Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 557

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design

Fuller, Jerry Bryan, Marler, Laura E., Hester, Kim·2006·Journal of Organizational Behavior

Abstract

Although new theoretical models that are suggestive of how work design might be used to foster proactive motivation and proactive performance have been proposed, these models need further elaboration and testing if they are to be useful tools for contemporary organizations. Accordingly, we examine the extent to which feelings of responsibility for constructive change is a proactive psychological mechanism that explains how work design characteristics influence constructive change‐oriented behavior and proactive performance. Specifically, we examine job autonomy, position in the organizational hierarchy, access to resources, access to strategy‐related information, and role ambiguity as antecedents to felt responsibility for constructive change (FRCC). We also examine the extent to which feelings of responsibility for constructive change are positively related to voice behavior (i.e., constructive, change‐oriented communication) and continuous improvement (i.e., proactive role performance). Results indicate hierarchical position and access to resources are positively related to FRCC. Results also indicate proactive personality moderates the relationship between access to resources and FRCC and the relationship between access to strategy‐related information and FRCC. Plots of the interactions reveal that these relationships are enhanced for individuals with proactive personalities. The results also indicate that FRCC is positively related to voice behavior and continuous improvement. Perhaps more importantly, the results suggest that FRCC explains the psychological process by which structural and socio‐structural forces influence proactive behavior. The results are discussed as they pertain to updated work design theory and theories of high involvement work systems, job characteristics, and leadership prototypes. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/job.408

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 557

Metadata

Authors
Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K.
Venue
Journal of Organizational Behavior
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-09-07
Volume
27
Issue
8
Pages
1089-1120
ISSN
  • 0894-3796 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1379
OpenAlex
W1990424534
Cited by
557
References
11
FWCI
14.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/job.408
The paper
Fuller, J. B., Marler, L. E., & Hester, K. (2006). Promoting felt responsibility for constructive change and proactive behavior: exploring aspects of an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.408

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.