An Expansion of the Beneficial Outcomes Associated With the Proactive Employee

Background: The central point of this study is team initiative, and we analyzed how the theoretical model of antecedents and consequents of personal initiative contribute to explaining the relationship between team initiative and its antecedents and consequents. Authentic leadership is proposed as the antecedent, and the consequent leads to two types of outcomes, one of which is related to employee well-being, and the other is related to performance. However, little is known about what occurs in this relationship once the focus shifts to the team level. From a team perspective, with the label team initiative, we propose a collective construct defined similarly to personal initiative. This study shows the relationship between team initiative and its two consequences, team work engagement and performance, which are measured in terms of team productivity by the leader. Methods: Our model was tested in a field study with 344 employees of 79 work teams belonging to 55 organizations. Results: The analysis of the results using SEM and a regression analysis supported our main hypotheses. Conclusions: The finding that initiative is related to performance establishes the importance of initiative at the team level. It also emphasizes its impact on employee well-being through team work engagement and suggests the importance of authentic leadership.

show abstract

“…Proactivity is negatively associated with burnout [ 21 ], so team initiative could be considered a protector against burnout.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Proactivity is negatively associated with burnout [ 21 ], and there are some studies that consider well-being variables as an antecedent to proactivity (e.g., [ 12 , 22 ]). We proposed that work engagement is a consequence and a measure of psychological well-being related to the labor context, as opposed to burnout.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initiative in Work Teams: Lever between Authentic Leadership and Results

Lisbona

Las-Hayas

Palací

2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, because managers with business-oriented background are taking greater part in managing their companies and are heavily focused on the business model and the financial aspect of managing the firm, as these are often their greatest challenges, the rationale of the imprinting theory suggests that these managers would be imprinted with these foci, thus giving lower weight to their personal motivations. The proactive business focus of these managers is going to lead to a better tolerance for change in terms of a financial harvest exit (Slatten, Carson, Baker, & Carson, 2013). As such, this paper proposes that: Proposition 1a: Manager's extrinsic motivation will be related to a more positive attitude towards the financial harvest exit strategy.…”

Section: Choosing the Financial Harvest Exit Strategymentioning

confidence: 97%

Preparing Managers for Entrepreneur’s Exit

Faifman,

Pittz,

Weaver

et al. 2024

Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to advance the literature on the target side in mergers and acquisitions (M&A) and entrepreneurial exit by developing a framework that explains how companies can prepare managers for the acquisitions, considering the different backgrounds and different initial motivations. This paper builds on the imprinting perspective and proposes that managers are motivated by different goals and objectives; and that these goals and objectives are instrumental in determining their attitude toward different exit strategies. In addition, we suggest that the relationships between motivation and preferred exit are moderated by the managers’ experiences and backgrounds. The first main contribution of the paper is delineating how the manager’s background may be the factor that both resolves the contradictions between different perspectives in the literature and offers greater support for previously tested hypotheses. The second main contribution is the addition of motivation for power and its relationship with the choice of exit strategies, as this specific motivation may affect the managers’ preferences and thus choices.

show abstract