Objective Australian research on volunteering is rich and diverse, but also increasingly fragmented. In an attempt to promote a more integrated study of volunteering, we review volunteering research conducted in Australia, using volunteering journey as a framework. Specifically, we summarise literature on volunteer characteristics, motivations, benefits, psychological contract, commitment, and withdrawal. Method A comprehensive review yielded 152 studies on volunteering conducted in Australia. Results We find that volunteers have distinct characteristics, such as being older, better connected, employed, and residing in rural areas. There are a variety of reasons that prompt individuals to volunteer, and this motivation does change over time. Volunteering leads to better psychological well‐being, as well as increases in social and human capital. Volunteer expectations and commitment are key drivers of ongoing volunteering. Finally, stress, work–family conflict, and negative interactions with others lead to volunteer withdrawal. Conclusion A lot is known about volunteering, however, future advancement of the field will depend on better integration across disciplines and domains. Currently, volunteering is viewed as a set of distinct stages, and a more integrated approach is required. We also note a lack of theoretical and methodological rigour in many Australian studies on volunteering.

No abstract

We tested the hypothesis that proactivity represents the engagement vector in the HEXACO model of personality. Questionnaire data were obtained in five studies, three of which consisted (mostly) of students: Study 1 (N = 188, Mage = 20.0, 89.4% women), Study 3 (N = 315, Mage = 20.4, 80.6% women), and Study 4 (N = 309 self‐ratings, Mage = 20.0, 78.3% women; N = 307 other‐ratings, Mage = 24.5, 62.2% women). Participants in the other two studies came from an ISO‐certified representative community panel: Study 2 (N = 525, Mage = 51.2, 52.0% women) and Study 5 (N = 736, Mage = 42.2, 48.0% women). Proactive Personality and Proactivity were positively related to Extraversion, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience, but only weakly related or unrelated to Honesty‐Humility, Emotionality, and Agreeableness, supporting the alignment of Proactive Personality/Proactivity with the hypothesized HEXACO engagement vector. Additionally, Proactivity explained incremental variance in self‐rated job performance on top of the HEXACO facets that were most closely associated with Proactive Personality/Proactivity, that is, Social Boldness (an Extraversion facet), Diligence (a Conscientiousness facet), and Creativity (an Openness to Experience facet), but not in entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship. Proactivity is the missing engagement link in the HEXACO model of personality. The results are discussed in light of higher‐order factors (e.g., general factor of personality and Alpha and Beta) of personality and bandwidth‐fidelity controversies.

With an archival data set from an Australian-based asynchronous video interview (AVI) vendor, we examined how employers implemented AVI features as a step toward understanding how AVIs can be more optimally designed. The multilevel data contained information about 2,550,105 responses from 627,999 candidates to 52,623 questions, nested within 12,105 interview templates. We found that AVIs were often used for small applicant pools (Mdn = 10 candidates per AVI) and that a majority of the AVIs comprised four to five questions, with candidates typically given 30 seconds to prepare a response, and 2 minutes to record it. Only rarely were candidates permitted to preview questions or re-record responses. Finally, we noted that the settings typically applied were highly consistent with platform's default settings.

No abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Although Rudolph et al. (2021) outlined how the current pandemic will affect the work and life of employees, they have overlooked the potential disruption this pandemic will have on volunteersa sizable segment of any developed economy (Volunteers, 2018)-and their volunteering experiences. Here, we define volunteering as time willingly and freely given to benefit another person, group, or cause (Wilson, 2000). We observed that volunteering has been disrupted substantially by the pandemic in our research with State Emergency Services in Western Australia, in which 96% of emergency service personnel are volunteers (Department of Emergency and Fire Services, 2019). The current pandemic has already affected the volunteering experiences of this essential segment of the Australian economy. The pandemic restrictions have disrupted the availability of emergency services volunteers to participate in face-to-face training activities and combat impending natural hazards such as bushfires, floods, and cyclones. For example, in times of disasters, additional emergency services volunteers usually come from interstate and overseas, yet such help is difficult to source due to the pandemic-imposed travel restrictions. Further, Australian emergency services should account for the possibility of hundreds of volunteers working on the front lines needing to be isolated if they become infected during the pandemic. In addition to these economic disruptions that the pandemic will likely cause for emergency services and other organizations employing volunteers, we argue that there are likely to be psychological disruptions and challenges. The challenges stem partly from the need to comply with the pandemicimposed restrictions and partly from the unique features of volunteering work.Rudolph et al. ( 2021) have discussed 10 areas, which will be most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Building on and extending these topics, we discuss two areas that will likely be disrupted by the pandemic for volunteers and their parent organizations: (a) leadership and (b) interactions with community stakeholders and associated challenges for volunteers and volunteering experiences. We conclude with some ideas on how we can tackle these challenges using the theories and research from industrial-organizational psychology as applied to the volunteering context. Challenge 1: Directive leadership is good for pandemic but bad for inclusivity The COVID-19 pandemic has created unique challenges for leaders managing volunteers. Rudolph et al. (2021) cited evidence suggesting that directive leadership tends to be particularly effective during times of crises such as the financial meltdowns of 2008(Stoker et al., 2019. These predictions are based on threat-rigidity hypothesis, suggesting that organizations respond to external threats such as financial meltdowns or global pandemics with actions that reflect rigidity (Staw et al., 1981). In particular, they implement directive leadership, which is based on

No abstract