only reacting to changes in their environment but who plan ahead and take the initiative to avoid potential problems or improve the eectiveness of the organization. In the academic literature, proactive behavior refers to “anticipatory actions that employees take to impact themselves and/or their environments” (Grant & Ashford, 2008, p. 4). In line with the call from practitioners for more proactive employees (e.g., Campbell, 2000), academics have investigated the phenomenon of proactive behavior and its consequences over the last two decades. Many different proactive concepts were developed and studied (Bindl & Parker, 2010; Crant, 2000), for example, seeking feedback (Ashford, Blatt, & VandeWalle, 2003), voicing opinions, suggestions, or ideas for change (LePine & Van Dyne, 1998), taking personal initiative (Frese & Fay, 2001; Den Hartog & Belschak, 2007), proactive problem-solving and idea implementation (Parker, Williams, & Turner, 2006), issue-selling (Dutton & Ashford, 1993), taking charge (Morrison & Phelps, 1999), and network building (Morrison, 2002). As a result, the concept of proactive behavior covers a vast number of quite diverse behaviors ranging from whistleblowing (e.g., Near & Miceli, 1985) to enhancing one’s career prospects by proactively seeking training (e.g., Seibert, Kraimer, & Crant, 2001) to proactively helping a colleague in need (e.g., Belschak & Den Hartog, 2010). The eld is therefore currently in need of theoretical perspectives that help structure and integrate these dierent behaviors.
