How employee proactive behavior shapes organizational ambidexterity under perceived organizational support
Abdallah Obeidat & Hassan R. Hamasha
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to examine the effect of employee proactive behavior on organizational ambidexterity and investigates the moderating role of perceived organizational support (POS) in the software as a service (SaaS) sector in Jordan, a context facing fast technological advancements, global competition and uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach A quantitative, descriptive analytical approach was used on responses from 350 employees across SaaS organizations in Jordan. Findings The results reveal that employee proactive behavior positively impacts organizational ambidexterity, including its exploitation and exploration dimensions. However, POS slightly negatively moderates this relationship. While POS correlates positively with proactive behavior, it reduces the successful transformation of proactivity into ambidextrous outcomes. This can be explained by several psychological and cultural mechanisms, including the initiative paradox, risk aversion, overreliance on structure and reduced urgency in high-support environments. Research limitations/implications The study contributes to organizational behavior theory by examining the conditional role of POS, especially in a developing economy. It expands existing theoretical frameworks like social exchange theory and organizational support theory by showing how supportive organizational contexts may limit the benefits of proactive behaviors. Practical implications Organizations are advised to balance support with autonomy, accountability and a healthy level of pressure to better convert proactive behavior into ambidextrous performance. Originality/value This study empirically tests the moderating role of POS in the relationship between employee proactive behavior and organizational ambidexterity, filling a significant research gap in the Jordanian SaaS context.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.